Game realy needs “SURRENDER” option. Since alot of people are afk, or doing nothing/feeding/helping more enemy than their own team. Instead of wasting time just FF option at least 3 votes for surr, and game instantly ends.
Or if u got 1 AFK , let others leave games without consequences, else this pharse will never ends
7 Likes
Didn’t you ask for this from the non-existing devs already?
2 Likes
Or you could just play the game.
2 Likes
went from “alot of afk” which would remove the capacity to get the 3 vote, to “1 afk”
If you’re giving one person the chance to ruin the game for 9 other people, that’d encourage others to keep this up instead of curbing it. If a player can’t ‘carry’ the game alone, then they’ll be able to ‘lose’ the game alone and shoot for people to vote/leave.
1 Like
Agreed with OP. After all these years it’s weird that they haven’t at least implemented allowing remaining players to leave penalty free from QM games.
2 Likes
it is not wierd at all; devs gave specific reasons that they didn’t impliment it, there isn’t an active team to change that, and there isn’t a monetization incentive to do it.
HotS isnt alone in not having it, and some games have gotten vocal backlash for what they made of their surrender system by active players.
2 Likes
There are plenty of threads on LOL forums about people that goes afk for whatever reasons and try to force out a surrender just because they fall behind in lvl and gold. Same would happen here. Surrender mode for 1v1 games are fine but in team games all 5 have to agree not just one.
And ofc when that one player dont get what he wants then he wil start acting like a baby and start crying in chat or afk in base. Its too hard for one guy to stop acting like an individual and start doing what is is best for the team.
But again too many think thier time is more important than others in a multiplayer game.
1 Like
I have a headache, has there been a fix for this yet? Blizz takes forever…
1 Like
I agree we need surrender option. I had a lot of games where I ask if they wanna just let them win but 1 or 2 keeps fighting so I end up just helping since it doesn’t let 3 or 4 people just end the losing game like it should. I’ll also say when I’m winning I prefer if the enemy team just surrenders if it is very one-sided.
2 Likes
They do that anyway. How often have you seen… “gg” in the chat and then the player who said it just give up. If my teammates are going to give up anyway I’d rather just queue again and have a chance at a match without loser minded players. I don’t think it belongs in ranked, but I don’t see an issue with it in QM.
Because it objectively is, to each person. I value my time above everyone else’s just like you value your time over everyone’s. Don’t come and tell me you let 9 random people control how you use your time because you want to be “polite”. You know that if the situation arose where you have to choose someone else’s time over yours, you’d put your time as priority.
1 Like
in the ‘west’, yes, individualism is more prominent. In the ‘east’ some view collectivism where their personal time/contribution is less than that of others and they may conduct themselves accordingly. However, since global travel is a thing, and philosophy, culture, whatever aren’t regionally locked, there are going to be people in either region that flip the self/group mindset.
People that value their presumption over others also then tend to assume that everyone else does that and uses that to reinforce the loop of presumption.
1 Like
Sounds good on paper, with the current declining playerbase a surrender option would probably lead to far longer queue times and few games completed. It’s all a moot topic of discussion as Hots development is over.
Personally the decision by the Dev’s not to add a surrender option made sense. The games on average are very short, so it’s not a long wait until the next match. If your game also has someone who called “GG” at the start of your match and disconnected, mostly likely your match will be no longer than 10-12 minutes.
2 Likes
The issue I have with this is that many people on here complain about how others time is valuable, yet say “just sit through a 10-15 minute loss” instead of having the ability to leave without punishment if the majority of players agree. If you surrender, it’s obviously because your team agrees and that should be fine, however if your team doesn’t agree and it’s just one or two people who want to surrender, they can leave and receive the leaver punishment.
“Games are already short so just stick with it” is not a solution, just an excuse for the devs to not implement such system. It’s a waste of time for players, and not something people should want to put themselves through.
2 Likes
The counterargument to your logic regarding time lost without a surrender option, is the time that could be lost with a surrender option.
If we had a surrender option now where if the majority of the team agree they can surrender, it would lead to longer queue times and fewer matches completed. My time would be wasted in longer queues and half played games due to people giving up for no good reason.
I’ve had many games where someone had a disconnect at the beginning of the game and players have called “GG” only for that DC player to return and we win the match.
My feeling is I’d lose as much time through half played games (with more bickering over a team majority to surrender) and then the longer queue times that would result from having a surrender option.
I must disagree with you there. I’ve encountered some reasonable people in Hots, but I’d hesitate to call them the majority. There is no guarantee that having a surrender option would be “fine” relying on players to agree and be reasonable.
1 Like
This isn’t right. The match would end sooner and they can re-queue. Instead of waiting 20-35 mins they can join another match and bring people who have been waiting as priority to enter a match first.
If I’m going to play a game with people who give up, throw, or don’t want to work together, I’d just log off and play something else until the match ends. Whereas a surrender option will end it quicker and people can re queue.
2 Likes
This is how I see it:
First, it’s only a loss when your core is at 0% hp. Before that, I think there is no such thing as a loss, and ppl shouldn’t give up.
Like this is a black’n’white game, you either win or lose, so ppl shouldn’t try to escape the game because they think they’re not winning, since that outcome was never guaranteed.
Second, if a team want to surrender, they actually, already can. If the team, in unity, leave the game, it’s over instantly, and no leaver penalty to them, no bots, just a true surrender win on the other side.
Third, if there is a system that makes giving up easier, more ppl will give up and more often, which is bad for the game, and thus to its players who try to have matches where one core dies.
And if ppl can vote to surrender, that would give a realistic ultimatum to the hands of ppl who tries to convince everyone to give up.
From that point, ppl could go “vote surrender or I’ll troll”. And don’t get me wrong, some ppl already do stuff like that, I know, but it’s not a real option yet. Ppl cannot vote to give up, the game won’t end just because they “agree” now. So it’s not an ultimatum, yet.
(Plus ppl would be able to “cheat”, to only play out a game if they think it’s a win.)
These are my issues with The Surrender.
The system already exists in the most healthy way (the whole team together can) while there is no more power to troublesome individuals and this behaviour is not encouraged.
1 Like
That’s not why most people give up. They give up because of idiots who just troll the match, intentionally feed, spend more time pinging and typing than actually playing, go afk, and such. Leavers aren’t as much of an issue because it’s replaced with AI.
In my experience it’s rare when people give up just because they’re behind in xp or kills or towers or whatever. It’s when people sabotage the game by doing the bs listed above that people want to just exit the match.
And that’s what causes people to have time wasted. Playing through a high probably of a loss because someone is afk but hasn’t left the match is a waste of time. In rare cases you can with a 4v5. Rare.
It’s not cheating because they’d lose if they surrender. It’ll count as a loss, just that if majority agrees, there’s less harsh penalties. If it become repetitive, then they can be temporarily suspended from multiplayer matches. The system should be able to track when you initiate a surrender just like how it tracks when you leave a match. There’s remedies to this that still give punishments to trolls while not wasting player’s time.
1 Like
I think neither of us can actually know it.
My experiences were all “i think this game is not winnable so let’s give up”, which I often disproved with the right minded allies.
If it wouldn’t count as a loss, it would no longer be a “cheat”, but a cheat.
But ppl could play out only the most certain matches.
1 Like
No, we can’t, but its human nature to form an option on something from our own experience.
In my experience, the situation is rarely remedied. Moral crushed losers I experience make most games dreadful. Its just a bunch of childish actions because they don’t seem to have that right mind, like your experience shows you. Might be the rank difference, but it still sucks to have to play through matches like that and waste 15-25 mins playing a game where your team just gives up. It sucks, and seems to happen often.
If your experience of having right minded allies often in your matches is true, they won’t play only for sure winnable matches. I do see that some people have the mental strength to play though a match because there’s a chance to win. I’m not talking about that. Those matches aren’t why I’m supporting this option. People who are level headed and headstrong won’t surrender even if the option was there, so nothing would change in that regard anyway whether its implemented or not.
I’m talking about those stupid troll losers who go afk at the first sign of trouble, feed intentionally, sit and type instead of play while remaining in the core, and ruin the match for everyone else in a clear way, tilting everyone else. That’s where I think the surrender option is useful because trolls can’t be reasoned with, that’s why they’re trolls.
1 Like
Just punish afk, trolls and game throwers harder. If people just straight up afk at start or throws the game by feeding multiple times in a raw then I’m ok with having a surrender if those people gets punished for it and not those who surrender. that actually want to play the game.
Some of the reasons why the devs 8 years ago refused to give us surrender was because of the negativ effects it has on some people. I played Smite for a few months some years ago and I perfecly know what will happen if one guy got his surrender overruled by his own team. Then he will afk or start trolling or flame in chat and then you are forced to listen to the quitter whole game until you give up and give the baby his candy.
1 Like