Quote Originally Posted by OliviaLugria View Post
I don't think that logic is sound. What I criticized was throwing the game to ensure a premade lost. If a premade farmed a team so hard they no longer have a chance of winning then they should also expect not to win due to retaliation.

This stays true the other way around. If you're going to attack a premade to the point they can't win, they will ensure your loss as well. So, really, it wouldn't increase your chances of winning, but only the 3rd unrelated team.

Obviously, hitting the premade team and keeping them from barreling over everyone is strategically sound. Doing this to the extent you also lose is stupid.
I'd suggest there's also a flaw in your logic.

If a premade team farmed a non-premade team so hard the non-premade team retaliated, what would happen? The non-premade team would get wiped out even faster. This is the crux of the matter. The only counterplay is if both non-premades get sufficiently hacked off they double-team the premade. Which is not easy to do without cross-team chat, although ironically the one group that could arrange this are PvP Discords. (Hence an unrelated concern about win-trading.)

Where I suspect you and I agree is that I regard it as contrary to the spirit of the game when non-premade_1 deliberately feeds non-premade_2 so that non-premade_2 edges ahead of the premade. The level of frustration is so high in some games I have seen it happen. I would never advocate for that approach.