123veceu (EUNE)
: My game is the same, its almost like it wants to fry my pc
> [{quoted}](name=123veceu,realm=EUNE,application-id=eZuvYsEr,discussion-id=lKAieEBR,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2019-10-16T14:48:11.652+0000) > > My game is the same, its almost like it wants to fry my pc The thing is though, I have a computer that's more than overkill to be playing League of Legends, but this software is so unstable and slow at times that it's still causing all these issues. Fancy animations are cool and stuff, but at least make sure it's functioning properly. Now because of this thing I can't even chat with my friends in League of Legends because of this dumb Leaverbuster warning I can't even agree to.
Rioter Comments
Kurotsu (EUW)
: Brooo, I finished Uni this year, I am TREATING myself to sleep whenever I want. I wake up around midnight these days xD
> [{quoted}](name=Kurotsu,realm=EUW,application-id=NzaqEm3e,discussion-id=ulmzvFnV,comment-id=000000000000,timestamp=2018-12-12T21:46:49.836+0000) > > Brooo, I finished Uni this year, I am TREATING myself to sleep whenever I want. I wake up around midnight these days xD Nice. I did that last year and I'm still doing it this year.
Kurotsu (EUW)
: I was just sipping on my morning coffee while reading your story. I read it slowly and all the way to the end. :)
> [{quoted}](name=Kurotsu,realm=EUW,application-id=NzaqEm3e,discussion-id=ulmzvFnV,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2018-12-12T21:33:30.755+0000) > > I was just sipping on my morning coffee while reading your story. I read it slowly and all the way to the end. :) Morning coffee? WTF? Are you sure you live in somewhere in west Europe? :P
Rioter Comments
Busty Demon (EUNE)
: I understand how you feel, however does he do it on purpose? Is he really doing it to ruin the game? I mean yeah people complain about the AFKers but you see people complaining about client lagging and freezing and getting dc randomly and etc. Anyway mate. Some things are hard to judge. You might be right. Who knows?
> [{quoted}](name=P1ATD,realm=EUNE,application-id=NzaqEm3e,discussion-id=gKyY6wku,comment-id=000400000000,timestamp=2018-11-26T19:43:51.739+0000) > > I understand how you feel, however does he do it on purpose? Is he really doing it to ruin the game? I mean yeah people complain about the AFKers but you see people complaining about client lagging and freezing and getting dc randomly and etc. Anyway mate. Some things are hard to judge. You might be right. Who knows? A 17,5% AFK rate isn't that hard to judge. Whatever the reason is, it's simply unacceptable or at last it should be in my opinion. And yes I would this player does it on purpose because if your AFK rate is that high for whatever reason you should be able to recognize a pattern and if that pattern is that you are unable to complete games you sign up for to play, then you simply should be stopping to be playing all together and especially don't queue up for things like ranked. If your situation is so unstable you are not fit to be playing cooperative multiplayer games like League of Legends.
: Please also note with int'ing punishments that they may not be immediately perma-banned or 14-day suspended. They can also get chat bans. So you'll see them still play but are unable to speak.
> [{quoted}](name=Chaocontrol64,realm=EUW,application-id=NzaqEm3e,discussion-id=gKyY6wku,comment-id=0005,timestamp=2018-11-26T13:27:00.259+0000) > > Please also note with int'ing punishments that they may not be immediately perma-banned or 14-day suspended. They can also get chat bans. So you'll see them still play but are unable to speak. Yes because chat bans are very effective to stop them from inting more.
Busty Demon (EUNE)
: In 100 games he left 17 games only. 2 games per 10. That's not high for such penalty. Be human. Some people aren't blessed with great life as urs or great network connection or good PC to play on.
> [{quoted}](name=P1ATD,realm=EUNE,application-id=NzaqEm3e,discussion-id=gKyY6wku,comment-id=0004,timestamp=2018-11-26T10:16:20.124+0000) > > In 100 games he left 17 games only. 2 games per 10. That's not high for such penalty. Be human. Some people aren't blessed with great life as urs or great network connection or good PC to play on. 2 per 10 games is even worse because that's 20%, but what penalty though? There simply is none. I am human and I'm saying it's not good for the common cause if we allow people like that to ruin the experience of so many more people. Who says I have a great life anyway? I'm here on the boards complaining about AFKers that Riot doesn't care about. It simply cannot be great if that's what I'm doing. The joke though is that it's still time better spent than being in a game with and AFKer that there are more than enough of.
Shädäm (EUNE)
: Riot certainly cares, they are just probably slow as f. I've had same players in my team and I also checked their following games. Once I had a Nida jg that run down my lane because she died first blood in river by getting 3v1'ed. I reported the player but she still played 2 games (in the first she trolled again, and in the next she was afk) after the bann set in. The reason is simple. Its harder to detect trolls, because Riot cannot judge by only stats. Afk can be detected by the Leavebuster, and flaming is detected by a BOT, but deciding whether it was real trolling or just a "bad game", as Riot calls it, is much harder and takes more insight, then just looking through a chat-log for swear words. And also, you met him just once, and there is not much chance that you get matched with him again, its not impossible tho, I have an example for that too. The game happened and nothing can change that now, and from that point its not your concern, but Riot's responsibilty to serve the rightful punishment.
> [{quoted}](name=Shädäm,realm=EUNE,application-id=NzaqEm3e,discussion-id=nA9jEoFU,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2018-11-26T09:37:51.080+0000) > > Riot certainly cares, they are just probably slow as f. I've had same players in my team and I also checked their following games. Once I had a Nida jg that run down my lane because she died first blood in river by getting 3v1'ed. I reported the player but she still played 2 games (in the first she trolled again, and in the next she was afk) after the bann set in. What makes you think they care? Because that's what they say? Do they even still say that? Well regardless of what they say, because frankly they could say anything, that doesn't make it true. The fact is actions speak louder than words and the action I see is that this player has played 15 more games after this tilt I was referring to over the course of 3 days. > The reason is simple. Its harder to detect trolls, because Riot cannot judge by only stats. Afk can be detected by the Leavebuster, and flaming is detected by a BOT, but deciding whether it was real trolling or just a "bad game", as Riot calls it, is much harder and takes more insight, then just looking through a chat-log for swear words. So you're saying Riot has the best of the best working on preventing trolls like that ruining their game but it's simply too hard to come up with a solution to this? Oh please... Like I said this player was not buying items and was recalling in the vivacity of other players without either canceling or casting a spell or anything. This shouldn't be to hard to pick up even by the simplest of automated systems. > The game happened and nothing can change that now, and from that point its not your concern, but Riot's responsibilty to serve the rightful punishment. If I'm playing this game it is my concern. I don't want to constantly be exposed to these kinds of players. But hey we're all still buying RP right?
Rioter Comments
Rioter Comments
HonorFive (EUW)
: HONOR NEEDS TO BE MORE RESPONSIVE
The honor system is just a joke, but it seems to be at least somewhat effective in motivating some players to be more 'honorable'.
: Lets stop trolls!
As a community the best we can do is simply to collectively, flat out ignore the trolling completely. Don't even say anything like "Vayne AP troll". Trolls feed off of comments like that. It would be better to just collectively ignore them. Trolling isn't fun when you don't get any response. Riot could be key in setting up such an environment, like by more specific public service announcements. They could perhaps even create a reward system around it for the ones that are ignoring the trolls. The first step though I think is for Riot to give a clear definition of what kind of 'trolling' is and isn't allowed, maybe even per game mode.
Shiwah (EUW)
: ***
> [{quoted}](name=Shiwah,realm=EUW,application-id=NzaqEm3e,discussion-id=ZXMW4E1a,comment-id=000d00000000000000000000,timestamp=2018-05-17T10:39:56.907+0000) > > The deal here is that feedback is only useful when there's an actually achievable suggestion on how to change things attached to it... otherwise it's an opinion. Still respectable, but nothing Riot could work with. And that's the pain point: Riot has tried almost everything players keep suggesting in regarding to a moltitude of topics. I haven't been around forever, but I have been around long enough to know about 99% (don't quote me on this number...) of the suggestions, even when some of them are easy to implement, are simply being ignored or not really actually considered, which actually makes sense by the way, but that's another topic. Still, there's hope that somebody comes up with a completely original idea that would also *not* hurt their business in the long run. Well then Riot should start hiring more or better people. They don't pay me to fight for their interests, so I won't, unless I think it's good for either myself or the rest of the community. > (And no, no company would close off registrations. Ever.) Of course not, because every registration form that has ever been created by any company is still active and accessible and will always be until the end of time and beyond... It's a choice to have an open registration form or not. > > That's exactly what I was talking about - the tendency to switch topics. My answer is in direct relation to your suggestion to make smurfing less likely by making it less attractive - which would directly address your concern about smurfs. I don't know if you are suggesting here that I'm trying to switch topics here, but I'm not. I'm trying to cut off the topic entirely because I don't think it's appropriate to be discussed here in this very tread. It's already gone way too off-topic in my opinion. Also, I don't feel comfortable talking about things I don't know shit about. Maybe something you could take as an example. Also, again, like I said, I personally don't really care about smurfs all that much. Also I would kindly request you to stop talking about my "tendencies", because when I'm talking about your "tendencies", I get censored because that's apparently "an immature personal attack which could lead to witch hunts". Well if that's how it is, fine, but then don't come talking to me like this because I won't accept that, since what you're saying not any better, even worse if you ask me.
Shiwah (EUW)
: ***
> [{quoted}](name=Shiwah,realm=EUW,application-id=NzaqEm3e,discussion-id=ZXMW4E1a,comment-id=000d000000000000,timestamp=2018-05-16T21:43:22.635+0000) > > Not even a theoretical question. You know? I should know better than actually reply to you here since it's been proven to me to be completely pointless, but let me entertain you with an answer anyway. I'm feeling stubborn and generous today. Now, I don't know if you're just trolling me by using multiple accounts, but I don't believe you as a seemingly third person have the authority to claim anything about a question asked by someone else, other than your own interpretation. You are nothing more than me though, I have the same right to have my own interpretation of a question **I'm** asked. I chose to give a theoretical answer, as in, this is theoretically what Riot could do, but I know very well it's rather unlikely they would do something like that because it's not in their interests. It is however **literally** very well possible that Riot can do such a thing and we will probably see that happening some time in the future. League of Legends will most likely not live forever. Account creation is most likely to be disabled some time in the future. >Somehow, you have this tendency of trying to weasel out of situations where you're directly asked to provide actual feedback. You say "Riot should do this and that" (in this specific discussion, they should be dealing with AFKers and flamers in a way that they can't return to the game), but when asked *how*, you suddenly give super vague or outright impossible to implement methods. I'm sorry, but you know what it is? Neither you nor Riot are paying me enough for this shit. I'm not obligated to provide any feedback whatsoever. I was talking with someone else (?) about something I cared about at that moment, AFKers and how other players look at them compared to flamers, steering Riot's policies in a certain direction that I think is not the best for the community. I do this on a voluntary basis. So for you to say I'm weaseling out of anything is very inappropriate. Like I have some sort of obligation... Please... Also please don't put words in my mouth they are often incorrect or don't show my intent of what I'm trying to say. I specifically mentioned smurfs in my answer. Something I personally don't even really care about, but I see a large part of the community does, so I thought I'd mention it because it relates to me on the grounds how easy it is to just make a new account without much consequence. Now if you wanted feedback on that, you perhaps could have just asked. As long as I've played League I've given Riot plenty of feedback and they never did much with it as far as I can tell. "They" even sent me a trolling emissary once saying something completely useless and irrelevant to the feedback I had. (Granted, my feedback could have been written down more clearly, but still if someone didn't understand, they could have just asked. Maybe it would also be helpful if that emissary wasn't lurking the boards to prematurely pounce (not more than 2 minutes) at the very first chance they have to say something useless like a real Internet troll) I'm sure you know what I'm talking about. I don't know what you're trying to achieve by harassing me here, because that's the way it's starting to look like to me. I thought emissaries were supposed to be helpful, but you're not helpful to me at all and if I might be so bold, not helpful to a lot of other players here on the board as well, with your one-side views and unreasonable attitude. If Riot wants my feedback well then here it is, remove Shiwah as an emissary. I honestly believe that would be better for fair open discussion here on the boards as this emissary creates a toxic environment here on the boards if you ask me. How's that for feedback? Want some more? Maybe it's time for Riot to implement personal message functionality for players here on the boards so people like me wouldn't be "forced" to voice their concerns out in the open like this. If I could send private messages to other boards users then I would have done things differently, but no matter. This can just be removed again on basis of "an immature personal attack". Well than what's this here above? I actually find it pretty damn insulting coming from an emissary nonetheless. > Funny enough, the changes to premium chests are intended to make smurfing less attractive. After all, people literally created new accounts just to get targeted skins from those chests... I don't know anything about this and I don't see how this is relating to what I was actually trying to talk about here so whatever. Good luck with those changes.
Rioter Comments
Shiwah (EUW)
: ***
> [{quoted}](name=Shiwah,realm=EUW,application-id=NzaqEm3e,discussion-id=ZXMW4E1a,comment-id=000d0000,timestamp=2018-05-16T09:38:14.673+0000) > > If it were that simple, they would have done so *ages ago*. > > But then, you didn't explain *how* they would identify the precise user whose account creation option would need to be disabled. Aka IP ban, the same thing that can't be used because of dynamic IPs. I was giving a theoretical answer to a theoretical question. Riot could theoretically simply disable new account creation all together for anyone. Like I said though, Now I'm not saying that's what Riot should do.
Mad Loony (EUW)
: Do reports have more value than we think?
Maybe you would be interested in reading this threat: https://boards.euw.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/help-support-en/kz1ed2Gm-honor-2?comment=00000002000000000000 There a Wrenchman is talking about this very topic. Now I don't know if his information is correct, but it very well might be I guess.
: What good would this do? EUNE servers are located at Frankfurt, Germany. EUW at Amsterdam, i think. Ping would differ like... what? 10 ms?
> [{quoted}](name=XxD4Rk5L4SH0RxX,realm=EUW,application-id=eZuvYsEr,discussion-id=jwpKWpXy,comment-id=0001000000000001000000000001,timestamp=2018-05-14T15:55:15.674+0000) > > What good would this do? > > EUNE servers are located at Frankfurt, Germany. EUW at Amsterdam, i think. Ping would differ like... what? 10 ms? Maybe they would be better off playing on the Turkish servers. I have no clue. It doesn't really matter though. If their connection isn't good enough they shouldn't be playing a coop game like this.
: Naw they only play League
> [{quoted}](name=Bunny Lucifer,realm=EUW,application-id=eZuvYsEr,discussion-id=jwpKWpXy,comment-id=000100000000000100000000000000000000,timestamp=2018-05-14T14:00:39.096+0000) > > Naw they only play League Unfortunately the world is filled with selfish people only concerned with their own interests. Very sad.
: Works fine for them, they have better ping on EUW while playing from Russian than on Russian server itself :P
> [{quoted}](name=Bunny Lucifer,realm=EUW,application-id=eZuvYsEr,discussion-id=jwpKWpXy,comment-id=0001000000000001000000000000,timestamp=2018-05-14T13:58:02.251+0000) > > Works fine for them, they have better ping on EUW while playing from Russian than on Russian server itself :P If their ping is shit anywhere then they shouldn't play anywhere. I suggest turn based games if you wanna play together. In turn based games ping doesn't matter.
: Nah aha, one of our friends started playing on EUW, so we joined him, been so for 8 years now, don't feel like moving over to EUNE :P
> [{quoted}](name=Bunny Lucifer,realm=EUW,application-id=eZuvYsEr,discussion-id=jwpKWpXy,comment-id=00010000000000010000,timestamp=2018-05-14T13:55:09.875+0000) > > Nah aha, one of our friends started playing on EUW, so we joined him, been so for 8 years now, don't feel like moving over to EUNE :P Well I don't know about you, but at least your brothers shouldn't be playing in EUW when they are residing in Russia. Just not cool.
HSBunny (EUW)
: Keep a good Mentality in SoloQ
The monkey part made me LOL. Thanks :)
: I personally have 49 ping, my brothers that are currently studying in Russia have 85 and 120 ping when playing on EUW, two of my other friends who live in Latvia have around 70 ping and one more who lives in Finland has 60.
> [{quoted}](name=Bunny Lucifer,realm=EUW,application-id=eZuvYsEr,discussion-id=jwpKWpXy,comment-id=000100000000,timestamp=2018-05-14T13:37:33.278+0000) > > I personally have 49 ping, my brothers that are currently studying in Russia have 85 and 120 ping when playing on EUW, two of my other friends who live in Latvia have around 70 ping and one more who lives in Finland has 60. Please migrate with your friends to EUNE.
Shiwah (EUW)
: ***
> [{quoted}](name=Shiwah,realm=EUW,application-id=39gqIYVI,discussion-id=B3p8o2vp,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2018-05-14T11:14:30.085+0000) > > You can set up your own shortcuts. I know... But it looks like me something regarding the retreat ping has changed since the last patch or the one prior to that.
Rioter Comments
: this community needs to change
I've been playing this game for longer, but I think you might be suffering from nostalgia goggles. The League community as far as I've known has always had players who are more on the casual side of the scale and the players who were more try hard, especially when players realized you could make a living out of playing League. I do agree people playing normals should just chill though. I often play non meta bot lane with friends and often enough the crying already starts in champion select before the game has even started. More often than not we actually do better than average in the bot lane playing non-meta picks than the enemy boy laners.
Pyrosen (EUW)
: Appealing my perma-ban, probably hopeless but I'm out of options.
> [{quoted}](name=Febos,realm=EUW,application-id=NzaqEm3e,discussion-id=ZXMW4E1a,comment-id=00010001000000000000000000000000000000000000000100000000,timestamp=2018-05-14T02:41:59.133+0000) > Extraordinary claims require extraordinay evidence. Any numbers on that? Not any other than those of my personal experience, but I don't always keep track. I recently started a blog about AFKers though, maybe you would want to read it and laugh at my misery https://boards.euw.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/player-behaviour-en/WKgdfbJr-four-games-and-counting You're welcome. > How many AFKs vs how many flamers? I'm sorry, but for something like this to have a clear decisive answer for, you first need to have clear definitions of what constitutes as AFK and what constitutes as flame. However, how many flamers there are, is partially independent of how many AFKers there are. They both influence each other though and it doesn't say everyhting about the severity of either problem either. > *** > > Is that so? Maybe I should have phrased this "Yet anyone playing the game can clearly see it doesn't matter at all." better, but this part "You can report all you want, but there will still be AFKers and there will still be flamers." isn't anymore less true. Maybe I should have said there are many players that are subjectively feeling those reports are pointless, and that makes sense if only 0.006% of the player base actually gets perma banned and you see both flamers and AFKers still so very often. The thing is, I was also tying to come to a conclusion in the limited amount of characters I had available in one post. Now I had split it up in two. > So we should stop using vacines and going to the doctor because sick people still exist and always will. > Or we should abolish the law system because crime still exists even after such many years. > > The point is, just because they exist doesn't mean they aren't being punished. Of course that doesn't mean we should abolish laws, stop using vaccines or stop fighting toxic behavior for that matter. However when vaccines and laws are not working sufficiently we try to improve them and I'm saying this should also be done fighting toxic behavior in League of Legends. When is the last time you've seen Riot doing something large to improve the situation and is the current situation at a point where it's not that big of a deal? I don't think so. What I'm trying to say is that Riot should do a better job. Of course this is coming from my perspective and is based on my interests and those don't necessarily over lap with Riot's, but I do believe there is some overlap. Basically I just find Riot not ambitious enough when it comes to this. > It's literally impossible to stop players from playing this game. League a **free** game. How do you stop someone from making a new account? Simple, disable account creation. Now I'm not saying that's what Riot should do, but they could at least make it less attractive in order to combat smurfs for instance. > Besides, all you need to do is go through the Player Behaviour board and see for yourself. Everyday I see multiple discussions about someone being permanently suspended. Those are minority within a minority. > With that in mind, how dare you say "reporting doesn't matter"? Of course it does, otherwise you wouldn't see those discussions. I see those too, but I also see the flaming and whatever undesirable behavior running rampant too, that's what I was referring to. Ultimately it doesn't really matter to me if countless of players get permabanned if hordes of other toxic players just replace them or whatever. Maybe it's the nostalgia goggles, but I don't feel like the current situation when it comes to many kinds toxic behavior (in my eyes) have improved much or anything at all really over the course of years in my experience. > You have no clue what you are talking about. "Extraordinary claims require EXTRAORDINARY evidence." Any objective arguments supporting that claim? You do realize that from my perspective it seems to be very much the opposite and to be the other way around, don't you? No, but seriously, to me it seems like you're so extremist you are not reasonable and if I can't reason with you, I don't see much point in talking to you anymore. Maybe it's a pointless exercise and I should just stop because it's looking pretty much hopeless. > ######Then there's this: [report feedback](https://boards.euw.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/player-behaviour-en/18B792J4-thank-you-riot). Yes, I get these too sometimes. It gives me some temporary satisfaction, but when I get yet another horrible experience it's just as quickly forgotten as well.
πET (EUW)
: > [{quoted}](name=Febos,realm=EUW,application-id=NzaqEm3e,discussion-id=ZXMW4E1a,comment-id=000100010000000000000000000000000000000000000001,timestamp=2018-05-13T10:23:27.902+0000) > > By the quality and quantity of reports it receives. If suddenly everyone stops reporting anyone that says "you suck" or "uninstall the game", for example, then the system will learn **not to** punish that. Likewise, if everyone starts reporting "cheese" as offensive (literally saying cheese), then it will to punish anyone who says it. Well if that's really how it works then I just have to say that even though it kind of makes sense, especially from a business point of view, it for me invalidates the IFS judgement even more than I already thought. To me this would mean the justice factor of the IFS is equivalent that of the Rwandan genocide. It's just the majority suppressing the minority, but instead of actually murdering people like in the Rwandan genocide the IFS is murdering players accounts. I think this would make for a very flawed system. > Some keywords are probably hardcoded into the system, but in a general sense the IFS will punish what the majority of the community deems as inappropriate. I hope there is more to it than just that and I'm pretty sure there is or I would expect very different results from what I'm actually seeing. Either that or my experience playing League must be very different from the majority of players, which I don't dare to rule out. > I don't think so. I have a friend that had multiple Leaverbuster penalties for a month or so. Not even joking. > I don't know if it's the Leaverbuster itself handling the punishment or if it just flags the player so the IFS can punish him accordingly. Simply ridiculous if you ask me, seeing the punishment for flaming. Now I'm not saying any account should be permabanned except maybe for those proven intentional AFKs, but there should at least be something barring continuously excessive AFKers from playing ranked or something, just anything. > > Very rarely. I can even count how many time is happened in two hands; maybe even just one hand. > Granted I don't play ranked, so I don't how much worse it is there. I see you rarely actually play the game so that would make sense then even though I see you played from season 3 at least. I have played LoL a awful lot so I've about seen it all and seen most things multiple times. Let me tell you it happens a lot. Way more than it should at least and I can't say this for sure, but I think most of the time those players who do that get away with it. > Suffice to say, if I know my connection is bad I won't even start a match. I usually wait 1 hour to be sure everything is working fine. Be careful with what you say. This isn't the off-topic section. You are posting this in the Incorrect Board. Choosing whether you start a match when you are lagging or not at all related to Player Behaviour in any way. > > Recently my ISP has had more problems than what it used to. That's one of the reasons why I avoid PvP games. I rather stick to bots where my team doesn't need me to win. For what it's worth... Good job! > My hard drive was faulty, but I had no way to predict that. It took me two hours to boot up the machine because it scheduled a system check/repair when the error, that led to the blue screen, happen. You know you can actually just skip those most of the time, right? Well at least now you know if it happens again in the future. > No clue. I reckon the 5v5 is higher, but I've won games 4v5. > My problem with flaming is that not only does it decrease my chances of winning but it also makes the game a living hell. This is highly subjective though. To me flamers don't make the game a living hell at all. To me AFKers or Inters do. Sure flamers are annoying, but it's nothing I can't handle and again, there is always the mute button. > At least with the AFK we can just "open" early and let the enemy win. This is literally inting by definition. Not cool... One question though. Why if flamers are even worse than AFKers, why wouldn't you just "open"early and let the enemy win when you have a flamer on your team? You said it yourself "Both will increase my chances of losing the game, but for one of them I know they're doing it on purpose." So you rather intentionally throw the game for someone who unintentionally AFKs and might come back than for someone who is doing what he or she is doing on purpose? > > Try as you want, I see no justification for flamming. Not even if someone insults you, your dog, cat, personal ghosts, hair, etc. Flamming is never okay. But letting the enemy win is? No seriously, you saying this just shows how unreasonable you are and here is why. I could be insulted when I kill an enemy and an ally tells me "Good job". Why? "Is my ally saying League of Legends is my job? What?! Like I don't have anything better to do than League of Legends! REPORT!" See the problem here? > Like I said, when someone AFKs, unless they "announce" it, we can assume it wasn't on purpose. The flamer doesn't have an excuse. He's flaming because he **wants to**. This is simply where you are wrong. The majority of flamers don't flame because they want to. If they actually did want to, they probably wouldn't be playing League because there are way better places to "flame" people. No it's rather that while playing League players often find themselves in situations which cause frustration and this in turn causes them to flame. To vent and express themselves. I'm not saying that's an excuse which makes it right, but it should lead to some understanding. Again I would really like to inspire you to think about why flamers flame and what could be done about it so those flamers are less motivated to flame. > Everyone is capable of self-restraint. You want to know why I'm so sure of that? Because they wouldn't act the same in IRL towards law enforcement, for example. In real life there are people who struggle and fail with self-restraint as well, even when dealing with law enforcement. Things are often more nuanced than that. How often have you checked a flamers match history? Maybe that's something you should try sometimes. You might be surprised as to what you'll find. > For some it's harder to have contraint, but not impossible. All those players need is discipline. Unfortunately for them, we are not here to educate them on proper maners and discipline. If that's the case then why even bother with warnings and stuff like that? Why bother trying to "reform" toxic players? Yes, Riot is somewhat lenient when it comes to this. This is good for them from a business point of view and in their interests, but not necessarily in the interests of the players. I think it would be in both the players and Riot's interest though if they actually would invest more in trying to get their players to reform. I think saying Riot isn't exactly doing the best job when it comes to this is quite the understatement. They could do so much better, but apparently they simply have other priorities. > No, they don't. Again, if we are talking about AFK as in "oops, my internet disconnected" then AFK is miles better than verbal toxicity. > While it's true that both will put you at a disadvantage and AFK is worse because 4v5, the flamer will do more harm in the long run. This is nothing more than your personal opinion. My personal opinion is exactly the opposite as I see AFKers and inters or other kinds of trolling being perhaps the number one reason causing flame in the first place. Also personally flamers don't bother me nearly as much as AFKers. > You need to look at this not as one isolated game but rather as a collection of them. That AFK player won't do that in as many games as the flamer will be toxic in his games, assuming we are talking about unintentional AFK. > That's the whole point here. You don't know someone is intentional AFKing unless they say so or they do it regularly. The flamer, on the other hand, is obviously doing it intentionally. Like I said before, there's no excuse for verbal toxicity. That's the thing. I don't look at as one isolated game. I look at it in patterns of undesirable behavior affecting one another, but I'm also keeping the goal of the game in mind. The goal is, in summoners rift, to kill the enemy nexus. Players could be having a blast chatting and joking about their pets or whatever without "flaming" but playing the game half focused which causes them to lose the game. I would call this inting. Now I could very much understand the players frustration of having to deal with a 4 man premade team that's playing like that. I can imagine if a player is going through stuff like this over and over that they become toxic over time. There are of course also a lot of factors that are not in anyway related to the game, but where it does come to the game, when you pay any attention, you should see patterns which I think it would be better if we would collectively try to break them and change them in more favorable patterns in which more players can enjoy the game better. > The "good" old argument: "just mute". Pressing that button doesn't solve anything. It "silences" that player for the remainder of that game, but what happens in the next game and the game after that? How can I silence him those games? You just press the same mute button again, everyone has a mute option available. > I don't want anyone else to be expvosed to that behaviour, if it doesn't affect me. And I don't want AFKers affecting me or anyone else, but they are running rampant. > The truth is you can deal with AFKs, intentional or not, the same way you deal with flamming: report them. > You won't be able to "fix it" in your game, but you will "fix" for everyone after you. Yet anyone playing the game can clearly see it doesn't matter at all. You can report all you want, but there will still be AFKers and there will still be flamers.
> [{quoted}](name=Febos,realm=EUW,application-id=NzaqEm3e,discussion-id=ZXMW4E1a,comment-id=00010001000000000000000000000000000000000000000100000000,timestamp=2018-05-14T02:41:59.133+0000) >What I do know is how many hours I've played - 2600+ ... I said I can count in my two hands the amount of times I saw a death treat. Let me be pessimistic and say 10 cases. That's 0.36% of my games... 3000 games isn't much, but you can't tell me the proportion of toxicity will increase from 0.36% to anything higher than 1.5%. Just doesn't make sense. But that's the thing with anecdotal evidence, the experience of one person can often be very warped compared to the average experience of a larger number of people. Maybe you've seen a relatively low count of death threats and maybe I've seen a relatively high count of death threats. To me it would make sense that the amount of death threats you see is heavily influenced by the way you play the game. To me it seems like you're a much more casual player than me, so to me it makes sense you would see a lot less than me because you play things like 3v3, ARAM, Dominion and things like that. You said you don't really ranked, but I do (now). And the player base (and maybe more importantly player mentality at the time, because it can be the same players obviously) mainly playing ranked is different from the ones playing mainly ARAM for instance. Nobody other than Riot should or could have the actual numbers on how many death threats are made in game. Also what do you count as a death threat? If we are talking about the infamous three letters or not makes for way different numbers. If you are actually only talking about the "Tell me where you live and I'm coming over to your house and kill you" kind of death threats I must say that to me it seems that those numbers have gone down over the course of time quite a bit. As far as anecdotal evidence goes. It was only yesterday or the day before I've seen the infamous three letters the last time and unless I would be playing less I estimate it would only take 2 weeks tops before I would see it again. My guesstimate for seeing anything I would count as a death threat (something mentioning the end of real life in any way shape or form) would range between 3%-5% of the games I play. I might not be the best at guessing though. > *** > I would, but the flamer wouldn't let the enemy push. My best bet would be to wait for 15 minutes and surrender, assuming every other team mate would agree to it. Good luck defending 1v5... > This is what I'm talking about. I wouldn't "open" the game by myself. We, as a team, would agree to let the enemy push, if we are talking before 15 minutes, and surrender otherwise. > > I'm not the type of player to stop playing even when the game is obviously lost. I just won't try 100%, but I won't int either. So it isn't "literally inting". It's a decision made as team when you're playing 4v5. I don't see how it's not inting. You are giving away the victory to the enemy team and you are doing it intentionally. How is that not inting? Do I smell a context matters argument here? It smells nice :P > *** > Even if that AFK comes back, the chances of winning are still low. Yes, so what? To me this is yet another indicator of why AFKers could be seen as a bigger problem than flamers. Sure flamers have lower win rates, but teams with AFKers in them (of course depending on the duration and timing of them AFKing) can have much lower win rates. Thus they have more impact inside the actual game. > The enemy team wasn't aware I was AFK, when they destroyed the inib. The enemy team had very poor map awareness if they actually didn't notice you have been AFK for about what? 5 minutes? Damn! :P > *** > I believe in second chances and so does Riot. But I'm not going to be your "professor" in discipline. I warn you about your behaviour and let you figure out how to improve it. And thus your actual contribution to improving the situation is very limited. Not that I'm saying I'm doing a better job, but at least I'm trying. Also "... when it comes to extreme toxic behaviour, like telling someone to take their own life, I would immediately remove that player from the game. Not even a temporary suspension..." doesn't really sound like you believe in second chances. > That's why this boards exist really. Here people can ask **how** to improve. It's their choice if they want to or not. I believe these boards serve (or should serve) more function than just that. That's why I'm here. > *** > > No, it isn't personal opinion. The AFKs I'm describing are the ones not doing it intentionally. How hard can is this to understand? It's not hard to understand, I just don't agree because I take more variables into equation then just "Flamming is never okay". Not to be insulting or anything, but when you're so extremist about a topic like this and don't think much further than your own personal extremist beliefs you're probably better off not asking questions like these. It looks pretty ... > Are you telling me I do more harm than a flamer because my connection drops sometimes? It seems like it's exactly what you are saying. Depending on how often and how severely that would impact gameplay I would say either yes or no. But since I personally think flamers (there are lots of different degrees to the heat of the flame) aren't that bad, I would be rather quick to answer yes. Flamers barely do me any personal harm. The biggest issue I have with flamers is that they are not focusing on the game and distracting other players from the game as well with their often pointless comments most of the time. When they are flaming the enemy team and causing them to tilt, I'm actually grateful for his or her efforts. I'm not saying anything goes though. I believe this question is showing you might be looking at this whole issue maybe a bit too personally, but I could be wrong. It seems to me you have trouble distancing yourself from your own personal view and experience and trying to look at things objectively. I would really like to inspire you to think about this whole issue more rationally. > Also, why would someone start flamming because someone on the team DCed? I can understand being frustrated, but starting to flame? Give me a break. Well again what's actually flaming? If you're talking about a game with someone constantly disconnecting and then saying "Report X AFK" it could be considered as flaming, but it would make perfect sense to me. That's not what I was talking about though. What I'm saying is that AFKers cause frustration and frustration can lead to flaming. This frustration is often carried over from game to game. > *** > > You are just looking for excuses for toxic behaviour. Just because someone is having a casual talk during the game, doesn't mean they aren't focused. First of all, I'm not. At least not in the sense that I'm saying it's totally fine. Where are you even getting these things from or do I simply not understand you? Second... > Actually, those premades are very likely to be connected by voice and have the same exact conversation. How can you tell if they are focused or not? Science, personal experience and logic. Do I really need to explain this? This has to do with how the human brain works. Humans simply cannot focus on some multiple tasks at the same time, it just can't be done. Sure some might be better at so called "multi-tasking" than others, but whenever humans are trying to do multiple tasks at the same time which requires the same conscious cognitive functions they have to shift focus back and forth. They can't do it at the same exact time. That's the mental thing. There is also the physical thing. When you have both hands on your keyboard to say something in chat you don't have your hand on your mouse. I think you would agree that having your hand on your mouse prior to something happening in the game allows you to react faster than when you also have to move your hand over to your mouse first. There is a reason to be using voice chat rather than in-game chat. It's less distracting > Stop trying to justify toxic behaviour. I'm not. If anyone, you are, not me. > Oh, and don't call that "initing". Uh? No! To me that's intentionally sabotaging your teams chances of winning because you find your own personal interests more important than that of someone else. I think it's despicable. > *** > > You didn't understand my question, or you purposefully ignore it. Maybe a bit of both, but there is a reason I said everyone has a mute button available. > How do I, **myself**, stop that flamer from flaming in his future games? I can't press the mute button if I'm not playing with him. How can I, myself, stop his behaviour after that one game? > > That's right, by reporting him and have him removed. Yes, sure. That's fine. I just wish that doing the same with AFKers would have been more effective.
XupleX (EUW)
: Read the text on the second picture... "Abandoning a match or being afk, results in a negative experience for your teammates, and is a punishable offense in League of Legends. You've been placed in a lower priority queue."
> [{quoted}](name=XupleX,realm=EUW,application-id=eZuvYsEr,discussion-id=8wfNyYc0,comment-id=00030000,timestamp=2018-05-13T19:08:36.212+0000) > > Read the text on the second picture... "Abandoning a match or being afk, results in a negative experience for your teammates, and is a punishable offense in League of Legends. You've been placed in a lower priority queue." So the system or your game client was derping and and it mistakenly detected you leaving a match. So what? These things happen. You could send a ticket to player support about it.
Febos (EUW)
: > [{quoted}](name=πET,realm=EUW,application-id=NzaqEm3e,discussion-id=ZXMW4E1a,comment-id=00010001000000000000000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2018-05-13T09:28:34.410+0000) > > The question is, how would IFS detect a morality change? By the quality and quantity of reports it receives. If suddenly everyone stops reporting anyone that says "you suck" or "uninstall the game", for example, then the system will learn **not to** punish that. Likewise, if everyone starts reporting "cheese" as offensive (literally saying cheese), then it will to punish anyone who says it. Some keywords are probably hardcoded into the system, but in a general sense the IFS will punish what the majority of the community deems as inappropriate. *** > [{quoted}](name=πET,realm=EUW,application-id=NzaqEm3e,discussion-id=ZXMW4E1a,comment-id=00010001000000000000000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2018-05-13T09:28:34.410+0000) > > Chat restriction x2 > 14 day ban > Permaban. I even wonder if any account is ever permabanned for excessive AFKing, like, is that even possible? I don't think so. I have a friend that had multiple Leaverbuster penalties for a month or so. Not even joking. I don't know if it's the Leaverbuster itself handling the punishment or if it just flags the player so the IFS can punish him accordingly. The information avaiable would have me believe the Leaverbuster does it all on its own. Still, for the cases when the Leaverbuster doesn't kick automatically we can still count on the IFS, assuming the player is reported. *** > [{quoted}](name=πET,realm=EUW,application-id=NzaqEm3e,discussion-id=ZXMW4E1a,comment-id=00010001000000000000000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2018-05-13T09:28:34.410+0000) > > but I assume you've also experience the ragequitters who specifically announce in chat they are ragequitting or AFKing to spite one specific person. Very rarely. I can even count how many time is happened in two hands; maybe even just one hand. Granted I don't play ranked, so I don't how much worse it is there. *** > [{quoted}](name=πET,realm=EUW,application-id=NzaqEm3e,discussion-id=ZXMW4E1a,comment-id=00010001000000000000000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2018-05-13T09:28:34.410+0000) > > but let's say you have connection issues very often, then your connection is simply not suitable to be playing a game like League of Legends with. My connetion issues happen very sporadically. I can go weeks without any problem and one day, for no apparent reason, my connection starts %%%%ing with me for a few hours. Funny enough, it always happens when I want to play an online game. Suffice to say, if I know my connection is bad I won't even start a match. I usually wait 1 hour to be sure everything is working fine. Recently my ISP has had more problems than what it used to. That's one of the reasons why I avoid PvP games. I rather stick to bots where my team doesn't need me to win. *** > [{quoted}](name=πET,realm=EUW,application-id=NzaqEm3e,discussion-id=ZXMW4E1a,comment-id=00010001000000000000000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2018-05-13T09:28:34.410+0000) > > Just to stick with the example you gave, those 2 hours it took to reboot your system might very well be a sign of poor system maintenance. My hard drive was faulty, but I had no way to predict that. It took me two hours to boot up the machine because it scheduled a system check/repair when the error, that led to the blue screen, happen. *** > [{quoted}](name=πET,realm=EUW,application-id=NzaqEm3e,discussion-id=ZXMW4E1a,comment-id=00010001000000000000000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2018-05-13T09:28:34.410+0000) > > I would say those times where it's really out of someones control is actually very rare. In both of those cases I had no control over the situation. Like I said, my ISP is generally pretty good and I have stable connection all day long for multiple days. It just so happens that sometimes it goes bananas. I suspect it isn't just about my ISP. For example, the cable company will do maintenance on the area without notice. Or when the electricity in my neighbourhood goes out for about 3 hours. I don't have any control over that. This happens very rarely. 1 day a month and I'm being "generous", but when it does happen it sucks; not just for me. *** > [{quoted}](name=πET,realm=EUW,application-id=NzaqEm3e,discussion-id=ZXMW4E1a,comment-id=00010001000000000000000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2018-05-13T09:28:34.410+0000) > > What's your 4v5 win rate and what's your 5v5 win rate where one of your teammates were flaming? No clue. I reckon the 5v5 is higher, but I've won games 4v5. My problem with flaming is that not only does it decrease my chances of winning but it also makes the game a living hell. At least with the AFK we can just "open" early and let the enemy win. With the flamer it's not quite the same thing. *** > [{quoted}](name=πET,realm=EUW,application-id=NzaqEm3e,discussion-id=ZXMW4E1a,comment-id=00010001000000000000000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2018-05-13T09:28:34.410+0000) > > Also I think it's rather shortsighted to say someone who is flaming does it on purpose. If you dig a little bit deeper into why someone is flaming you might be seeing that differently. Try as you want, I see no justification for flamming. Not even if someone insults you, your dog, cat, personal ghosts, hair, etc. Flamming is never okay. LIke I said, when someone AFKs, unless they "announce" it, we can assume it wasn't on purpose. The flamer doesn't have an excuse. He's flaming because he **wants to**. Everyone is capable of self-restraint. You want to know why I'm so sure of that? Because they wouldn't act the same in IRL towards law enforcement, for example. For some it's harder to have contraint, but not impossible. All those players need is discipline. Unfortunately for them, we are not here to educate them on proper maners and discipline. Riot is actually very lenient on this. A few slaps in the hand (chat restrictions) and they give plenty of chances to reform, when the offense is minor. For serious stuff, they'll first give you a warning (14 day suspension). Only cheaters, hackers and other illegal stuff are served with a permanent suspension on first offense. *** > [{quoted}](name=πET,realm=EUW,application-id=NzaqEm3e,discussion-id=ZXMW4E1a,comment-id=00010001000000000000000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2018-05-13T09:28:34.410+0000) > > The reason as of why I would say AFKing is a more undesirable form of behavior over flaming though would be that when it comes to the game, AFKers have more negative impact on the outcome of a game than flamers. No, they don't. Again, if we are talking about AFK as in "oops, my internet disconnected" then AFK is miles better than verbal toxicity. While it's true that both will put you at a disadvantage and AFK is worse because 4v5, the flamer will do more harm in the long run. You need to look at this not as one isolated game but rather as a collection of them. That AFK player won't do that in as many games as the flamer will be toxic in his games, assuming we are talking about unintentional AFK. That's the whole point here. You don't know someone is intentional AFKing unless they say so or they do it regularly. The flamer, on the other hand, is obviously doing it intentionally. Like I said before, there's no excuse for verbal toxicity. *** > [{quoted}](name=πET,realm=EUW,application-id=NzaqEm3e,discussion-id=ZXMW4E1a,comment-id=00010001000000000000000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2018-05-13T09:28:34.410+0000) > > here's also the fact that there the flaming issue can literally be fixed with the press of a button but there isn't any option available to fix the AFKing issue. The "good" old argument: "just mute". Pressing that button doesn't solve anything. It "silences" that player for the remainder of that game, but what happens in the next game and the game after that? How can I silence him those games? I don't want anyone else to be exposed to that behaviour, if it doesn't affect me. Just because the "mute" button exists it doesn't give you green light to be toxic. If I have to press that button then the damage is already done. I usually use this analogy: "Fire extinguishers exist, but that doesn't mean you can start a fire". Same thing here. The truth is you can deal with AFKs, intentional or not, the same way you deal with flamming: report them. You won't be able to "fix it" in your game, but you will "fix" for everyone after you.
> [{quoted}](name=Febos,realm=EUW,application-id=NzaqEm3e,discussion-id=ZXMW4E1a,comment-id=000100010000000000000000000000000000000000000001,timestamp=2018-05-13T10:23:27.902+0000) > > By the quality and quantity of reports it receives. If suddenly everyone stops reporting anyone that says "you suck" or "uninstall the game", for example, then the system will learn **not to** punish that. Likewise, if everyone starts reporting "cheese" as offensive (literally saying cheese), then it will to punish anyone who says it. Well if that's really how it works then I just have to say that even though it kind of makes sense, especially from a business point of view, it for me invalidates the IFS judgement even more than I already thought. To me this would mean the justice factor of the IFS is equivalent that of the Rwandan genocide. It's just the majority suppressing the minority, but instead of actually murdering people like in the Rwandan genocide the IFS is murdering players accounts. I think this would make for a very flawed system. > Some keywords are probably hardcoded into the system, but in a general sense the IFS will punish what the majority of the community deems as inappropriate. I hope there is more to it than just that and I'm pretty sure there is or I would expect very different results from what I'm actually seeing. Either that or my experience playing League must be very different from the majority of players, which I don't dare to rule out. > I don't think so. I have a friend that had multiple Leaverbuster penalties for a month or so. Not even joking. > I don't know if it's the Leaverbuster itself handling the punishment or if it just flags the player so the IFS can punish him accordingly. Simply ridiculous if you ask me, seeing the punishment for flaming. Now I'm not saying any account should be permabanned except maybe for those proven intentional AFKs, but there should at least be something barring continuously excessive AFKers from playing ranked or something, just anything. > > Very rarely. I can even count how many time is happened in two hands; maybe even just one hand. > Granted I don't play ranked, so I don't how much worse it is there. I see you rarely actually play the game so that would make sense then even though I see you played from season 3 at least. I have played LoL a awful lot so I've about seen it all and seen most things multiple times. Let me tell you it happens a lot. Way more than it should at least and I can't say this for sure, but I think most of the time those players who do that get away with it. > Suffice to say, if I know my connection is bad I won't even start a match. I usually wait 1 hour to be sure everything is working fine. Be careful with what you say. This isn't the off-topic section. You are posting this in the Incorrect Board. Choosing whether you start a match when you are lagging or not at all related to Player Behaviour in any way. > > Recently my ISP has had more problems than what it used to. That's one of the reasons why I avoid PvP games. I rather stick to bots where my team doesn't need me to win. For what it's worth... Good job! > My hard drive was faulty, but I had no way to predict that. It took me two hours to boot up the machine because it scheduled a system check/repair when the error, that led to the blue screen, happen. You know you can actually just skip those most of the time, right? Well at least now you know if it happens again in the future. > No clue. I reckon the 5v5 is higher, but I've won games 4v5. > My problem with flaming is that not only does it decrease my chances of winning but it also makes the game a living hell. This is highly subjective though. To me flamers don't make the game a living hell at all. To me AFKers or Inters do. Sure flamers are annoying, but it's nothing I can't handle and again, there is always the mute button. > At least with the AFK we can just "open" early and let the enemy win. This is literally inting by definition. Not cool... One question though. Why if flamers are even worse than AFKers, why wouldn't you just "open"early and let the enemy win when you have a flamer on your team? You said it yourself "Both will increase my chances of losing the game, but for one of them I know they're doing it on purpose." So you rather intentionally throw the game for someone who unintentionally AFKs and might come back than for someone who is doing what he or she is doing on purpose? > > Try as you want, I see no justification for flamming. Not even if someone insults you, your dog, cat, personal ghosts, hair, etc. Flamming is never okay. But letting the enemy win is? No seriously, you saying this just shows how unreasonable you are and here is why. I could be insulted when I kill an enemy and an ally tells me "Good job". Why? "Is my ally saying League of Legends is my job? What?! Like I don't have anything better to do than League of Legends! REPORT!" See the problem here? > Like I said, when someone AFKs, unless they "announce" it, we can assume it wasn't on purpose. The flamer doesn't have an excuse. He's flaming because he **wants to**. This is simply where you are wrong. The majority of flamers don't flame because they want to. If they actually did want to, they probably wouldn't be playing League because there are way better places to "flame" people. No it's rather that while playing League players often find themselves in situations which cause frustration and this in turn causes them to flame. To vent and express themselves. I'm not saying that's an excuse which makes it right, but it should lead to some understanding. Again I would really like to inspire you to think about why flamers flame and what could be done about it so those flamers are less motivated to flame. > Everyone is capable of self-restraint. You want to know why I'm so sure of that? Because they wouldn't act the same in IRL towards law enforcement, for example. In real life there are people who struggle and fail with self-restraint as well, even when dealing with law enforcement. Things are often more nuanced than that. How often have you checked a flamers match history? Maybe that's something you should try sometimes. You might be surprised as to what you'll find. > For some it's harder to have contraint, but not impossible. All those players need is discipline. Unfortunately for them, we are not here to educate them on proper maners and discipline. If that's the case then why even bother with warnings and stuff like that? Why bother trying to "reform" toxic players? Yes, Riot is somewhat lenient when it comes to this. This is good for them from a business point of view and in their interests, but not necessarily in the interests of the players. I think it would be in both the players and Riot's interest though if they actually would invest more in trying to get their players to reform. I think saying Riot isn't exactly doing the best job when it comes to this is quite the understatement. They could do so much better, but apparently they simply have other priorities. > No, they don't. Again, if we are talking about AFK as in "oops, my internet disconnected" then AFK is miles better than verbal toxicity. > While it's true that both will put you at a disadvantage and AFK is worse because 4v5, the flamer will do more harm in the long run. This is nothing more than your personal opinion. My personal opinion is exactly the opposite as I see AFKers and inters or other kinds of trolling being perhaps the number one reason causing flame in the first place. Also personally flamers don't bother me nearly as much as AFKers. > You need to look at this not as one isolated game but rather as a collection of them. That AFK player won't do that in as many games as the flamer will be toxic in his games, assuming we are talking about unintentional AFK. > That's the whole point here. You don't know someone is intentional AFKing unless they say so or they do it regularly. The flamer, on the other hand, is obviously doing it intentionally. Like I said before, there's no excuse for verbal toxicity. That's the thing. I don't look at as one isolated game. I look at it in patterns of undesirable behavior affecting one another, but I'm also keeping the goal of the game in mind. The goal is, in summoners rift, to kill the enemy nexus. Players could be having a blast chatting and joking about their pets or whatever without "flaming" but playing the game half focused which causes them to lose the game. I would call this inting. Now I could very much understand the players frustration of having to deal with a 4 man premade team that's playing like that. I can imagine if a player is going through stuff like this over and over that they become toxic over time. There are of course also a lot of factors that are not in anyway related to the game, but where it does come to the game, when you pay any attention, you should see patterns which I think it would be better if we would collectively try to break them and change them in more favorable patterns in which more players can enjoy the game better. > The "good" old argument: "just mute". Pressing that button doesn't solve anything. It "silences" that player for the remainder of that game, but what happens in the next game and the game after that? How can I silence him those games? You just press the same mute button again, everyone has a mute option available. > I don't want anyone else to be expvosed to that behaviour, if it doesn't affect me. And I don't want AFKers affecting me or anyone else, but they are running rampant. > The truth is you can deal with AFKs, intentional or not, the same way you deal with flamming: report them. > You won't be able to "fix it" in your game, but you will "fix" for everyone after you. Yet anyone playing the game can clearly see it doesn't matter at all. You can report all you want, but there will still be AFKers and there will still be flamers.
Febos (EUW)
: > [{quoted}](name=πET,realm=EUW,application-id=NzaqEm3e,discussion-id=ZXMW4E1a,comment-id=000100010000000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2018-05-13T06:14:57.022+0000) > > How does IFS still learn from us then? As far as I know this has happened in the past, but is not applied to new reports coming in. I don't know how familiar you are with machine learning, but those system don't stop improving until the dev pulls the plug. This system is always learning from the input we give it. It can't be static because "community morality" can change, and does change, overtime. *** *** > [{quoted}](name=πET,realm=EUW,application-id=NzaqEm3e,discussion-id=ZXMW4E1a,comment-id=000100010000000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2018-05-13T06:14:57.022+0000) > > If it does though how can all those AFKers be explained? If there is one thing I think most players have consensus about it's that AFKers should be punished. They are. We actually have a 2nd system in place for that. This one, as far as I know, is independent from the IFS regarding detection. The system picks up on those cases automatically. It's called the Leaverbuster. Obvisouly, that doesn't mean you should stop reporting AFK behaviour. You should still report it, even with the Leaverbuster here. Technically speaking, we also have a Feederbuster to detect intentional feeding (duh). I assume that works independently from the IFS, just like the other one. In this case, the feedback we give it is invaluable since it's that much harder to detect griefing. *** I'll tell you a short story. Some weeks back (2 months ago) I made a new account. I played 1 game against Intro Bots. However, I didn't actually "play" the game. I wasted my first 10 minutes tinkering with the settings. My teammates ended the game in 15 or so. While I wasn't AFK in the game, as I was moving around the map, I was still detected as such by the Leaverbuster. I was placed in low priority queue for just that one game. If you want, you can test it yourself. Make a new account, hop into a CoOp game and just AFK in base by running circles around the nexus for at least 10 minutes. You can play normally after that. Just like in this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BUKwYGRCiVI Let's see if the Leaverbuster picks up or not. *** *** > [{quoted}](name=πET,realm=EUW,application-id=NzaqEm3e,discussion-id=ZXMW4E1a,comment-id=000100010000000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2018-05-13T06:14:57.022+0000) > > If IFS would learn from this then AFKing should be the hardest punished form of undesired behavior, but it's not. Not even close. Why should it be the hardest punished behaviour? Players AFK for a multitude of reasons, for example: disconnect, must leave the computer because X, windows update, pc shutsdown, blugsplat followed by client corruption check, etc One of those reasons can be to just grief the game. However, if only 1 of X cases is intentional griefing, why should it be punished the hardest? I speak for myself here. I've had cases where my internet would disconnect randomly or that one time when my computer crashed with "the blue screen of death" and it took 2 hours to boot up. Why should I be punished harder for that? It wasn't in my control. I got the leaverbuster penalty anyway. Actually, when it comes down to "undesired behaviour" you're talking from a place of emotion/opinion; not fact. **You** don't like AFKs, but are you sure **most of the community** doesn't like them as much as you? Again, speaking for myself. I would rather have an AFK than a flamer in my team. Both will increase my chances of losing the game, but for one of them I know they're doing it on purpose. I still report AFK as much as I do verbal toxicity, but to say "AFK is more undesired" is a really bold statement on your part.
> [{quoted}](name=Febos,realm=EUW,application-id=NzaqEm3e,discussion-id=ZXMW4E1a,comment-id=0001000100000000000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2018-05-13T06:52:15.898+0000) > > I don't know how familiar you are with machine learning, but those system don't stop improving until the dev pulls the plug. > This system is always learning from the input we give it. It can't be static because "community morality" can change, and does change, overtime. I'm not an expert on the matter, but I think I have a general idea of how machine learning works and how this relates to the IFS. My point is, is that when IFS was implemented, Riot used the former Tribunal system reviews as input for the IFS. The tribunal is now defunct so there is no new community input coming into the system anymore except for maybe the reports coming in, but I don't know if that data is used to "improve" the system or only triggers review based on current standards. The question is, how would IFS detect a morality change? > They are. Yes, but not nearly as frequent as players who show verbal toxicity in chat. > We actually have a 2nd system in place for that. This one, as far as I know, is independent from the IFS regarding detection. The system picks up on those cases automatically. It's called the Leaverbuster. > Obvisouly, that doesn't mean you should stop reporting AFK behaviour. You should still report it, even with the Leaverbuster here. I know about the automated leaverbuster system, but as far as I know that system that system is independent from the IFS. As far as I know leaverbuster doesn't give players the punishments in the same way as IFS does. Chat restriction x2 > 14 day ban > Permaban. I even wonder if any account is ever permabanned for excessive AFKing, like, is that even possible? And if so, then is this being handled by the IFS or the leaverbuster system or aren't they as independent as we might think? > Why should it be the hardest punished behaviour? Players AFK for a multitude of reasons, for example: disconnect, must leave the computer because X, windows update, pc shutsdown, blugsplat followed by client corruption check, etc > One of those reasons can be to just grief the game. However, if only 1 of X cases is intentional griefing, why should it be punished the hardest? I know players AFK for a multitude of reasons, but I assume you've also experience the ragequitters who specifically announce in chat they are ragequitting or AFKing to spite one specific person. "I'm AFK. I want this Nami to lose." things like that. > I speak for myself here. I've had cases where my internet would disconnect randomly or that one time when my computer crashed with "the blue screen of death" and it took 2 hours to boot up. Why should I be punished harder for that? It wasn't in my control. First of all, I didn't say (this time) AFKers should be punished harder because I thought so, but when you get a blue screen of death or are experiencing connection problems it might very well be in your control. I'm not advocating that someone who is AFK should be instantly punished, but let's say you have connection issues very often, then your connection is simply not suitable to be playing a game like League of Legends with. Just to stick with the example you gave, those 2 hours it took to reboot your system might very well be a sign of poor system maintenance. I'm not saying these things don't happen and it's reasonable to expect everyone to have a backup system ready to log in to when the system they are playing on crashes, but don't act like players have no control whatsoever. I would say those times where it's really out of someones control is actually very rare. > Actually, when it comes down to "undesired behaviour" you're talking from a place of emotion/opinion; not fact. **You** don't like AFKs, but are you sure **most of the community** doesn't like them as much as you? In this case I was actually talking from a place of community consensus about AFKing being not cool. I wasn't really dragging my own personal opinion in what I said in my previous comment. Sure, I don't have hard numbers, never did any proper research )or would even be able to) and based what I said purely on anecdotal evidence, but that's the thing. I based it on anecdotal evidence I witness from the community while I'm playing the game. When someone is AFK in a match and it's not a remake I guesstimate that about 90% of the time I see at least one player saying "Report X AFK". When I see someone flaming or whatever I see "Report X flaming" maybe 33% of the time? I don't know, but it's certainly a lot lower compared to when players AFK. So assuming my experience isn't THAT MUCH different from other players, I would also assume that if IFS would learn from those AFK reports just like other reports, that AFKers should see much more frequent punishment than they do now. > Again, speaking for myself. I would rather have an AFK than a flamer in my team. Both will increase my chances of losing the game, but for one of them I know they're doing it on purpose. Well that's your opinion and that's fine, but I would say it's very shortsighted way to look at things, especially if your talking about increasing your chances to lose a game. What's your 4v5 win rate and what's your 5v5 win rate where one of your teammates were flaming? I would be very surprised if your 4v5 win rate is higher. Also I think it's rather shortsighted to say someone who is flaming does it on purpose. If you dig a little bit deeper into why someone is flaming you might be seeing that differently. > I still report AFK as much as I do verbal toxicity, but to say "AFK is more undesired" is a really bold statement on your part. Your kind of putting words in my mouth, but that would be my personal opinion, but like I said I wasn't talking about my personal opinion here. I was rather asking questions and maybe trying to expose flaws in logic and that would make sense in a theoretical situation. The reason as of why I would say AFKing is a more undesirable form of behavior over flaming though would be that when it comes to the game, AFKers have more negative impact on the outcome of a game than flamers. There's also the fact that there the flaming issue can literally be fixed with the press of a button (Well, maybe two and some mouse movement, but you get the point) but there isn't any option available to fix the AFKing issue.
Febos (EUW)
: > [{quoted}](name=l ToxicPlayer l,realm=EUNE,application-id=NzaqEm3e,discussion-id=ZXMW4E1a,comment-id=0001000100000000000000000000,timestamp=2018-05-13T02:45:42.376+0000) > > first of all i want system operated by humans > i know it does takes a load of money and time but it can be made > it would purge community withing months The Tribunal was that. It's not only impractical but also, like you said, expensive. Consider the following: * At least 1 player is reported every game, regardless if it's a false report or not. * Every second, 11.57 games start. In other words, 1 million games every day, for EUW+EUNE combined. This is the bare minimum. If you think it is too much, it really isn't. There have been 95176800 **ranked games** in the last 7 days and EU is 29,6% of every game. [Source](https://lolalytics.com/ranked/worldwide/platinum/plus/champions/). The 1 million is just a nice number to give you a scale of the thing. * In The Tribunal, to review a case, you were hard locked for 20 seconds. That means you couldn't vote before 20 seconds had passed. A good judge would need anywhere in between those 20 seconds and a 1 minute to read everything and make a decision. Let's just say, for the sake of argument, 30 seconds. * If you have 10 games per second, then you also have 10 reports. Simple enough. One full day, 86400 seconds, would mean 864000 new cases. Each case takes 30 seconds, so 25920000 seconds of review time. * The typical job, at least where I live, goes for 8 hours a day; 28800 seconds. To review cases every day, you'd need to employ 900 people just for EU alone. Mind you, this is **nonstop** work or, in other words, no break days nor break hours. * Remember what I said about EU being 29.6% of the ranked population? Now scale that number to 100%. You'd need a little over 3000 people for this task alone. It doesn't seem like much, until you consider how many employees Riot currently has. If you trust Wikipedia, that number shouldn't be much higher than 2500. In other words, Riot would need to **double** their workforce just to meet the demands of the system Here's something I mentioned earlier at a glance. Those numbers are just for the **ranked** population. Let's assume, for the sake of argument, that ranked vs non-ranked (Blind, Draft, ARAM, TT, RGM) is a 50-50 split. In other words, you'd need to **double** that number once again. *** Even if they made this community driven, like they did in the past, the system would still be slower, and more inaccurate, than it is now. Machines are fast, impartial and less likely to fail in a general sense, since they've been built for that specific purpose. I'm not saying machines don't fail, but I reckon we, humans, are much more likely to do it. Then you have the other problem with this being community driven. What is the incentivize for the judges? Would we get anything? How sure can you be that we won't "exploit" the system just to reap the rewards, for example spamming the "punish" button? You'd need even more players to do this job since, most of us, have life outside of the game. We would do this as an hobby, like I did back then. Even if every judge gave 1 full hour of work, you'd still be looking at 50k-ish players around the world as judges. With so many people "judging", don't you think the system would be worse? It's just unpractical. Also expensive, if you hire people for that job instead. *** The machine can do that work just fine. It doesn't get tired, it doesn't need payment (electricity bills...) and is blind/imparcial. There's no way you can argue against this, but feel free to do so. ######One last thing. The machine learns from us, so, technically, we decide what is to be punished and what isn't. We are still the judges. The IFS is like a "collective brain" entity.
> [{quoted}](name=Febos,realm=EUW,application-id=NzaqEm3e,discussion-id=ZXMW4E1a,comment-id=00010001000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2018-05-13T05:13:47.110+0000) > One last thing. The machine learns from us, so, technically, we decide what is to be punished and what isn't. We are still the judges. The IFS is like a "collective brain" entity. How does IFS still learn from us then? As far as I know this has happened in the past, but is not applied to new reports coming in. If it does though how can all those AFKers be explained? If there is one thing I think most players have consensus about it's that AFKers should be punished. Whenever there is an AFKer players always say report champion name AFK almost without exception unless it's a remake. If IFS would learn from this then AFKing should be the hardest punished form of undesired behavior, but it's not. Not even close.
Smerk (EUW)
: Same here, season 1 player and I honestly have no idea where people find all those toxic players. Passive-aggressiveness, some blaming? Sure, happens. But death threats? Once in hundred games maybe
> [{quoted}](name=Smerk,realm=EUW,application-id=NzaqEm3e,discussion-id=ZXMW4E1a,comment-id=00040001,timestamp=2018-05-13T04:44:10.810+0000) > > Same here, season 1 player and I honestly have no idea where people find all those toxic players. Passive-aggressiveness, some blaming? Sure, happens. But death threats? Once in hundred games maybe I think I see death threats in maybe 5% of my games tops, but certainly more than 1%. I see inting, AFKing or other kinds of problematic trolling in about 33% of my games though? Maybe even more if I should count the enemy team as well. Edit: Funny enough the first game I played after posting this my midlaner told my bot lane to go put an end to their lives with three infamous letters.
Pyrosen (EUW)
: The game span was 26 minutes I believe, I didn't spam them at them but they were responses, I should of just muted which you're right but I didn't really say aynthing which warrants my ban The 14 day ban was 2 months before this came around, I think that was short enough to trigger it lol
> [{quoted}](name=Pyrosen,realm=EUW,application-id=NzaqEm3e,discussion-id=ZXMW4E1a,comment-id=0000000000000000,timestamp=2018-05-13T02:25:38.453+0000) > > The game span was 26 minutes I believe, I didn't spam them at them but they were responses, I should of just muted which you're right but I didn't really say aynthing which warrants my ban Sadly those chat logs don't show timestamps and they don't show other players chat either so it's nearly impossible to say anything informed about it. I don't see why you should mute them. As long as chatting isn't distracting you or others too much that it hurts your gameplay it shouldn't be a problem. I often tell players who talk too much nonsense that this game is not chat roulette though. > > The 14 day ban was 2 months before this came around, I think that was short enough to trigger it lol Well that's too bad. Maybe it takes a whole season to reset? I don't know. I read it supposedly resets over time though if you "truly reformed". Honestly I find this whole "reformed" concept kind of short sighted. A lot of this "toxic" behavior has little to do with the players intrinsic motivation to showing this "toxic" behavior, but more with external motivation, often game related, to show this "toxic" behavior. If Riot truly wanted to do something about "toxic" behavior they should do something about the things they can influence instead of just punishing players who go over a certain "toxicity" threshold.
Pyrosen (EUW)
: I've had my 14 day ban and then perma, haven't had a chat restrict before And they weren't being toxic using the chat, they were intentionally feeding I can't mute player behaviour and the system doesn't punish player behaviour, it punishes player chat lol
> [{quoted}](name=Pyrosen,realm=EUW,application-id=NzaqEm3e,discussion-id=ZXMW4E1a,comment-id=00000000,timestamp=2018-05-12T23:56:59.116+0000) > > I've had my 14 day ban and then perma, haven't had a chat restrict before > And they weren't being toxic using the chat, they were intentionally feeding > I can't mute player behaviour and the system doesn't punish player behaviour, it punishes player chat lol Yeah, if you do something bad enough getting that instant 14 day ban, then you skipped the chat restrictions and you are immediately on thin ice. I don't know anything about your prior offense, but this punishment is undeserved in my opinion. If it was up to me I wouldn't even give you a chat restriction for this depending on how spread out these comments of you were. It looks kind of spammy if you ask me, but other than that it is not that bad in my opinion. Still there is a mute button.
: the rito emplooyes only want party and connect with teh girls in teh office. they dont care about patches.
> [{quoted}](name=Wholesome Pervo,realm=EUW,application-id=2BfrHbKG,discussion-id=tsAEKq7Q,comment-id=00060000,timestamp=2018-05-12T23:30:14.353+0000) > > the rito emplooyes only want party and connect with teh girls in teh office. they dont care about patches. Well I don't know about that, but sure they have different interests than the players, but there is probably some overlap as well.
Pyrosen (EUW)
: Appealing my perma-ban, probably hopeless but I'm out of options.
You must have been toxic and been punished in the past because I can't imagine someone being instantly permabanned for just this game. I would just send a ticket to player support. Approach them friendly and calmly and give them a piece of your mind. Even if you won't get unbanned then maybe all these appeals will be reason for them to finally review their policies. If you ask me this kind of "toxicity" if you even call it that should not be a problem. THERE IS SOMETHING CALLED A MUTE BUTTON. Sorry for all caps, but it's like people don't don't know that.
BambiTheNub (EUNE)
: How Ban system works ?
I'm sure the system just saw it as him having a bad game. I'm sorry but I can't read your post very well.
: Riot Games on Twitter
Is it just me or does it look like some of those people in those pictures actually agree with OP? Some of them look like they are thinking why am I here and why am I doing this?
: Looking for a girlfriend
Of you really want to hold hands while watching LCS I'll suggest looking for a boyfriend and not a girlfriend. You'll probably have a higher chance.
XupleX (EUW)
: Got a leavebuster even though I played?
Don't you only get that thing when you dodge a game in champion select? I'm not sure if this is because you were supposedly AFK. I'm guessing you accepted a match and something went wrong to actually get you in champ select so you didn't pick or ban a champion and then the system decided you dodged.
ereson99 (EUNE)
: guess i am just that bad(jungle main btw)
> [{quoted}](name=ereson99,realm=EUNE,application-id=39gqIYVI,discussion-id=7OuQgF62,comment-id=00000000,timestamp=2018-05-12T16:47:10.044+0000) > > guess i am just that bad(jungle main btw) Well you're Silver 2 and you play since season 6? So there is a high chance you don't see certain things yet. When it comes to Nasus as a jungler, you either have to camp him from the start while he's weak. Or just ignore him and get the other lanes (preferably bot most of the time) rolling, so they can deal with Nasus when he's strong.
Shukr4n (EUW)
: Or yourself sometimes
> [{quoted}](name=Shukr4n,realm=EUW,application-id=NzaqEm3e,discussion-id=QyJHUIRx,comment-id=0001000000000000,timestamp=2018-05-12T15:35:08.389+0000) > > Or yourself sometimes I can't say that in hindsight I never played too long when I needed to sleep, but I rarely play when I'm tired. I for sure won't play ranked. I only play longer than I should when I play with friends.
: Well, at least you have better chance at carrying games because most people are half asleep at that time.
> [{quoted}](name=SectionedOne,realm=EUW,application-id=NzaqEm3e,discussion-id=QyJHUIRx,comment-id=00010000,timestamp=2018-05-12T15:13:57.222+0000) > > Well, at least you have better chance at carrying games because most people are half asleep at that time. The problem is that your teammates are sleeping too.
: Yet another issue with your game.
Maybe it was just a temporary issue so when you got in the practice tool your lag was over. I suggest that whenever you experience lag, you open a command prompt and test your connection to another destination. I always do "ping 8.8.8.8 - t" maybe there is another address you can ping instead, one of the game servers, but I don't know the address. You should know that there are different game servers too. When you have issues connecting with one you don't have to have issues connecting to another.
: Things we all do
Players who can't handle the flame should play with fire. /mute all or take the responsibility of choosing not to do it.
Târìc (EUNE)
: Why do I get -24 and +13 LP
Probably because your MMR is low. The question would be why that is though. With that winrate it doesn't seem to make much sense.
ereson99 (EUNE)
: Riot i want to ask you something.
Vampiric Scepter also gives 15AD which nasus's passive does not. Also Nasus needs this life steal to have some sustain. It is funny you mention lvl 1, because nasus even with his life steal passive is really weak. He deals no damage so what good is his life steal?
GreyfellD (EUW)
: The Hypocrisy of League Players
OP has a good point, but it's not only the players fault. Matchmaking can be really poor at times and that's also because of Riot's policies. They are choosing for quicker matchmaking at the cost of accuracy. There are also other variables that can be manipulated for a more accurate matchmaking, but Riot chooses not to. And then there are the smurfs... Riot could honestly do a lot better when it comes to handling smurfs. Since runes reforged it has never been so easy or advantageous (if you want to call it that) to smurf. Sure if someone really wants to smurf then it is really hard to stop them. There is no need to make it easy though. Riot could do a lot better when it comes to smurfing too, but they don't do that either. They actually don't do anything as far as I know.
Show more

πET

Level 238 (EUW)
Lifetime Upvotes
Create a Discussion