eSVau double standards / abuse of league admin power

[griffin1987]

3. The "being provoked" thing can be taken as something reducing the punishment, but saying it's okay if you get provoked is a self-righteous argument. Look at the law for example - do you think you could kill someone without being punished if he provoked you? Do you think you would get less punishment (jail/money) for doing something against the law if you said that you "were being provoked"?

There are extenuating circumstances ("mildernde umstände") in law and forms of provocation are in fact part of these. So yes, you will get less of a punishment if you can prove that you were being provoked.


Also the analogy to football is terrible as it is a time-based game. You can see that in professional (and non-professional) league of legends it does happen that teams surrender before the nexus is destroyed, when they think they don't have a chance any more (their surrender vote is similar to the BT one). In professional (and also non-professional) Starcraft it is common practice to leave the game before every building is destroyed.

In sports like cycling, running, or cross-country skiing it is common not to finish a race when you are too far behind, so you save stamina for the next races.

There are probably more examples of forfeiting in sports and competitive gaming.

Thank you for the "extenuating circumstances", that was what I was actually looking for. As far as I know provocation is not being taken into account anymore in europe at least, since they removed the "heat of the passion" paragraphs, but I don't want to get into discussing law here so let's just put the law thing aside.

Also, before I write anything else: Thank you for staying objective with your arguments.

About the analogy: Leaving is something different than -giveup. I'm okay with someone leaving if they don't want to play anymore. So your starcraft example just undermines that And regarding sports: Your examples aren't better, as all of these are about reaching a target in the shortest possible time, and btanks is not a race. I guess paintball would be an appropriate example, but then again I don't have any experience there about people giving up or not, so I can't say much about that. But if you look at the last btanks tournament where there were games with a 1,5h limit then we're back to football (just to clarify: I'm talking about what britain would call soccer), because in that case it's both fixed time and about who gets more points in the alloted time.

Anyway, I would welcome it if you put your (really good I think) arguments to my threads regarding removing the -giveup option, as I think they're more fitting there. Thanks

Edit: There's also a difference between there still being a chance to win, which is ALWAYS the case in BT (there are replays on the forum of winning with the main building at less than 5% of hp), and it being physically impossible to win anymore (e.g. if you were behind in a shooter by 10 kills and the remaining time were 5 seconds with only 8 players in the game and a respawn time of 10 seconds, then it would be physically/mathematically impossible to win anymore), so not every other game is a good/appropriate analogy (though, I must admit, league of legends is a very good one)

Edit2: https://www.google.at/search?q=league+of+legends+giveup most of the results for me are about "you should not give up", don't know about you (thanks to google personalized results), so at least from the outside it seems to me that there are actually many people with LoL who aren't happy with the giveup either.