Boards›Player Behavior

Banning Toxic or Cheating Players doesn't work...

HalcyonDweller··2 votes·908 views

...when they can just create a new account or log into their alt account and keep right on playing.

So I'd like to propose a solution:

Riot could implement an encrypted key / lock system in the client that would track all accounts used through that instance of the client (basically from that computer). If one account on that client / machine gets punished for toxic behavior, then that client would carry the punishment for the duration of the account (applying any time an account tries to use that client for the duration of the punishment).

Now you might say, "Wait what if it's at an internet cafe or in a home where multiple people use the same computer?!?"

I say that's good, it should initially have that effect. But we include an appeals system wherein the client could be unlocked and the punishments moved directly onto the offending player's accounts.

This would create real-world consequences for being toxic, drawing the attention of the people around them. Someone who screws up a client at an internet cafe could get banned from coming back, someone who messes it up for their siblings could face getting grounded or losing privileges.

I believe that this system would more effectively catch and punish toxic players. What do you think?

P.S. sorry for the clickbait title, but it's my genuine opinion. This needs addressing.

EDIT: INB4 first comments saying this is just like IP / MAC address bans.

I'm aware that this is similar to IP and MAC address bans. I believe these could be effective as well, but they are not used heavily enough. Not to mention the other issues they face. My suggestion would give Riot a more direct way to properly identify machines on which a toxic person is accessing the game.

46 Comments

deathgod56 votes

I could work around with a virtual machine within 20 seconds and with a vpn in around minus 4 seconds.

also this would really be a disaster for any public network or university network. There would also be no evidence that players who appeal the ban wouldn't be the same player on multipe accounts saying that he shares this account. Effectively everybody that get's punished by this method are the people who live with toxic assholes.

So no I respectfully disagree with this solution

elduris2 votes

Yeah, you covered all the points I was going to bring up. IP/MAC address bans are too much effort for too little benefit. Not only do you have to implement that type of punishment across all platforms, but you'll then have to deal with numerous support tickets asking "why can't I play on campus but I can at home?" or "why is my account banned here but not there?"

This Is Your Dad1 votes

The only way to logically solve the problem is by implementing a monthly subscription to each account. BUT Riot doesn't want to do that because it'd ruin their playerbase.

HalcyonDweller1 votes

That is one way to do it. I can't believe it is the only way though.

This Is Your Dad1 votes

It's the only way without a loophole.

HalcyonDweller1 votes

By assuming that you shut yourself off from your creativity. You miss out on the future possibilities if you stop trying.

No offense intended. You do you. I for one, am not giving up though.

SecondAirbane1 votes

basically ruins the whole ranked system you would decay before u pay your subscription so riot would have to make you climb within 1 month

dont even get me started on the amount of money and playerbase riot would lose by implementing this

This Is Your Dad1 votes

I did mention that it would ruin their playerbase. It's just the only way to solve the problem.

SecondAirbane1 votes

it wouldnt just ruin the playerbase though lmao it would make the problem worse with nobody being able to get to challenger and stay there with the monthly subs nobody has enough time to get there in a month

HalcyonDweller1 votes

I never said we should use subscriptions. Why is this a reply to my comment?

HalcyonDweller1 votes

I see their points, I'm not sure what to do about virtual machines. The one saving grace that has is that it is costly to have a computer powerful enough to run multiple operating systems at once (so most people will not have access to that option), that and players who want to work around it have to go through the effort of setting it up and re-installing league every time.

If Riot had a client based tracker that didn't work off of IP/MAC address, but instead created its own unique identifier for the client then it could effectively track the client without affecting people differently at home vs. on campus.

ModThe Djinn1 votes

{quoted}The one saving grace that has is that it is costly to have a computer powerful enough to run multiple operating systems at once (so most people will not have access to that option), that and players who want to work around it have to go through the effort of setting it up and re-installing league every time.

A LOT of players have machines powerful enough to do that (gamers, remember?), and internet connections fast enough to download League in a few hours at most are fairly commonplace, sadly.

HalcyonDweller1 votes

I see. Ok. Could Riot maybe work with ISP's to coordinate which users are playing league from a given location?

ModThe Djinn1 votes

{quoted}

I see. Ok. Could Riot maybe work with ISP's to coordinate which users are playing league from a given location?

I mean, Riot has the IP already, I believe. So they don't need the ISP to help out.

HalcyonDweller1 votes

IPs can be spoofed. I'm looking for methods to track down the residence, or even the router that that offending player is connecting through.

I also just had another thought. If we cross reference the 'DNA' data you've mentioned before with IP or router info and my unique identifier, then the system could catch fresh installs of clients being used through the same connection, thus identifying that sort of workaround. This would work, no?

ModThe Djinn1 votes

{quoted}I also just had another thought. If we cross reference the 'DNA' data you've mentioned before with IP or router info and my unique identifier, then the system could catch fresh installs of clients being used through the same connection, thus identifying that sort of workaround. This would work, no?

I'm not a network genius, so...maybe?

But that's a LOT of work to make a reliable system that can do that. The issue here is whether that development effort can be spent more productively somewhere else.

HalcyonDweller1 votes

That's a fair point too. I could see them investing in honors systems as a higher priority based on behavioral psychology. It is more effective towards changing behavior if you reward a good behavior to replace the bad than if you punish the bad just to get rid of it.

But I dunno which is faster, deleting toxic toddlers or teaching them how to reform. I suppose for such purposes as the good of society and the human race it's better to reform them than just get rid of them... but still, that leaves us dealing with them for a while longer still.

ModThe Djinn1 votes

{quoted}But I dunno which is faster, deleting toxic toddlers or teaching them how to reform. I suppose for such purposes as the good of society and the human race it's better to reform them than just get rid of them... but still, that leaves us dealing with them for a while longer still.

Well, the system doesn't necessarily TEACH them to reform so much as encouraging it with penalties. Truly reforming a player is beyond the ability of a system -- they have to WANT to reform, and take actions to accomplish that on their own.

The problem is that it's HARD to stop them -- detection technology is difficult to create and maintain, and, with VPNs, new installations, etc, it's fighting a never-ending battle. There will ALWAYS be trolls to some extent. The trick is to figure out the right balance in dealing with them.

SecondAirbane1 votes

hard to help players reform when u take their friends away

ModThe Djinn1 votes

{quoted}

hard to help players reform when u take their friends away

Again, the system is not designed to HELP players reform. It is designed to encourage them to reform THEMSELVES before the punishment becomes permanent. Each player may need a different set of techniques to actually reform themselves.

Also, once you've hit a permanent ban, it's Riot's way of saying they don't believe you CAN reform, at least in a timeframe that is acceptable given your behavior in the average game.

SecondAirbane1 votes

yeah i int 1 game and im 1 punishment away from perma already fun system

ModThe Djinn1 votes

{quoted}

yeah i int 1 game and im 1 punishment away from perma already fun system

Yep. Inting is considered entirely unacceptable, and chat bans don't help against it at all. You may say it's a "fun system" sarcastically, but having inters in games isn't fun at all for ANYONE but the inter (and often not even for them, since it's often done in frustration).

SecondAirbane1 votes

its my way of saying fuck jungle id rather int then feed trying anyway and having my teammates get mad 1 way or the other

i know i wont do it again but come on

HalcyonDweller1 votes

Haha true. People often don't want to change.

It is hard to stop them, it's very inefficient to deal with problems after the fact because there is so much forensic work to do.

I believe it would be much easier to apply concepts of behavior psychology to trick players into reforming. On top of that, the truth of the matter is that punishment doesn't work very well to modify behavior unless it happens immediately after the targeted behavior.

Stuff like secretly muting toxic statements in chat so that the rest of the players in the game can't see it was said and thus do not respond. That takes away the social reward (attention) the toxic player gets for behaving poorly.

Or applying a toxicity prediction AI to the matchmaking queue to catch and prevent things like auto-filled players stealing roles or holding teams hostage with troll picks in order to force others to dodge. Imagine the power of instant punishment for players who grab disco-nunu and threaten to int when they don't get their precious mid/top?

ModThe Djinn1 votes

{quoted}Stuff like secretly muting toxic statements in chat so that the rest of the players in the game can't see it was said and thus do not respond. That takes away the social reward (attention) the toxic player gets for behaving poorly.

I suspect people would figure that out super quickly though -- the playerbase is good at spotting that sort of thing.

Or applying a toxicity prediction AI to the matchmaking queue to catch and prevent things like auto-filled players stealing roles or holding teams hostage with troll picks in order to force others to dodge. Imagine the power of instant punishment for players who grab disco-nunu when they don't get their precious mid/top?

...I'd be super impressed if someone could build that. My problem here is it ENCOURAGES minor toxicity just to get filtered into the category where the system believes you NEED your primary role or you'll troll.

The idea of preemptive punishment is one I'm fully against though.

HalcyonDweller1 votes

[{quoted}](name=The Djinn,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=EjxsVX0N,comment-id=000100000001000000000000000000000000000000010000,timestamp=2017-04-28T22:00:54.777+0000)

...I'd be super impressed if someone could build that. My problem here is it ENCOURAGES minor toxicity just to get filtered into the category where the system believes you NEED your primary role or you'll troll.

Oh I think I must have mis-spoke or you misunderstood me. I'm proposing they get kicked from the queue in a forced dodge once they threaten to troll / steal a role. That way the other players won't be forced to dodge to avoid an awful game experience.

The idea of preemptive punishment is one I'm fully against though.

I don't mean to suggest preemptive punishment. Just instant response punishment for select behaviors that are easily identifiable as unacceptable.

EDIT: PS I don't know if you were able to see my comment on the other post this afternoon since the post got deleted by mods, but you're fun to interact with here. You've got some great wit and sense for comedy, and a solid thinking head on your shoulders. Thanks for humoring my crazy ideas ^_^

[slayer-pantheon-thumbs]

SecondAirbane1 votes

terrible idea it has too many flaws

HalcyonDweller1 votes

Ok, like...?

I'm open to discussing and adapting the ideas. As I've stated in a response to your earlier comments.

You still aren't contributing anything meaningful, step up your game son!

[slayer-jinx-catface]

HalcyonDweller1 votes

{quoted}

I could work around with a virtual machine within 20 seconds and with a vpn in around minus 4 seconds.

Not much else I can say to that, if you're willing to put that level of effort in and you have a computer that can run a virtual machine without slowing down the processor too much then of course there's no way to stop you.

...There would also be no evidence that players who appeal the ban wouldn't be the same player on multipe accounts saying that he shares this account. Effectively everybody that get's punished by this method are the people who live with toxic assholes.

This is true, I haven't worked out a way to deal with that yet. Possibly phone authentication, or some other form of authentication. What about this other possible solution?

{quoted}

Or maybe it could apply punishments to the computer/game client, but only take away end-of season rewards from the account that triggered the ban.

deathgod51 votes

Phone authentication is a better idea, however you are still only banning our people that can't get their hands on a free sim card.The biggest problem in the internet age is trolls using multiple accounts. and even cell phone authentication isn't doing much to prevent this. You only get more steps for new people to join your website while doing not much to fix the original problem.

HalcyonDweller1 votes

Well shoot, what else can be done?

Someone below commented a really interesting thing that Riot could possibly do:

{quoted}

did you know, riot already has the ability to identify the links between accounts?

Champ pools, click speed, click locations, gaming habits, screen positioning, hotkey settings, etc etc. All that information leads to a certain player and no player has the exact same gaming DNA.

deathgod51 votes

Yes that might work. First an ip check and then a behaviour check. It would take a lot of money to implement tho and if it fails you might wake up one day to see your account is perma banned because you played on a pc a perma banned player once used.

http://forums.na.leagueoflegends.com/board/showthread.php?t=4811133&page=12#post49532921 . however as a forum mod on the old forums of riotgames proved, they actually already use this method of banning from time to time.

edit: fixed some of my horrible english(sorry not my native language)

HalcyonDweller1 votes

I see what you mean. I guess it would require better automation so that it could function well enough on its own without require Riot to continue inputting time and money to run it.

I would hope that with the right kinds of checks and balances it wouldn't end up permabanning people in such specific and strange circumstances.

Thanks for the link I'll go give that a read!

Don't sweat the english dude! You get your ideas across plenty well.

[slayer-pantheon-thumbs]

deathgod51 votes

the link isn't to anything special. Just a riot moderator banning all accounts of a player on the former boards to prove that they have a good idea allready to what accounts are owned by the same player

HalcyonDweller1 votes

It was very satisfying to read. Thanks for posting it!

Kei1432 votes

did you know, riot already has the ability to identify the links between accounts?

Champ pools, click speed, click locations, gaming habits, screen positioning, hotkey settings, etc etc. All that information leads to a certain player and no player has the exact same gaming DNA.

The real question is why don't they link the accounts together and apply the same punishment? Who knows, maybe Riot believes in reform too much. Maybe they are afraid that they would mix up the gaming DNAs and cause harm to the innocent. Maybe it cost too much resources to implement such a behavioral feature and thus the priorities get shifted to something else (like new client / new honor system).

HalcyonDweller1 votes

I did not know this, that sounds awesome!

Indeed, the real question. Why the hell haven't they done something with this?!?

ModThe Djinn1 votes

{quoted}

I did not know this, that sounds awesome!

Indeed, the real question. Why the hell haven't they done something with this?!?

Because it's not entirely foolproof, to my knowledge, and Riot isn't happy with any system that has more than about a 0.5% chance of accidentally impacting an innocent player.

HalcyonDweller1 votes

I can understand not wanting to impact innocent players. But this seems to have a pretty low chance, one that could be brought even lower with proper joining of data sources. Cross reference the 'DNA' with other data such as IP address (or other connection data) and my idea for a unique identifier per client. This could offer even higher levels of accuracy and further reduce that 0.5%.

HalcyonDweller1 votes

Or maybe it could apply punishments to the computer/game client, but only take away end-of season rewards from the account that triggered the ban.

ModThe Djinn1 votes

{quoted}This would create real-world consequences for being toxic, drawing the attention of the people around them. Someone who screws up a client at an internet cafe could get banned from coming back, someone who messes it up for their siblings could face getting grounded or losing privileges.

The problem is that it has real-world consequences for those who AREN'T toxic as well.

What happens to the owners of an Internet Cafe when trolls get all their clients banned, and their well-behaved customers can't play? Worse, remember -- what happens to your account is private, so the owners would never know who it was who caused the problem.

What happens to the siblings no longer allowed to play League?

I believe that this system would more effectively catch and punish toxic players. What do you think?

I think it's a suggestion that can catch innocent people in the cross-fire, and doesn't really work across the board, as there are toxic players with access to effectively endless machines (internet cafes, IP-tricking software, college campuses, etc). Since it can harm the experience of innocent players AND since it doesn't work equally across all punished players, I don't think it's a good solution.

HalcyonDweller1 votes

[{quoted}](name=The Djinn,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=EjxsVX0N,comment-id=0002,timestamp=2017-04-28T19:31:19.616+0000)

The problem is that it has real-world consequences for those who AREN'T toxic as well.

What happens to the owners of an Internet Cafe when trolls get all their clients banned, and their well-behaved customers can't play? Worse, remember -- what happens to your account is private, so the owners would never know who it was who caused the problem.

What happens to the siblings no longer allowed to play League?

With the appeals system this could be prevented. It might create some disruption at the Cafe or at the home for a few hours, but it would get fixed eventually. It could even be adjusted so that it requires multiple accounts being used on that computer trigger the punishment, this would reduce the chances of false flags.

I think it's a suggestion that can catch innocent people in the cross-fire, and doesn't really work across the board, as there are toxic players with access to effectively endless machines (internet cafes, IP-tricking software, college campuses, etc). Since it can harm the experience of innocent players AND since it doesn't work equally across all punished players, I don't think it's a good solution.

I believe that the appeals system could be set up to serve as a proper relief valve allowing innocents to get back into the game. And with regards to IP software and college campuses:

{quoted}

If Riot had a client based tracker that didn't work off of IP/MAC address, but instead created its own unique identifier for the client then it could effectively track the client without affecting people differently at home vs. on campus.

ModThe Djinn1 votes

{quoted}

With the appeals system this could be prevented. It might create some disruption at the Cafe or at the home for a few hours, but it would get fixed eventually. It could even be adjusted so that it requires multiple accounts being used on that computer trigger the punishment, this would reduce the chances of false flags.

Riot doesn't really like systems that cause problems for innocent players like this would though. Even if it's easily reversible, it still takes time, and that time is lost revenue for a cybercafe and/or player frustration. The lost revenue for the cafe might be reason alone to drop League in favor of something else.

HalcyonDweller1 votes

They could offer registered Cafes a bypass to the ban, or even not block them and instead notify them of the account and other user information so that the Cafe could directly address the problematic player.

This wouldn't be too different for Universities and Colleges either. They have the same sort of feedback system for athletes that go to the school, if they behave poorly then they face the school's punishment system as well as backlash and can sometimes even be suspended from the sport or lose scholarships.

SecondAirbane1 votes

so now you're suggesting that riots reform system should just be scratched out?

god what has the world come to so 1 person gets punished a WHOLE HOUSE gets punished with them sounds fun sounds like an amazing idea 10/10 seriously does nobody use their brains before suggesting an idea?

HalcyonDweller1 votes

Ouch, did you mean to come off sounding so arrogant? That's a mighty fine high-horse you've got there. :)

The point of creating a post about this was to spark a discussion. Take a look through the comments. Ideas are cropping up and being refined. I'm moving my focus past my initial suggestions on to other more useful ideas that are forming here.

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 HalcyonDweller

PSA: You shouldn't negotiate with champion select terrorists. Here is why:
Player Behavior193 comments
177
votes
Riot should insta-ban any account that says this in chat:
Player Behavior138 comments
130
votes
Riot, give us wish-lists.
Story, Art, & Sound27 comments
107
votes
Games are too short, and snowball too quickly.
Gameplay148 comments
103
votes
Can we please put the "safe space" argument to rest?
Player Behavior314 comments
86
votes
We mute a player in-game because we don't want their chat, so why do they get un-muted in post-game?
Player Behavior55 comments
74
votes