Welcome to the Forum Archive!

Years of conversation fill a ton of digital pages, and we've kept all of it accessible to browse or copy over. Whether you're looking for reveal articles for older champions, or the first time that Rammus rolled into an "OK" thread, or anything in between, you can find it here. When you're finished, check out the boards to join in the latest League of Legends discussions.

GO TO BOARDS


Guide to Getting Ranked in the Tribunal

Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Riverstyx201

Senior Member

02-03-2013

Quote:
SlitYourWrist:

Or you could just stomp your feet and run and hide when the truth becomes too hard to deal with. Bye-bye now.


What truth? All I see is what we all already knew: That 80% of tribunal cases get punished. And how is that a surprise? Given that you need quite a lot of reports to end up there in the first place, most people are there for a reason. I'm kind of surprised it isn't more to be honest.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

SlitYourWrist

Member

02-03-2013

Quote:
Fudouri:
Appreciate the call outs!

You are almost correct. Unfortunately, I ran another 14k cases in the 1630000 to 1545000 (technically its 14.6k cases).

Some things have changed since the original 79% punish rate.

1) They have removed 1 game cases.
2) They have removed cases in which 1 report/game existed.

This has lead to the new punish rate to be 85%. (I am making some inference here, but not sure how to check).

Essentially, my hypothesis is that it is now harder to get into tribunal and so there should be less cases. But with no date on a case, its not possible for me to figure out if the volume of total cases has dropped.

So, now using the new 85% punish. Assuming you had started when it was still at an 80% punish rate, depending on when the change occurred and when you started doing this (of which neither I know), I don't think you have shown an actual effect on the tribunal cases (not statistically significant).

Again, not a statistics major, and if I hadn't ran the new set of data, I would actually agree with you (that you were statisticall significant in the cases you did), but with the new data, it is once again inconclusive.


The new punish rate of 85% would be consistent with the jump in accuracy I've seen over the past week. Prior to that, the account had a stable rate of 80% +/- 0.4% for almost two months.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Fudouri

Senior Member

02-03-2013

Quick addition.

Quick calculation shows you have a 4% permaban rate. The sample I took (in both december and january) showed a 2.6% permaban rate.

So, you have a higher than normal permaban rate! Though, I don't know if its statistically significant due to small sample size.

Also, the higher permaban rate may actually point toward the off said "Riot would be harsher" statement. But its such a small sample size, I wouldn't feel comfortable saying anything either way in relation to your permaban rate.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Fudouri

Senior Member

02-03-2013

Quote:
SlitYourWrist:
The new punish rate of 85% would be consistent with the jump in accuracy I've seen over the past week. Prior to that, the account was had a stable rate of 80% +/- 0.4% for almost two months.


Oops, just to be clear, I miswrote. I didn't mean to say that you had no effect on the cases. I am saying its inconclusive whether you had an effect on the cases.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Shiister

Senior Member

02-03-2013

Riot open the thread back up. 0_0.