dafuker leave

[Kreutertee]

he just left, coz ppl failed to votebalance. he crying for the difference of roughly 5 elo and just left before draw (which wasnt even necessary).

https://entgaming.net/findstats.php?id=9930461

(00:15 / All) Kreutertee: just play. dont make a fuss for 5 elo..

(00:15 / All) 1007: i make you ez choice?
(00:15 / All) 1007: i just leave
(00:15 / All) trancedout: dafuker has left the game voluntarily.
(00:15 / QUIT) dafuker: Left
(00:15 / Allied) TinSoldier: LOL
(00:16 / Allied) Halp: lol
(00:17 / All) trancedout: 1006 has left the game voluntarily.
(00:17 / QUIT) 1006: Left

wtf is that rly... ?

[Don_Killuminati]

I asked myself why Kreut would report this since the game is draw and we played right after with balanced team.
Then i did read chat log and laughed because i find out that you wanted play this unbalanced game so baad lmao.
(00:15 / All) Kreutertee: dont be a baby for 5 more elo
Guess whos the baby now

[Kreutertee]

So the next time I don't like something in a game for some dreadful reason, I just leave and start a new game? Lol, I guess that's not how it works.

And the defiance that even made Tin "LOL" is what's wrong here. Everyone always needs to bend or break rules, force stuff on others by actions like that, trying to get your will one way or the other.

Well, guess what. I don't respond well to pressure, being forced into doing things a certain way, while there are rules in place saying something else.

And this here is my way of showing it. Deal with it.

[nicolai123]

Well i remember a game where the host forgot to check for votebalance aswell and people said they refused to play and it got drawed. I don't think there is an explicit rule for it but its just common decency to votebalance it.

Auto-balanced games are hosted after enough players (8 , 6 or 4, depending on the desired game size) sign for a game

Doesn't this imply that game should be balanced by default?

[Kreutertee]

Well, games were autobalanced in the past and I suppose that statement (or rule?) is a remnant from that time. But it was enforced automatically by the bot, which it currently does not do anymore.

But if in fact that means votebalancing is mandatory and therefore a draw is mandatory if it wasn't balanced, I'd like to ask to update the rules accordingly to be clear on that matter.

[dweiler]

It's called "VOTEbalance" for a reason, and people have to vote for it for a reason: i.e. if there are not enough people voting to balance, the game won't be balanced. I have had 2 or 3 games like that in the past week.

@sonycrockett any reason other than that you did not like that they didn't vb why you left this game?

[FateStayNight]

@mickeythemousie

Hazardous made clear that votebalance is mandatory with the discord bot.

[dweiler]

@mickeythemousie

Hazardous made clear that votebalance is mandatory with the discord bot.

Okay, if that is so I am unaware of that. @hazardous ?

[Don_Killuminati]

Lol, votebalance is pure mandatory since one season mby? So plz, don't put yourself as a victim and assume the fact that you acted like an 'elo whore'.

I just came first to point out the contradiction of how you behave,
(00:00 / Allied) Kreutertee: nice 21 elo game
(00:15 / All) Kreutertee: just play. dont make a fuss for 5 elo..
Not to say that you said nice 21 elo game before zooming
So you wanna behave like a big boy on all chat, a sneaky rat on allies one and a victim of the holocaust on forum..

@Mickeythemousie we played one of thoses games together but it doesnt means that vb are not mandatory and i assume that you should also ask to 1007 and trancedout why did they left before game draw then.

[dweiler]

Lol, votebalance is pure mandatory since one season mby? So plz, don't put yourself as a victim and assume the fact that you acted like an 'elo whore'.

That is not true, we have played many different ways, including random teams, balanced teams, all games 15/15, elo-based etc. The last update I am aware of this: viewtopic.php?f=207&t=97057&p=384503&hilit=balance#p384252

In here it clearly says !votebalance is just that, a vote, no obligation for it. I assume this is also the last update @Kreutertee is aware of, so to be honest I find your accusations a bit distasteful.

[Kreutertee]

When I saw the game was started and teams didn't change, I realized game wasn't votebalanced. So I tried fast votebalance. But I am not responsible for that...

[trancedout]: !start
[System]: 5. . .
[System]: 4. . .
[System]: 3. . .
[Kreutertee]: !votebalance
[System]: 2. . .
[System]: 1. . .

So ye, after the game started I checked the elo while others were still loading the game. Only then I knew it was in our favor. Just leaving without draw ain't definitely the way.

It was established more than once very clearly that leaving a game due to a rule violation is definitely not the way. If you feel a rule violation occurred, finish the game and report after.

I once left/raqequit after Tin abused antistuck and I paid my dues for that. And I didn't appeal my ban, coz I actually take responsibility for my actions. And I expect nothing less of my fellow LIHL players.

So don't act like you're hovering on the moral highgrounds and blame me instead.

[Don_Killuminati]

@Mickeythemousie , I said that vb is mandatory mby since one season so i dont get why you bring back stuff from year ago.
What you saying here would change the entire current lobby meta and im pretty sure that I have been told many times that vb is mandatory.
The only distasteful thing i see here is kreut behavior but thats my opinion.

[FateStayNight]

Rules are important but their highest priority should always be justice for everyone. If no vb, teams can be very unfair, so leaving after 2 seconds and hosting new game seems way more fair than playing 36 min with unfair teams.

If rules would be straight forward, there would be no need for lawyers at all. Thats why its also kinda dumb to give same punishment for same rulebreak when the circumstances are quite different.

[Kreutertee]

True, could be unfair.

But unfair to whom? The team with lower average elo and therefore worse players? Or unfair for the team with higher average elo, cause they would lose more? Or is it maybe just fair for both teams, since better players -> higher chance to win and worse players -> higher reward if they win.

Who knows really and who is to tell what's fair and what's not?!

Anyway, I agree rules aren't always black and white and therefore I consult the Mod-Team (LIHL lawyers so to speak) to rule according.

[dweiler]

A bit off-topic, but I have always been a fan of non-balanced games. Instead of the same boring meta of supposed stronger and weaker players mixed, everyone has to fight for their Elo. Weaker players don't get carried and stronger players have to fight for their Elo more. Nowadays all games are the same, because you never have an underdog team pulling some stunt, or stronger players really having to show they are better if they get outrolled by supposed weaker players. That is why I have never supported mandatory !votebalance, and if it did pass somewhere somehow, I would consider that a loss.

Also remember that Elo is in itself balancing, in the sense that it values your win/loss. So a top-team winning vs a worse is valued less. It is not unfair at all. It's more unfair to me that top players almost never get to play together and people aren't forced to show their calling skills, because they are always put together in a team with top players who do their calling.