@Lyte - Player Behavior, Matchmaking, and Life as a Scientist

First Riot Post
Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Ding an Sich

Senior Member

09-04-2013

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pryotra View Post
Hey lyte, I have a question for you.

How effective is punishment that seems to come from thin air versus a punishment that comes from a clear source?

For example, The Tribunal today is a clear source, it is given email notifications on bans/warnings, players are warned previous to entering the tribunal, and players get to see what they did wrong. Previous to that, The tribunal, in its initiation, was pretty shrouded. Players would receive bans without warning, and there was many a thread on GD asking for the ban repealed claiming innocence. In a way, I miss the PENDRAKILLS, but in all honesty I'm glad those days are behind us.

In my eyes, this was always supposed to be about rehabilitating the players that could be saved, and losing the players that could not. Which tribunal satisfied that goal best?

Edit: As for leavers/afkers, why not return the whole consecutive games finished bonus for IP? Just attach it to leaverbuster so that it will detect afks on top of leavers.

Pyro you weren't handed out a punishment out of nowhere, the only people like you who were banned were ultimately those who knew they were far over the lines of their actions. The only real problem from the old tribunal was those who received warning or 2 day bans, simply because they always had less history, and maybe their reports were one of the few anomalies in the system. But anyone who was out right banned? They were given bans based on the severity of their ingame decisions that showed a clear and consise disregard for the summoners code.

Pyro you've been around long enough to answer your own question "How effective is punishment that seems to come from thin air versus a punishment that comes from a clear source?". The tribunal at its inception was not meant to change most players, it was there to get the .5% who ultimately caused a major hindrance on others. Those who ultimately got their first warning+first punishment were very few to ever return to the tribunal. It was only in the last year(maybe less) where it has been more directed to easy potential .5% people who only become as bad as that subsection given a special context.

You can as far back as Pendragon to get sources on those who usually go past a certain X amount of tribunal bans never reform, while those who stop at a specific point before X were reformed.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Litose

Senior Member

09-04-2013

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lyte View Post
Why has positive reinforcements and rewards had much larger community change than punishment?
with all due respect.... the honor system is far from what i would call a "positive reinforcement" system....

a positive reinforcement should reward you for doing the things you want them to do (in this case be a positive player)...the honor system doesnt reward you for being a positive/nice player....you can be the nicest player in the game and get no honour at all and you can be a jerk all game and have a lot of honour....

you arent rewarding people for being nice...you are rewarding the people that can convince the other players that they (for w/e reason) deserve to get honour (some of them are nice players....some of them arent...)

a player can be nice in all his matches and can get no honour if the other players dont give him honour....but even without the honour that doesnt mean that he wasnt a nice/positive player...or the player can be a ****** and still get honour(lots of examples by just seeing the called "pro" players...most of them are (or were when i used to play the game) ******s...and most of them get honour cause they are e-famous...)

imo...ur system doesnt reward the positive player and can be really frustating for some positive players that expect to get honour since they are really being positive players and still they get no honour at the end of their matches...

making others vote on you is really far from rewarding positive behavior

also....what about the BR tribunal that got 1 temp ban in 31k cases ? (or in the last data(didnt check the fonts...) 3/4 cases in 52k cases...)....7 months since the "tribunal launch"...and that **** still doesnt work


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

rExekias

Game Design Intern

09-04-2013
99 of 107 Riot Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by Give Me LP View Post
I still don't understand why you can't opt-in to restricted chat.

Let's say you know you have a bad temper in game, and you wan't to try to both improve yourself, and keep the REST OF THE COMMUNITYfrom experiencing toxicity, why can't you just opt in?

That makes absolutely zero sense, you're just setting people up to get banned because you guys don't want to implement an easy fix to toxic chat. You could argue "Well just don't be toxic", but telling someone to not **** talk while getting stomped on by an enemy team in a high stakes ranked game is easier said than done.

Either allow players to opt-in to restricted chat, or don't ban for verbal abuse, except in extreme cases (Racism, threats, etc.)

Itís something weíve considered numerous times, but ultimately, Restricted Chat modeís main goal is to help reform players. If we allow people to opt in, then not only does it lose its impact as a punishment, but it also doesnít help the volunteers to improve their behavior. Instead, it would serve as a crutch that might actually prevent improvement. For example, if youíre not great at riding a bike and want to get better, do you keep riding your bike and learn from each fall or do you start to use training wheels every time you use your bike from that point forward?


I know that there are plenty of situations where it feels impossible to keep emotions from violently erupting but nobody ever said the road to improving behavior was an easy one. It may be a hard and difficult journey, but at the end of it, I think that you will find your efforts rewarded by a much more enjoyable in game experience.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

rExekias

Game Design Intern

09-04-2013
100 of 107 Riot Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pryotra View Post
Hey lyte, I have a question for you.

How effective is punishment that seems to come from thin air versus a punishment that comes from a clear source?

For example, The Tribunal today is a clear source, it is given email notifications on bans/warnings, players are warned previous to entering the tribunal, and players get to see what they did wrong. Previous to that, The tribunal, in its initiation, was pretty shrouded. Players would receive bans without warning, and there was many a thread on GD asking for the ban repealed claiming innocence. In a way, I miss the PENDRAKILLS, but in all honesty I'm glad those days are behind us.

In my eyes, this was always supposed to be about rehabilitating the players that could be saved, and losing the players that could not. Which tribunal satisfied that goal best?

Edit: As for leavers/afkers, why not return the whole consecutive games finished bonus for IP? Just attach it to leaverbuster so that it will detect afks on top of leavers.


I hope you donít mind if I answer your question, but itís a good one that touches on the PB teamís continuing efforts to increase the visibility of our features. Originally, punished players had only a vague idea of why they were being punished. Given that clarity of feedback is a huge factor in creating effective feedback loops for changing behavior, it was much harder for these players to improve. Furthermore, the vagueness actually led to some punished players coming back angry and confused.


Reform cards not only dramatically reduced the number of reports punished players received in the future, but also gave punished players feedback on how they could improve. This second part is very important as many punished players were often unaware of how just how negative their behavior had become.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Kallanne

Junior Member

09-04-2013

So this is something of a crazy idea, but has it been considered that perhaps all of this is treating symptoms, rather than the problem?

So much of the negativity in this game feels like it comes from RANKED solo queue. The toxicity, the holier than thou mindset that leads to picking on the weakest link and rage quitting, all feels like it comes from the mindset of that player trying to win at league and thinking they can do it without working with anyone else.

Perhaps getting rid of ranked solo, and providing more tools for serious players to find consistent teams, could do a lot to alleviate some of the less healthy 'I in team' attitudes that plague the game. It would almost force players to learn how to work with other people, in a team setting, to move forward, rather than rewarding people for approaching the game concerned with only their own standing, and considering that League is a TEAM game, that makes more sense to me.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Pryotra

This user has referred a friend to League of Legends, click for more information

Senior Member

09-04-2013

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ding an Sich View Post
snip
Dude, that is a whole lot of mad. I never got banned, can't a guy just ask a question?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Riot Exekias View Post
I hope you donít mind if I answer your question, but itís a good one that touches on the PB teamís continuing efforts to increase the visibility of our features. Originally, punished players had only a vague idea of why they were being punished. Given that clarity of feedback is a huge factor in creating effective feedback loops for changing behavior, it was much harder for these players to improve. Furthermore, the vagueness actually led to some punished players coming back angry and confused.


Reform cards not only dramatically reduced the number of reports punished players received in the future, but also gave punished players feedback on how they could improve. This second part is very important as many punished players were often unaware of how just how negative their behavior had become.
Thanks Exekias! It's OK if you aren't Lyte, just was wondering if it had panned out to be more effective or not. Seems like it has!

Lot's of respect for PB team here. I've been around since season 1, there wouldn't have been a season 3 without them. Kudos guys!


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Fomorian27

This user has referred a friend to League of Legends, click for more information

Senior Member

09-04-2013

Does the data show that losing teams are much less likely to honor than winning teams? There are times when I'm playing a game and meet someone who is friendly and cooperative in game, but we start losing and my mind turns toward the negatives of the situation and leave the lobby without honoring them. I wonder if there's a way to solve this, or if it needs solving. I personally try to remain conscious of friendly people even when losing, but I'm afraid most people let their negativity overcome them and leave without honoring.

It also doesn't help that the friendly person may start to go quiet the longer the game goes on because they are too involved in their own play. Actually, that might be an interesting stat in itself: are losing teams less talkative in chat than winning teams?


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

kinata1

Junior Member

09-04-2013

Ive got two things riot should sit down and consider

1.) When someone complains to support about leaver issues they should be able to tell their bosses about ideas the guy has directly its not right that i have to go into a forum where my issue may not ever be seen or taken care of especially when i already have someone i'm obviously talking to from riot

2.) leaving in games- When a player leaves a game he is marked at the end with red bold letters saying "this guy left" riot obviously has ways to track leavers so i ask HOW IS IT FAIR THAT 4 PLAYERS GET PUNISHED FOR 1 GUY LEAVING 5 players lose lp in ranked for 1 leaver/afk the possibility of winning a 4v5 is extremely low everyone has to be 100% on their A game and fed way early off in order to have a chance of 4v5 the 4 should get a pardon of some sort after all it's not their fault someone isn't there even if the player might say "they complained so much i left" he still made the choice to leave and screw the team over i know many people who are stuck in bronze sheerly out of leavers in their promo series If you can track leavers and you know its a community issue why not make the 4 not have to be punished for the fact that somebody left? Also i know timestamping a leaver isn't hard at all i mean starcraft has leaver checks that were available to be put in use for the common map maker these are CUSTOM GAMES THE PLAYERS MADE THAT HAVE BETTER WAYS OF TAKING CARE OF AFK BASED GAMES THAN RIOT HAS EVER HAD CONTROL OF if people like that can make leaver timers buffs and debuffs for the appropriate teams when a player leaves I KNOW riot can its not a case of money either


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Transending deat

Member

09-04-2013

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lyte View Post
I agree with you and Ginga, there's more we could do to address / reduce the impact of Leavers on the other 4 players in the match.

I think LeaverBuster does a decent job against the Leaver, but I'm open to more discussion around what we can do for the other 4 players.
Well the thing is lyte, i'm not so sure you are so up for discussion about what you can do for the other 4 players, and if you are up for this so called discussionthen it is a very limited discussion, and not a discussion looking for actual feedback to where you can improve the system.

I mean don't get me wrong, you are probably an outstanding guy who wants to fix this problem and make everything better, yet you have this entire "would be abused" mentality that makes it damn near impossible to fix this kind of a problem.

Every time someone has posed a perfectly reasonable fix as to how you can better the other 4 players after someone leaves the game, you always lead with something like "yea well, then that 1 person will get abused and will be made to want to leave".

Every time i get a reform card from the tribunal, it says that ON AVERAGE less than 1% of the player base is reported every month.

So tell me, why do you have such a "would be abused" mentality when it comes to approaching these kinds of things?


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

The Dork

Senior Member

09-04-2013

Hey Lyte, Riot Exekias.
Has the idea ever floated around to take summoners that have an extremely good record of being friendly, and helpful players to make them some sort of mod almost in game? What I am imagining is someone that can say at the end of a game, flag a toxic player that can be looked at by people in your staff, who can then try and help change the toxic players behavior in a positive way.

Also in regards to champ select: Summoner X loves to play *insert role*, but summoner X doesn't like to cause problems in the lobby with other players who are aggressive in wanting that role. The end result is summoner X hardly gets to do the thing he likes most about League. Have you guys made any headway with this sort of thing?