Instant Feedback System is So Bad

Minulfur·3/2/2018, 4:44:51 PM·3 votes·1,848 views

How are you gonna have an algorithm instantly ban people with no chance of an appeal? I mean I have kids actually "passive inting" or actually inting in my games and report them and nothing happens. But god forbid I type "ff 15 I don't wanna play a game that is 24-3 and 2 people are feeding." Algorithm should be able to instantly detect shit like teemo jungle in ranked and ban that kid for trolling. He puts the team at as much as a disadvantage as someone who is flaming.

28 Comments

SavageConcordia3/2/2018, 4:51:31 PM5 votes

How are you gonna have an algorithm instantly ban people with no chance of an appeal?

You can submit a ticket to Riot Support if you want to appeal a ban but odds are the ban was correctly applied.

I mean I have kids actually "passive inting" or actually inting in my games and report them and nothing happens.

Inting and having a bad game or getting stomped are not the same thing. Looking at your match history I don't see any clear cases of people truly inting.

But god forbid I type "ff 15 I don't wanna play a game that is 24-3 and 2 people are feeding."

Well, given that there is nothing constructive about typing that and all it does is announce to your team that you have given up. Yeah, that can warrant a chat restriction.

Algorithm should be able to instantly detect shit like teemo jungle in ranked and ban that kid for trolling.

Want to create an algo that can tell when someone is trolling with teemo jungle versus having a bad game but genuinely trying an off meta pick? It's not as easy as you seem to think.

EDIT: On the note of that teemo, he had the highest kill participation on your team, did the most damage and had a 2.11 KDA. He wasn't trolling, you just flammed him for not playing a meta jungle.

Kaioko3/2/2018, 4:51:53 PM3 votes

Not doing what is optimal is not considered ban worthy, it's called playing the game.

I also highly doubt that just saying "ff 15 I don't wanna play a game that is 24-3 and 2 people are feeding." is what got you banned, but by all means screenshot your reform card and prove me wrong.

Lastly a instant feedback system is necessary simply due to the large amount of games which would be impossible to look at under a manual review process.

ModPeriscope3/2/2018, 4:58:41 PM1 votes

There is support ticket review, as well as community review, wherein you share whatever the reform card shows you when you log in and folks here weigh in on the chat logs. They do unban people, but only when there's been an error.

Kagemyth3/2/2018, 4:59:36 PM1 votes

so i get that its frustrating to lose but what you're suggesting kind of takes away player agency. they cant just ban people for picking something thats not meta. and as far as the inting thing, well thats a hard one to tackle just with an automated system because theres some really bad situations that sometimes look like inting but aren't, it might take a few games to catch legitimate inting. Also its kinda rude to just call people a kid based on in game performance its a game some people play to have fun and de-stress. i hope you feel better though losses like that are always a headache. just remember we've all got our own ideas on how the game should be played.

Imperial Pandaa3/2/2018, 5:34:26 PM1 votes

So, lets have a discussion :).

Bans and unjust punishments can and will be undone despite the "no punishment will be reversed." What that refers to are punishments given out correctly. Simple to misunderstand that. Perhaps an example would be a sign saying "No animals." but they still allow service animals in.

Off meta can work at times, even that Teemo jungle. If it is played effectively then it can be quite oppressive. This remains true for other lanes/champs too. Yes, I may prefer a different jungle but I also rather them not "first time" a jungle they don't know.

You seem to want manual reviews, so a tribunal sort of deal. Sure we can get a review by one person but for best results you want probably 3 different people to review a case (in case someone is tired/having a bad day). These judges would need to watch entire games and even if someone was premade (enemy reports because someone built 6 warmogs on a Mundo. But mundos team was premade and okay with that build.). We will go with 30 minute games on average. A work day is usually 8 hours. So a single worker should check 16 games/cases in a work day.

They could hire 100 people for this and boom 1600 cases/game reviewed a day. That is nice and all but does it make even a dent? I'm going to throw out some low ball or high ball numbers. Low ball: 1 million people play in a single day. 10 people in a match so 100k games played. High ball number: in 50% (basing off my experience and estimation based of forum complaint) of those games someone is accusing another player of trolling or intentionally feeding. So at least 1 person gets reported. So now 50k games need to be reviewed.

Remember our previous number? 1600. They can just hire more people. Maybe but remember more than 1 million people play everyday. We also didn't factor in reports for verbal toxicity. And the 1600 number is also basing off only 1 person reviewing a case; if you factor in the 3 per case the number checked is less than 600 per day, about 533. Even a mutilmillion dollar company would be hardpressed for the amount of staff needed.