Rulesets within LCS and Global Leagues

Riot·Feb 22, 2016·2 votes·25,498 views

TL;DR:

We’re making some changes to the LCS rules landscape based on feedback and observations we’ve made over the last year.

There are three initial changes we’re making:

Penalty index: To create consistency and set clear expectations around penalties, we are releasing a “penalty index,” or list of common offenses and their associated penalties, to make penalties more predictable and transparent.
Penalty tracker: We will be maintaining a public-facing penalty tracker which will keep track of all penalties levied during the LCS season.
Increased dialogue with pro players and owners: We’re ramping up our efforts to incorporate more dialogue with pro players and owners into the LCS disciplinary process and structure.

This is pretty long, so buckle up.

Now that the 2016 season is underway, we wanted to take some time to discuss the role that rulesets play within the LCS and global leagues. Most importantly, we’d like to take a closer look at how we approach setting and enforcing rules, why we believe they’re important to the health of the league, and what new measures we’ll be taking to streamline the process in 2016.

Our goal for League of Legends esports is to showcase the highest quality of play and sportsmanship in competitive League of of Legends. To meet that standard, we need to establish and uphold goalposts to ensure a fair and stable ecosystem for players, teams, and the league.

The goal of both regional and global rules is very simple: to deter and penalize behavior which is at odds with the health of the league. They’re also designed to offer a clear and transparent set of guidelines for players and teams to be able to fully understand the consequences of any rules broken. We believe that evolving how we present the ruleset will help us improve this experience and offer greater transparency - and we’re implementing three significant changes to make the league disciplinary process for the 2016 season more consistent and predictable.

PENALTY INDEXES

Moving forward we’re going to be introducing two complementary ways to track penalties for typical offenses in competitive play: (1) An LCS penalty index (EU LCS version) which typically cover common or minor offenses which warrant a suspension of less than 3 competitive months, and (2) A global penalty index which applies to major offenses warranting a suspension of 3 competitive months or more, and whose penalties will be the standard across all global leagues.

Over the last few seasons our approach to penalties has meant that each league across the world has looked at all fines and suspensions on a case-by-case basis, with penalties tailored to each case. While the intent was to be as fair as possible, in practice, this approach has had some drawbacks:

Inconsistency: Different approaches and philosophical changes over time led to inconsistencies in how players in different regions, or even within the same region, were punished for similar offenses.
Unpredictability: Teams, players, and fans have sometimes felt surprised by penalties, whether too heavy or unexpectedly lenient. We want to make sure that rulings feel consistent and penalties are predictable yet effective deterrents.
Delayed Decisions: Reinventing the wheel on what an appropriate penalty is after each incident rather than working within a preset range has led to significant delays in taking action, sometimes leaving teams and orgs in limbo. We want to cut down on the delay between investigations and rulings so the affected parties can plan accordingly.

To be clear, our intent in streamlining our disciplinary process isn’t to penalize more frequently. Instead, we hope that clearer communication about league discipline sets expectations, disincentivizes misconduct, and educates teams and players.

For more information about the Global Penalty Index, NA and EU LCS Regional Penalty Index, and an explanation of how they work, check out this post.

PENALTY TRACKER

Transparency is something we value highly, and is one of the reasons we publicly disclose every fine and suspension related to violations of league rules via competitive rulings. Though there are many different types of misconduct ranging from turning in paperwork late to extreme toxicity, up until now we’ve used one mechanism to publicly disclose penalties for all of them. We think there are better ways to give context about fines and suspensions than producing uniform posts for all offences, minor or major.

Moving forward we’ll be using a public-facing penalty tracker which will document all penalties levied during the LCS season. Penalty tracker entries will be less detailed than competitive rulings but will be covering more straightforward violations (e.g. a uniform violation or missed roster deadline) - this will also help us respond more quickly to minor offenses. For more complex offenses such as poaching or extreme toxicity we’ll still issue competitive rulings where we’ll provide context about the penalty in question, and they will be linked on the penalty tracker to make it easier for teams to search for past records of disciplinary action and better understand precedent.

INCREASED DIALOGUE WITH PRO PLAYERS AND OWNERS

Towards the end of the 2015 Summer Split we started piloting the idea of an “LCS Pro Player Panel,” inviting every team to send one player representative chosen by their teammates to the Riot offices to meet with us periodically to give their feedback on a wide range of topics ranging from the league format and player welfare to the 2016 penalty index. The feedback we received on a number of topics ranging from the LCS format to player protections was valuable and has helped inform our offseason plans including our Summer Split format changes and changes to player-team contracts to improve the league in 2016.

While we’ve been speaking with players informally about these kinds of issues since the formation of the LCS, having an organized and consistent channel for that feedback really levels up our process. We first introduced the penalty index to this group last year - their feedback and input helped us to refine and make tweaks before this final version.

The LCS Pro Player Panel is still in its early stages, but we’ll continue seeking feedback on ongoing developments and changes in the future. We’ll proactively discuss league rules and best practices (amongst other things) regularly with this group, as well as meet individually with players who’ve been penalized to make sure they have an opportunity to ask for clarification about potential penalties and how they can avoid them in the future. This is something we’ve done informally in the past, but we’d like to make it a formal part of the LCS moving forward.

We’re similarly looking to meet with LCS owners more frequently than we have in the past to discuss pressing concerns in the league and improve our ability to incorporate their feedback into our disciplinary policies and vision for the league’s future. As with players, we’ve already had feedback from owners inform our some offseason plans, including our overhaul of the promotion-relegation system.

All of this is part of a larger effort to incorporate more dialogue with pro players and owners into the league disciplinary process and structure. Since one of our goals behind league rules is to encourage teams to behave professionally and exhibit good sportsmanship, it makes sense to engage in a more consistent dialogue with players and owners about what exactly that means.

CONCLUSION

Penalty indexes and the LCS ruleset aren’t intended to be stone tablets from above - LoL esports is still young and we’re learning how exactly leagues are best governed. As such, we expect the system to evolve over time. As always, we’ll monitor the results of these changes and make adjustments as needed to better serve the ecosystem.

Thanks for reading!

15 Comments

Angry MonsterFeb 23, 20166 votes

be nice if the page worked

Camba4everFeb 23, 20165 votes

be nice if you'd explain yourself instead of making snide and unhelpful passive-aggressive remarks

Angry MonsterFeb 23, 20164 votes

it was showing error 500 7 hours ago. Why you bother posting 4 hours later, when odds are the problem is fixed?

man i hate people like you, have to comment on something that you are clueless about. This wasn't even an opinion piece, the stupid thing wasnt working. All any riot member had to do was click the link at the time.

Obviously the post had nothing to do with you.

[zombie-brand-clap]

SpiderTeoFeb 24, 20162 votes

Why would Camba4ever bother posting four hours later? Well, It's probably to make a comment on the snide and unhelpful passive-aggressive remark that was posted before his/hers.

Seriously, when one reads, "be nice if the page worked" then one is inclined to think that the poster is being a whiny little bitch. If you present yourself like a whiny little bitch, then expect others to respond to you and treat you as though you were a whiny little bitch.

Now, anyone could disagree that Angry Monster's first comment did sound much like that of a whiny little bitch. However, one cannot say that Angry Monster could not have used a more tactful and less condescending post. A simple "Yo, Riot! The page is %$#@! up. Anyone else having this problem, yo?" statement would have sufficed.

Now, to publicly state one's hatred for someone who comments on one's own first comment, which was perceived as being rude and impolite, is just a dick move. That's something grade school kids do. If you act rude or inconsiderate, and someone calls you out on it, then don't try to deflect blame and make yourself out to be the victim. If you don't want someone to call you out on being a whiny little bitch, then don't do anything that would suggest you could be a whiny little bitch. Don't direct your anger and frustration at the person who called you out on your faults. Angry Monster is angry, not because someone made a reply to his comment, but because he got recognized as acting like a whiny little bitch.

I Am MagicianFeb 24, 20161 votes

Page didn't work when he posted, no one needed to respond just downvote, why give recognition. The holier than thou complex is strong in you, eh? Your post is way worse than his, droning on for 4 paragraphs about a single remark is pathetic. Get your head out of your butt and keep your mouth shut.

SpiderTeoFeb 28, 20161 votes

The "holier than thou" comnplex is actually very weak in me, if not pretty much non-existent. In fact, I admit that I can and will be a jackass at time, though I do try to keep it in check. However in the above scenario, Angry Monster was acting like a whiny little bitch. His post was "worse" because he didn't even try to correct himself, but rather attack "Camba4ever" for his/her comment so that Angry Monster's own snide, unhelpful, and passive-aggressive comment.

Angry Monster got called out, and he replied to it, not with grace, but with whiny, bitchy attitude. It would only be natural that he should expect someone to reply if he feels the need to attack someone calling him out. So I called him out on his sorry whiny little ass. In fact, if he has a problem with it, let him try to attack me or refute what I had been saying. Otherwise, his silence would be accepted that he acknowledged that we was a whiny little bitch.

Now to respond Jack Magics: Angry Monster was given recognition because he was acting like a whiny little bitch. Silently accepting his little entitled rants would only enable and encourage further behavior, rather than try to prevent it. So the page doesn't work. Boo hoo. Try not to be a jackass about it. But if you do, then be ready to be called out on it and accept it with grace, rather than trying to start a flame war just because your ego got bruised.

My post is not worse, not by a long shot. Angry Monster was being a whiny little bitch, and he needed to know it. A community that permits such behavior only becomes worse over time. And I really don't want this community to get any worse than it is.

Also, I didn't "drone on for 4 paragraphs about a single remark." Any proficient reader can tell that the comment flowed well from beginning to end: the opening was to answer an obvious rhetorical question with an equally rhetorical answer. This makes the reader aware that the rest of the comment would probably be at least incendiary, if not outright condemning. The rest of the comment then exposes Angry Monster's ego problem, reiterates Camba4ever implied point, and explains how not to do that shit again.

It is also clear that it was not a single remark. Angry Monster expressed his hatred, assumed that Camba4ever was clueless, and declared that his post should be ignored because "had nothing to do with" anyone else. Admittingly, I can say his posts were not as long as mine, but his post lacked coherent and consistent thought, as well any sort of wit.

Now, if any of you want to call my writing "pathetic," then that opinion is well within your perogative to express. Personally, I just think Jack Magics is just a dumb-ass %%%%%* who doesn't like to read amd he's pissy that his head hurts from trying to read it. Though, I will admit that is an assuption on my part.

My head has never been up my ass. If it were, then I wouldn't have been able to recognize Angry Monster's whiny ass rant, nor be able to draft such an eloquent response to it. I am very aware of myself and what goes around me.

I will also not keep my mouth shut. I will speak when someone act like a jackass. If you don't want me to speak, then don't talk to me and don't act like a jackass. (hint hint)

*My use of this controversial word does not mark me as racist. Hell, to me, it's just a word that is capable of evoking certain reactions. I do not condone any attempts to justify the use of this word toward racist, xenophobic, or discriminatory actions. I'm assuming Jack Magics to be a "%%%%%" regardless of his race, ethnic background, or other irrelevant phenotype; I'm assuming Jack Magics to be a "%%%%%" because his post seems to reveal a preference for ignorance over intelligence.

DrCyanideFeb 24, 20161 votes

I'm getting a 500 error code as well, and 500 is for server side errors, so...

FooDangFeb 23, 20163 votes

Interesting...

The Polar BareFeb 23, 20161 votes

Taking headset off early is an offense?! LMAO

MasalarFeb 23, 20163 votes

My assumption is that the headsets are primarily there for noise canceling. Taking it off early could let you hear things that give you an advantage.

KLAGedFeb 24, 20161 votes

How do they limit caster and crowd feed back on the microphones? A loud crowd reaction like a gasp or laugh could more or less give away information, being that the people playing actively rely on the power of deduction. Unless the mics really just don't pick up noise that isn't right in front of them. Though, in one of the Mic Checks a team asks "If it's normal to here the crowd go "Steve!" in the EU lcs.

MasalarFeb 24, 20161 votes

I think it's just an unavoidable fact. They do what they can to mitigate it, and the crowd being really loud doesn't necessarily tell you WHAT is about to happen, just that SOMETHING is happening (and it could just be a ward clear).

PapaCamFeb 24, 20161 votes

Last year I read a post where pro's admitted that at times they could hear the casters through their headphones and thus giving away the enemy teams strategy. This happens in Counter Strike a lot more than league (based on the number of post I've seen.) These happen frequently at IEM events as the arenas are much larger thus requiring a higher volume. A great way to combat this is sound booths like they have in LCK or OGN. ESL (who runs IEM) claims sound booths are too expensive. Makes sense for a company who's former President made enough money for multiple houses.
Professional post made on the topic: http://www.goldper10.com/article/2334-we-need-booths-in-csgo.html

Also based off some brief research, A sound booth for an entire team+coach would probably run 10 grand at the most. This is if it is purchased. If ESL did purchase their own they could ship them between tournaments and also be able to rent them out to other tournaments.

TL:DR; ESL is cheap and lazy a f.

EpicWallyFeb 25, 20161 votes

I like the attempt at transparency, and clarity with regard to penalties and enforcements. That said, when I saw "penalty index" I actually assumed an index (i.e. a number, or scale.) rather than a list of common infractions and the penalty that they generally convey. Especially given that the league discretion is always allowed to adjust these penalties based on mitigating circumstances, I think this is a great start, but isn't nearly as clear or as comprehensive as what I might have imagined. What I think would work would be a scale of say 0-10 that goes something like this...

Penalty Index

0 - Minimum warning, maximum loss of ban.
1 - Minimum loss of ban, maximum loss of 3 bans.
2 - Mimimum loss of 3 bans, maximum 1 game suspension and/or fine of up to $1000 US.
3 - Minimum 1 game suspension and/or fine up to $1000 US, maximum 4 game suspension and/or fine up to $5000 us. ... ...
10 - Lifetime suspension and/or fines of up to $50,000 or whatever.

You can then take the penalty list, and simplify it as such:

Headset violation - Severity 0
Ignoring officials instructions - 1
Minor Toxicity - 3
Elo Boosting - 5
Major toxicity - 7
Tampering with officials - 8 ... etc.

You can then include a clause such that "Repeat offenses will move the punishment up the scale by 1 tier for each infraction. Similarly, for those extenuating circumstances, in the competitive rulings, you can state "This infraction is typically a level 5, however because of overwhelming cooperation from the player/org we decided to assess it at a level 4" or "This instance was egregious because X, therefore we are assessing it at a level 7 instead of the usual 6."

There would probably need to be two such scales, one for organizations and their infractions, and another for player specific infractions, but I think this system would be overwhelming clear, transparent, and still flexible.