Boards›Player Behavior

Overly Strict Suspension/Ban System?

Pyke Tyson·7/26/2019, 10:14:43 PM·6 votes·3,255 views

I know this thread will probably get downvoted to oblivion because I'm "sticking up for the toxic players" and threads on this topic are universally berated but just take some time to read it because in reality this would be better for everyone. Also, take note that this is mainly regarding Verbal Abuse, and not offenses such as cheating or inting.

LoL has a very rigid formula when it comes to penalties, and from what I've heard, there is only 4 total steps on the Penalty Ladder. A big issue with the Penalty Ladder is the fact that it has a very linear formula that doesn't take into account the severity of the offense. Below is the order in which penalties are given out.

  1. 5 Game Chat Ban
  2. 25 Game Chat Ban
  3. 2 Week Suspension
  4. Permanent Ban

And keep in mind, regardless of what you say, you could get a permanent ban for just calling someone "trash" as long as you're on the 3rd step of the Penalty Ladder. It's like giving the death penalty to someone who stole a pack of gum from the store just because he has a criminal record. I think this is a big mistake, and severity should be taken into account. If you're cussing left and right, saying racial slurs and telling people "ky.s" then that would be more liable to the 3rd and 4th step. Otherwise, I think they should just repeat the chat bans, and perhaps have them stack up for chat-related offenses. Overwatch has a great example of this particular system, where repeated chat-related offenses will result in increasingly greater chat bans (I believe the duration is doubled with each offense). In fact, Overwatch's penalty system helped shaped my behavior into just remaining quiet even when unbanned just because I was used to the long chat bans.

When so many players are permanently banned, a sizable chunk of the player base along with Riot might think this is good at face value and that it is purifying LoL of toxicity, but when you think about it, it really isn't. This means that much of the toxic players will end up making smurf accounts to harass the newer player base when in reality they could've just received a chat ban which would've solved the problem right there. The only one benefiting from this is Riot, since the banned players will likely spend more money on their new accounts to purchase skins again.

Also, I know someone will say "just don't type and you'll be fine" but my main issue isn't with penalties being given out but with how they're given out. If toxic chat is a person's only problem, then giving them a chat ban eliminates that problem, and eventually the person will have to shape their behavior otherwise they will simply remain chat banned. With that being said, I think LoL has a very primitive penalty system and should look at some of Blizzard's penalty systems to get a better idea.

37 Comments

zPOOPz7/26/2019, 11:05:29 PM8 votes

I think you'll get downvoted to oblivion not because you're "sticking up for the toxic players", but rather for regurgitated the same old tired routine people posted more or less once a week.

Infinitely scaling chat restriction already been tried. It failed. This is not a theoretical discussion. Rito has hard data when they already implemented that system.

If Rito allows toxic players to infinitely get chat restriction, 100% of them will remain and be toxic. If Rito perma-banned then, some of them will quit the game altogether.

I'm not even going to dignify you with a response to the stupid theory that people will spend more money for a company that kick them out like a dog and stripped them of everything they paid and in many cases worked very hard for for months/years.

No, you will get downvoted to oblivion because you could have just googled the 1000 similar threads with previous discussions to any of these things to read them instead of wasting the board time.

I really wish someone would post that PB Bing Card!!!

KFCeytron7/26/2019, 11:44:04 PM5 votes

Usually, one transgression by itself wouldn't be enough to bring a clean account to an instant permaban, but the IFS works on an escalating punishment system. Breaking a minor rule, like engaging the team in useless arguments, has a minor punishment: a chat restriction. Breaking that same rule over and over again, however, doesn't prompt an endless series of chat restrictions. The severity of the punishment ramps up over time, because the goal is to eliminate the punished player's willingness to break the game's rules. If two chat restrictions don't stop the useless arguments, the system will increase the punishment to a 14-day suspension and deliver a very clear message that the continued rule-breaking is becoming a serious issue and any further instances will result in a permaban. Again, the point is to put a stop to this misbehavior. If a player is more interested in repeatedly breaking the rules than in maintaining access to their account, they'll lose access to their account.

Riot's punishment system used to hand out stacking chat restrictions, such that consistently toxic players basically had a permanent chat restriction. Unfortunately, it turns out that such players used their few chat opportunities to be toxic, and, when they couldn't be as toxic as they wanted to, they resorted to committing non-chat offenses such as griefing (following someone around and taking their farm, using wall abilities to interfere with their play, etc.) or inting. The purpose of the punishment system is to eliminate rule-breaking, not make it worse. Thus, if a couple chat restrictions don't make any difference in a player's misbehavior, the system ramps up the punishments until the player is permabanned and thus unable to use that account to break any more rules ever again.

Riot used to give toxic players a long series of gradually-increasing suspensions. However, they found that players who got more than a few punishments would never stop misbehaving and receiving punishments. As the goal of the punishment system is to eliminate rule-breaking and Riot has absolutely no interest in coddling toxic players, the system was changed to eliminate this long tail of irredeemable players. Compared to the hundreds or even thousands of typical players who are bothered over dozens or hundreds of matches ruined by a toxic player, that one player's ability to annoy people merits no sympathy or concern. The preferred outcome of punishing a misbehaving player is reform: according to Riot's figures, most players who get one punishment never get another. However, when a player refuses to stop breaking the rules after a few warnings (punishments), they are removed from the game with a permaban because Riot no longer believes them capable of reform.

Just because this behavior is permitted and/or prevalent in other games doesn't mean it's okay in LoL, in the same way that you can legally drive at highway speeds on a highway but not in a residential area. Rules in other games have no bearing on your punishment in LoL.

The ability to play on a new account doesn't negate the benefits of permabanning toxic players. If every single one of them did that, then it would at least be a minor punishment, taking away their unlocked skins, icons, champs, and so on. Any who don't do that are removed from the game and the problem is solved in at least those instances. Quite frankly, Riot and 99.994% of the playerbase (people without permabans, according to Riot's figures on this, which I see no reason to doubt) don't give one whit for how permabanned players feel about being ejected from the game for consistently appalling behavior. Most permabanned players stop playing the game. It's extremely rare for a permabanned player to be so oblivious and/or unbalanced that they accumulate multiple permabans on a series of accounts. Riot does not have the wherewithal to prevent that except when a highly-visible player (such as a popular streamer) engages in this behavior, in which case they may issue an ID ban (Riot employees manually ban any account that such a player is seen to use).

The Law oƒ One7/26/2019, 10:47:25 PM3 votes

nobody at riot has actually thought deeply about it, like you would literally be better at the job than whoevers doing it currently. i agree with your suggestions. non-gameplay related "toxicity" should never get your account disabled, unless its extreme like threats etc. if someone is inting games, we all agree to punish that, but if someone is just being a meanie in the chat, if youre going to punish that the OBVIOUS thing to do is restrict their chat abilities.

VindicatorOFThey7/26/2019, 10:53:15 PM3 votes

Overwatch has a great example of this particular system, where repeated chat-related offenses will result in increasingly greater chat bans (I believe the duration is doubled with each offense). In fact, Overwatch's penalty system helped shaped my behavior into just remaining quiet even when unbanned just because I was used to the long chat bans.

isnt overwatch dying?

they could've just received a chat ban which would've solved the problem right there.

welp ,,, if they cant type ,,they will troll grief does resulting in a ban again ....(IT WAS TESTED !!!)

Luther King Jr V7/26/2019, 10:55:37 PM2 votes

I'll only call it strict when everyone who's repsonsible for a toxic situation gets rightfully banned the way it's now one gets banned 3 get away with it not strict enough..

Kuponya7/26/2019, 10:53:55 PM2 votes

Seems like more a case of salt, it isn't hard to be in control of your emotions and not berate other people.

You can call someone trash every game and suffer zero penalty, it is only when you go further and continually harass them that you get punished. You view it as a primitive system not because it is, but because you lack the basics functions necessary to control yourself

General Esdeath 7/26/2019, 11:08:43 PM1 votes

Actually it's not strict enough

https://i.kym-cdn.com/entries/icons/mobile/000/030/414/plant.jpg

ModJikker12/13/2019, 4:23:47 PM1 votes

Please do not necro old threads as doing so violates the Board Universal Rules. I'm going to lock this thread down now.

If anyone has questions about this lock, feel free to reach out to the Moderation Team via:

[poppy-wink]