Going over the current behavior system

Normally you'll find me fighting to get Solo-queue back, but there's certainly more than just one issue with League currently. Issue number 2 on my addendum is the automated behavioral system.

Frequenters of this section of the boards are probably content with the system without realizing how backwards the current system actually is and how it can actually be the cause of more toxicity than the cure to it. This certainly sounds like an outlandish idea, but allow me to break down how this system works - there will be a TL;DR at the end of each section indicated by bold and italic lettering, so don't fret at the length. This is only to ensure all details on how things work and why are present in case of counter-argument:

First and foremost, an automated system operates on the absolute minimal level of substance when it comes to content-filtering - the only things this kind of system can spot with certainty are keywords (racial slurs, homophobic remarks, just general curse words). This doesn't check for context or otherwise, so god help you if you miss a crucial space between words. Unfortunately - and, uh, kind of fortunately, I guess - unless you wanted bans through the roof, these guidelines are very strict and so often will not spot simple workarounds or diversions. In fact the system is so easy to trick you honestly probably could just space out letters or add extra characters to fool it. So if we're relying on this system to do _any_thing, then we'll need a backup plan to this meager functionality. This system does cover AFK's and the such moderately well, but is ultimately still lacking.

That brings up what actually tends to get things moving - volume. Now, again, volume does not know context or otherwise, and so is judged strictly on just volume. Generally speaking, for this system, it only takes two players to report somebody for the same thing for it to have an effect. It really isn't hard. This system then starts to tally the amount of games in which you've acquired multiple reports - obviously this is sped along the more reports you gain per game, but the point stands. Now these tallies will decay over time - or, I should say, over games. They are much less time sensitive and take into account more the amount of games you have gone through without being toxic since the last one. Now this next part I can't stress enough: these decay very slowly, and will not decay if you receive any more reports. For example, let's say that decay starts at 5 games for you from you just being reported - should somebody report you during this time-frame, the decay period will be reset and you will gain more points against you. This can mean you can build up a level of "toxicity" over time without ever knowing why or how.

Now while that doesn't sound all that threatening because you are an angel of benevolence and all that, but here is the most important distinction: this system does not check for context. This doesn't just mean that it's checking for reasons to be toxic - this means the system doesn't actually know what you did. If you are reported for "negative attitude", the game has zero way of understanding how. Literally none. In fact, the system also accepts a single kill as disproving "intentional feeding", I shit you not. The system doesn't have any sophisticated programming to try and mimic human judgment, and so can only work off of the most basic algorithms that only understand - once again - volume and keywords.

So let's expand a bit on that: that means that should somebody report you for pinging too much, that qualifies as a report. If you had a bad game, if the duo who got pissed at you decide that you're feeding, they can report you for negative attitude - you do not need to ever speak a single word for the system to ban you for negative attitude.

In short: not only is an automated behavioral system easy to fool, it is also incredibly easy to exploit. This is why the Tribunal was a much greater entity as human players are far more capable of deductive reasoning and forming complex connections. This system is absolutely no replacement.

This brings us to the second point: your current punishment system is also incredibly dated and simplistic. While at first there doesn't seem to be a problem with something that appears to be removing toxicity, I will offer evidence otherwise:

boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/player-behavior-moderation/sU5wOfFJ-proof-that-the-automated-system-is-broken?

Before the argument comes up: I am aware that Slumber Jack had cleared up the reason for the ban. What I need is for everyone to consider these facts:

The player was noted as being reported for "intentionally refusing to cooperate".

The punishment was nothing but chat bans until the decisive ban.

Now, initially, we may just attribute this to the system being confused as to what this player should be punished for - but what other punishments are there?

You can be suspended or banned permanently. There is no other in-between.

This is what I mean by "the punishment system is dated and simplistic". It has three modes of functionality for all scenarios and that is the extent of it. This means that a fair amount of the time you can have players get away with toxic behaviors far longer than should be acceptable because the system cannot 1) tell the difference and 2) even act appropriately on the matter.

In short for this part: the utter lack of multiple functionality for your system results in many issues not actually ever being solved. There needs to be a wider variety of punishments that can be tailored to ensure certain behaviors are punished in a way that halts the behavior.

So that part was refreshingly short, but that's only because it is largely tied into the third and final part here, and this is the most important point to take away from this:

Your behavioral system does not adequately halt toxicity - it in fact tends to breed it.

Ignore your first reaction to this statement - no doubt reading that line probably gave you a nosebleed from sheer indignation about how stupid I'd have to be to believe that. So if you'd be so kind, stick with me through this last explanation.

Let me be the first to say that permanent banning usually doesn't solve much of anything. I say "let me be the first to say that" because most - if not all - of you would never believe such a thing. But it is true - currently, only IP address banning is actually absolute, and even that ends up becoming moot if the person moves.

Usually, what happens more often than not is you get a situation more like the guy that's been banned 17 times - I don't remember his name, I don't really care that much, he's just a good example to go off of. This player was probably comparably more mild in attitude on his first account than on his subsequent ones (though that's not saying a ton), the reason being the first account still holds that attachment that it could be banned and you don't want it to - if you're still toxic, you're trying to kind of skirt that line without crossing it. Eventually this guy crossed it, and somehow pulled himself together to make a second account.

The issue being he's still as toxic and probably is now more jaded, so now he doesn't care enough to hold back. A fair amount of toxic players don't try to return after their accounts are banned, but the ones that do aren't about to change their behaviors the 8th or 9th damn time because they don't care anymore. It's clear that at that point they just want to play the game (or they're the most dedicated troller the world has ever seen), but now it's just going through the motions - re-level, play to rank, get reported, get banned after several ages, rinse and repeat season after season. This is actually the same exact issue with the incarceration system in the United States - guy breaks the law, guy goes to prison, loses everything during incarceration, gets released. That guy is now more likely to go back to prison than ever before. Now granted, the primary reason is that criminals often don't see an alternative to a criminal lifestyle due to being stigmatized, but it is also much easier to accept going back to prison if you're not phased by the threat of it. This is just plain truth.

Hell, the numerous "toxic smurf" reports we get on the boards? Those probably aren't actually smurfs but rather secondary accounts. I would be willing to bet if you tracked IP's you would find a connection in there somewhere.

So with that explained, I am not saying that bans shouldn't be something we can resort to - by all means, there are certainly extreme situations where these are appropriately. But as they stand right now, they are bordering on the only frontline you have for dealing with toxicity when it should only be a damn backline and should have more permanency than simple account banning.

In short: as it stands, the current punishments you have in place not only usually don't rectify the toxic behavior, but also have a tendency to do nothing but move it elsewhere in the game where it can still negatively affect your positive players. This is the reason why this game appears more toxic than others and is where you are ultimately failing in advertising it to new players.

So then I've shared these complaints and "opinions" (though really they tend to be more factual than opinionated), do I have any suggestions on how to fix this?

I do, actually, and not because I developed them by myself - these are systems that both Dota 2 and Heroes of the Storm have had in effect since the beginning. Although Dota 2 honestly actually incorporates theirs much better, but that's neither here nor there...

First of all, I must stress that you, Riot, understand the absolute necessity of the Low Priority Queue. This is where a player is punished for a certain number of games by being put in a lesser queue.

For those that don't know what this is, here are the guidelines for such a queue:

1. You will experience extended wait times when queuing up for a game (usually these are extended by a specified amount of time). Grouping with friends does not mitigate this in the slightest.

2. You will be grouped with other players deemed as toxic as you (within a certain guideline, gradually loosened if match candidates are few). This includes feeders, AFK'ers, negative players, etc.

3. You cannot queue up for ranked matches during this time and are limited to basic game modes.

4. Subsequent reports will increase the amount of games needed to lift the limitations.

This is a system that has enabled Dota 2 - which I can say with absolute certainty is the actual most toxic game ever created - to actually skirt along with considerably lower amounts of bans and still appear to be less toxic on the outside. But how does that work?

First of all, these kinds of limitations are quick-acting - you don't prattle about for months on end waiting for results, you can achieve a low-priority queue in a matter of a few days (I know because I begged players to report me at one point just to test how fast-acting this could be. It took 4 games and I was put in a low priority queue for 5 games. Honestly, still haven't finished the 5th.). What this means is that even if a player were to "exploit" the system by just creating a new account, if they are toxic on that one, they will quickly be placed with other toxic players. It is not drawn out like a ban process.

Second, this does not just displace toxic players into games where they can punish other normal players - toxic players become the punishment. By misbehaving, you are more likely to have to deal with frustrating and toxic players yourself - and, at the same time, other toxic players would have to deal with your toxicity. You have basically corralled all consistently toxic players into one area that the entire community knows is toxic. The game is now no longer toxic in and of itself - the queue is now where toxicity resides.

Thirdly, for those that may be having a bad day or taking out their anger on people in the game rather harshly, this queue does two rather magnificent things: First of all, if this person is not just flat out terrible as a human being, they can easily see the wrong in others' actions and are forced to reflect on themselves with a clear example and counterpart. It is not, "Go into timeout and think about what you've done" - it is, "You're acting like that guy. Do you really want to be like that guy?" The other thing is that it immediately takes them out of a competitive environment by keeping them from ranked - unless these people were raging over normal games (which good lord, man, take a break and cool down), being put in a normal-queue game diffuses a lot of the tension these players would have built up from bad or difficult games because normal games don't hold any weight. Additionally, this player is even more unlikely to be toxic again the same day because the extended wait time functions on the "risk//reward/punishment" idea - if a player knows that their next game will not only take a while to actually get in to but is almost guaranteed to be a hassle, they are going to be less likely to queue back up. Instead, this player will likely just wait until another day when they feel good and ready to deal with the game again. And they will - League is still mechanically a good game (if still rather flawed) and is enjoyable, so there's no real reason to worry whether or not a person might try again (unless they have like, I dunno, 20 low priority games to knock out, in which case probably better they don't come back anyway).

And this deflects so much toxicity without even the necessity of banning - in fact, banning becomes the bloody back-line at this point. This queue also covers every single base when it comes to the scale of toxicity - no matter what you did or do, you will be punished appropriately by this queue. It is much more in-depth and in-tune to the community and to gaming than your current punishment system.

In the end, it comes down to this: revamping the behavioral system will keep more people playing the game while even minimizing the pain toxicity brings. It needs to be done. What you have in place right now is not only irresponsibly poorly implemented but ultimately causes more damage than actual good. Under the evidence and support I give for this argument, I would urge you to revisit your behavior/punishment system with urgency. Not only is it dysfunctional, but this makes the experience for players that are new to the game fucking miserable with absolutely no chance at recourse. Whether you use a low-priority queue or not is your decision, but the current system cannot stand.