League of Legends Community
12345 ... 10

League of Legends Community (http://forums.na.leagueoflegends.com/board/index.php)
-   General Discussion (http://forums.na.leagueoflegends.com/board/forumdisplay.php?f=2)
-   -   Vote to Kick: The Definitive Solution (http://forums.na.leagueoflegends.com/board/showthread.php?t=2936939)

Vanitius 12-24-2012 12:24 AM

Vote to Kick: The Definitive Solution
Section 1: The Problem As I See It.

I don't have to tell those of you that are or ever have been anywhere in the 800-1800 ELO range that if there is one never ending constant in RANKED solo/duo queue (emphasized for the illiterate), it's trolling. Trolling champ select however, is something that is not touched upon in any real, tangible way by the current report system. Only being able to report people after the game has been played doesn't proactively prevent a troll from trolling. It only may discourage them from doing it in the future. Not to mention 20-45 minutes on average have been wasted on a game that should have never happened.

The simple compromise/solution to this problem is have the report system implemented in champ select (for Solo/Duo queue only) as a Vote to Kick system.

Section 2: The Proposed Solution

If a player is reported by at least 3 of his teammates he is removed from queue, reports pass to tribunal, tribunal does what it does. Doesn't take all that long to type up "4th pick, picked mid after we already had one, said 'mid or feed'." Whether or not they have a dodge timer or anything like that doesn't really matter to me. You're not going to convince a troll to stop trolling by punishing them, if that were true there would be no more trolling. The important thing is that if they're blatantly trolling they not be allowed to affect others. That said, the tribunal will still have power to pardon/punish as it sees fit. It's still normal reports, just for champ select instead of the game itself.

If you have 3 of 5 people in solo queue all agreeing that someone is being a troll, having never played with any of them before, it's a safe bet that the person in question doesn't need to play with them. Regardless of if they're right or wrong. (The right or wrong statement here being a note to why I don't see the need for a dodge timer, unless it's several games in a row.)

Section 3: Merits of the System

Not to mention this gives additional ammo to the tribunal, judges will be able to see "Oh look, this person trolled champ select on 12/23/2012 and then trolled in a game on 12/23/2012. Clearly they were out trolling."

How could this system really be abused? Who will be hurt by it?

Most of us playing solo/duo queue are trying to do just that: play. We don't want to be dicking around in queue after queue waiting to finally get a team with no trolls on it and we certainly don't want to be ruining the game for others.

Countering abuse of this system is pretty easy if a solo player is the only person to report a particular player for something, nothing is done. If they report everyone on the team, instant 30 min ban as far as I'm concerned. If another person votes for the same person, but a third doesn't, nothing happens. I don't really see duos being a problem. If they both vote for someone but no one else does, nothing happens. Limiting the number per day is viable if it's a limit above 10-15. I've personally queued that many times in a 4-5 hour span because of ~10 dodges spread between 3 or 4 games.

I think I speak for everyone when I say this: The fact of the matter is I should not (nor should anyone else) have to sacrifice my play time or ELO because someone decided not to obey the rules, rules that are not enforced effectively if trolls are allowed to enter into a game after clearly disobeying them.

1. Ranked Solo/Duo queue.
2. A vote is a report for a particular action.
3. Three votes, you're out.
4. No immediate penalty required. (Recommended for repeat offenders)
5. Reports go to the tribunal.

"But Vanitius," you ask, "what can I do about it?"

Pass this thread around, talk about it, get your friends and people you know to vote in the poll, comment, leave your thoughts. Get people talking about it and it will happen eventually. RIOT knows by now that it's an issue that must be addressed.

Section 4: Specific Explainations

Report Categories:
AFK in champ select --- (whether or not this is punishable is debatable)
Refusal to communicate with team --- (not the same thing as no one saying anything in chat)
Doubling up on picks --- (picking something someone has already locked in as)
Demanding a role under threat of feeding or AFKing --- (i.e. "Mid or afk")

Section 5: Addressing (Sometimes not so) Simple Concerns

There seems to be a large amount of concern towards abuse, (most of it is justifiable, if unwarranted) let's examine it.

Say someone is playing something 'outside the meta', like Jungle Nunu. (I realize Jungle Nunu technically fits the meta, but most people don't like it for various reasons, it's just an example.)

One of two things happen: Jungle Nunu gets kicked (which means they are reported for something they did not do, since "playing outside the meta" is not an option). Jungle Nunu requeues. Jungle Nunu is pardoned by the tribunal, and those who reported him get a "black mark" on their record. Once they get enough black marks, they get punished at Riot's discretion. This forces them to dodge if they don't want to play with a Jungle Nunu.

Or they get to play it, and possibly get reported afterwards depending on how the game goes. <=But this already happens normally. Unless someone dodges. So really only the first option is relevant to this system.

I don't foresee many people abusing this feature, since the chat log is typically very showing in champ select. It's typically (emphasis on typically) pretty clear who is trolling or not paying attention, and who is actually trying to play the game correctly.


Originally Posted by Eleven13 (Hozzászólás 32800778)
There needs to be a vote kick AND a report function in queue. It's just ridiculous, by not having one Riot is rewarding trolls and hurting players who actually follow the "summoner's code."

Take an example I have from a game yesterday:

We enter ranked queue (my friend and I) and are 4th and 5th pick. We start figuring out roles with the other players (2nd and 3rd pick) while 1st pick remains quiet. Then the bans come:
Janna, Ziggs, Zilean

...this guy is trolling. Proceeded to champ select, he picks soraka smite/revive and repeatedly says "TROLOLOLOLOLOLO" over and over. So now we're faced with two situations:

1.) Lose a game and elo for the sole purpose of reporting this guy after the game and hopefully getting the other team on board too.
2.) Someone who isn't breaking any rules dodges and gets penalized in having to wait 30 minutes to play again because of this jackass.

It's just ridiculous, one of our teammates ended up taking the bullet for us and dodging, and low and behold the troll wins. This should not happen, ever.

I don't disagree, but I'm basically suggesting that a report in champ select is the same as a vote to kick and vice versa. It will function exactly the same. Otherwise you could vote to kick someone for no reason with no repercussions.


Originally Posted by fishnchipsmate (Hozzászólás 32804060)
sorry, there was only one problem i ever had with vote kick systems, are you saying that someone whose kicked should receive the dodge penalty or not?

Originally I said no, I still say no, but I'm examining the relative merits of both sides. A troll who keeps trolling will keep getting kicked. Someone falsely kicked should be able to play again. So in my mind, maybe a 5 minute dodge timer would be fine, just so you don't get matched up with someone who kicked you before, that would be a toxic situation. But more than that I'd have to go with no. Waiting 5 minutes isn't that big a deal. Not to mention if I'd been falsely kicked, I'd need time to cool off. But that's me.

Summary: No dodge timer. 5 minutes at most.


Originally Posted by Mensen (Hozzászólás 32804826)
But the vote-kick system is only a band-aid solution, and only complicates things.

Imagine you had a leak in your roof. Water is now dripping onto your floor. You can do two things:

1. Put a bucket/bowl underneath the drip, and contain the water

2. Fix your roof so it no longer leaks

The vote-kick solution is comparable to the first solution to the problem in the analogy. While is fixes the problem (water is no longer all over your floor), it introduces new problems (you now have a bowl/bucket in the middle of your hallway).

Likewise, the vote-kick solution simply introduces new problems.The fact of the matter is, vote-kick system has several negative consequences, including:

- Meta stagnation
- Period between successfully being matchmade and getting into a game is detrimentally increased
- And that "trolls" will still be there; they just won't have so much influence on what happens in champion select

Again, if this was the solution, it would of already happened. Believe it or not, Riot employees do play their own game, and experience everything you do. It is likely something of their concern and probably something they will address in the future.

I can forgive all of this except: "Period between successfully being matchmade and getting into a game is detrimentally increased" being matched with a troll on your team is not effective matchmaking. That's not to say it's Riot's fault, but it's certainly not your responsibility to play with a troll on your team. You cannot stop people from trolling proactively. The problem is not that people are trolling, the problem is that their trolling affects other's gameplay. Something directly against the summoner's code. That is what I'm trying to prevent. As far as I'm concerned, if you find clear evidence of someone deliberately trolling, and they're punished by the tribunal, they should be instantly and permanently banned. But I don't decide punishment. I just report those who I think deserve punishment.

tl&dr: Your leaky roof analogy is flawed. Trolls aren't the drip, they're the rain. You can't stop the rain, but you can fix your roof so the rain doesn't get through.


Originally Posted by Mensen (Hozzászólás 32805636)
It's interesting.

The other night, I was watching Dyrus stream, and it was during the champion select. As the champion select progressed, one of the players on his team picked jungle Nunu. He said it himself, that if he was "tryhard" he would dodge, solely because he does not believe Nunu to be a strong jungle pick.

Now, what does that mean for your vote-kick system?

It means if you play a character people do not believe to be optimal, you can be vote-kicked and forced to re-queue (which for some people, takes a LONG time), and you are also forcing the other players on the opposing team to re-ban, re-pick, etc.

But again, you're assuming that 2 other people are going to agree with Dyrus in that situation and vote to kick as well.

I don't foresee that happening often. I've sat in champ select plenty of times and seen people try to go something like sion mid, or ap yi mid. Something that can work, but I just don't think it does that often when people are actually trying. I've said "that's a bad idea" in chat. And no one agreed with me. So again, I don't disagree that people will try this. I just don't think people will be kicked for it very often.

Edited to expand a bit:

The problem you're addressing is with people's attitudes towards the meta. Not a flaw in this system. Why would you want to play with a team if 3 or all of the other people on it are going to have a negative attitude towards your pick the entire game? What are you losing by being kicked for this reason? You're not going to punished by the tribunal, and there is no dodge timer.

Mensen, you make good points, we just have to agree to disagree as to the impact of the proposed system on your concerns.

Literally What 12-24-2012 12:26 AM

Then suddenly, you call mid first, then 4-man premade decides to kick you because one of them wanted mid.

Vanitius 12-24-2012 12:30 AM


Originally Posted by Eve?ynn (Hozzászólás 32782561)
Then suddenly, you call mid first, then 4-man premade decides to kick you because one of them wanted mid.

How may 4-man premades do you know playing solo/duo queue?

Way to read the post.

AimShootKill 12-24-2012 01:49 AM

I think this idea is very good !!

SQUATSbrah 12-24-2012 01:51 AM

have it sent to the tribunal (like you stated), if the tribunal deems that votes to kick the person were not warranted, have the voters punished for false reporting

Rachel 12-24-2012 01:53 AM

I see this being abused
primarily by dominant duo queues manipulating the weaker beta solo queuer into bending to their will

which is pretty ****ed to say the least
but it happy every day

people are dying

Rachel 12-24-2012 01:54 AM

thats also a whole lot of bureaucracy which will clog up tribunal more and make riot angryface

Mamie Jeadows 12-24-2012 01:55 AM


Originally Posted by Rachel (Hozzászólás 32783942)
I see this being abused
primarily by dominant duo queues manipulating the weaker beta solo queuer into bending to their will

which is pretty ****ed to say the least
but it happy every day

people are dying

Make it so the 'first pick' of the duo gets to choose to kick, instead of them having 2 votes.

Wolfmor 12-24-2012 01:57 AM


Originally Posted by Eve?ynn (Hozzászólás 32782561)
Then suddenly, you call mid first, then 4-man premade decides to kick you because one of them wanted mid.

If you had taken the time to read the FIRST SENTENCE you would have seen him say SOLO QUEUE and DUO QUEUE

OMG Turtle 12-24-2012 02:06 AM


Duo queue states they will feed if you don't vote to kick someoe. What's the chances both of the others won't vote to kick? I would, I'd prefer to re queue than get stuck with some dick duo queues.

Some duo gets a bad match-up, calls up bogus stats of one other guy, they both rage, get a vote to kick so new queue...

Yea, abused so easily.

All times are GMT -8. The time now is 12:41 PM.
12345 ... 10

(c) 2008 Riot Games Inc