Shamose (EUW)
: Yeah dude. That streamer with the name close to a champion plays ~900 games every season only when Riot tells him he's broken.
I also don't get why Riot would tell him that Yasuo is broken, like he isn't capable of reading the patch-notes himself.
Èclair (EUNE)
: > [{quoted}](name=RallerenP,realm=EUW,application-id=NzaqEm3e,discussion-id=6hToAyNN,comment-id=,timestamp=2019-02-05T20:42:16.812+0000) > > I often see posts of players actually wondering why they got punished, and someone just responds 'nice to see the system is working' or 'I hope you get permabanned' I refuse to believe people who post chat logs with stuff like _"you should kill yourself for stealing me blu"_ are genuinely wondering why they were banned. The required brain capacity to make such connection is actually lower than to remember how to properly defecate. The question _"Rito why"_ isn't asked to know how IFS works but to display their displeasure with the fact that wishing somebody's death over a video game isn't consequence-free. Some people are way too smug when presenting chat logs leaking with vile shit and they usually retaliate anyway when replying to comments like that.
> I refuse to believe people who post chat logs with stuff like "you should kill yourself for stealing me blu" are genuinely wondering why they were banned. The required brain capacity to make such connection is actually lower than to remember how to properly defecate. Of course there'll be players like this. I still think that even in these cases we should just either ignore it, or just provide a simple explanation. But most posts are from players that are expressing displeasure AND is genuienly not seeing what was so toxic about their behavior. Simply explaining it in a non-hostile way and being patient with the person has the best chance of calming them down and then they might actually realize what they did wrong. Of course not everyone will be like that, but I think we should atleast still try.
: In any language that has no mechanism to combine words to arbitrary large length or where this is basically only used to a certain length, the set of words is finite and so is the set of combinations to a certain practical length, whether it is feasible to save them all is a different matter. But since there are certain rules to combinations (grammar), there is basically no need to save them all, just stems and combination rules. And actually just banning a few words solves already 90% of the problem. Nobody writes elaborate sentences to insult someone, 90% of the time it is one word or that one word characterizes the whole insulting phrase. You can basically never solve a problem 100%, trying to archieve a 100% catch rate is probably the worst approach you can have, since this would almost certainly trap many innocent ppl in your net. No, the idea is to take the most practical, most precise method to identify the worst cases of toxicity. And a simple stem list does it, and btw. even neural networks need feature lists and often work with the bag of words approach. When it's about the problem that ppl want the list to try and avoid it but still be toxic, then that is one argument against riot compiling and publishing such a list.
I think we're almost on the same wavelength here. I fully agree that if such a list could be made, it shouldn't be published. We are just arguing semantics about whether or not a list *can* actually be made. Sure, if everyone adhered by the same grammar rules and such, the list would be very small. But you don't have to adhere by grammar when you're toxic. So I am 100% convinced that there is an unending amount of ways you can be toxic. Once you *think* you've listed them all, someone will just come along with something new to add, and the process repeats.
: At the end of the day it comes down to intent, and there is no automated system in the world that can correctly identify a person's intent with 100% accuracy. It's just not possible.
Great point. Even humans often have trouble with discerning intent behind text. It's just too vague. But that doesn't mean we should stop trying :) --- The point of the system Riot has isn't to be 100% accurate, but to be accurate enough. (And it's surprisingly good. Initial analysis of the system showed that only 1 in 6000 cases was a false positive.) We have to recognize that nothing will ever have a 100% success rate. But a computer can get VERY close (or even better) than a human at detecting toxicity. The point of my post is to make people aware of why making a filter/list based system just isn't going work, and I present the alternative which Riot is currently using.
Haze97 (EUW)
: I didn't lol. Somebody else did and I would be pissed at it if I were in this guy's place. Trolling is still trolling however, and if he wanted to play adc he should have gone bot lane instead. Ironically in the second match he picked Caitlyn instead and you can refer to the second pic for his first words. Some people are here to ruin other's time and I don't regret losing 3 LP in place of 22 on that account.
Ah, ok. Then I fully agree with you that he's just an ass, and not you.
: 3rd Party Overlay Program
You might want to ask [Riot Support]( directly. It's a tough question actually, because any third party software would be 'use at your own risk'. As long as it's only information that you can actively see, like your own HUD you *may* be fine. But anything like tracking enemy cooldowns something like that which you *could* calculate yourself, is a no go. If you want to do that, calculate the time manually, and then write it in chat or something. I'd say ask support. If they tell just tell you that it's 'use at your own risk', I'd play it safe and just not use it.
Haze97 (EUW)
: RIot has the best moderation system in the world.
Well, did you ban his champion? I'm not saying that what he did was right, but there's nothing inherently wrong with playing MF top. The rules are that as long as others can't dictate what you play, you also don't get to dictate what others play. It's fine to want to play by the meta, but don't force others to go by the same rules :/ --- In the end, while I agree that what that player did was worse than what you did, what you did was also quite bad.
Evidence (EUNE)
: I like ur idea,hope riot sees this :)
Thanks, but I'm not actually proposing a change, sorry. I often see posts suggesting that Riot could just release a list over what is toxic. My post is explaining why such a list would be impossible :/ The system Riot actually uses at the moment, is also the system I would personally use if it was up to me. It's such a great idea, but it's a shame that we just aren't good enough at utilizing the technology to it's full extent!
: Wait, what, sry, but stopped in the middle. First such a list would be finite, 2nd such a list would be used by machines, which could easily detect variations, for human review a comprehended list of the stems would be sufficient, 3rd more complex interactions are often not required, but could be in theory tested for. But all aside the logic flaws, what is the point of this post, after half this block of text, i still dont get what you're going at, from the end i take, you are against Riot publishing such a list? If it is for technical reasons, then i would disagree, it would be technically possible. Personally, i think it is just something that isn't rly necessary, we all know, what insults and slurs are, it's no secret...
You may be correct in stating that simple variations on the single words (i.e. 'Pizza' and 'Pízza') wouldn't be infinite. But certainly a list of sentences that needed to get banned *would* be infinite. > 3rd more complex interactions are often not required, but could be in theory tested for. With something as complex as toxicity, you cannot simply ban a few words and call it a day. Toxicity is WAAAY more than just a couple of words or sentences (although it *can* come in those forms aswell, it's often not). So we *have* to test for these complex interactions. And if you want to do it by making a list of possible phrases of, going back to the example, ways to describe eating pizza, then it would be infinite (whether or not it's *actually* infinite is up for debate, but the point is that such a list would be too long to actually put together or even get any use of). > i still dont get what you're going at, from the end i take, you are against Riot publishing such a list? I understand :) My post actually went in the direction the technical reasons why Riot cannot possible make such a list. Then it went into the system Riot is currently using, a neural network. Finally, I ranted a bit about how I see alot of rude pricks that explain things like they are superior to the person they are talking to. (I certainly hope you don't get that vibe from me! :))
: How about not talking about fast food in an online game? That's how I avoid being flagged.
As I stated, this wierd company actually don't have a problem with talking about fast food. They just don't like people talking about *eating* fast food. Sure, that's how you avoid getting banned. But if you ban saying specific words like 'Pizza', you'd still end up with a ton of problems. Not just that people can no longer generally talk about pizza, or say any words associated with it, but people can still just tack on random letters to the words, and suddenly they still show up.
Rioter Comments
: Riot should add a list to let you know what counts as toxic or abusive
# very long post tl;dr at the bottom Ok. Let's make a list. This will be a list over words that will be banned in a hypothetical game. 1. Pizza 2. Hamburger 3. Fries Great. Our list, while bad, is now complete. But wait. What happens when someone then writes '*Pízza*'? Oh well, we'll just add it to our list 1. Pizza 2. Pízza 3. Hamburger 4. Fries Hmm. But now someone could just 'Pizzza', right? Ok, say that somehow we can manage to know every single variation of the word 'Pizza'. Of course, we'd also have to know every other variation of every other word on our list. So: 1. Pizza, etc.. 2. Hamburger, etc.. 3. Fries, etc.. Now this list is already unusable. There'd be a thousand different variations of each word. And what if we branch out. In hypothethical game, we actually don't care about people that say's Pizza. It's OK, Pizza isn't inherently offensive to us. It's *eating* pizza that is the problem. So would the list now look like this? 1. I like to eat pizza 2. I like to eat hamburgers 3. I like to eat fries But people could just phrase it differently i.e. '*I enjoy consuming pizza*'. Ok, so we figure out all the different variations of sentences you can use to describe eating pizza. 1. I like to eat pizza, etc.. 2. I like to eat hamburgers, etc.. 3. I like to eat fries, etc.. So now the list actually may be unending, because there could theoretically be a unending amount of ways to say these things. Oh, and you also have to avoid every singe variation of every single word in these sentences. Ok, lets say that you can magically do this. You've found out a way to list every single combination of phrases, including every variation of every word. What happens when someone says 'I like to eat pizza' and someone else responds 'me too!'? You'd need a list of all phrases describing eating pizza, with all possible variations of words used in those sentences, and all variations of all responses that would indicate that you agree with that sentiment of enjoying pizza, including all variations of words to possibly use in those sentences. Ok, you have that. You have the list. The extreme, infinite list of banned things. (Funny thought really, since the amount of banned things to say is infinite, there are as many banned things, as there are allowed things) What happens when the chatlog looks like this: > PizzaHater34: Wow, I really hate pizza > PizzaLover12: I like to eat pizza No problem, right? Well, now 'AgreeMan34' chimes in: > AgreeMan34: Me too! What is he agreeing to? There isn't actually a way to know. Do you punish for this deplorable act, or not? Ok, let's just say that you have godly powers (which you have, since you've made an infinite list, know every variation of the phrase '*I like to eat pizza*' and every possible variant of the words in that sentence). You make a list that also have perfectly maps every response to every sentence. No one else can read it. It's infinitely long. So you summarize it. The general idea is: Don't advocate eating junk-food. A couple of weeks later, someone write on your forum: "You should really make a list of what can be punished". --- This is the problem developers have been facing since the dawn of times. Censorship in games %%%%ing sucks. You cannot make a list. You and I know exactly what not advocating eating junk food is like. But computers are deterministic. They don't know. But we can teach them. You and I are pattern finding geniuses. We are experts in the field. We do it impressively well, literally before we are born. When we see a phrase saying: "I enjoy consuming pizza", we KNOW what it's about. Even if we had NEVER seen that exact phrase before, we know what it means. That's because we are pattern finding experts. We can from our past experiences determine what that phrase means. And only because our brains work so well, can we know what each word means, and dynamically create an understanding of the sentence. A computer *can* actually do that aswell. You teach it. The principle can be called 'machine learning'. Riot actually employs a subgenre of machine learning: Neural Networks. They function almost as our brains does, but they are initially empty. You feed the computer data. You show it an example of someone saying they enjoy pizza. Then one more. Do this for as long as you can, but you don't need to give it an infinite list. Also give it list of data with examples of someone NOT saying that they enjoy pizza. The computer will now be able to take in an input (i.e. '*I like pizza*'), and determine whether or not that input is actually advocating eating pizza. Riots algorithm works on this principle (Although, I have MASSIVELY simplified it, there are MANY more variables than the ones I mentioned), but it works with toxicity. It can actually do all the things you can't make a list of. The data Riot uses for it's algorithm comes from reports (although, a single report wont significantly affect it in ANY way to prevent false reports from clogging it up). That way, if something *becomes* offensive, when it previously wasn't, the algorithm can instantly respond. But a side effect of this is that, just like you can't possibly make a list, the computer can't either. # TL;DR no. they cant
: Trying to 1v9 game as support always pulls permaban what can i say more LAME COMPANY
> guess till that day be ready i just need to find good vpn Riot doesn't track your IP, which is the one thing a VPN hides.
RallerenP (EUW)
: You literally just proved his point lol. You answered his toxicity with your own, and it just escalated from him calling you sensitive, to you telling him that you hope he dies. And your comparison to real life doesn't work. In real life if you punch someone in the face they might be dettered. But this is online. You're not scary. You're not intimidating. You aren't dettering ANYONE through words on a screen. You're quite literally JUST escalating the situation. What if you had just ignored him calling you sensitive. Just stopped replying at that point? Then the situation wouldn't have escalated.
You're trying to tell me that 'I hope you die' is a resonable response? It's not. Your comment got removed because it was no question toxic. ImainLilSatan is *really* standing on the line. I agree he's toxic, but you escalated it even further. --- On another note, I havent report any of your comments, but starting up old threads is against the rules. Just wanted to make that clear, so you probably should respond to my comment. You can start a new thread if you want, but I wont be replying any more.
Avinychus (EUW)
: How does it work?
To build upon what TheToysTracker said, it's not actually always 6 months. The time it takes varies from case to case. This is because no 2 cases are exactly the same, and because it avoids people gaming the system. But just keep positive and you'll never have to worry about. Instead of typing anything negative, just type nothing :)
JuiceBoxP (EUNE)
: Changing your IP address is easier than brushing your teeth before bed. give me a break, The only reason he couldn't play not in secret is because if he'd stream they would see that it's him under a different name and he plays the game for a living. there's no point for him to play it if you he don't stream and make money off it.
I find it funny that you are rational enough to know this, yet not rational enough to know that you cannot track smurfs without accidentally affecting innocent players. Also, the amount of Diamond players is already EXTREMELY low. While the amount of Silver players is extremely high. The chances of you getting an actual Diamond smurf in your game, especially on a regular basis, are astronomical. To suggest that smurfing is part of what keeps you down in Silver is just unfounded.
N o (EUW)
: Saying "Ez"/"Easy" at the end of a game
> At last: In my humble opinion - as a player, who plays since this game exists, and who has been banned during Season 1-4 for being toxic - people should get an instant and hard punishment for saying something like this. I made it to get a grip and be a respectful, nice and calm player, always respecting my opponent, maybe fooling around with them a bit, but always keeping the respect up. I mean, I agree that it's negative and should get punished to a certain degree, I don't agree that it should be an instant punishment. The way they are handling it now is that while it'll never get someone punished on it's own, it can *contribute* ever so slightly to a punishment. Which is think appropriate. If you get overly offended, then you are taking it too personal. It's often not about disrespecting your opponents, but just having fun with your teammates. Rarely does anyone mean anymore than some light BM with it. This effect is ofcourse multiplied in URF where having fun and friendly BMing takes focus over anything else.
: ***
You literally just proved his point lol. You answered his toxicity with your own, and it just escalated from him calling you sensitive, to you telling him that you hope he dies. And your comparison to real life doesn't work. In real life if you punch someone in the face they might be dettered. But this is online. You're not scary. You're not intimidating. You aren't dettering ANYONE through words on a screen. You're quite literally JUST escalating the situation. What if you had just ignored him calling you sensitive. Just stopped replying at that point? Then the situation wouldn't have escalated.
Gsummon (EUW)
: Greetings Christien, giving my account's name and password is not allowed ,i know that. but it was under my roof, in my own personal computer.I wasn't aware of the circumstances Cordially yours
Thats still acount sharing. Which is still against the rules.
: I can go and spread the information. It's YOUR responsibility to check whether the source is credible or not and it's up to you to decide whether you believe it or not.
You have to be trolling man. It's just as much my responsibility to check whether the source is credible, (which I already did), as it is YOUR responsibility to provide evidence for your claims (which you didn't).
: I am the source.
Then you might as well be making it up. Don't go spreading information you can't provide any form of verification for, when you're not a trustworthy source.
: Actually using the f-word and the n-word would have been way worse. K y s doesn't get you banned as easily as those words.
I'm going to need a source for that
: Do I understand that right, people want to go on a "play strike" because some other players got basically free skins? This is petty jealousy in hyper drive mode lmfao. Ever considered to be HAPPY for those who got some nice skins? Wouldn't YOU be happy about getting some? It's not like someone stole from you. And don't come at me with "BuT iT RuInS vAlUE". No it doesn't this isn't the stock market, you can't sell your skins. If you complain about fortunate events happening to others you trully live a sad life. And no i didn't exploit the glitch I'm just not a miserable human being.
I imagine that these guys are the same that complain when others win the lottery. Some players were just at the right place at the right time. Riot stated that many regions had fewer than 100 players abusing the bug. Even if we are generous and assume that 300 players from each server were able to take heavy advantage of the bug, that's still only 0.00005% of the **monthly** active players from **2014**. The chances of ever meeting anyone with playing with a skin they got from this bug are astronomically low.
Vegito101 (EUNE)
: Program banning
Actually, some human behaviour isn't really that hard to classify. Toxicity in chat is really easy to work with. You have few factors to account for and it's relatively easy to process. Riot bases it's punishment system around what is being reported. So when trends shift and new things are found culturally inappropriate, Riot doesn't have to manually define that. The system is actually quite successful in that regard, and rarely gives false positives. Meaning almost no one gets unfairly punished. The few that are actually unfairly punished, can be dealt with via support and manual overrulings. I don't think the system is as bad as you think, it's just that you don't understand it. It doesn't look for who started it, or if you were being flamed back. It just looks at your chat a decides if what you wrote is toxic. It's really simple. Don't be toxic and you don't get punished. You're also missing the entire point of the system being automatic. There just aren't enough human resources to review all reports. Imagine if Riot had to look at every, single report being made. That's insane. Even hiring a thousand people to do it non stop, would still not be able to keep up with the amount of reports.
: Stop lying to yourself :)
He is absolutely just trolling you man
Vytautis (EUNE)
: Is there a way to get a person insta permabanned when he says in chat....
Nope. That's just not how it works, sorry. You'll just have to report them normally. But LeaverBuster can definently still figure out if a person is AFK if all they're doing is standing in base.
: > [{quoted}](name=RallerenP,realm=EUW,application-id=NzaqEm3e,discussion-id=RiX8JnRE,comment-id=00010000,timestamp=2018-12-26T23:57:20.680+0000) > > Lol this is a public forum and you are just spamming. > > This isn't the place to report anyone. Contact support, contact Battlefy admins. Spamming?. he just opened a thread about a problem.
lol you forgot to switch accounts
: ***
Lol this is a public forum and you are just spamming. This isn't the place to report anyone. Contact support, contact Battlefy admins.
: Oh you ''know''.Well good for you. Anyway i use this acc to play and comment.I dont hide myself with secondary account.
It's not that I 'hide' myself, this is just the account I've used on Boards the most. And still, even if I was level 50, it's doesn't matter. You're absolutely just being rude for the sake of it. Unless you can provide some proof, this will be my last comment to you.
: ***
Everyone knows that my level directly tied to my knowledge of the punishment system. Not research. Not spending time on boards. But my in-game level. --- Anyways, you are 100% correct. You don't have to prove anything to me. I'll just assume you are lying then (which I already knew tbh). Which is fine by me, if it's fine by you. (BTW: my level is higher than 50, I just don't play on this account as often anymore)
: Dont use chat.But even if you don't use it you might get ban.Trust me i know. Btw do not hope for any help here.This is the place where trolls spawn. And as someone wrote riot ban ''system'' is a joke.What can you expect from money grabbing ''ladies of the night'' company.
> Dont use chat.But even if you don't use it you might get ban.Trust me i know. I don't trust you. Prove to me that someone has gotten banned due to chat-related behaviour, without ever writing anything in chat.
BleupizZ (EUW)
: Can you block a player from playing with you in the future games ??
Nope. Overwatch had a system like that, but quickly a problem occured when it would take one of the top players hours to get into the game. They didn't block him because he was toxic, they blocked him because he was extremely good. So that way they could get a higher ranking without having to face off against a guaranteed better opponent. The same will happen for League.
: Can I see why i have chat restriction for 24 games, bcs i dont get any message?
To get any help about that, you need to go to [Riot Support]( You *should* get a message when you log in, but if you don't definently contact support. --- > Begin to punish people who troll and flame at the same time and later come out as they were victims. You must change the system urgently! The issue is much more complex than that. You can't just 'begin' punishing players. I really don't want to have to get into the deep details of why yet again. Basically, there are too many reports to manually review. The amount of resources it would take is ridiculous. So instead, they are trying to use a complex AI to handle it. It takes ***A LOT*** (and I really cannot stress how much) of time to train an AI, but eventually it'll become good at it's job. That way the system can become fast, effecient, and consistent.
Rynor (EUW)
: The reform card shows you chat like "Go hide in bush" "Ban Leona", "I don't need gank".
If humpel had said that, and only that, he wouldn't get banned. If he had also called you a %%%%%% and told you to kill yourself, then yes it *would* have shown up, but that's just because it includes your whole chatlog, and not just the parts it found toxic.
Adrian Ashe (EUNE)
: Riot Games what if you do the experiment here in EU (EUNE-EUW)?
> No one is Perfect, We are humans and we all deserve to get the Last Chance I like the positivity but, sorry, your 14 day ban WAS your last chance. If Riot extends it to giving you one more chance, nothing is stopping you from wasting it and coming back here asking for a new 'last chance'.
: Giving permanently banned people a second chance
> I've seen NA giving people 2nd chance to show they've reformed but we don't have this in EU? Why so? This is so discriminative... It was an exeriment to see if giving back the account was worth it, or if they were just going to be toxic again. If the experiment is successful, we *might* see it on EUW, but it's no discrimination. It's not a full feature. They only took in a limited amount of players.
: Still blurry
What do you mean by 'blurry'? Can you take a picture of it. It honestly sound more like a problem on your end than on Riots end really.
: > [{quoted}](name=Hansiman,realm=EUW,application-id=2BfrHbKG,discussion-id=eJci4qEy,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2018-12-17T23:12:08.367+0000) > Account gifting is a strict violation of the ToU, and the penalty for that is simply a permaban without the ability to recover them. I don't understand rule, is it to prevent buying accounts?
In addition to what you said and what Hansiman said, it's also to avoid boosting. (As in someone playing on your account to rank it up)
íGengar (EUW)
: The last one in EU failed so hard it's not even worth considering again. Giving people another chance lead to the same people getting re-banned because some people just don't learn. The 14 day ban is your clear warning, if you then get perma banned you should have 0 chance of getting it back.
But they DID re-do the experiment. Mind you, we've not heard anything about the result, and I think it was a failure, but they did actually redo it. That's what OP is asking about.
: Punished for Reconnecting to a Game
I agree. There must be a better way to deal with these things. At the very least you just shouldn't be punished for reconnecting, if you do it in a timely manner. The system already kind of works like this, but the timeframe in which you have to connect is very small. They should make it so that if you come back and win, you don't get punished. Whether or not you get any LP/XP gains should be up to how long you were AFK. (Of course if your team somehow manages to win a 4v5, then you should still get punished if you join back within the last couple of minutes)
: "[Champion Name] sell skin" should be bannable
I mean, the system likely already picks up on that. It picks up on a lot of toxic stuff, but this just really isn't all that toxic. It's mildly toxic at best. Which is also how the system treats it. On its own it's not bannable because that's just dumb, you shouldn't get banned for only saying that, but it'll contribute to a punishment. If they also say other toxic stuff, it will be part of the reason why they get punished.
Asher2406 (EUW)
: > [{quoted}](name=RallerenP,realm=EUW,application-id=NzaqEm3e,discussion-id=IGnFcX7E,comment-id=0001,timestamp=2018-12-16T21:08:29.931+0000) > > Well what was the name exactly? If it was a date like 11/9 2001 I can understand it. No matter how controversial it is, it still should accept this date as long as it is just numbers (without '/').
I mean, it'll accept it. You CAN probably have it as your username. But it'll just get removed. It serves literally no purpose other than to upset people. And if you do something purely to upset people, then you deserve to be punished imo.
TEMP23452 (EUW)
: Date - Inappropriate summoner name?
Well what was the name exactly? If it was a date like 11/9 2001 I can understand it.
Ðeathmarkx (EUNE)
: New system for bans?
As much as Riot believe in reforming, they also know from experience that people generally don't reform if they are still toxic after a 14 day ban. No amount of punishments is going to make them behave. Also, banning random players with an ID ban is impossible. It's only possible for popular players because they reveal their accounts themselves. Any random person can't have their accounts reliably tracked, and any tracking would certainly end up affecting innocent players. Finally, Riot doesn't do infinite chat bans because they know that players will just begin trolling. Since trolling is alot harder to catch, it's not worth the risk. And as stated earlier, people generally don't reform if they haven't reformed after a 14 day ban.
: Why is flaming bad players bannable?
You're 100% trolling. > Especially new players who are just terrible at the game, why is it a problem telling them that they are bad at the game and should either uninstall or get better? If you have even the slightest amount of common sense and decency, this really shouldn't need to be answered.
Galadriel75 (EUNE)
: Dont reply to unhelpfull comments, mute flammers and do your best to be a good teammate both in aram and SR and you will lvl up Alternativ is play with friends and agree to honor eachother it dosnt count as much as non premade but everything counts in the end :) Good luck with your mission
The premade honor thing doesn't work. You don't progress in honor at all due to honors recieved from premades: > ## Can I game the system and boost to level 5 by constantly playing with a premade and honoring each other every game? >Nice idea. We had it too. So we specifically built Honor so potential exploits like this give you (and your friend) literally no benefit. [From the Honor FAQ](
: Concern about reaching honor 2 before February 12.
Riot gave you an example of chat you should avoid. And if your honor got slowed from 'several' reports, that means you've been correctly reported in several games. (As only one report is counted per game). So my advice would be don't concern yourself about reaching honor 2. Concern yourself with not being negative. Literally. Don't say anything slightly negative in your games. It achieves nothing but making the game worse for everyone, even if you aren't the one that starts it. If you're really having a hard time, just keep yourself to saying 'gg', 'wp' and 'gj' unironically. Mute anyone who starts flaming. And in the worst case scenario, just don't write anything at all.
: Cant Purchase Karma in the Store
100% a bug. I cannot for the life of me imagine that they took down a champion lol. Try re-logging. If that doesn't fix it, you should wait around a day or so and see if it's fixed. If you're still experiencing problems, contact support and they'll try to help you. EDIT: Yeah, it seems like a bunch of people are currently experiencing this issue with different champions aswell. You'll just have to wait untill Riot fixes it.
Kimmaz (EUW)
: I didn't say they should improve tracking. I said they should improve the ban method by Adding tracking. One game I played was strict about this sort of thing. You had to registrer your phone number/sms vertify and ip adress as part of account creation. And only one account per ip adress/phone number. This way, most players had 1 account only. But the downside was you could not play unless you was home. since you could not log in or play on any other ip adress.
Yikes man, even if IPs DID work like you think they do, it would be a terrible idea to restrict people to just playing at home. No more LAN parties. No more having friends over and playing. All because of a tiny minority of players cant stop having tantrums.
Kimmaz (EUW)
: I hope they improve by adding ip-adress and mac-adress and other info to the ban info to prevent ppl who gets banned from playing on a different account.
You literally cannot improve IP or MAC tracking. Any amount of tracking would be the highest amount you can do. That's just how IP's and MAC works.
Show more


Level 50 (EUW)
Lifetime Upvotes
Create a Discussion