This player asked for mid, then banned our mid's pick intent when they said no

5000000000000000·Jul 19, 2017·52 votes·2,419 views

Is this reportable, given that the pre game chat isn't saved? Even worse, someone on enemy team dodged before the game started, thus cleaning up any evidence that this player did this.

In the remade lobby, the player did the same thing, but also stole the pick this time.

Third lobby, I (support) was queued with this player again, but without other players on my past team (presumably they just dodged and re-queued). The player got top again, but our mid was willing to swap.

Please tell me this is a reportable offense. I can provide the username privately if necessary (currently saved elsewhere, since I can't name and shame). I have no screenshots or other evidence, though.

98 Comments

ShadòwJul 19, 201710 votes

on the one hand yes, on the other hand he could just say that he banned the pick cause he didn't want to play against it.

banning a pick is not reportable.

5000000000000000Jul 19, 20178 votes

While I see what you mean, it was pretty obvious. If Riot saved the chat log, at least.

Baka RedJul 20, 20171 votes

This is little beside the point, but in fact Riot saves the pre-game chat log and can use it when they investigate reports. Can Riot chat log reading bot program actually understand what has been said is another thing. Unfortunately this kind of case will probably require manual reading by an actual person, and I don't think Riot has manpower to do such checking.

ChermorgJul 19, 201714 votes

I just want to highlight something you said:

banning a pick is not reportable.

ÂFRÏCÂN GØDJul 19, 20173 votes

{quoted}

I just want to highlight something you said:

banning a pick is not reportable.

Votable JesterJul 21, 20171 votes

For some reason, the effective swap in which part is quoted really amuses me.

ShadòwJul 19, 20177 votes

well it isn't

ChermorgJul 19, 201714 votes

That's why I highlighted it. Because it's true and something people here don't want to accept.

cissco45Jul 22, 20171 votes

ye u cant report for banning a pick, thats why u dont show pick intent

General Esdeath Jul 19, 20178 votes

Griefing, and I believe pre-game chat is checked as well. Screencap the chat or record it.

ChermorgJul 19, 20174 votes

This is not griefing. People are permitted to ban whoever they want for whatever reason they want.

ÂFRÏCÂN GØDJul 19, 20172 votes

{quoted}

This is not griefing. People are permitted to ban whoever they want for whatever reason they want.

Exactly... These kids are sensitive about every single thing its annoying lmao

SqkergJul 19, 20178 votes

First off, it's rude to patronize the other side and call them names.

Secondly, a person isn't "sensitive" because that person doesn't want people to be assholes, that persons quite normal actually.

ÂFRÏCÂN GØDJul 20, 20171 votes

Just because you dont want someone to be an asshole, doesnt change the fact that they exist. Hitler tried this mentality once. assholes are quite normal actually.

SqkergJul 20, 20174 votes

No ones doubting the existence of assholes, but you're not "sensitive" for trying to limit their ability to do asshole-y things.

Iźuku MidoriyaJul 20, 20172 votes

It is griefing actually. If you were a one trick with a 70% win rate on 100 games, or just bought a new champion to play in normals and someone banned your champ, how would you feel

ÂFRÏCÂN GØDJul 20, 20171 votes

I would pick another champ considering I play all of them. Im an adult who understands life isnt always gonna go my way so I move on because a video game doesnt control how I "feel".

Iźuku MidoriyaJul 20, 20172 votes

You are an adult, your summoner name says otherwise. Let me tell you a story of actually being an adult. I have a wife and one daughter and work most days each day early mornings to late at night. I dont get much time to play league and its something i do for fun. When you ban a champion that I want to play, I normally dont get a chance to play another game.

SzGamer227Jul 20, 20171 votes

Doesn't matter how adult you are, you're coming off as quite the asshole. Nobody likes what you have to say, you're just defending an unpopular stance on an internet board and justifying it with derogatory assumptions about the people you're responding to. You're not going to get anywhere believing your innately superior or that your opinion is more correct, but have fun farming those downvotes my friend. I'm sure Chermorg really appreciates the effort you're taking to defend their post.

ÂFRÏCÂN GØDJul 20, 20171 votes

[deleted]

SzGamer227Jul 20, 20171 votes

I'll just repeat what I said again here.

Sad.

ÂFRÏCÂN GØDJul 20, 20171 votes

[deleted]

SzGamer227Jul 20, 20171 votes

Now you're not even trying. I ain't wife-n-child guy, my friend.

Anyhow, I'm genuinely amused at how worked up you're getting over this. What can I say? Seeing someone claim to be an adult and then lash out at people who disagree with their opinion on a random online thread is genuinely entertaining. I mean, you can keep going, but I think I'll refrain from responding any further. Cheers!

5000000000000000Jul 20, 20177 votes

for whatever reason? Does that include "this guy didn't give me the position I want, so I'll ban this guy's pick intent?"

I can understand banning declared intent in some situations, but "for whatever reason" seems too far.

ChermorgJul 20, 20172 votes

Please show me the crystal ball that you have that can show you he wasn't already planning to ban that champ? Please tell me how you know the ONLY reason he banned it was because he couldn't trade lanes?

EVEN if it was proven that he only did it because he couldn't trade lanes, he is permitted to ban whatever champ he chooses for whatever reason.

PunisherJBYJul 20, 20174 votes

I mean he literally says he did it a second time with presumably a different midlaner. So that argument is invalid.

ChermorgJul 20, 20171 votes

There is no way you can tell me that the player wouldn't have banned the champion even if it wasn't hovered.

There is no proof. Correlation is not causation. You cannot begin to try and formulate an intent without them explicitly saying something such as "lol i guess ill just ban ur champ then".

Even if there were concrete proof.. Please read this: Players are permitted to ban whatever champion they think they need to to help the team, even if their teammate is hovered it, or if their teammate wants to play it. I don't care why they ban it, if they chose to ban it, it's their right. You have the right to ban any champion you want. So do they.

PunisherJBYJul 20, 20173 votes

So in champ select 1 he is denied midlane, midlaner has a champ hovered so he bans that champ. Champ select 2 dif midlaner with dif champ selected, gets denied midlane and bans that guys champ. And that is not a sign he is trying to do that? And im not arguing it is a punishable offense. Im saying this guy was up to no good and trying to punish people for not giving him what he wants.

5000000000000000Jul 20, 20175 votes

Same midlaner, actually. First time our mid hovered Zed, and our top banned Zed. Mid swapped to LeBlanc. Next queue, our mid hovered LeBlanc, and our top banned LeBlanc instead. When the midlaner said they were planning to pick Zed anyway, the top picked Zed before mid got a chance to pick.

PunisherJBYJul 20, 20172 votes

Well still solidifies my point that it wasn't the same champ and intended the ban.

ChermorgJul 20, 20171 votes

It's suspicious I grant you. But none of the things you describe are reportable or bannable.

If top decided they wanted to play Zed? Cool. If they decided they wanted to ban Zed? Cool. If they decided they wanted to ban LeBlanc? Cool. It's their right to do all of those things.

Pick and ban order exists for a reason. If he picked it before midlaner could, tough.

5000000000000000Jul 20, 20178 votes

I mean, sure. They're allowed to do those specific things, just like picking Nunu and taking clarity and clairvoyance in champion select. But we can reasonably understand that the player is intentionally griefing.

ChermorgJul 20, 20172 votes

It is literally impossible to determine intent over a videogame. That's why Riot requires in-game evidence of trolling/griefing before issuing a punishment.

With the current summoner spells, there are very few combinations that could be considered likely trolling, and even then they're not all cut/dry. It's very possible that clarity/clairvoyance would be a decent combo based on the enemy team.

You don't have a crystal ball, and just cause it makes you angry doesn't make it trolling. Just play the game, move on, and if you are so inclined report after the game if they actually troll during the game.

Also maybe work on the fact you seem to be getting so worked up over someone not treating your midlaner like the team captain who gets to do whatever they want.

5000000000000000Jul 20, 20175 votes

Not sure why you think I'm getting worked up? I do think toxic players should be punished, but I don't think that's necessarily treating midlaners as team captains.

The example I showed was the infamous disco nunu. While yes, you technically don't know whether the Nunu will troll, you can reasonably assume that is the case. Same with the case I'm making here. Sure, it's technically possible that this guy actually meant to ban and pick those champions with good intentions, but you can reasonably assume that isn't the case based on their behavior.

Serika ZeroJul 20, 20171 votes

let me translate this for you since "Chermorg" seems to have failed reaching you.

Technologically, riot can't determine that. I do agree with you that what the player in your game tried to do was a bad thing. But riot has no way of either stopping or detecting it due to technology still not being at that point yet.

You can imagine it this way: the player in your game was a rapist (picking rape since its a more easy analogy) and he tried to 'rape' and even did rape your mid laner. now, technologically speaking like 100 years ago the rapist couldn't be identified that easily. meanwhile, today, we have DNA testing technology to identify people from hair, blood, body fluids, etc.

riot is in a similar position. The technological requirements to realize what you are asking for (which is a good thing btw) are currently to high. Artificial Intelligence would need to improve a bit for riot to be able to do what you wish.

Albeit, I'm a bit wrong as well. The current development in AI allows riot to code an AI which can make the same distinction we've made (that player was intentionally trying to harm his mid laner). However, it would require A LOT of space, A LOT of computing time and A LOT of data (examples, such as yours) from previous games (as well as examples where players did a similar thing without being 'bad' people or had the intention to hurting their team mates). Now, the problem is that those 'examples' or 'data' required to feed the AI need to all be manually asserted by humans with the result of 'negative bad player with bad intention' or 'something different, not bad intentions'. And you need them in high numbers (think over 5-10 million).

Hence, the cost (money and time) of this feature would be absurd. That's why, a better analogy would be. What you ask for is: everyone should be able to travel in space and to the moon. Which once more, is not a bad idea. But the cost required to fulfill that idea is to big.

That's why, currently, we lack the technology to do what you are asking for at a reasonable cost and in a reasonable time frame. Likewise, if you like studying history. You can look over how many people had cars about 100 years ago. And compare that with how many people got cars now ^^. Technology advances with time (till it dies and gets replaced with a different age), and your desire requires an automated solution.

Votable JesterJul 21, 20171 votes

Technically the "technology" is here and has been here for a while. Ever hear of the tribunal?

There was a voluntary justice tribunal players could take part in to determine if a reported individual deserves punishment. Therefore the "technology" is here in that they could simply do that again. If this isn't time-efficient, they can add rewards for doing it this time, which will surely entice more players to take part in it.

Of course, this wouldn't be perfect, but no system is perfect.

Serika ZeroJul 21, 20171 votes

yes, i've heard you people keep mentioning it. I've also started playing in season 3 (year 2013) and there was never online after I started.

Do you know why it was taken out? Because the "players" can have ulterior motives and usually they don't.

Take a look anywhere in the world. You will find people being PAID to do things, in order to keep a more objective stance on the things they are doing.

That's what's wrong with the 'tribunal' system. You would 'use' players that have no reason or motivation help you and maintain integrity. It would cause more harm than good. That's why it got taken out.

No society and no environment was build up where people could make highly impactful decisions without being responsible for them.

Yes, the system wouldn't be and was't perfect. The reason it got taken out is due to it being so imperfect, it started to fail at doing its job.

Likewise, you can take a look at PBE. Do bugs often get out of PBE to the live servers? Do badly balanced heroes often get out of PBE to the live servers?

You can make use of your playerbase (random people) to a degree for certain things. But, judgement is not one of them. If we all were so nice and saints and good people. We wouldn't have "the most toxic moba community on the internet" stamp on us, would we?

The same people that intentionally feed or troll your games are going to handle reports. The same people that flame and afk are going to handle the reports in the tribunal system. Those are the people that play this game, it was one of the good decisions rito made, to take the tribunal off.

Ofc, there's also nice people in this game. But they are in the minority. If they weren't in the minority, you wouldn't have that big issues finding support players that you have to come up with 'autofill'. Heck, you could've just let the old system were everyone calls their role in camp select and have it be a positive experience.

But lets be real for once, that's not how it was and not how it is.

Votable JesterJul 21, 20171 votes

You have a bleak view of the world that does not line up with my experience. Have fun being surrounded by mean, plotting people.

Serika ZeroJul 21, 20171 votes

i trusted my boss(es), ended up failing a project because i've trusted them and having to resign from work i trusted my real estate agent to help me find a place to stay in rent, got fucked over and lost the $$ for 1 month rent i've pressed legal actions for that, but then the person promised to give em back to me in 2 months, i retracted the legal actions and trusted once more. You can guess the result.

trusting people only works when you know each other to some degree you do not know all players in this game, but you know for certain this community is seen as one of the worst on the internet. And if that doesn't ring any alarm bells for blinding trusting players being a problem, i don't know what will

SanKakUJul 20, 20171 votes

[deleted]

ÂFRÏCÂN GØDJul 20, 20172 votes

either way.. banning a champ isn't bannable. this discussion about intent cannot be all riot goes on because then even when a person makes a personal choice to ban a champ and it is a mates pick intent, everyone would be butthurt reporting this offense even if the person didnt mean it intentionally and just decided that they didnt want the champ in the game period. This literally happens with yasuo's, rivens, zeds, vaynes, etc. its happened with every pick or ban champ. a person decides that not only do I not want it on the enemy team, but i dont even want it on my team or in the game period.

Votable JesterJul 21, 20171 votes

The difference is that there is significant evidence in chat that the intention behind the ban was to target the "ally."

SzGamer227Jul 20, 20171 votes

In the future, don't touch people's pick intents to better your own odds. You're banking on them being able to play another champion better than the champion they picked.

The odds you see on 3rd party sites is the average win rate for that champion. The actual win rates for players who play that champion frequently are much higher, while the win rates for people playing champions for the first time is much, much lower. If you ban Cait because she has a 48% win rate when the teammate who wanted to play her has a win rate closer to 55%, you've just taken the risk that your teammate also plays another adc more successfully than the one they wanted to play, which usually results in you tanking your win rate, because people are most likely picking the champs they play the most.

Banning your teammate's pick intent to better your own win rate will not work unless you ban a champ with a steep skill curve that someone on your team is very new to playing. Banning a first time Yasuo? Good idea if you care about your win rate. But randomly banning a teammate's champ because you perceive it to be a bad pick? Nope. Not only are you being a dick, but you're not doing your win rate any favors either.

SanKakUJul 20, 20171 votes

[deleted]

SzGamer227Jul 20, 20171 votes

Just thought I'd let you know that banning someone's pick intent to improve your win rate doesn't work, except when they're learning a difficult champion, which is the specific case that you're against banning someone's pick intent. I'm against banning someone's pick intent for any reason, but in your case you didn't even gain anything from it. You blocked someone from playing Caitlynn so that they don't feed as Caitlynn and you just ended up with the bot laner playing a champ that they're less experienced with. You denied someone the champ they wanted to play at the expense of your chances at winning. Nobody is better off in that situation.

SanKakUJul 20, 20171 votes

[deleted]

SzGamer227Jul 20, 20171 votes

Caitlyn mains have a 55% win rate. Banning the pick intent of someone in a population with a 55% win rate is detrimental to your win rate. End of discussion.

SanKakUJul 20, 20171 votes

[deleted]

SzGamer227Jul 20, 20171 votes

Sorry, I'm not comfortable ensuing discourse with someone who contorts the supposedly simple line of logic I put forward by twisting the meaning and making wild assumptions about my opinions on the subject. I'll just end by saying "dafuq? that ain't what I said m8" and show myself out.

http://www.leagueofgraphs.com/champions/stats/caitlyn http://champion.gg/champion/caitlyn/ADC?league=