Quoting OMG__IN1, reply 25RotT is very harsh to leavers. If you have above 15% leaves, your account is perma-banned
Yeah - but I'm really just talking about surrendering. The rule is after 20 min you can surrender. I'm griping about folks that have refuse to surrender when there is no real chance of winning and forcing players that would rather move onto a game that might actually be winnable to stay and play crap out.
That said, I'm all for perma bans for leavers, etc. I don't know what policy lol has in place for such things though. It's like for every feature that would be good, there's someone abusing it. For instance, it would have been great and guaranteed my team a win if we could somehow kick the guy that intentionally feeding. But if there was an ability to vote a person out, then shites would just do that if someone was crap on their team, etc. There wouldn't be any balance. It would be nice if there was some sort of empowerment given to honest players to kick or ban folks like that... but oh well. I'd wager they could implement something silly like auto-kicking if someone dies like 8 times in 4 or 5 minutes or so.
Hope not to take this off topic, and I know I'm addressing a post from a while back (but I did read all the posts following), but this is an issue I had too, except I found it interesting that I had the opposite view.
I totally understand your view, that fighting a losing battle is a waste of time and having someone choosing not to surrender when it's an obvious loss can be annoying, I agree. My gripe though, is when people surrender when there is still a chance - as long as they change their strategy.
I'm not an experienced player at all, and perhaps my views are wrong, but I've had experiences where people quit after losing several team battles and the enemy is way ahead in items/gold and levels. Woah, you might think, if they're way ahead in items and exp, then quite obviously they have the advantage and our chances of winning are low. I agree with your judgment, and the surrender happens at this point anyway.
However, after the first or second team battle loss, I find it a fairly poor idea for us to rush their team again, right after an ace. Yet that keeps happening. Quite obviously if we lost before when we were closer in levels and power, we might win, but we're just giving them a greater advantage every time we die, and yet we still rush into them.
After several times of running into the anvil, we surrender. My way of thinking is this: if you're going to surrender, just take another route and rush their nexus/base thing. Why? Because if you surrender, it's a loss. If you take another route and their team steamrolls the towers and then the nexus, then it's a loss.
But if you, by rushing their base, cause one or two to warp back in confusion and defend their base, perhaps we have a chance of destroying half their team while they decide whether to push or fall back. Even if they push, if we push fast enough, we may even destroy the nexus before they do. According to their surrender philosophy, it's a loss either way. Why not try one last push for a slim chance of victory instead of the tried-and-failed method of rushing their fed team?
As I said before, I'm not an experienced player, and have my fair share of losses, and would say that I may have played poorly enough to contribute a lot to the falling of my team. Since I have not managed to get any team to try this tactic, I'm wondering if the more experienced players could lend a word in letting me know if, in a surrender situation, it's a good idea?