Boards›Player Behavior

Is it unreasonable for me to keep pursuing justice? [Long]

KuribohOP··4 votes·1,262 views

EDIT, UPDATE: After 2 months, 24 days, 29 support tickets over 2 accounts (yes I got an account banned/suspended from customer support) I have finally gotten justice. http://prntscr.com/9wgqhl.

(I made a post similar to this awhile ago but felt the need to do a more detailed more updated version)

On the 11th of October I hit lvl 30 on this account on the 12th of October I played my first ranked game and by the end of the 24th of October I had played 17 ranked games (13 wins, 4 losses). I came to log on about 2 weeks after this (can't remember exact date) and found out my account had been suspended for "MMR boosting" as I have played every game on this account myself. I will talk in detail about my inquires on this suspension but TLDR: 23 support tickets later I am still none the wiser as to why they think someone else played on my account. Not only do I not know why they think someone else played on my account they haven't even disputed the evidence I have provided them that I have played every game myself. And I have now been suspended from RIOT games support without a warning or email or anything.

After reading the email I had been sent saying I had been accused of being "MMR boosted" which came with a definition I submitted my first ticket telling them that they had made a mistake and that I had played every game myself. He replied with a copy-paste of the definition and closed the ticket. I then made a second ticket saying that I know what "MMR boosting" is and that I have not taken part in it. I was then told they "have clear evidence that I had another player play ranked games on my account" but that I was welcome to provide any evidence I thought was relevant. I then proceeded to talk about where I play game on that account from (my home time address and my term time address), my mentality going into my lvl 1-30 games compared to my mentality going into ranked games, the fact that I play on my main account (TypicalBailey EUW) much more frequently than I play on this account and that if you compare my games on that you will see my ranked games are as you would expect. I mentioned that I had been to multiple LOL events with my uni and was happy to play in person in front of a rioter and that I would get similar results. I was then told that they did not take games from my other account into consideration and would not despite knowing I own both of them. (This is just making the sample size small for the sake of making it small and only lowers the overall accuracy by increasing the variance). This either means that there sample size was 17 games or that they included pre lvl 30 games which I played infrequently with many more games being played on EUW in between and where the MMR is not know accurately as pre lvl-30's rarely play against lvl 30's. If you compare pre lvl 30 games where I can't be bothered to try very hard because it is full of smurfs flaming other smurfs to ranked games where I am trying my hardest of course their will be a difference this is not very surprising. So I deduced that their sample size was either very small or it was not very accurate. So I waited until after my suspension and played some more ranked I am currently Plat 5 with around plat 3/2 MMR with 30 wins 13 losses. I have submitted many tickets asking that they simply compare the ranked games I have played after the suspension to whatever games they did not think were me previously so that they could see that all of the games were me. Unfortunately the only responses I got were "we consider this matter closed" followed by the closing of the ticket. There were some other responses in there that I can't remember and can't check without going through allot of emails a couple of responses I do roughly remember were "proving that you have played those games does not prove you played the others" whilst this is sort of true the basis of the argument is that the previous games were me by showing that I play exactly like I did in those games. The whole basis for their argument is that I apparently don't play like I did in those games so if it is an invalid argument then they have no basis on which to claim I have been "MMR boosted". Another response was something along the lines of "doing so would reveal too much about our investigation techniques" if carrying out an investigation into an accounts involvement in "MMR boosting" is too revealing of the investigation then the first investigation would have never taken place. I don't know what frustrates me more when they don't say anything and close the ticket or when they write some flawed logic and close the ticket. On my 23rd ticket the support staff just changed the status to solved without typing anything I reopened it by asking why he had changed the status to solved without solving my issue to which he just changed the status to solved again so I reopened it and he said the case is closed and changed the status to solved and after I reopened it again I was suspended from customer support. I have now submitted an inquiry into my suspension from the support site via another account thought that inquiry has finally had a response after 4 days confirming that my account was suspended from customer support and that this account will be as well if I continue to pursue justice. I talked to arbiter Daen about this in a private chat and after a bit of discussion all he could really do was reassure me that it won't happen again though he didn't seem overly confident in RIOTs decision I did however feel less frustrated after and do appreciate him taking the time to talk (if only the support staff were more like him/her). I just recently private messaged a RIOT employee explaining my situation not sure if anything will come of it but it is worth a try.

So that is my experience so far. The as RIOT would call it "the player who got boosted to Gold 3 and seamlessly and legitimately climbed to Plat 5 once his suspension expired." sounds convincing doesn't it. Anyway if you have any questions feel free to ask.

21 Comments

Lithium Rosa2 votes

It's kinda ridiculous if Riot keeps saying "we have clear evidence" but never show a single tiny piece of them.

Samus721 votes

The only thing I have to say on this is "Insufficient data." I don't have enough information to know why Riot did what they did. While I know what "boosting" is, I would need to know more about them.

I suspect most people on the forums are in a similar boat. This is something you'll have to take up with Riot. But if you've done so and they said the punishment stands, you may not get any further.

Colgate Gator1 votes

Just as other people have said, we don't have enough information to back you up, the number of people claiming to be innocent for X reason of ban and then being shown they are full of BS is extremely high for me to give you the benefit of doubt.

That being said, if you truly have been wronged, then keep contacting Riot and get to the bottom of this.

themachamp1 votes

Riot has grown too big to care. It's like trying to reason with wal-mart......or exxon mobile or something.

Jubbinaut1 votes

Your concerns have been addressed elsewhere by other Arbiters, but there's a couple things I want to make note of here that I hadn't seen elsewhere.

{quoted}

(This is just making the sample size small for the sake of making it small and only lowers the overall accuracy by increasing the variance). This either means that there sample size was 17 games or that they included pre lvl 30 games which I played infrequently with many more games being played on EUW in between and where the MMR is not know accurately as pre lvl-30's rarely play against lvl 30's. If you compare pre lvl 30 games where I can't be bothered to try very hard because it is full of smurfs flaming other smurfs to ranked games where I am trying my hardest of course their will be a difference this is not very surprising. So I deduced that their sample size was either very small or it was not very accurate.

This section in particular is what I want to clarify.

To the best of my knowledge, Riot doesn't rely on statistical analysis to determine the validity of MMR Boosting bans. Neither is performance a determining factor. Rather, they seem to rely on a combination of IP addresses and login times, and a player's "fingerprint" - which is the only factor that variance or sample size might be relevant regarding, and which is built based on your overall play (notably, "not trying" isn't likely to make an impact on that data).

As such, the limitations you indicate here are exceedingly unlikely to have any impact on the validity of their conclusions.

Another response was something along the lines of "doing so would reveal too much about our investigation techniques" if carrying out an investigation into an accounts involvement in "MMR boosting" is too revealing of the investigation then the first investigation would have never taken place.

I believe you misunderstood the intent of their statement. They aren't saying that a second investigation would by itself be revealing - but that comparative investigations could be (much like in logic problems, where the correct answer is derived by comparing multiple related statements to each other).

So that is my experience so far. The as RIOT would call it "the player who got boosted to Gold 3 and seamlessly and legitimately climbed to Plat 5 once his suspension expired." sounds convincing doesn't it. Anyway if you have any questions feel free to ask.

It's important to keep in mind that comparative rank isn't really meaningful to Boosting bans, either - though I'll gladly grant that that's certainly counter-intuitive. What matters is whether someone else played a Ranked match on the account in question.

KuribohOP1 votes

To the best of my knowledge, Riot doesn't rely on statistical analysis to determine the validity of MMR Boosting bans. Neither is performance a determining factor. Rather, they seem to rely on a combination of IP addresses and login times, and a player's "fingerprint" - which is the only factor that variance or sample size might be relevant regarding, and which is built based on your overall play (notably, "not trying" isn't likely to make an impact on that data).

Is a players "fingerprint" not just a collection of data based on previous games for which they would rely on statistical analysis to compare. I imagine tabbing out to switch youtube videos and generally spending time looking at my other monitor would effect the way I play especially stuff like the way I click. So I would have though "not trying" would have a impact on the data.

I believe you misunderstood the intent of their statement. They aren't saying that a second investigation would by itself be revealing - but that comparative investigations could be (much like in logic problems, where the correct answer is derived by comparing multiple related statements to each other).

I kind of see where your coming from but if that was the case someone who cared about reverse engineering the system could just use multiple accounts. Also even if someone did reverse engineer it, it could be constantly being tweaked for all I know.

Jubbinaut1 votes

{quoted}

Is a players "fingerprint" not just a collection of data based on previous games for which they would rely on statistical analysis to compare. I imagine tabbing out to switch youtube videos and generally spending time looking at my other monitor would effect the way I play especially stuff like the way I click. So I would have though "not trying" would have a impact on the data.

Apologies. I assumed that by "not trying," you were referring to trying new things, playing off-meta, or simply not playing to your best ability in some way. I didn't consider that you might have meant you were actively playing less than normal. I suppose there's some chance that may have some effect, but I still find it unlikely - their phrasing would tend to indicate that they recognized that many-to-most of your Ranked games to be played by you, which would indicate that however they build their "fingerprint" is clever enough to recognize both of those general behaviors as being "you."

I kind of see where your coming from but if that was the case someone who cared about reverse engineering the system could just use multiple accounts. Also even if someone did reverse engineer it, it could be constantly being tweaked for all I know.

I don't believe the fact that there are possible ways to reverse-engineer means there's no value in trying to minimize the ability for people to do so.

KuribohOP1 votes

their phrasing would tend to indicate that they recognized that many-to-most of your Ranked games to be played by you, which would indicate that however they build their "fingerprint" is clever enough to recognize both of those general behaviors as being "you."

Their phrasing never indicated this to me I assumed and still assume they didn't think any of the games were me since to me there were no stand out games. Looking back at my match history I haven't played adc much since the suspension but then again adc isn't my best position the only reason I picked it is because I felt it would allow me to carry better against worse opponents. So maybe it was the adc games maybe it was all of them I can't think of any reason why anyone would think some games are not me but not others. After a quick count I played 5 support games, 2 mid games, 5 adc games and 5 top games I mean I guess the 2 mid games went very different the Annie one was a bit of a disaster and the Veigar went well. Maybe it was that I played champs I hadn't before, the Viegar game was my first Viegar game on that account, the Alistar game was my first Alistar game on that account and the Morgana game was my first Morgana game on this account since March. I am really struggling to see anything concrete that would suggest another player playing a few of these games. I wasn't really thinking about how I was clicking I would assume it would have been similar between games maybe varying slightly between different roles. I may have taken quick-cast off Viegars 'e' or that may have been a EUW game I can't remember.

Jubbinaut1 votes

{quoted}

Their phrasing never indicated this to me I assumed and still assume they didn't think any of the games were me since to me there were no stand out games.

My understanding - and admittedly, my information regarding the specifics of this validation is second-hand at best - was that the statement was phrased similarly to: "we found at least one game that we are certain was a different player." That type of phrasing (the "at least one" part in particular) typically indicates a fairly small number of positive triggers from the review - there may be a few, but it's unlikely to be all of them, or even a majority.

I am really struggling to see anything concrete that would suggest another player playing a few of these games.

Keep in mind that the data available to Riot is far more detailed than we have access to after the fact. Except in really obvious cases, their evidence is often invisible to players simply because our data isn't nearly as complete. I'm not sure whether that's a good thing or a bad thing (I could see solid arguments for both sides), but that's the way it is.

KuribohOP1 votes

My understanding - and admittedly, my information regarding the specifics of this validation is second-hand at best - was that the statement was phrased similarly to: "we found at least one game that we are certain was a different player." That type of phrasing (the "at least one" part in particular) typically indicates a fairly small number of positive triggers from the review - there may be a few, but it's unlikely to be all of them, or even a majority.

From my understanding the wording is just them just being vague I feel like they would have used the same wording if they thought it was 1 game or if they thought it was every game.

Keep in mind that the data available to Riot is far more detailed than we have access to after the fact. Except in really obvious cases, their evidence is often invisible to players simply because our data isn't nearly as complete. I'm not sure whether that's a good thing or a bad thing (I could see solid arguments for both sides), but that's the way it is.

While I don't have any of the hard data like how much I clicked or whatnot I can still remember the games vaguely and how I played in them.

Jubbinaut1 votes

{quoted}

From my understanding the wording is just them just being vague I feel like they would have used the same wording if they thought it was 1 game or if they thought it was every game.

I base my conclusions on a lot of experience reading Riot Support responses, whether they're posts here on the boards, or screen-shotted Support Tickets. Given that experience, I have reason to believe that the minimalist language used in that discussion indicates a small number of findings - because it is my experience that when a large proportion of games are in question, they tend to use different types of language (such as "a lot", "many", "most", "a significant amount", etc.).

It's certainly possible that I'm wrong - any conclusion based on incomplete data can be wrong - but I think it's a safe assumption.

While I don't have any of the hard data like how much I clicked or whatnot I can still remember the games vaguely and how I played in them.

I'm a strong believer that hard data trumps memory every time. Memory is a tricky thing - it's prone to all kinds of bias, and by its inherent subjective nature, is incomplete. With no first-hand knowledge of the situation, I've no choice but to recognize that the side with the data has an inherently stronger basis for their claim.

All of this has been a little beside your original point, because I wasn't sure how to actually address that. I've been thinking about it, though, and here's what I think you need to understand moving forward.

Your case has been looked into multiple times, presumably by multiple Rioters. Each of those Rioters has found evidence that convinced them someone else has played at least one game on your account. Continuing to pursue this is extremely unlikely to change that - and therefore is probably not worth the time, energy, and stress you'd be putting yourself through.

KuribohOP1 votes

I'm a strong believer that hard data trumps memory every time. Memory is a tricky thing - it's prone to all kinds of bias, and by its inherent subjective nature, is incomplete. With no first-hand knowledge of the situation, I've no choice but to recognize that the side with the data has an inherently stronger basis for their claim.

I personally don't think a sample size of 17 games split across multiple roles is enough of a sample size is an inherently strong basis to make any claim especially when all of the data that I can see suggests all the games were played by the same played.

Your case has been looked into multiple times, presumably by multiple Rioters. Each of those Rioters has found evidence that convinced them someone else has played at least one game on your account. Continuing to pursue this is extremely unlikely to change that - and therefore is probably not worth the time, energy, and stress you'd be putting yourself through.

It was looked into the first time I inquired true. Since then I played more games so they would have a larger more up to date sample size of how I play. All subsequent inquiries have ignored this and just assumed the first investigation to be true. I am putting myself through this partly as I view the way they have handled this as anti-consumer, if a player goes into ranked for the first time and gets falsely accused like I have and goes to support and they basically tell them we know it wasn't you don't do this again or your banned do you think that player is going to want to play ranked again. Secondly I am doing this because I understand the importance of the system but it cannot improve without acknowledging its false positives and better detection that makes fewer false positives is better for everyone is it not?

Jubbinaut1 votes

{quoted}

I personally don't think a sample size of 17 games split across multiple roles is enough of a sample size is an inherently strong basis to make any claim especially when all of the data that I can see suggests all the games were played by the same played.

When only a single game is required to determine veracity, the size of the rest of the sample is meaningless once that single game is found.

If you're referring to the sample of games used to build your fingerprint, I see no reason that only Ranked games would be used for that.

It was looked into the first time I inquired true. Since then I played more games so they would have a larger more up to date sample size of how I play. All subsequent inquiries have ignored this and just assumed the first investigation to be true.

Experience tells me that each time you spoke with a different Rioter - or at least, a different Player Behavior Specialist - about it, the case was reviewed again (after all, that's the entire purpose of having them respond to tickets in the first place). I can state with certainty that the Rioter Daen spoke to checked the details of the case.

That's multiple reviews. The only truly valid reason I can see for multiple unrelated reviewers to claim the case is valid would be if they all saw the same data and drew the same conclusions. Well, that, or there's some anti-Kuriboh conspiracy roaming Riot's halls, but if that's the case, you're in the same boat - there's nothing to be gained from continuing to push the issue in this way.

I'm honestly sorry I couldn't be of more help to you, here, but there's not much else I can say on the matter.

KuribohOP1 votes

When only a single game is required to determine veracity, the size of the rest of the sample is meaningless once that single game is found.

If you are only going off a single game there is nothing compare it to to say the player played different than usual as that game is the only way you have seen that player play. If you have only seen the player play a few games you may have a very rough idea how the player plays but you will not have very concrete data on how they play.

If you're referring to the sample of games used to build your fingerprint, I see no reason that only Ranked games would be used for that.

Are you suggesting games where:

  1. pre lvl 30 games so there was allot of variance in the ability of of teammates and opponents
  2. Where the MMR compared to lvl 30's was not accurately known
  3. Where the level of toxicity is such to the point where I stopped caring about winning once one of my teammates inevitably started flaming another member of my team.
  4. Where I would play stuff I know i'm not very good at/practiced on
  5. where I would be watching youtube at the same time and not giving the game too much attention.

Are suitable to compare to games where:

  1. Games where there is much less variance in player ability and the MMR of players is more accurately known.
  2. Where a teammate flaming me or another teammate will not discourage me from trying to win.
  3. Where I play champions I am confident and proficient on where possible.
  4. Where the game has my complete concentration.

I see plenty of reasons why pre lvl 30 games would not be compared to ranked games.

Experience tells me that each time you spoke with a different Rioter - or at least, a different Player Behavior Specialist - about it, the case was reviewed again (after all, that's the entire purpose of having them respond to tickets in the first place). I can state with certainty that the Rioter Daen spoke to checked the details of the case.

That's multiple reviews. The only truly valid reason I can see for multiple unrelated reviewers to claim the case is valid would be if they all saw the same data and drew the same conclusions. Well, that, or there's some anti-Kuriboh conspiracy roaming Riot's halls, but if that's the case, you're in the same boat - there's nothing to be gained from continuing to push the issue in this way.

No it's 1 review which multiple people have assumed to be true. I have seen no evidence to suggest that any investigation has taken place with the larger, more up to date sample size of how I play.

Akenero1 votes

The weirdest thing? Ive had a diamond friend play on my account to get me through series games a few times. This is before i ever knew of mmr boosting, and i have admitted this before! I have since told him to not do it again, and have improved greatly since. But ive never been flagged, and will sometimes fet into a zone where i show play FAR different than usual.

So, why haven't I gotten any shit for this, when a more skilled player than me, yet less than my friend, plays games?

Honestly riot, make him do an oath of silence and fucking email him the data!

Daen1 votes

I talked to arbiter Daen about this in a private chat and after a bit of discussion all he could really do was reassure me that it won't happen again though he didn't seem overly confident in RIOTs decision

To clarify, in our discussion I made sure to bring the case directly to the attention of Riot Player Support, and they re-checked the suspension to determine that there was indeed clear evidence that led to the punishment.

KuribohOP1 votes

To clarify, in our discussion I made sure to bring the case directly to the attention of Riot Player Support, and they re-checked the suspension to determine that there was indeed clear evidence that led to the punishment.

Apologies if I have misinterpreted how you felt and apologies if I don't think that it was checked thoroughly.

ModWuks1 votes

{quoted}

Apologies if I have misinterpreted how you felt and apologies if I don't think that it was checked thoroughly.

Your suspension was checked on at least three separate occasions: your initial suspension, your correspondences with Player Support, and when you brought the issue to our attention. Each time, a Player Behavior Specialist was able to reaffirm that there were MMR Boosting activities and that the suspension was justified. Fortunately, the suspension was only temporary, so take it as a learning experience and avoid violations of the Terms of Use to prevent the suspension from escalating to a permanent suspension.

KuribohOP1 votes

a Player Behavior Specialist was able to reaffirm that 3rd Party Applications and/or Modifications were used on your computer and that the suspension was justified. Fortunately, the suspension was only temporary, so take it as a learning experience and avoid the use of such applications and modifications to prevent the suspension from escalating to a permanent suspension.

ummm... I am very confused now. I have never used any 3rd party applications that effect League in anyway nor have I been accused of using 3rd party applications. This is the first time I have heard anyone mention about the use 3rd party applications.

ModWuks1 votes

{quoted}

ummm... I am very confused now. I have never used any 3rd party applications that effect League in anyway nor have I been accused of using 3rd party applications. This is the first time I have heard anyone mention about the use 3rd party applications.

I've modified my response to better fit your situation. The fact remains that your account was thoroughly investigated (at least twice manually).

KuribohOP1 votes

I've modified my response to better fit your situation. The fact remains that your account was thoroughly investigated (at least twice manually).

it doesn't make a difference if an identical investigation is carried out multiple times, if one makes a false positive they all will. Since the first investigation I have provided them with a larger sample size of games since which is something they have yet to acknowledge.

More from Player Behavior

The indefinite banning of Tyler1
Player Behavior4,799 comments
2,942
votes
14 day ban because playing Nunu Support with Smite is "stealing other people's roles"...?
Player Behavior1,525 comments
1,086
votes
Riot should add monthly status cards
Player Behavior241 comments
843
votes
Reminder that we haven't gotten our Summoner report cards yet :/
Player Behavior145 comments
619
votes
I'm not "triggered" by you throwing insults.
Player Behavior361 comments
548
votes
Black Alistar, King Rammus!!!!
Player Behavior462 comments
503
votes

More by KuribohOP

I think RIOT games support does a poor job at dealing with false positive accusations
Player Behavior33 comments
6
votes
I no longer feel comfortable playing ranked to the best of my ability
Player Behavior4 comments
2
votes
Is anyone else having trouble logging onto RIOT games suppport
Player Behavior2 comments
2
votes