Welcome to the Forum Archive!

Years of conversation fill a tonne of digital pages, and we've kept all of it accessible to browse or copy over. Whether you're looking for reveal articles for older champions, or the first time that Rammus rolled into an "OK" thread, or anything in between, you can find it here. When you're finished, check out Boards to join in the latest League of Legends discussions.

GO TO BOARDS


Afk = loss prevented?

12
Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Avser

Junior Member

10-29-2014

Hey..

So i have just had 3 ranked games. 2 of them had leavers. From the very start of the game.
I find it hard to belive that it's not possible to get a loss prevented for a team that had a player that did not move 90% or more of the time.
And i find it just as hard that leavers like this don't get a "ranked only" x day(s) ban.
Something has to be done soon. It's hard to get anywhere in the league when leavers ruin it for 4 other players.
Are there anyone else out there that have it the same way or is it just me?


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Hansiman

Senior Wrenchman

10-29-2014

Greetings.

Activating loss prevention for cases like this opens up for a lot of abuse, and should therefore not be done.

LeaverBuster is being redesigned, but the main focus for Riot is the new Tribunal. Ranked Restrictions are, for instance, being tested on NA and EUW right now.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Avser

Junior Member

10-29-2014

I know loss prevention have a down side but the fact remains that something is only done when it's to late.
Punishing a person so he can't join a ranked for 2 days after he was afk is fine but the 4 ppl that just had a loss and might be high in their league just gets punished.
Preventing a loss with 100% afk should be able to be done.
Any move or chat = not 100% anymore. The only way this could be abused if someone where teaming up and just wanted to make their team loose.. And we got those allready in form of feeding or trolling.
Hope you are able to see the point i'm trying to make.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Hansiman

Senior Wrenchman

10-29-2014

If you want to make a system that prevents a team from losing points if they have an afk player, you also need to prevent the winning team from gaining points. Otherwise you'll skew the entire scoring system.

And if you add a feature like that, you provide people with a tool to prevent the opposing team from winning games.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Onizuka

Senior Member

10-29-2014

I dont know about skewing the scoring system. Loss prevented already is a thing and I dont think it skews anything.

However the potential abuse makes this a total no go.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Hansiman

Senior Wrenchman

10-29-2014

The current loss prevention doesn't really skew the scoring system, because it's only used under very limited conditions. In the big picture, the amount of loss prevented games out of all the games played is extremely small.

Implementing the same feature for AFK players will make it come into play for a large portion of the games, and this is why it will start to actually affect how the scoring system works.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Adrenalotr

Senior Member

10-29-2014

There is, however, talk of loss mitigation of some sort for games where a player never connects and it's a 4v5 the entire game. While this too would affect scoring system, it's a lot harder for randomly matched players to abuse.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

warmachine1

Member

10-29-2014

That exactly what I suggested in different thread, those points winners gain must be substracted somewhere, then why not substract them from the leaver's account.
Whey players get to know what leaving cause to their standing, they will stop doing that regardless of provocation & flame. They will finish the match & those flamers will get restrictions faster than ever.
Things might get worse before they get better, but eventually it could work so well to replace leaver-buster in ranked games alltogether.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Adrenalotr

Senior Member

10-29-2014

I actually prefer players leaving to players flaming. Leaving can happen for a lot of irl reasons. House can be on fire, internet or power could have broke, a family member may have an emergency... Flame, however, has no excuse. Flaming so hard that someone leaves because they couldn't focus on the game anymore is completely reasonable, and more the fault of the flamer than the leaver. While I'd rather not have any leavers or any flamers in the game at all, the reality is that both exist. But one of them doesn't have to.

Besides, I've won 4v5, and lost 5v4. Team cohesion is a lot more important than numbers advantage.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

warmachine1

Member

10-29-2014

But what leaving because someone is flaming u gets u.
It gets u banned, that is it & flamer have won. CG.
It may seem resonable but totally counter-logic!


12