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


Which punishment do you think should be enough to make toxic players change behaviour

Restricted game chat for X number of played games 92 38.02%
Disabled skin changing for X number of played games 34 14.05%
No IP/XP gain for X number of played games 93 38.43%
Ability to play only 1 Ranked game daily until X number of played games 59 24.38%
Ribbon for being toxic and matchmaking them with other flagged players forX number of played games 104 42.98%
All of the above punishments X number of played games 66 27.27%
Multiple Choice Poll. Voters 242 .

Punishment alternatives that discourage toxic players

Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

slamor

Senior Member

03-06-2013

I have a very good idea Lyte that I thought out carefully.
The objectives of the my ban suggestion is to make it so you have to play games to lift the ban and can be more frustrating then a flat time ban without being worse. This makes it so you have in the end no escape and promotes positive attitude. Toxic players will be filtered out of the game quicker and people will have less of a feeling that their punishment was unjust.

I was thinking of a time penalty till you can enter que if you are toxic. Like make a level 1 toxic penalty 5 minutes. Make each game played reduce the que by 30 seconds. If a player gets some insane ban like a 20 hour wait, make the que reduced by 2 hours. If a player gets reported for X number of reports, he automatically gets moved up a toxic level. The catch here is that if accused player believes he was falsely reported on numerous occasions, he can have the reform card posted to tribunal to veto the bump up in toxic level. A player has to play X number of games below a certain report percent for like every 20 games and then support gets notified to review the case and can decide if to lower or remove this type of ban.This way, players get out of the game a lot more quickly but of course has to be punished by tribunal to enter this cycle in the first lace. Lets in theory also say a person with a que ban of 19 hours gets down to 1 hour que time but toxic level did not go down, the next time he goes up a toxic level, he gets a 20 hour wait ban before he starts grouping with a team. You will have to take care of the checks and balances lyte as I do not have riot's tools available to me.

The advantages to this system can be that players are pushed out of the game much quicker. Lets say if a player puts a case up for tribunal, he will still be able to rack up toxic levels can be waiting quite a long time. Even with que wait time decreasing every game, very toxic players will immediately raise it back up in theory if reported by 4 solo qued strangers and a couple enemies. In all honesty, this system could remove perma bans completely as the que time will rise to where it is too impractical to play. Nobody feels like they have their RP or time completely taken away and this can be seen from a mile away instead of bam, bam, bam, dead. Other benefits could possible include a tremendously better and happier new player experience, less toxic players that play daily on average, and less of a feeling that tribunal is automated or community spams punish. Support will fully review all the bans that escalate the que wait by 3 hours to make sure it was deserved.

Now lets list potential negatives. Players will be made a little angry by extensive que times but it is better then just spamming a new account every ban and that just means really toxic players are kicked out more quickly. Players might create new accounts anyways but at a random lower rate. Players will try to find an excuse that the punishment is unjustified but I can trust you can try to fill these holes. This project will require massive resources and effort and may require more staff to maintain it but are all the benefits worth it?

P.S. The system would be warning, restricted chat, and then this cycle. This will probably work best if comboed with other player behavior measurements. I seek your wisdom and knowledge lyte. Please respond.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

slamor

Senior Member

03-06-2013

Quote:
OP stun:
You can get MAC address, AFAIK. But it can be changed... not by everyone, but it can. Well, it's at least better than IP bans.


Did the mac client come out like 3 days ago? Any mac toxic players may not be in tribunal yet.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

DrVenz

Junior Member

03-06-2013

Labeling a toxic player with a ribbon that everyone can see is a terrible idea and would only cause problems. Players will start to harass those with the ribbon and toxic players will become defensive and act out even more.

I've always believed that positive reinforcement is a far greater motivator then punishment is a deterrent. The answer to solving behavior problems is by increasing(creating) rewards for good behavior rather than trying to come up with clever ways to punish bad behavior. Even something as simple as an IP boost for not being in the tribunal for a set period of time would be sufficient enough to keep most people from being toxic. Seriously Dr. Lyte, consider this.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

slamor

Senior Member

03-06-2013

Quote:
DrVenz:
Labeling a toxic player with a ribbon that everyone can see is a terrible idea and would only cause problems. Players will start to harass those with the ribbon and toxic players will become defensive and act out even more.

I've always believed that positive reinforcement is a far greater motivator then punishment is a deterrent. The answer to solving behavior problems is by increasing(creating) rewards for good behavior rather than trying to come up with clever ways to punish bad behavior. Even something as simple as an IP boost for not being in the tribunal for a set period of time would be sufficient enough to keep most people from being toxic. Seriously Dr. Lyte, consider this.


Can you look at my ban solution? I have it at the top of the page. This could be what the game has needed for 3 years.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Failbot Deploy

Recruiter

03-06-2013

I don't think the toxic ribbon will end up being a great idea. Ideally it would show who is toxic and do a Scarlet Letter type thing, but it often will end up having players being toxic to them. People won't trust their judgment, antagonize them, and create an environment where nobody is happy, likely leading to losses and more reports everywhere.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Sikozu

Member

03-06-2013

Flagging a player with a ribbon for being Toxic is like rewarding them for being Toxic. That would actually encourage the bad behavior.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

DarthReckoner

Senior Member

03-06-2013

I really think the idea of suspensions by number of games rather than number of days is the best I've heard so far. Someone countered this saying that the trolls would then rush through the games in a toxic manor to lift the suspension, but I will counter that by adding another rule: To have the suspension lifted, the player must play X amount of games with a minimum of X reports. I also think this would work well in conjunction with the no IP/XP gained while on suspension.

You can further promote non-toxic behavior by rewarding players w/ bonus IP for every X amount of games played w/ a minimum report %. I know the honor system is supposed to be doing this, but just a little bit extra reward never hurts

Also, you could promote the toxic players on suspension to change their ways by giving them an initial larger IP/XP reward for X amount of games played w/o reports after a suspension is lifted to make up for their time in prison.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Just a forum acc

Senior Member

03-06-2013

Quote:
slamor:
Did the mac client come out like 3 days ago? Any mac toxic players may not be in tribunal yet.

lol not the Mac address, meaning Macintosh(is there even such thing as Macintosh address?), I meant on router/modem physical address(a.k.a. Ethernet hardware address (EHA), hardware address, or MAC - Media access control address).

You see? Not many people know about it, how many can know how to change it?


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Zeranis

Member

03-06-2013

Quote:
Phobia00:



[*]Mainly,let's change the punishment length from "hours and days" to "games played".This would count normals,Coop vs. Ai,Custom and any games played together and i would put the number around 10 to 20.


it shouldn't count Co-op vs Ai, because Co-op games are usually shorter than other games.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Kinvaras666

Senior Member

03-06-2013

I disagree greatly with limiting how many "ranked" games someone can play.
That's bull, I mean, if said player is ruining games, why are we allowing, or worst, encouraging them to play more and more?
They will just ruin more games.

Everyone here wants to believe that people will understand that their behavior is bad ans will change, but that's not happening. How many people get permaban everyday? How many of them actually get what was wrong?

Yeah, not many.

Making stuff like this will just encourage the player to keep playing and ruining more games.