Can we please just have a surrender function in game?

[Coopmore]

Look. i know its a lol thing and the community hate lol with a burning passion, but its not a bad idea. people are forced to sit around for a while waiting for the game to end with a foregone conclusion, and sit in fountain twiddling their thumbs. I was stuck in low priority because of an abandon today, because i had to drive a family member to an important event very suddenly. we had lost the game by the 15 minute mark and were being crushed in every fight no matter the situation. however, they were not farmed enough to take the base, and we had to sit around waiting, with all of us agreeing that the game was long lost. BUT WE COULD NOT END IT. can we please have this dealt with? Just give us a surrender function.

[LastWerd]

I agree. People will just alt-tab out of the game and do other stuff when surrendering would save everyone time. I bet this would also be cost effective for the DOTA 2 administraters since shorter games would likely lead to lower server administration costs.

[Groover]

i agree but it everyone has to agree to it,if 4 says yes and 1 says no,then no surrender

[Coopmore]

there is honestly no loss to adding a function, but i think it should be majority, or only if 4/5 agree, getting 5 to agree is problematic, cause the standard drow/sniper/generic ranged agi carry picker tends to have a mindset of "no we cant quit ill just outcarry them with farm." no offense to legitimate ranged agi carry players.

[Leberwurst1234]

5/5 and only on specific circumstances

[R3450N]

I think the surrender function should be a certain self-destruct sequence in which at least 3 players Attack-Move on the Ancient of which its power starts to be drained. When 3 players do so, then the Ancient is destroyed and the game is a loss as always. In that essence, I think this is a good idea.

This can only happen 15 minutes into the game though and when the enemy team's total kills are over 50% higher than the opposing team's.

[Lord_Mareck]

Surrender is a bad idea. I have had many games that we turned around right at the end. Giving players a chance to copout does not allow them to be pushed to their limits and grow.

[R3450N]

Ursprungligen skrivet av Mareck6679:

Surrender is a bad idea. I have had many games that we turned around right at the end. Giving players a chance to copout does not allow them to be pushed to their limits and grow.

This is true, but there are times where you just know that you are hopeless to win. If your team have 3 kills, and your enemy have 30 kills and downed all your lane towers, then you obviously know that defeat is imminent. The problem is, referring back to my suggestion: who would be around by then?

[Lord_Mareck]

Hi Raven, the simple thing about games is leadership and balance. I understand like you said you get games where you are outmatched but for games like that take some initiative and apply some leadership.

If you are in a game and you find yourself 3-10 down. Start working on lane assignments, switch people around, match your heroes for opposing lanes. A few minutes of analysis and pairing strong and weak players can save your game.

If you are kind to your fellow players they will listen. I have had a game where we where down 25 - 50. But we held the line at our base and won the game after a grueling 1h40mins of fighting to survive.

Those truely wonderful moments in life dont come from giving up, it comes from doing the impossible.

[R3450N]

Ursprungligen skrivet av Mareck6679:

Hi Raven, the simple thing about games is leadership and balance. I understand like you said you get games where you are outmatched but for games like that take some initiative and apply some leadership.

If you are in a game and you find yourself 3-10 down. Start working on lane assignments, switch people around, match your heroes for opposing lanes. A few minutes of analysis and pairing strong and weak players can save your game.

If you are kind to your fellow players they will listen. I have had a game where we where down 25 - 50. But we held the line at our base and won the game after a grueling 1h40mins of fighting to survive.

Those truely wonderful moments in life dont come from giving up, it comes from doing the impossible.

That's a nice thing to say, but it's no use if heroes won't cooperate. I myself just won a match of 27-43 mostly because I decided to undermine the enemy who were farming at mid. By the time my enemy found out I was already breaching bottom, they knew their loss was nigh. It's not always about kills, but strategy. I had a plan and used it to my advantage while my allies never even bothered to help me until the last minute when I told them to push. Perhaps I am bossy, but in situations such as these rare ones, a surrender is unlikely. Perhaps laziness is a contributing factor to a surrender, but better far one admits defeat than tries to act as though they're winning while it's contrary. Here and now, anything can be rare in PvP, but there are times where there is simply no other alternative than to stop feeding and simply be the mature one and quit.

[lostsomething]

Ursprungligen skrivet av Mareck6679:

Surrender is a bad idea. I have had many games that we turned around right at the end. Giving players a chance to copout does not allow them to be pushed to their limits and grow.

Not every group connects, not every game has to be fought like it was Iwo Jima. There are plenty of times the writing is plain on the wall and we'd all be better off just having it done with.

[aHTuTaHk]

We must create a system off surrender,administration should do something in that way..

[noodle]

I agree, some kind of system but it might have to be unanimous because you know..there are a lotta trolls in this community

[ZAM<Choky Ice]

No surrender, no retreat. Like in the Van Damme movie.

[noodle]

We do, especially because no one wants to end the game they just fountain farm and deny their creeps even though the game is clearly over.

[TheKasp, 뱁새]

*hihi* There IS already a surrender function in the game.