Boards›[ARCHIVED] Miscellaneous

Exploring player behavior (without being condescending)

slippykitten··9 votes·3,077 views
Exploring Player Behavior Design Values

TL;DR - Riot needs to take responsibility for their community, instead of blaming them, and develop means to reduce the CAUSES of toxicity.

Riots recent article on player behavior perfectly articulates the main problem behind toxicity. Let me break down what they really said:

  1. Gamers will naturally be toxic without provocation and toxicity is a result of gamers not being punished. Riot stated "In the early days of the internet, players might use racist or homophobic language and nothing would happen; as a result, deviant behaviors not only emerge, but become the norm. In these cases, a non-action such as silence is reinforcement of the behavior, so the behaviors grow in frequency and severity."

  2. Toxicity is a minor problem in league. "Reform is critical because less than 1% of players are so persistently negative that they trigger a permanent or 14-day ban, ranked restriction or even a single chat restriction."

  3. This one is about what was not said. At no point did they mention the cause or provocation to toxicity was a factor at all.

Basically Riot's position is that gamers are sometimes negative and toxic for no reason whatsoever and the key to fixing that is manipulating people to be kinder through punishment and/or rewards. The problem is that they fail to see that there is a cause to toxicity!

People are not claiming the community is a problem based on the 1% of games Riot says contain serious toxicity. We all understand you will sometimes get the random jerk that wants to be a jerk just for the sake of being a jerk, but that is the anomaly, not the norm. Toxicity is a problem during games with normal people that are otherwise kind. Negativity is happening in games with people that are not purposely trying to troll, **and Riot is patronizing these players by ignoring the cause of the in game frustration **

Riot needs to stop being condescending to their players. They need to stop acting like the only negativity is the extreme permaban cases. They need to stop denying that there are actual issues that cause players to become toxic during the course of a game. They need to take responsibility for creating an environment that is inherently frustrating.

Here are some of the issues they SHOULD be talking about:

  1. Having options when you get an afk - Sure, punishing afkers is great, but we are currently stuck for at least 20 min in an inherently annoying and frustrating game with no options whatsoever. Dota lets you leave, other games let another player join, league just lets you suffer.

  2. No rules, no consequence - Currently there is nothing that stops me from getting mad at my team and just roaming the jungle all game to spite them. Players become verbally toxic because a member of their team decides to purposely lose the game, and here is the key phrase again,** they have no options to change it. **

  3. Matchmaking doesnt work well - Is there a difference between someone who has played 1000 games and is gold 5 and someone who has played 100 and got lucky to be seated gold? ABSOLUTELY. It is inherently frustrating playing with people that have a disproportionate skill and knowledge. What can you do when you get stuck with someone who doesnt understand the basic tactics of the game? once again, nothing.

  4. Report happy - I rarely play a game where someone isnt reporting someone else. this creates a negative environment usually from the start or upon the first mistake. When there are no other options available, people just throw around reports and threats of reports.

There are many other issues that CAUSE otherwise nice players to become toxic during games. it isnt just because they are a bunch of racist loser gamers that have been allowed to be toxic so they need a spanking. Come on Riot, get real.

First edit:

Riot recently released another article illustrating perfectly their inherent flaw in philosophy. Here is the main idea quoted from the link

"We don’t always share numbers, but because we are only talking about ranked games (meaning all accounts are active in ranked queue and Level 30) we felt these are pretty easy to make sense of without a ton of extra context. Since introducing ranked restrictions, verbal harassment reports in ranked games dropped 18%. After identifying some of the motivations behind ranked play and designing a system that provides meaningful penalties related to those motivations, the percentage of ranked games with moderate negativity fell 28% (from approximately 1 in 8 games to less than 1 in 10), and the percentage of ranked games with high levels of negativity (such as death threats, sexism, racism or homophobia) plummeted 47% to 0.8% of all ranked games."

Let me say this, i absolutely appreciate that they are realizing players need information regarding their behavior. Of course, if i was pessimistic, i might say 5 years is too long to develop a system of communication so players actually know what they did wrong, but i wont do that. This is on the right track.

HOWEVER, this article points exactly to the problem. They clearly are using verbal communication as a yardstick for success. Yes, they created an atmosphere where more people were unwilling to rage at other players because they were afraid of the ranked ban. Does this do anything at all to identify or mitigate the reasons for the rage in the first place? A resounding no.

The issue is still as i proposed. The majority of "toxicity" is not coming from "homophobic tweens" as riot would have you believe. It is happening because the game does nothing to mitigate toxic behavior (as contrasted to toxic speech). If players had options when mid went 0/10/0, they might be inclined not to rage at them. If we could do anything at all when had an afk other than get violated for 20 min, less people might be on tilt and angry.

Riots main concern is still the fruit of the problem rather than the root. Verbal toxicity (for the most part) is a product of larger problems, not the main concern.

Second edit: Since people are accusing me of having unfair expectations of a company making 100's of millions with an entire team devoted to this exact subject, i will give some possible solutions to the problems. Should i be expected to come up with the solutions for people that are paid to? I don't think so. Do i think they should be able to come up with solutions to better their own game? certainly. But here it goes anyway.

  1. AFK - Many options are available but here is my personal favorite. If someone is afk for 5 min, they can be replaced. The champion and items will stay identical, someone else will just be playing in the original players stead. There would be an additional queue to join a game for an afk for an opportunity to win double lp - meaning if you take the place of an afker in a random role and champion, you will get double the lp for winning it (or maybe just have it normal lp for a win and that player wouldnt get any lp loss if they lose). Would this cause some players to beg feeders to afk? Yes, but thats already bannable behavior, and already occurs.

  2. Feeders - Have each case of feeding actually reviewed and if it said person was feeding intentionally (or refusing to take rational steps to not die every 7 sec) then they will incur the total lp loss from the match and the rest of the team will be refunded their lp loss. Once again, this would have to be upon review. But this would make you feel like theres a chance of being redeemed for being screwed by a single teammate. It would also motivate someone who is feeding to keep trying rather than just throwing the game because they know if they feed they might lose 90 lp instead of 15.

  3. Matchmaking - All they have to do is add an additional layer to the system that factors in total games played (or maybe even games played since latest patch) so you arent queued with someone with technically the same MMR, but has only played 38 games and doesn't know there is a dragon buff now.

  4. ANY OTHER TOXICITY - If 4 or more players report you in a match, it should be immediately reviewed and punished. If your entire team says you were refusing to help, you should be punished for refusing to help. a. Another great idea is simply grouping players together that are often reported for similar behavior. You are a feeder? here is other feeders to play with. You often refuse to help your team and let them die? Here are other players that dont like to play as a team. Verbally abusive? here are other verbally abusive people. This would allow people to possibly better see their behavior on the other end and possibly reform. ( this would have to be for a set number of games and for them to get a message reading something like "you have been frequently reported for feeding, you will have to play x number of normal matches with other players of similar reports before returning to full population queue")

These are all ideas that are imperfect solutions off the top of my head but are all infinitely better than nothing. I bet if some of these rioters took some time off from patronizing its playerbase to work on some solutions like this, the game might actually improve.

41 Comments

BigNasty30004 votes

Truth! Picking leaves will not kill a tree, destroying the roots will.

It seems as if the meta in lower elos is - taunt my opponent enough until someone on their team afk's or rages.

The jinx who constantly talks to the enemy team, and dies while typing? Not toxic

The leona who say "wtf jinx" - banned.

People spamming ez after every kill? Healthy smack talk

People responding in anger? banned

Top lane clearing entire jungle after typing "lol, idc" when the jung politely asks them not to? perfectly fine

Jungler stops being polite? banned

If you taunt people, you don't get to be hyper-sensitive. These kids would have never acted like this in the old arcade days, when you had to be within punching distance of your opponent.

slippykitten4 votes

I appreciate those of you who understand. Some don't get it and will simply say "but they have INCREASED bans on verbally toxic players!". This single post that riot made and i replied to marked the beginning of the end for me (unless they change their approach, which is unlikely considering their usual 'i'm right and you're wrong' mentality).

I have only played a few games since writing this and they have all been painful. The first game, i tried to talk to my team (not rage at them) and let them know how they could improve. When i told the support that it was now even more important that dragon is warded, she told me "well you just bought yourself a support that wont ward anything for being a dick", after she got ganked 3 times and died from having zero wards, both the adc and support went afk. The rest of the game i played didnt go much better, but i didnt bother typing anything.

Basically, most games just arent fun anymore. Very seldom is a game an honest, good match, it is usually just 'who has the worse troll'. Unfortunately, i think i'm done, it is just too difficult to enjoy.

Archaic Mythos3 votes

Wow, reading this post verbalizes everything ive been feeling about this game lately..

Sadly were all just toxics and should be banned.

Its okay RIOT, like I said before.. you won't see my money again.

slippykitten3 votes

Lets also clear the air of this, because this seems to be a common point brought up. Riots statistics are most definitely skewed so they can paint the picture they would like to paint. The post referenced says

** "For about 95% of players, they’ll never see these harsh penalties and don’t drift close to negative behavior except on the rare bad day." **

That should mean i have ONE toxic person in one out of twenty games i play (providing i play with different people every game). I typically duo queue, which should reduce that number even further. Does anyone honestly think that third party websites are writing articles on the toxicity in leagues community because less than 5% of the time they get someone toxic? Can we stop the delusional, deflective statistics that are obviously created to pacify?

You can say "according to riots statistics, there actually aren't any trolls, its all in your head" but we all know that's B.S.

Jubbinaut1 votes

If 5% of the playerbase is toxic, you'll see an average of 1 toxic player almost every other game.

Furthermore, if you consider (from Lyte's MIT talk) that about 77% of all toxicity seen in games comes from players who are identified as "good," it's easy to see how the actual number of toxic players can be surprisingly low, while the amount of visible toxicity remains high.

I'd highly recommend you check out that video if you haven't, by the way (there's a couple of links in one of my other posts here). There's a lot of fascinating information in it that reveals interesting things about how we perceive toxicity.

slippykitten2 votes

{quoted} If 5% of the playerbase is toxic, you'll see an average of 1 toxic player almost every other game.

Furthermore, if you consider (from Lyte's MIT talk) that about 77% of all toxicity seen in games comes from players who are identified as "good," it's easy to see how the actual number of toxic players can be surprisingly low, while the amount of visible toxicity remains high.

I'd highly recommend you check out that video if you haven't, by the way (there's a couple of links in one of my other posts here). There's a lot of fascinating information in it that reveals interesting things about how we perceive toxicity.

That's kinda my point though. Ignoring the insinuation that toxicity is simply delusional players thinking it exists, i'll reference back to the original point.

"toxic" isnt just flaming your team in chat. In fact, at least in my opinion, that is the least toxic thing you can do, because it is the only form of toxicity i can stop. I can push a button to make you stop talking to me instantaneously. The other forms of toxicity, that PRODUCE verbal toxicity are the situation i brought up. Riot fails to see that there is in fact a cause for verbal outbursts other than that the internet is just full of jerks.

I gave examples of several forms of toxicity that perpetuate and exacerbate toxicity that are not factors in any of riots statistics, and thats the problem. When they say "5% of players are toxic" they mean "5% of players sometimes cross the verbal appropriateness line", they do not factor any other forms of toxicity.

So, if i start a game as jungle, never say a word, go in and feed a few kills to lanes, and then never leave farming my jungle until the nexus explodes, then, according to Riot, i am not toxic. However If i am the toplane in that very same game and i say "wtf jungler, you cant just feed lanes and then abandon your team, we need your help" then I am toxic.

Therefore the statistics are not measures of actual toxicity, they are measures of how often toxicity becomes bad enough that players are so angry that they are willing to risk getting punished just to let someone else know how angry they are.

TL;DR, sometimes small plants have big roots, and sometimes you have to look a little bit under the surface to see the real situation.

Jubbinaut1 votes

{quoted} That's kinda my point though. Ignoring the insinuation that toxicity is simply delusional players thinking it exists, i'll reference back to the original point.

I didn't intend to insinuate any form of delusion. I will unequivocally state that the perception of toxicity is worse than the fact of it. That perception is a product of Negativity Bias and Confirmation Bias, as well as the oddities of how the statistics work out (for example, the 5% statistic implying a toxic player in roughly half of games played).

That doesn't mean it's not there. It often, however, means that it is perceived to be worse than it actually is.

There's additional concerns regarding that, such as the influence we have on toxicity around us, but those aren't particularly germane to my point.

"toxic" isnt just flaming your team in chat. In fact, at least in my opinion, that is the least toxic thing you can do, because it is the only form of toxicity i can stop. I can push a button to make you stop talking to me instantaneously. The other forms of toxicity, that PRODUCE verbal toxicity are the situation i brought up. Riot fails to see that there is in fact a cause for verbal outbursts other than that the internet is just full of jerks.

This is beyond self-evident, though. It's why Leaverbuster is a thing. It's why they're working on a "feederbuster" system. It's why Trundle and Anivia players that intentionally use walls to grief their team are banned.

It's not as though these things are ignored. They're simply not seen as excuses for other forms of toxicity.

I gave examples of several forms of toxicity that perpetuate and exacerbate toxicity that are not factors in any of riots statistics, and thats the problem. When they say "5% of players are toxic" they mean "5% of players sometimes cross the verbal appropriateness line", they do not factor any other forms of toxicity.

Would you mind sourcing your claim, here? I know full well that players are punished for more than verbal toxicity (having done so myself in the Tribunal and having seen their complaints in the forums), and the 95% statement related explicitly to behavioral sanctions. This leads me to believe that at least some of the 5% of players who received sanctions must have been given those sanctions due to non-verbal toxicity.

I have not, however, read anything to explicitly correlate that statistic with any particular form of toxicity. If you've seen statements to the contrary, I'd be glad to know of them.

slippykitten2 votes

{quoted} I didn't intend to insinuate any form of delusion. I will unequivocally state that the perception of toxicity is worse than the fact of it. That perception is a product of Negativity Bias and Confirmation Bias, as well as the oddities of how the statistics work out (for example, the 5% statistic implying a toxic player in roughly half of games played).

That doesn't mean it's not there. It often, however, means that it is perceived to be worse than it actually is.

There's additional concerns regarding that, such as the influence we have on toxicity around us, but those aren't particularly germane to my point.

This is beyond self-evident, though. It's why Leaverbuster is a thing. It's why they're working on a "feederbuster" system. It's why Trundle and Anivia players that intentionally use walls to grief their team are banned.

It's not as though these things are ignored. They're simply not seen as excuses for other forms of toxicity.

Would you mind sourcing your claim, here? I know full well that players are punished for more than verbal toxicity (having done so myself in the Tribunal and having seen their complaints in the forums), and the 95% statement related explicitly to behavioral sanctions. This leads me to believe that at least some of the 5% of players who received sanctions must have been given those sanctions due to non-verbal toxicity.

I have not, however, read anything to explicitly correlate that statistic with any particular form of toxicity. If you've seen statements to the contrary, I'd be glad to know of them.

I suppose it is unfair to definitively state that other forms of toxicity do not EVER factor into riots calculations. However, we can see by the original article referenced, that it is written towards verbal abuse and the statistics are placed into a conversation entirely about verbal abuse. It would seem strange if they only spoke about verbal abuse but yet were actually referencing toxicity numbers from other forms.

The tribunal was much better at this, in my opinion, than the current method. Because Riot does not share ban information in detail, all we can see was when Lyte took the program, that there were droves of people coming to forums to get reasons for their bans (which is another problem that probably should be addressed - players should be given detailed explanation of what behavior they exhibited that was unacceptable and not told to go beg on forums for it). I saw not one person asking for information regarding a ban that was NOT verbal in nature. It was also shown that only chat logs from the offender were given. If you know of any, i would like to see, but i didnt see any "lyte smites" that were for anything except verbal toxicity.

It would also seem odd for riot to spend almost no time talking about other forms of toxicity but then for them to use those things to inflate their statistics to make themselves look worse. That would not be good business, and is highly unlikely.

So, no, i cant PROVE that other forms of toxicity are not part of their statistics, but i can clearly see their focus and aim is on verbal toxicity and they themselves have openly said that there is no action or provocation that makes verbal toxicity any less warranting of punishment.

Also, i want to point out that im certainly not trying to say that we pardon verbal toxicity because they were provoked. what i am saying is that verbal toxicity is inherently going to be there when you give players no options to combat gameplay toxicity. If the only reason players arent cursing each other out every game is because they dont want to get banned, then you still have major problems.

Jubbinaut1 votes

{quoted} I suppose it is unfair to definitively state that other forms of toxicity do not EVER factor into riots calculations. However, we can see by the original article referenced, that it is written towards verbal abuse and the statistics are placed into a conversation entirely about verbal abuse. It would seem strange if they only spoke about verbal abuse but yet were actually referencing toxicity numbers from other forms.

So, because Lyte used an easily recognizable form of toxicity in a few examples, he must be speaking expressly about that form of toxicity? I don't see how that follows.

I also don't see how his statistics can be stated to be "entirely about verbal abuse."

For example, in the following quotes, I don't see any references to any specific form of toxicity:

"Reform is critical because less than 1% of players are so persistently negative that they trigger a permanent or 14-day ban, ranked restriction or even a single chat restriction."

"For about 95% of players, they’ll never see these harsh penalties and don’t drift close to negative behavior except on the rare bad day."

The only statistic that relates specifically to any individual form of toxicity is this:

"we’re seeing this type of language in less than 3% of games globally"

Where it's part of the aforementioned example.

The tribunal was much better at this, in my opinion, than the current method. Because Riot does not share ban information in detail, all we can see was when Lyte took the program, that there were droves of people coming to forums to get reasons for their bans (which is another problem that probably should be addressed - players should be given detailed explanation of what behavior they exhibited that was unacceptable and not told to go beg on forums for it). I saw not one person asking for information regarding a ban that was NOT verbal in nature. It was also shown that only chat logs from the offender were given. If you know of any, i would like to see, but i didnt see any "lyte smites" that were for anything except verbal toxicity.

This actually makes me wish I'd done a better job bookmarking some of those Lyte smites. I know there was at least one that I saw where Lyte told the player he'd been banned for intentionally feeding. I want to say there was another where WookieeCookie told the player he'd been banned for abuse of the emote system.

I've seen at least one other player come forth in the TBI forum with a Support ticket response stating that he'd been banned due to emote spam. Refused to believe it was bannable, actually.

And I'd love to source all of those, but I have no idea where to find them anymore, as I did a terrible job keeping track of those things. Then again, I didn't think I'd ever need to reference back to them, so I blame my own short-sightedness. I do agree, however, that the Tribunal was at least more visible about banning non-verbally toxic players.

So, no, i cant PROVE that other forms of toxicity are not part of their statistics, but i can clearly see their focus and aim is on verbal toxicity and they themselves have openly said that there is no action or provocation that makes verbal toxicity any less warranting of punishment.

That's true, but then that's been their policy for as long as I've been paying attention. The Tribunal also tended to punish retaliatory toxicity, though as I've admitted before, it was somewhat more lenient about that.

what i am saying is that verbal toxicity is inherently going to be there when you give players no options to combat gameplay toxicity. If the only reason players arent cursing each other out every game is because they dont want to get banned, then you still have major problems.

Here's my question about that: What do you propose to do about it? I've never seen a system for preventing the harm of, say, an intentional feeder, that's safe from abuse. Or for Leavers, or for pretty much any form of non-verbal toxicity. And giving trolls more tools seems like a terrible idea to me.

Thing is, I don't think that most players avoid cursing each other because they don't want to be banned. I think that most players avoid cursing each other because:

  • They see no benefit to doing so
  • They see no reason to do so.
  • They prefer to avoid the stress.
  • They see less toxicity in the first place.

And other intrinsic reasons that I can't begin to consider. The threat of punishment, however, is effective for some. Positive rewards are effective for others (and they're working on more systems for that).

The entire point of Lyte's post was that there's no easy solution. Any effective attempt at addressing Player Behavior must have multiple systems with multiple approaches to handle the myriad of different personality types that make up the community. There is, as he says, no silver bullet.

Erratan2 votes

Numbers 1, 2, and 4 hit directly on the truth of the matter! (number 3 is important too, but an indefensible point) It's been this way for several years now, and I know it's driven me to take long breaks from league in search of something else. Coming back always feels like a mistake because of the players, but it's true that there's nothing that an innocent person, who's done nothing wrong, can do when they encounter this except endure it until the surrender, and "report". Or worse, when there's two issue players and you can't get a surrender to pass. And 90% of the time, the toxic player makes up an excuse to report the person they've been haranguing all game. Now the innocent have to wonder if they're going to get a ban or restriction, and none of the topic board reassurances that I've seen have been in any way reassuring. Time becomes wasted, opportunities for people without a lot free time are lost. The toxicity spreads, as players realize that their very participation is pointless if they run into a player that is causing problems. And since the tribunal is those same toxic players reading and rating the reports, it's disappointing to think about what they've the potential to do.

Jubbinaut2 votes

Well, since players like me (never been punished, never been warned, never been close to any form of behavioral problem) who used to be the most common and prominent Tribunal users are so terribly toxic, I suppose you're pleased to know that the Tribunal isn't up right now. That Riot's handling all of the judgments in-house.

I also suppose it would surprise you to know that they're actually more strict than the Tribunal was.

To the OP:

Your premise boils down to a statement that toxicity breeds toxicity. You specify forms of toxicity (leavers/afks, trolls, report abusers - all of which are notably punishable and fairly regularly punished, even under the Tribunal) that lead to verbal toxicity. In contrast, Lyte doesn't spend much time talking about forms of toxicity at all, save for the hate speech example.

Thing is, they are aware that those kinds of problems often lead other players to become toxic. That's why they punish those behaviors. They are aware that they cause occasional issues for players. I'm actually surprised that there's no reference to the design of the Behavioral Systems being intended to ensure that as few "rarely triggered" toxic players run into them as possible.

But Riot's policy has - to my knowledge - always been universally against toxicity. Meaning that while they understand that there are external stimuli that can breed toxicity - and therefor a need to minimize those issues - they believe that it is nevertheless the individual's decision to express toxicity. And, frankly, they're right. The actions of others do not define your actions, only influence them.

So a player who occasionally runs into something that he just can't stand and snaps about it isn't likely to be punished. But a player who can't keep from running his mouth off at everything that doesn't go the way he thinks it should probably will.

alaskaneagle1 votes

Well, since players like me (never been punished, never been warned, never been close to any form of behavioral problem) who used to be the most common and prominent Tribunal users are so terribly toxic, I suppose you're pleased to know that the Tribunal isn't up right now. That Riot's handling all of the judgments in-house.

I also suppose it would surprise you to know that they're actually more strict than the Tribunal was.

54367

lol, not really. They are more strict with the victims of harassment but allow the players who instigate and are the most vicious free riegn. I was banned for encouraging my team to report the player/players who were making sure we lost the game and were harassing me or another teammate all game. I was a bit of a di ck about it but when you consider the guy who didn't get a temp ban and his season rewards taken away was yelling things like "noob", "fa ggot" and "loser uninstall" All Game Long you have to wonder what riot is trying to accomplish. I have 30+ of the Worst trolls I've ever met in game on a watch list, and not a single one has ever been punished, and you can tell by their lolkings and match histories they do the same toxic behavior nearly every game.

I got, as the first time I've ever been punished Ever, a 2 week ban and All my season rewards taken away. My only crime as being annoyed that I'm losing another game to trolls and wanting to make sure the system to punish them was being used (also known as spamming;-).

Jubbinaut1 votes

Perhaps I wasn't clear in how I phrased that. I'm sorry if I caused any confusion.

Riot personnel tends to judge the cases put before them more strictly than the Tribunal did. This is, in part, because the Tribunal judges tended to apply more leniency to players they felt had been antagonized, whereas Riot personnel tend not to do so, as their policy is that retaliatory toxicity is no more acceptable than any other form of toxicity.

As for the rest of your argument, I'm unable to address that. I have no data contradicting it, nor do I have any data to support it beyond your unverifiable claim. Attempting to argue either side of that would be incredibly presumptuous of me.

alaskaneagle1 votes

Perhaps I wasn't clear in how I phrased that. I'm sorry if I caused any confusion.

Riot personnel tends to judge the cases put before them more strictly than the Tribunal did. This is, in part, because the Tribunal judges tended to apply more leniency to players they felt had been antagonized, whereas Riot personnel tend not to do so, as their policy is that retaliatory toxicity is no more acceptable than any other form of toxicity.

As for the rest of your argument, I'm unable to address that. I have no data contradicting it, nor do I have any data to support it beyond your unverifiable claim. Attempting to argue either side of that would be incredibly presumptuous of me.

54367

so what you are saying is that so many people were being abused that they sympathized to much with the ones taking abuse. Makes sense, the ones who would use the trib would be the ones who cared more about the game and the players so they'd empathize with the ones being abused.
I remember when I first questioned what riot was doing about trolls in the game. I kept getting harassed by people saying "they made the tribunal and it was working." I responded with; "then why are there so many trolls in the game and the # of trolls going up?" The most common response "The trib just needs more time to work, it can't do it immediately" My last response never got a comment back "it's been over a year since it was put in place... How long does it need. If it was going to work it would have worked by now. I like the trib and use it but I think it needs a supplement system to help it."

No responses from people and NEVER a red post. I've been responded to by reds but NEVER for anything to do with player behavior. Their policy seems to be ignore it and hope it goes away. Though now they seem to be taking it a step farther with "punish the ones who complain about trolls, if no one talks about them they aren't a problem."

Jubbinaut1 votes

so what you are saying is that so many people were being abused that they sympathized to much with the ones taking abuse.

I'd appreciate if you didn't put words in my mouth. You're welcome to draw whatever conclusions you want from my statements, but don't attribute your conclusions to me.

What I am saying is that the players who voted in the Tribunal tended to be more lenient than Riot personnel. This was, in part, due to players being more forgiving of small outbursts, particularly when they believed the player in question to have been antagonized. Nevertheless, the Tribunal still overwhelmingly tended to punish those who responded to toxicity with more toxicity (which is in accordance with Riot's stated policies against retaliation).

Note: Video links should link to the appropriate part of the video. In case the links don't work properly, I've included timestamps.

In the talk given by Lyte and StatusKwoh at MIT last year, there was a 79% agreement between Tribunal verdicts and internal Rioter verdicts. (link 16:35)

Considering that some 77% of witnessed toxicity comes from players identified as "good" or "positive," (link 5:00) it's not unreasonable to assume that this is due to a relatively small difference in judgement on borderline cases, rather than drastic, sweeping differences. This is also evidenced by the very fact that the Player Behavior team saw no cause for concern in this level of agreement.

Of interest, earlier in the same talk, they discuss the comparative number of games resulting in a report. Tribunal judges experienced 20% fewer games of this sort than toxic players, and 3% fewer than a baseline "average." (link 14:30) Not what I would call "being abused."

alaskaneagle1 votes

so what you are saying is that so many people were being abused that they sympathized to much with the ones taking abuse.

I'd appreciate if you didn't put words in my mouth. You're welcome to draw whatever conclusions you want from my statements, but don't attribute your conclusions to me.

What I am saying is that the players who voted in the Tribunal tended to be more lenient than Riot personnel. This was, in part, due to players being more forgiving of small outbursts, particularly when they believed the player in question to have been antagonized. Nevertheless, the Tribunal still overwhelmingly tended to punish those who responded to toxicity with more toxicity (which is in accordance with Riot's stated policies against retaliation).

Note: Video links should link to the appropriate part of the video. In case the links don't work properly, I've included timestamps.

In the talk given by Lyte and StatusKwoh at MIT last year, there was a 79% agreement between Tribunal verdicts and internal Rioter verdicts. (link 16:35)

Considering that some 77% of witnessed toxicity comes from players identified as "good" or "positive," (link 5:00) it's not unreasonable to assume that this is due to a relatively small difference in judgement on borderline cases, rather than drastic, sweeping differences. This is also evidenced by the very fact that the Player Behavior team saw no cause for concern in this level of agreement.

Of interest, earlier in the same talk, they discuss the comparative number of games resulting in a report. Tribunal judges experienced 20% fewer games of this sort than toxic players, and 3% fewer than a baseline "average." (link 14:30) Not what I would call "being abused."

54367

I was kinda putting words in your mouth, lol.

I do have to ask; If they were so pleased with the tribunal and found it to be so accurate, why did they shut it down?

I don't know if I missed something but I never did read anything that made sense. I remember a lot of what you are referancing as part of the reason they changed the trib to have the cases that were not overwhelmingly agreed on the punishment monitored by riot unless challenged by the player, but again I have to ask why you are referencing that when they have indeed taken the tribunal away from the players.

O 20% really? Ever consider the source? It seems to me that riot is trying to improve their perception of the community instead of actually improving the community. Every season they do a big talk/show of improving player behavior and removing toxicity from their game. It lasts for around 2 weeks and is never talked about again. Not even with a red just posting in an interesting thread. The PB section of the old forum was the least red used section of the entire forum. Other than lyte saying he'd post everyones chat's last season towards the end in response to the trib going away (which he didn't really do often and has stopped doing completely) there is never a red post on a behavior related topic.

When it comes to actual toxicity in the game riots stance seems to be "deny the battle to ensure victory". The community is considered the worst community out of all on-line games which no one even tries to dispute anymore like they did years ago.

Since you don't like me to draw conclusions and repeat what I think you meant let me know. It looks to me like your post is mostly about a dead system that is no longer in use.

Jubbinaut1 votes

{quoted} I was kinda putting words in your mouth, lol.

I do have to ask; If they were so pleased with the tribunal and found it to be so accurate, why did they shut it down?

The Tribunal developed a bug where it wasn't building cases fast enough. They had been working on some upgrades, and decided to take the Tribunal down to repair it and apply the upgrades in one pass. This has taken longer than anyone anticipated, in part because they're wanting to do a world-wide rollout of the upgraded system, and some of the webtech in other countries isn't capable of handling it at the moment.

but again I have to ask why you are referencing that when they have indeed taken the tribunal away from the players.

Contextually, I was speaking to another poster regarding the Tribunal being down, and Riot being more strict than the Tribunal was. I didn't figure this to be a source of confusion, since you quoted me and began this extension of that discussion.

In referencing the Tribunal, I'm attempting to focus on bringing forth data that relates to my prior claim that Riot is more strict than the Tribunal was.

O 20% really? Ever consider the source? It seems to me that riot is trying to improve their perception of the community instead of actually improving the community. Every season they do a big talk/show of improving player behavior and removing toxicity from their game. It lasts for around 2 weeks and is never talked about again. Not even with a red just posting in an interesting thread. The PB section of the old forum was the least red used section of the entire forum. Other than lyte saying he'd post everyones chat's last season towards the end in response to the trib going away (which he didn't really do often and has stopped doing completely) there is never a red post on a behavior related topic.

As a regular poster in both the Player Behavior and Tribunal Ban Inquiries sub-forums, I can absolutely agree that there was not a spectacular amount of Red communication in those sub-forums. I can also attest to sincere attempts to adjust that before the forums were taken down, and to the fact that PB and TBI were both fairly low-use sections of the forums in general (which would mean low visibility for red posts, which might go a long way towards explaining why there weren't very many).

Since you don't like me to draw conclusions and repeat what I think you meant let me know. It looks to me like your post is mostly about a dead system that is no longer in use.

I stated clearly that you're welcome to draw whatever conclusions you like. I asked you to not attribute those conclusions to me. However, yes, my post was about a system that's no longer in use. More specifically, it's about the relative strictness of the Tribunal and internal Riot audits. And more tellingly, I posted it because you seemed to require clarification about my previous statements.

Or, to put that another way: We only came down this rabbit hole because you wanted to know what was down it.

alaskaneagle1 votes

{quoted} The Tribunal developed a bug where it wasn't building cases fast enough. They had been working on some upgrades, and decided to take the Tribunal down to repair it and apply the upgrades in one pass. This has taken longer than anyone anticipated, in part because they're wanting to do a world-wide rollout of the upgraded system, and some of the webtech in other countries isn't capable of handling it at the moment.

Contextually, I was speaking to another poster regarding the Tribunal being down, and Riot being more strict than the Tribunal was. I didn't figure this to be a source of confusion, since you quoted me and began this extension of that discussion.

In referencing the Tribunal, I'm attempting to focus on bringing forth data that relates to my prior claim that Riot is more strict than the Tribunal was.

As a regular poster in both the Player Behavior and Tribunal Ban Inquiries sub-forums, I can absolutely agree that there was not a spectacular amount of Red communication in those sub-forums. I can also attest to sincere attempts to adjust that before the forums were taken down, and to the fact that PB and TBI were both fairly low-use sections of the forums in general (which would mean low visibility for red posts, which might go a long way towards explaining why there weren't very many).

I stated clearly that you're welcome to draw whatever conclusions you like. I asked you to not attribute those conclusions to me. However, yes, my post was about a system that's no longer in use. More specifically, it's about the relative strictness of the Tribunal and internal Riot audits. And more tellingly, I posted it because you seemed to require clarification about my previous statements.

Or, to put that another way: We only came down this rabbit hole because you wanted to know what was down it.

54367

Nice to read something worth reading on forum :-) I wish I had more to offer right now but I'm pretty spent and I think I'm done with posting for the day. Thx for clarifying, I'm glad I got a good well thought out post to read before getting off for the day.

You seem more optimistic than I am about riots intentions but that seems to be the only difference in our thoughts of what has, is and is going to happen and there is nothing wrong with that. I'm a bit drained of optimism at the moment and it seems my bucket is empty. Hope we get to converse on topics again. Night

Trinityunicorn2 votes

My only crime as being annoyed that I'm losing another game to trolls and wanting to make sure the system to punish them was being used (also known as spamming;-).

I'm afraid you lose your credibility with me when you say: " I was a bit of a di ck about it"

alaskaneagle1 votes

{quoted} I'm afraid you lose your credibility with me when you say: " I was a bit of a di ck about it"

54367

you are being a bit of a di ck now... Guess you have no credibility either huh?

Trinityunicorn1 votes

You're entitled to your opinion. Interestingly enough, its usually not the term that people would use after having interactions with me.

I'd be very surprised if you said "report xxxxx" one time in a game and got banned.

Wow, just looked at those chat logs provided to you for your ban.

first time I've ever been punished Ever,.....My only crime as being annoyed that I'm losing another game to trolls and wanting to make sure the system to punish them was being used (also known as spamming;-)."

First off, people that split their curse words so a system doesn't pick them up doesn't bode well for you. Neither do those chat logs that were provided to you explaining your ban. There are other flags in your posts that I just didn't want to get into, while I can understand why you're so pissed at Riot, I can also see that you were highly toxic in those logs.

Hopefully, you will review those logs provided to you, that I'm sure you demanded, and figure out what got you banned. Unfortunately, for those getting banned, the attitudes that go with the toxicity are not so easily changed, and go way deeper than just stopping saying certain words.

Max Nobody2 votes

Hi.

Having options when you get an afk - Sure, punishing afkers is great, but we are currently stuck for at least 20 min in an inherently annoying and frustrating game with no options whatsoever.

You can still win 4v5, the leaver can still reconnect, you should take it as a challenge.

Dota lets you leave

Encourages to surrend easily. There is no more fighting spirit.

other games let another player join

I'd like to see which games does so, and how they manage it when the leaver RC.

Players become verbally toxic because a member of their team decides to purposely lose the game, and here is the key phrase again, they have no options to change it.

One day I had a Jax. The Syndra made a shitty engage and gave their adc a triple kill (Syndra, Jax and Sona-me). So Jax said "f**k you i afk jungle". During a minute he did indeed farm his jungle, even refusing to save his top laner who went just next to him when he was doing his wraith. I just said "Well, ok, I'm not the one getting demoted soon after all. Don't think you can say the same Jax".

Of course, it's an example where I could easily reason him, and sometimes it's harder, but you can almost always talk your way out of it. So yes, players have an option to change it.

Matchmaking doesnt work well - Is there a difference between someone who has played 1000 games and is gold 5 and someone who has played 100 and got lucky to be seated gold? ABSOLUTELY.

... ABSOLUTELY....... Not. Because Matchmaking in ranked (and normals and all modes) doesn't give a s**t about ranking, only ELO, which is totally different of ranking. You can be Gold 5 and be matched with Silver 2 because you have a Silver 2 ELO. Reversely, on my last solo games, I was matched with Silver 2 to Gold 4 players when I'm Silver 3.

It is inherently frustrating playing with people that have a disproportionate skill and knowledge. What can you do when you get stuck with someone who doesnt understand the basic tactics of the game? once again, nothing.

First, yes you can explain him politely, being the smartest one, telling him why Rabadon is better than Mikael on Sona, why you shouldn't chase in their jungle, why warding here is more important than warding there.

And what tells you what YOU know of the game is right? That the one who have less skill and/or knowledge can play in good conditions? That he's not just half asleep?

Report happy - I rarely play a game where someone isnt reporting someone else. this creates a negative environment usually from the start or upon the first mistake. When there are no other options available, people just throw around reports and threats of reports.

Well, I don't know how it is on NA, but I can tell you on EUW we don't use threats of reports often. In fact, during my last 10 games, I've only seen it once or twice.

Jubbinaut3 votes

Well, I don't know how it is on NA, but I can tell you on EUW we don't use threats of reports often. In fact, during my last 10 games, I've only seen it once or twice.

I see a lot of people threatening to report. I see a lot fewer of them actually doing so. Toxic players like to use the threat of reports to bully people into doing what they want. They don't always go through with it, and those that habitually do are almost entirely ignored by the system anyway, so their reports don't really matter.

Arch Sight2 votes

Toxicity breeds toxicity is fighting fire with fire where another player loose there cool because the other player instigated. It's best not to say anything to them. To ignore them at that point.

The Op wasn't getting into toxicity vs toxicity only, he was getting into the design of the game helps to create the environment where that toxicity grows from frustration with dealing with the game's designed features and player's not being able to do anything to avoid having their game experience ruined any further. (My rematch system that I've been posting about would solve this. [Riot I told you so :P])

I see a lot of people threatening to report. I see a lot fewer of them actually doing so. Toxic players like to use the threat of reports to bully people into doing what they want. They don't always go through with it, and those that habitually do are almost entirely ignored by the system anyway, so their reports don't really matter.

"I see a lot fewer of them actually doing so." How can you see them reporting the player or not reporting the player? The report system is not post to be seen by other players.

Jubbinaut1 votes

Toxicity breeds toxicity is fighting fire with fire where another player loose there cool because the other player instigated. It's best not to say anything to them. To ignore them at that point.

I agree. That's always the best first step in dealing with a toxic player.

The Op wasn't getting into toxicity vs toxicity only, he was getting into player's not being able to do anything to avoid having their game experience ruined any further and saying that the design of the game helps to create the environment where that toxicity grows from frustration with dealing with the game's designed features. (My rematch system that I've been posting about would solve this.)

Any systems that might remove sources of toxicity from concern - and thus alleviate the stress and frustration of their presence - would be rife with abuse. People have been trying to brainstorm some method of addressing that issue for years, and still have yet to hit on something that wouldn't simply give trolls more power.

I encourage thought along these lines, as it's certainly important, but I'm forced to recognize that - barring some game-changing idea - the best response to a toxic player is still to mute and ignore them, play to the best of your ability, and report after the game.

"I see a lot fewer of them actually doing so." How can you see them reporting the player or not reporting the player? The report system is not post to be seen by other players.

I played a long series of games at one point where - in virtually every single game - one or more players threatened to report me for whatever reason. I never received a pop-up warning, nor any form of sanction.

I played another series with a friend who, according to Lyte, has about a 0.5% reported rate (as in, he has only been reported in about 0.5% of his games). He, also, was threatened with reports multiple times in those games. He also never received a pop-up warning, nor has he received any form of sanction.

Given this, it's not unreasonable to assume that while those players were threatening to report, they weren't actually doing so (as players with low rates of reports, it would not take very many to "spike" over our relative averages and trigger the in-client pop-up warnings).

This also agrees with Lyte's statements to the same effect: toxic players often threaten to report, but tend to follow through less often than their threats would imply.

alaskaneagle2 votes

This also agrees with Lyte's statements to the same effect: toxic players often threaten to report, but tend to follow through less often than their threats would imply.

54367

You really think the toxic players are the ones that point out that you can report them? Ever consider the fact that being harassed constantly might effect people negatively to the point they look more toxic due to having their fill of abuse and not being stockholms?

I've seen quite a few examples recently of people (I'm included in this group) of people being punished for being trolled. It seems now that riot punishes people who don't thank the trolls for the abuse. I say it like this because I have 30+ of the worst trolls in the game on a watch list and not a single one has ever been punished.
But I complained about trolls and encouraged my teammates to report them (I was to insistent on it but even in this thread it's pointed out that people often don't report even when they should) so they took all the rewards I worked a year to get.

I am not as nice to people in this game as I used to be and the reason is none of the actual toxic players I've run into have ever been punished. WTF does reporting do? I don't know why I bothered trying to make sure people used riots system when riot doesn't use it; Not for finding/punishing trolls. I'm not a good little stockholm like riot likes. I don't thank people for harassing me from select menu to stat page and I wanted them to be reported to see if MAYBE riot would finally punish a troll but it never happened. About half my watch list is from this season and all of them got their season rewards, but I tried to encourage the use of riots own system so I lost mine.

final score

TROLLS = 30 RIOT = -1

Jubbinaut1 votes

I seem to have walked into a poor phrasing again, my apologies. In rereading that quote, I realize that I've managed to imply that threatening reports is something that toxic players commonly do. I'm not sure if that's the case or not, but it's certainly not what I intended. Although, it is notable that one of the words most commonly used by players who are identified as toxic is "report."

What I intended to indicate that toxic players actually report far less often than they threaten to. For example, while a particular toxic player may make report threats in some (extremely hypothetical) 30% of his games, he only actually reports in (again, hypothetically) 10% of his games.

Again, I apologize for the miscommunication.

alaskaneagle1 votes

I seem to have walked into a poor phrasing again, my apologies. In rereading that quote, I realize that I've managed to imply that threatening reports is something that toxic players commonly do. I'm not sure if that's the case or not, but it's certainly not what I intended. Although, it is notable that one of the words most commonly used by players who are identified as toxic is "report."

What I intended to indicate that toxic players actually report far less often than they threaten to. For example, while a particular toxic player may make report threats in some (extremely hypothetical) 30% of his games, he only actually reports in (again, hypothetically) 10% of his games.

Again, I apologize for the miscommunication.

54367

I remember Lyte/morello (I'm not sure which said it) mentioned that it was one of the words used that was punished the most. I suppose I should have taken that as a hint to not try to encourage people to use the only system in place to deal with trolls.

I usually pick up on subtext and hints so well too...

I have also noticed that people say they will report Much more than they actually do. One of the games that gave me the most influence to start trying to make sure people did report trolls was when; our select menu had a troll who double picked top (pretty common actually) so I, the first pick, said I can mundo top if you will report our double top for trolling our select menu after the game. The all agreed and I was a support mundo... I am a vicious mundo though and we won pretty easy. I got our adc around 8 kills in lane and we swept through the enemies with the top laner not really doing anything good or bad. AFTER the game everyone refused to report him saying "why report we won the game".. This guy stole my spot, cut our chances of winning Drastically, and was a total troll/jerk, but I was good enough to make up for it and Nice enough to take one for the team, so HE gets let off the hook...

After that game I was more harsh on trying to get people to actually report trolls instead of giving them free passes. Since I got all the rewards I work a year getting taken away for it though I doubt I do anything but laugh with the trolls, mute them and take the loss they give me without a word or even a report. Riots marketing mix seems to favor stockholms so I guess I'll have to fake it to make sure they don't punish my account again.

Jubbinaut2 votes

{quoted}

I remember Lyte/morello (I'm not sure which said it) mentioned that it was one of the words used that was punished the most. I suppose I should have taken that as a hint to not try to encourage people to use the only system in place to deal with trolls.

There's no need for such encouragement. Cases are built based on the number of reported games. The case-building aspect of the report system doesn't pay attention to how many reports are issued in any particular game, only how many games the player in question is reported in.

Specifically, it took some 12-25% of reported games to trigger a case in the Tribunal. Since there's been no announcements regarding changes to the reporting system - or to how it builds cases - I assume that to still be accurate.

Calling for reports, therefore, is not only risky, but offers no benefit towards ensuring that a case is built against them.

alaskaneagle1 votes

{quoted} There's no need for such encouragement. Cases are built based on the number of reported games. The case-building aspect of the report system doesn't pay attention to how many reports are issued in any particular game, only how many games the player in question is reported in.

Specifically, it took some 12-25% of reported games to trigger a case in the Tribunal. Since there's been no announcements regarding changes to the reporting system - or to how it builds cases - I assume that to still be accurate.

Calling for reports, therefore, is not only risky, but offers no benefit towards ensuring that a case is built against them. 54367 quick note; they did announce that the system was going to start putting the games with more reports in the trib instead of just selecting random ones. Basically to make it so the games people were actually jerks in were there for people in trib to judge instead of the games where people were just reported by accident or other reasons.

Jubbinaut1 votes

{quoted} 54367 quick note; they did announce that the system was going to start putting the games with more reports in the trib instead of just selecting random ones. Basically to make it so the games people were actually jerks in were there for people in trib to judge instead of the games where people were just reported by accident or other reasons.

This is true. Once a case is built against a player, the Tribunal tended to select games from that case that had more reports. However, that had (and has) no impact on whether a case is built or not.

Good catch, though.

alaskaneagle3 votes

Toxicity breeds toxicity is fighting fire with fire where another player loose there cool because the other player instigated. It's best not to say anything to them. To ignore them at that point.

The Op wasn't getting into toxicity vs toxicity only, he was getting into the design of the game helps to create the environment where that toxicity grows from frustration with dealing with the game's designed features and player's not being able to do anything to avoid having their game experience ruined any further. (My rematch system that I've been posting about would solve this. [Riot I told you so :P])

I see a lot of people threatening to report. I see a lot fewer of them actually doing so. Toxic players like to use the threat of reports to bully people into doing what they want. They don't always go through with it, and those that habitually do are almost entirely ignored by the system anyway, so their reports don't really matter.

"I see a lot fewer of them actually doing so." How can you see them reporting the player or not reporting the player? The report system is not post to be seen by other players.

54367

"Toxicity breeds toxicity is" what happens when people are constantly exposed to toxic behavior over and over and see first hand that riot doesn't do anything about it to the point you are annoyed by it which puts you in a bad mood causing you to be more toxic than you were before.

Being effected negatively by the game causes you to treat the game negatively. I am FAR from being toxic compared to the people I have seen in game and the ones on my track lists that have never been punished. I have been posting on forums for years now and you can see the progression of the tone of my comments. I started out happy, helpful, and hopeful in every post. I talked like the few I seen were the exception and that it was a rare occurrence to see a troll. You can see how riots lack of response to anything having to do with player behavior, the constant and growing amount of trolls I'd come across in game, and seeing that not a single troll I looked into was ever punished wore me down. I was Extremely nice when I started posting in forums, but sadly I don't have a fuck left to give. "Would you like to see my bucket? I'll show you all my fu cks." I'm not even close to acting like the trolls in game, BUT I'm not nice anymore. I'm blunt, I'm a bit rude, and I don't sugar coat anything. I even got all the rewards I worked for a year to get taken away while the one who called my top laner a "ni gger" all game long Got Their rewards....

In light of all that, I'd say most of the trolls in the game now are people like me who cared and wanted to help riot and the community but were abused so much their attitude went the other way which caused more trolls to be created and more.

The only people who seem to be able to play this game indefinitely without punishment from riot are stockholms and the people that abuse them the worst. If you don't like to abuse or be abused then you will get punished for complaining about it like I did.

Dreampod2 votes

I find angry diatribes like this fascinating because they don't reflect my experience with League at all. I'm pretty calm and friendly with other players and find that I see very little game play trolling and only a moderate amount of unacceptable language. When things start going poorly and players get angry I try to calm the situation and focus on coming back which seems to work. I do see occasional disconnects or players that don't show up until 5 minutes into the game but almost never an intentional afk, in those games I always focus on playing safe and helping that player catch up and I probably still win 25% of the games with a DC that never returns (not the 50% that it ought to be but not too shabby). I see almost no threats of reports as a tactic to bully people though not infrequently I see a request for other players to report someone disruptive in the postgame chat but rarely do they belabour the point prior to the end of the game.

It might be worth considering how your interactions with other players might be altering the dynamic of how they behave and escalating behaviours that could have been avoided if you hadn't put fuel on the fire and your perceptions of what trolling is (playing badly and losing your lane or playing with a different style isn't trolling) because the game you describe playing and the one I play every day sound like two completely different games.

slippykitten2 votes

{quoted} I find angry diatribes like this fascinating because they don't reflect my experience with League at all. I'm pretty calm and friendly with other players and find that I see very little game play trolling and only a moderate amount of unacceptable language. When things start going poorly and players get angry I try to calm the situation and focus on coming back which seems to work. I do see occasional disconnects or players that don't show up until 5 minutes into the game but almost never an intentional afk, in those games I always focus on playing safe and helping that player catch up and I probably still win 25% of the games with a DC that never returns (not the 50% that it ought to be but not too shabby). I see almost no threats of reports as a tactic to bully people though not infrequently I see a request for other players to report someone disruptive in the postgame chat but rarely do they belabour the point prior to the end of the game.

It might be worth considering how your interactions with other players might be altering the dynamic of how they behave and escalating behaviours that could have been avoided if you hadn't put fuel on the fire and your perceptions of what trolling is (playing badly and losing your lane or playing with a different style isn't trolling) because the game you describe playing and the one I play every day sound like two completely different games.

I find people that think the multitudes of people complaining about the community are lying to also be fascinating. Do you think everyone is making it up, that you are somehow more intelligent than every person who has observed the community differently, or do you think that your experience must certainly be the same as everyones and they are simply delusional? I really don't see any value in people arrogantly dismissing the complaints of such a high percentage of the population. I mean, even third party organizations have referenced the poor quality of the league community.

So, no, your experience (whether factual or not) is not what we all typically experience and no, dismissing complaints and genuine problems by burrowing your head in the sand will not accomplish anything.

You did exactly what riot did in their post. instead of actually having the integrity to listen to the real problems, you simply blame the players that bring up the issue. I suppose that is the easier way to handle it though....

Dreampod1 votes

Sorry that you feel like I was claiming that you were lying or making stuff up. I genuinely am interested in why the experience of the game is so different between players like you who feel like the community is very hostile and players like me who feel that it is quite friendly. My suggestion that you considered your interactions wasn't an accusation of bad behaviour but thought you might be able to improve your own experiences by changing your interactions.

OhBoyItsaMegaman2 votes

Do you think everyone is making it up, that you are somehow more intelligent than every person who has observed the community differently, or do you think that your experience must certainly be the same as everyones and they are simply delusional?

How about D.) different players have different experiences based on how they act towards their team and what attitude they expect to encounter in others?

You mentioned in another post that you nicely suggested that the support should ward dragon, and they complained about you being a jerk and deliberately stopped warding. Clearly, your interaction with this person got you thinking that they were toxic, and your interaction with this person got them thinking you were toxic. And if Dreampod or I were in that game in your place, what we would have said (probably nothing) would have had both parties peacefully enjoying the game.

The issue is not that you're lying or delusional; it's that you are a common element in all of your games and you are a factor in how other players act.

I really don't see any value in people arrogantly dismissing the complaints of such a high percentage of the population.

High percentage? A high percentage of the population complains that toxicity is rampant and that it's clearly caused by unpunished report begging and poor matchmaking? How high of a percentage, and what makes you think so?

Most people who play this game say practically nothing in chat other than "drag soon", "gj", "can I blue?" and so on. Check that massive thread where Lyte was posting logs of random people and giving rewards. Compare that to any Smite thread. It's just like Riot claimed. A massive percentage of people who play this game do not ever (or very rarely) create negative experiences, and it makes sense that that same group of players rarely encounter negative experiences as well.

slippykitten1 votes

{quoted} How about D.) different players have different experiences based on how they act towards their team and what attitude they expect to encounter in others?

You mentioned in another post that you nicely suggested that the support should ward dragon, and they complained about you being a jerk and deliberately stopped warding. Clearly, your interaction with this person got you thinking that they were toxic, and your interaction with this person got them thinking you were toxic. And if Dreampod or I were in that game in your place, what we would have said (probably nothing) would have had both parties peacefully enjoying the game.

The issue is not that you're lying or delusional; it's that you are a common element in all of your games and you are a factor in how other players act.

High percentage? A high percentage of the population complains that toxicity is rampant and that it's clearly caused by unpunished report begging and poor matchmaking? How high of a percentage, and what makes you think so?

Most people who play this game say practically nothing in chat other than "drag soon", "gj", "can I blue?" and so on. Check that massive thread where Lyte was posting logs of random people and giving rewards. Compare that to any Smite thread. It's just like Riot claimed. A massive percentage of people who play this game do not ever (or very rarely) create negative experiences, and it makes sense that that same group of players rarely encounter negative experiences as well.

I suppose that there will always be people that say "you get toxic people because YOU are toxic!"

You plainly just said i was toxic by asking a support to ward dragon. I'm not sure what i am supposed to say to that or what kinds of things i should be saying in game. If i cant use the chat function to ask a support to throw a ward on dragon, what can i use it for?

What might be more likely than that everyone that complains about toxicity being the cause of it, is that it could actually exist. you guys sound like republicans talking about the poor. They actually do exist, it isnt a lie from the enemy.

But i guess youre right, i'm a delusional, hallucinating, schizophrenic. Along with everyone else that thinks there is toxicity. I'll stop talking about it and go see a doctor.

BTW, you dont work for riot, do you?

OhBoyItsaMegaman2 votes

You plainly just said i was toxic by asking a support to ward dragon. I'm not sure what i am supposed to say to that or what kinds of things i should be saying in game. If i cant use the chat function to ask a support to throw a ward on dragon, what can i use it for?

I plainly did not say that. In fact, I specifically chose not to say it. I said that your interaction with the support caused you to think that they were toxic, and for them to think you were toxic. They could have been wrong about you.

And you could have been wrong about them. Were their exact words really "well you just bought yourself a support that wont ward anything for being a dick"? Or were you expecting them to say that, so when they replied "I know how to ward, you concentrate on your own lane" you interpreted it (and remembered it) as way more hostile than it was intended? And before you jump up and say I'm accusing you of being delusional, isn't that exactly what you're accusing the support of?

You simply told them that it is important that dragon is warded: an innocent helpful tip. They apparently took so much offense to that that they completely refused to ward at all, according to you. Does that seem like a rational, reasonable response? It doesn't. It sounds like you said one thing and they heard something completely different. How does that happen? Well, they've been in games before where people go apeshit on them if there aren't enough wards. They expect that, so when someone says something that has even the potential to be antagonistic, they perceive it as 100% toxic. And I suspect that you probably do this to some extent too. You claim that you see toxicity all over the place, and it is likely because you're expecting to see it all over the place. You go for a kill but die and go to 0/3, one teammate says "this Fizz" and the other says "stop diving". When you get out of that game, I wonder if you say "My entire team raged at me all game!"

Again, I'm not accusing you of anything except the thing that you're accusing your own teammate of. You claimed that he had a ridiculous overreaction to something that was not in any way toxic. Is it that hard to imagine that you unconsciously do the same? A combination of a subtly aggressive tone and a tendency to see perceive others as more toxic than intended would totally explain why your experience isn't the same as everyone else's.

Drunk Rummate1 votes

2 things here

  1. Yes, there are instances in this game that can bring on anger. That's just how life works. You can't eliminate all potential for anger, there's always going to be something completely out of your control that's capable of setting you off. They key is to look past the things that anger you and focus on the good so that you don't become negative as a result of the negativity around you. On a side note, nobody wants to be friends with a negative person, and isolation breeds more negativity. It's a really sad spiral that you should try to avoid.

  2. I agree with a lot of your points. Improving the afk and griefing situation would be a godsend for this game. The problem is that there's no apparent way to solve the issue. From my soapbox it looks like Riot is trying their best to fix this issue in a non-intrusive way. I agree with their approach because I think a more intrusive system could easily be abused. But there are always going to be dissenters (like yourself) who think that more intrusive method to deal with AFKs is better, and it's obviously not right to completely shove your opinions under the rug.

slippykitten1 votes

Since people are accusing me of having unfair expectations of a company making 100's of millions with an entire team devoted to this exact subject, i will give some possible solutions to the problems. Should i be expected to come up with the solutions for people that are paid to? I don't think so. Do i think they should be able to come up with solutions to better their own game? certainly. But here it goes anyway.

  1. AFK - Many options are available but here is my personal favorite. If someone is afk for 5 min, they can be replaced. The champion and items will stay identical, someone else will just be playing in the original players stead. There would be an additional queue to join a game for an afk for an opportunity to win double lp - meaning if you take the place of an afker in a random role and champion, you will get double the lp for winning it (or maybe just have it normal lp for a win and that player wouldnt get any lp loss if they lose). Would this cause some players to beg feeders to afk? Yes, but thats already bannable behavior, and already occurs.

  2. Feeders - Have each case of feeding actually reviewed and if it said person was feeding intentionally (or refusing to take rational steps to not die every 7 sec) then they will incur the total lp loss from the match and the rest of the team will be refunded their lp loss. Once again, this would have to be upon review. But this would make you feel like theres a chance of being redeemed for being screwed by a single teammate. It would also motivate someone who is feeding to keep trying rather than just throwing the game because they know if they feed they might lose 90 lp instead of 15.

  3. Matchmaking - All they have to do is add an additional layer to the system that factors in total games played (or maybe even games played since latest patch) so you arent queued with someone with technically the same MMR, but has only played 38 games and doesn't know there is a dragon buff now.

  4. ANY OTHER TOXICITY - If 4 or more players report you in a match, it should be immediately reviewed and punished. If your entire team says you were refusing to help, you should be punished for refusing to help. a. Another great idea is simply grouping players together that are often reported for similar behavior. You are a feeder? here is other feeders to play with. You often refuse to help your team and let them die? Here are other players that dont like to play as a team. Verbally abusive? here are other verbally abusive people. This would allow people to possibly better see their behavior on the other end and possibly reform. ( this would have to be for a set number of games and for them to get a message reading something like "you have been frequently reported for feeding, you will have to play x number of normal matches with other players of similar reports before returning to full population queue")

These are all ideas that are imperfect solutions off the top of my head but are all infinitely better than nothing. I bet if some of these rioters took some time off from patronizing its playerbase to work on some solutions like this, the game might actually improve.

slippykitten1 votes

I wish i could get a red post here and see their thoughts but apparently they have grown past the point of communicating with their customers.

More from [ARCHIVED] Miscellaneous

Open Letter to Parents of League of Legends Players
[ARCHIVED] Miscellaneous860 comments
2,611
votes
Rewards for positive play
[ARCHIVED] Miscellaneous19,712 comments
1,337
votes
I don't like Boards
[ARCHIVED] Miscellaneous324 comments
809
votes
STOP ALLOWING LEVEL 1 ACCOUNTS TO SEND FRIEND REQUESTS!!!
[ARCHIVED] Miscellaneous291 comments
679
votes
Wanting to do something special for an awesome friend. Riot, please help? <3
[ARCHIVED] Miscellaneous220 comments
614
votes
People that are telling others to kill themselves has to stop! Please help me get this noticed!
[ARCHIVED] Miscellaneous605 comments
600
votes

More by slippykitten

I don't care about dominion at all, but here is why I'm still pissed they're removing it
Gameplay287 comments
319
votes
Morde is the perfect example of Riot's flawed design philosophy
Gameplay158 comments
209
votes
It irks me when people beat me
[ARCHIVED] Miscellaneous97 comments
173
votes
Why the "it will all even out eventually" is a bad argument for trolls and afks losing lp's
Gameplay173 comments
162
votes
So I see that tribunal is still not back....
Gameplay84 comments
161
votes
Honestly, this game is a fucking joke
Gameplay92 comments
159
votes