HeartVine (OCE)
: Just to be clear, Riot have introduced 2FA in the form of email verification codes. You can refer to the [2FA and Trusted Devices Support article](https://support.riotgames.com/hc/en-us/articles/360010366413) for more info.
that's a start. but as there is nothing about this through the client (unless im blind), i imagine most people haven't heard of it.
Latte420 (OCE)
: Permanently Banned Wrongfully
multi billion dollar company, still no 2 factor authentication btw
Ornn (OCE)
: Boycott eternals. DON'T BUY THEM!
but according to the resident 'volunteers', riot is not a greedy company.
: Let me get this straight
just another predatory business model capitalising on the FOMO on "exclusive" items phenomenon. create system that you know the average player will struggle to complete without substantially increasing playtime. sell entry to said system. make deadline to purchase extra tokens longer than the deadline to earn them. bundle said tokens to other crap in the store so people have to spend ridiculous amounts. watch as weak minded people spend $60 or more just for a chroma or icons, or to get the "prestige" skin they fell a few hundred tokens short for, which they have already basically paid for via the pass. copy paste every 2months. genius.
: A player not receiving a ban doesn't mean nothing was done. OP.GG doesn't show chat restrictions for example. Nor does any one player have the full story of another player's history and account status. Manual reports are also slow.
why would they get a manual review? if someone uses certain language, the bot is meant to pick it up and dish out the punishment. it was literally created to replace manual review..... those cases i told you about weeks ago, those players when i look them up today, still have never had a substantial break in their game history. yet others, have received the punishment. so what's going on? instead of trying to defend and justify it, maybe admit something is just not working properly? like, how can a bot fail to detect obvious 'no tolerance language'? if it's only working some of the time, then you can't trust that it is making any right decisions ever. the other possibility is that riot has changed their stance and this language is no longer 'no tolerance' and are now giving warnings, ie chat restrictions, out first.
: Scripting escalates straight to permanent suspension (no warnings). In short, it is banned, regularly and with great predjudice. Boosting is also banned. First offence is a 2-week ban and loss of all current and previous ranked rewards, second is perma. Smurfing is not against any rules. It can be harmful yes, but matchmaking is designed to mitigate that as much as possible. To be clear, smurfing is not the same as someone deliberately dropping their rank to stomp new or weaker players. Smurfing is simply playing on a second account. Smurfs of a significantly higher rank almost immediately (within 3 games) have their MMR boosted up way high to match their apparent skill. It won't be a perfect match for a few more games, but a Diamond smurf is *not* going to be consistently vsing legitimately low ranked players. There are two key things here. First, someone who is deliberately reducing their rank to stomp noobs is not a smurf, they are an asshole and should be reported for griefing. Second, the lower the rank the more polarising the games, so a player doing well in a particular game, will generally do very well, and the reverse is also true. Just because you were beaten badly, does not mean that player was a smurf. Just because they say they are a smurf, does not mean they are a smurf. Even if they are a smurf, that doesn't mean they are a high-ranked one. https://matchhistory.oce.leagueoflegends.com/en/#match-details/OC1/246430954/201524503?tab=overview You did very well in this game, compared to your team-mates relatively mediocre score, were you smurfing?
> [{quoted}](name=Seras Dragon,realm=OCE,application-id=FjGAIbRv,discussion-id=MGYb0THk,comment-id=000100000000000000030000,timestamp=2019-06-30T10:45:56.669+0000) > Smurfing is simply playing on a second account. > that's not quite true. that would be an alt account. smurf is literally a term used for intentionally playing in lower ranks on another account. although admittedly the term is being used too liberally now that the 2 get confused.
: ***
i mean, the kind of person you are is on display here. not that we needed this particular post to know this. you talk about social circles' in a way that you think that is the only way people are. there's plenty of people that don't behave in this manner. ironically, only the shittier people behave like this. as was the case in the specific instances i gave. it's not like uni societies were only like this. most people were normal. a lot chose not to participate because of said people. in different years the whole 'scene' was better as those particular groups were not there and it wasn't quite as 'cliquey'. again i was not referring to people wanting to connect with familiarity and similarity and i'm not even saying cliques are bad or not normal. its natural. i'm talking about when a person or certain cliques try to dictate and specifically try to exclude others from things. not because they've crossed some line in terms of anti-social behaviour, but because they simply can not handle having to interact or be seen associating with 'different' looking or minded people. we're not talking about private events or whatever. we're talking about some kind of event or thing that is for everyone. in regards to sport, your comment would suggest you have not played much sport if you think that there aren't individual personalities on a team that may not be particularly pleasant. there is plenty of egos and narcissism. have you never heard of the term 'ball hog'? there are teammates that are heaps critical, heaps negative, there are others that are generally all around 'good teammates'. in some cases there can actually be bad blood between 2 particular people. generally in this case, they either deal with it or 1 person quits. nobody gets kicked out for any of these reasons. someone would OBVIOUSLY have to really cross a line in terms of behaviour to get kicked out. but in terms of this whole discussion, this was not originally what you were talking about. you were talking about his general personality and playstyle. you never said you want him banned because of his specific cases where he crossed the line. which is what he has been punished for. you want him banned simply because 'people dont like him'. what are you talking about? people were literally 'reporting' nb3 and riot employees were literally replying to these people stating excuses. ironically nb3 has probably been 'reported' way more than nubrac, which as you say is why he's been punished. as a volunteer here has pointed out, there's no way it should have taken this long for nb3 to be punished for this. it should have been instant as part of the whole investigation into the whole issue. as always you come up with bullshit analogies in your logic. 'this is why society has prospered because we don't tolerate bad behaviour' problem is we are not talking about 'bad behaviour'. this discussion has been about tolerating different people and personalities. who are you to judge certain 'styles' as 'good' or 'bad'. it's actually the opposite of what you are trying to insinuate. we have prospered as a society because we do, as time passes, tolerate differences and influence each other. unfortunately as humans we still have a long way to go in this regard. you need different minded people to grow. another irony here(your arguments seem to have a lot) is that western society is largely driven by narcissism and greed. i think the only one in a deep hole is you. i've only ever defended him in regards to his personality and playstyle. i have never defended any specific instance of him targeting someone. there just was not any evidence of this until now apparently. it's been made clear (or at least claimed) that he INDEED has been banned for specific instances of behaviour, not for his overall style. you can change tune if u want, but you originally were talking about getting rid of him because 'people don't like playing with him' and because of narcissism and the kind of person he is, not because of a specific game or games that he crossed the line in terms of behaviour and therefore deserves punishment for those circumstances. my main issue now is why was there such a disproportionate effort now that certain personalities became involved, which resulted in a big backflip of their original investigations (because apparently certain 'evidence' was ignored previously because not the same amount of effort is made when its 'normal' people having an issue)? is it because it's more about PR and not actually about player behaviour? if it was about player behaviour, nb3 would have been punished immediately. his behaviour was literally on display. but no, it took community pressure for it to happen. it comes back to the OP's post. 'streamers can get people banned?". it's perception that matters. regarding tyler1. not sure what details im skipping. riot made a big public PR post about it at the time. 'we've got your back community!!!' when they banned him. then they realised he is actually quite popular with the community. so they made him a poster boy. those are 2 very big extremes. that shows no credibility or that they were ever genuine in the first place (it also shows that they miscalculate things). do you even watch tyler1? overall he has not actually changed. his behaviour is actually what makes him popular... all he's done is refrain from saying and doing certain things in-game. he still does the same stuff on stream. so why does riot now want to associate itself with that? i mean, he literally calls the company trash...
: 8 months ago i posted this shit, i come back 8 months down the track with a new account thinking, "hey things might have just changed during this time". Fuck was I wrong to assume shit would ever change. Obviously nothing changed since the start of OCE so why should I hope that things would over 8 months. Fuck this region is run by idiots. I hope none of you buy shit from their shop, you're just supporting a company that obviously doesn't give a fuck about you.
just curious, who are you classing as 'trolls'?
: ***
lmao so you think because i comment on the nastiness of people in 'social circles' it means i dont go out or have no relationships. that says a lot more about you as a person than it does me. i comment on it because i saw it happen to others first hand and hated being involved in any way. im not talking about people connecting with others based on similar interests etc. im talking about the intentional efforts of some to exclude others from 'public' events, solely based on them not being the 'same' as a particular person or a group of persons. sometimes it was incredibly nasty out of spite, other times it was because these people felt 'awkward' around them (eg this happened to some of the 'nerdy' type at uni, it also happened to some of the more 'outspoken' and critical people). if you feel awkward and uncomfortable around people that are different at networking events, then that means you are the issue, not them. look at sport for example, something a bit more comparable to league. i played on proper teams, i also played social sport where you are kinda playing with randoms. you don't exclude someone from it simply because you don't like them or because they are a bad teammate. you have to deal with it like adults or choose not to participate if it is that much of an issue for you. in THIS case, you were literally saying that this person should be banned because he is a narcissistic bad teammate that makes people uncomfortable in some way because of his personality and/or playstyle. that alone is not a reason to ban/exclude someone from this service. we were talking about his overall match history, not specific instances of targeted intentional griefing that may have occurred (which is what he is apparently been punished for). now in terms of nb3s ban, yet again you miss the issue/point entirely. no shit riot issued him a punishment because people called for it. the issue is, which goes all the way back to the original OPs post, why was he not punished immediately? if riot backflipped on their initial investigations on the teemo, because a few streamers made it a big issue and due to 'new evidence' (we have volunteers here saying it was due to vods that were apparently ignored previously), then why did they ignore the blatant evidence of his own behaviour? is it because this entire thing was always about PR, it was never actually about punishment and 'doing the right thing'? as a secondary to this, is it because certain people get special or favourable treatment? (there's nothing necessarily wrong with this, but idk why some want to deny it) i mean, you should look at riots current feedback survey. it's literally all questions about PR and what kind of image they have, especially compared to other companies. so again, idk why people just want to deny that these very public stunts, are exactly that, stunts. imagine if nubrac got permmed for this, but then he became incredibly popular. watch them change their tune quickly when money starts getting involved. remind you of anyone else?
: > but trying to get someone banned from an online service entirely just because you don't like them is a false equivalency. A customer can be ask to leave if they are disturbing everyone else. This is simply removing the one to appease the many. > that ends up being a form of bullying. Speaking for Nubrac, or against Nubrac? Hard to tell. > if you don't like somebody, and they are attending some event, then it's on you to either not go or to suck it up like an adult. Riot is a company, their job is to keep the masses satisfy. This is not on a personal level. > i remember **nasty people like you** at university. they would try to exclude certain people from a certain uni society's events and meetings, simply because they didn't like them. Drawing a line between right and wrong, is not the same as turning people away in the name of justice. Big different, k? I don't know which context your reference is coming from. Creating a blockage or whatever form of obstruction; That is solely on the university campus to do something about it. The fact that they didn't take action or unable to. Speak volume about the leading figures, they've pretty much allowed it to fester. Just like now Nubrac was allow to initiate and persist his disguised parade of "Off meta" theatrical play; **UNTIL the masses complains**, leading up to the ban. You aligning my reasoning to those naive university students, is quite the insult. And proof, of a lack of understanding. > not be immature and 'ban' them when they have every right to be there. ironically they were the ones creating a toxic environment, not the 'unlikeable' people. When one person is disturbing everyone else, that said person is not welcome to be among those that play to the civility of the rules. This is a basic concept which are taught socially from exposure to environments such as, education, friends, work place, social gathering, and relationship. How can you expect Riot to let him go unchallenged? What about other people's complains? What make Nubrac worth more than the many? > ironically **they **were the ones creating a toxic environment It seem to me you've bought in to this notion of injustice, from looking at ONE CASE, his game with NB3. Why don't you look for more examples then see if your stance is still the same. You are not defending a right done wrong here. You are protecting a scheme that is beyond a naive comprehension.
what masses complained lmao? literally a handful of people complained relative to the population....... you realise there is 10 people in his matches right. how many of them did not ever complain, ie report him. im willing to bet when he won he didn't get many reports, if any at all. and like it has been shown, he was deemed to not be doing anything wrong because false reports are exactly that, false, until a certain person complained. so your logic about numbers/masses is flawed because he probably actually had more people not reporting him, than reporting him. someone else has brought up this fallacy before about how riot claims they ban people for certain things because it's 'what the community votes for' but then at the same time only a single person in the game making a report can get someone banned. well if it was about majority rules that makes no sense. also riot has stated that 'gg ez' is one of the most reported things, yet nobody has ever been punished for that. you talk about the civility of rules? again, he didnt break any rules lmao. can you show me an actual shred of evidence that he broke any rules? people getting upset by his play style is not breaking rules. the same goes in real life. your personality is not something that can have a 'rule' on lmao. sure it DOES happen, but those people are, ironically, the socially inept, as they can't handle different personalities, and need to form cliques and toxic environments of whatever they deem to be 'cool'. in the case of league, it seems to be, if you dont play a certain way, then you ain't cool. again, this isn't about your personal choice to not associate yourself with someone you don't like, it's about trying to ban/exclude them from something that is for everyone, solely because you don't like them. and when it is a group of people trying to do it, it's even worse. it's literally bullying. again, the biggest thing you seem to be missing, is that riot themselves literally investigated him and found him to be fine, and also directly told him he is not doing anything wrong. but back flipped when they saw an opportunity for PR. why is it only considered wrong when he is in games with popular content creators? but all his other games were apparently fine.
: Not the whole game, which I why I didn't want to get too in-depth. I didn't comment on NB3's behaviour at all. This was about Nubrac, and as I understand it, this was one of many games where Nubrac specifically targeted a certain set of players (streamers) with the intention of getting a negative reaction. I.E griefing. Should he have had more than this one game linked? Probably. Does that change what he did? No.
firstly , what was the evidence that it was intentional to grief? was it chat logs? vods? why was this not found in the prior investigation if now apparently there is evidence. secondly, he has a big match history of playing this 'strat'. so why is it only deemed bannable if he plays it with streamers and upsets them but it's fine (and there is direct quotes from riot telling him it is fine to play) to play with 'regular' people?
: I mean, I get it. Ultimately PBE is about feedback, and streamers by nature give feedback because they are generally talking over their gameplay. Not to mention the chat. Getting those streamers through first not only means more players overall are exposed to the content (audiences), it's also an easy way to guarantee a wide spectrum of feedback from the small percentage of players that can actually get in. Let's be honest, most of the people queueing for TFT right now aren't doing it because they want to provide in-depth and considered feedback or even regular old bug reports. They just want to play it ASAP, which is not the purpose of the test server.
let's be real, it's a lot more to do with advertising your new game then feedback reasons... they are entering a new game market and aggressively competing with other games of the same genre. of course it's for free advertising and hype. nothing necessarily wrong with that. it is what it is.
: > there's so much shit that is BAD and creates negativity. so you're logic suggests that it should all be banned. that's fine, but then proper rules need to be laid out as to what can be played where Look, the issue here is when you are playing with others and you only want to do things you like; Then for sure people wont invite you again. The concept here is continuation. He is at a tier where the players are few and the chance of the same encounter are numerous. So if he consistently want to persist his style, knowing how many hate it. He should not be surprise about the negative result. He want to look for a loop hole to annoy others, congrats! he found it. Then after riot keep getting stacks of reports, they have to use unconventional mean to satisfy their other clients. >again, you say because people don't like him as a teammate? so what? that's not a reason to be banned. And why not? Riot have the TOS, it is within their boundary to do just that. He is creating many unpleasant games for many players, when confronted with the issue, he dressed it up as "Viable off meta". The only ones having fun are the enemy team and himself. > he needs to be breaking specific rules. so if his personaliy, for eg, means he is typing certain words constantly that are prohibited, then yeah you can ban him for that. but you're just doing what you usually do on these forums, and call for people being banned simply because you don't agree with them or like them. That's what it mean to find a loop hole. He took advantage of it while having fun at other's expense. Do you think the guy is as innocent as his baby face suggest? For every complaint he received, he gave a come back of why he know better. Days after days, more and more people words of disapproval stacked up. And he still persist in his ways. All for what? so he can be unique, so he can stand out. The guy constantly voiced his fascination of wanting to be different from others, like he is tired of no one is looking at him or something. > for people being banned simply because you don't agree with them or like them. In life if people don't like you, they have the option of isolating you from the group. If this is what Nubrac is practicing toward, then go for it.
firstly i dont know why you bring up tos. tos means literally nothing and riot does not need an actual reason to ban someone. they can do what ever they want. you dont actually need to be breaking any rules to get banned. if you dont understand this is all a big PR stunt to make it look like they punish trolls then idk what else to say to you. even further proved by the fact they caved into pressure, and again, banned nb3 for PR reasons. 2ndly, sure if people dont like you they can choose to not play with you ie not duo with you or in this case, dodge a solo queue game if they see you in it. but trying to get someone banned from an online service entirely just because you don't like them is a false equivalency. that ends up being a form of bullying. it just like in real life. if you don't like somebody, and they are attending some event, then it's on you to either not go or to suck it up like an adult. you can't be trying to remove said person from event. i remember nasty people like you at university. they would try to exclude certain people from a certain uni society's events and meetings, simply because they didn't like them. it's on you to exclude yourself if you can't handle someone you don't like being there. not be immature and 'ban' them when they have every right to be there. ironically they were the ones creating a toxic environment, not the 'unlikeable' people.
: > like you can't just start banning people because of their personality lmao. It depend on what you mean by personality. Are you using it in the concept of displaying it facially, Or acting it out? A negative respond will beget a similar act in kind. He has gathered a long list of reports and so he received his just reward. What is there not to understand? > point is the 'strat' or whatever u want to call is legit. legit in terms of, it's something this person is trying to do in order to win. You can spin it however you want, when all is said and done and the wheel stop turning. The crux of the matter is, his game style put his team mate in a disadvantage position and give them antagonizing experience. And of course, as long as he covered all of that with a thin veil of "Am trying to win", this is suppose to nullify all the negativity he has created? > he isn't doing it purely for shits and giggles and to specifically troll and grief people. He doing this because the kid clearly wasn't being taught the golden rule of, is not about winning, is how you play the game. If you don't understand what this mean, reply and quote. I'll explain what it mean to you. > people sperging out because it's different, is on them. again, it's a game with randoms. you are going to play with people of different playstyles, skill, temperament, mental game etc. It's not just different, it is also **bad**. Understand? > like i could argue that my support who likes to play passively, when i like to play aggressively is tilting, therefore im being griefed because this is not a desirable team mate. That is a weak argument. Whether you and your support synergies well or not, is not even on the same page as Nubrac. He is forcing others to be what HE WANT THEM TO BE. There is no choice but to comply. Look at all those games when he went mid and top as a support. What are they suppose to do? Chase him off? They cant! No matter how unpleasant this guy is, you have to play it out. Same with his ADC. How can the 2 scenarios converge as you've described? As much of a coward the support is, at least he held your hand and do his job. While Nubrac forced 2 solo lanes into a off role bottom lane. And not to mention he only build DPS items on Teemo and not a single warding item! And we all know how shit an unfed Teemo can be. > besides, riot themselves said they had already 'investigated' and concluded he wasn't doing anything wrong. but you know, when a content creator with a sizeable following complains the rules change. Oh please, the balloon pumped with ego and knotted cord made out of arrogant know as NB3. Is not the sole reason Nubrac got banned. Nubrac wrongs are more selfish leaning. It might not be a total disaster, but sure as hell not many want to be his team mate.
where is there a rule that states the support has to sit in bot lane? why can't he support one of the other 2 lanes? i agree with you that it can be frustrating in a solo queue environment. but that is only because people have been programmed into a certain way to play. at the end of the day it's on them if they can't handle it. there's so much shit that is BAD and creates negativity. so you're logic suggests that it should all be banned. that's fine, but then proper rules need to be laid out as to what can be played where, what can be built on what champion etc. like really, i hate seeing a vayne top on my team. it never works, and it's always some narcissistic kid playing it. so i guess it should be banned? either i need to accept that a person can play it and that there is a chance i will run into it in a solo queue environment where it is not pre planned amongst 5 players on a team, or riot needs to prohibit it from the get go because it then forces their teammates to play differently and causes negativity. again, you say because people don't like him as a teammate? so what? that's not a reason to be banned. that's life. that's what i mean by personality. if he's an egotistical know it all, well so be it. if he does his own thing, and not be a team player, so be it. you can't want someone banned simply because you don't like them lmao. he needs to be breaking specific rules. so if his personaliy, for eg, means he is typing certain words constantly that are prohibited, then yeah you can ban him for that. but you're just doing what you usually do on these forums, and call for people being banned simply because you don't agree with them or like them. again, in terms of his 'strat', he was deemed to be not breaking the rules, until now. if riot is gonna change the rules, fine, but they better be consistent with it.
HeartVine (OCE)
: > [{quoted}](name=Exarch Leona,realm=OCE,application-id=Ntey9fRZ,discussion-id=z9tuNHiV,comment-id=00000001,timestamp=2019-06-20T04:17:51.601+0000) > > Yet they can't ban other who do the same? > Which goes back to OPs original statement, only streamers can get others banned. It's a bit more complicated than that. You'll likely find that all the OCE volunteers agree that the systems in place for gameplay offences just aren't as good as they should be, and that's something Riot needs to address (presumably they are, but there's no info on that as far as I know, and a lot of players feel it's just worse now than when the Tribunal was available). The systems that *are* in place either take too long to act, or just don't figure it out, and in that sense it's very important for players to follow up any gameplay issues through "higher escalations" methods (such as submitting a ticket to support) to help the process along. It's fundamentally because of a flaw in Riot's systems, but players shouldn't claim it doesn't work if they don't take the effort to help it work. Even in this case with Nubrac, the system in place *just didn't get it*. The situation was misread as nothing more than a case of a player going off-meta when the situation was more complex than that, and as a result we now have a high-profile situation that is just flooding the boards and Reddit and such with misinformation and half-truths, a situation that likely could have been avoided if Riot's systems and policies were up to scratch. It's not that "*only* streamers can get players banned", it's that the systems in place are fundamentally flawed, and it takes significantly more effort to get results because of that, effort which NB3 actually took, while many other players simply wouldn't consider it because of a belief that "it wont work".
except this person wasn't specifically griefing. just because people feel that way because most are programmed into a specfific way the game has to be played, doesn't mean it is. it's on them if they feel that way. the game with nb3 is case in point. they could have easily won that match and just played around it. the irelia could have easily snowballed. instead they baby raged and afked. don't get me wrong, i can totally understand the frustration. people want to win, and so unconventional stuff isn't exactly what you want to be forced into doing if it isn't pre-planned. but you gotta accept that you're going to get this if you're choosing to be matched with randoms. otherwise you need to lay down some rules and completely forbid all non-meta in the solo queue environment as it's always going to force the random teammates to play around it. (please ban people from playing vayne top. it never works.) now if he played like this specifically because he got into a game with nb3 and was on stream, you would have a case. but as you know he has a large match history of playing this. kinda a stretch to compare this case to the usual 'trolls don't get banned' thing. people usually are referring to instances of intentional throwing of the match and running it down other people's lanes etc that don't seem to get punished. the issue is the system has problems differentiating high deaths due to 'trolling' to high deaths due to being bad to the point where very obvious trolling takes dozens of games to get punished.
: > [{quoted}](name=HeartVine,realm=OCE,application-id=Ntey9fRZ,discussion-id=z9tuNHiV,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2019-06-18T03:44:51.779+0000) > > The bottom line regarding Nubrac is that he was consistently griefing other players, a behaviour that can (and likely will) get any other player banned. You can refer to [this statement by WookieeCookie on Reddit](https://www.reddit.com/r/leagueoflegends/comments/c0m449/nightblue3_gets_his_teammate_banned_for_playing/er61hxj/) for the explanation, but the basic situation is that Nubrac was intentionally griefing consistently and repeatedly (he admits as much in his stream), blatantly refusing to communicate with his teams (which is a breach of the rules in and of itself), using the whole "off-meta" thing as an attempt to shield himself from the consequences (basically, attempting to circumvent the rules), specifically targeting streamers with this behaviour, and consistently and repeatedly reported for those behaviours. > > Riot initially reviewed the case 3 weeks or so prior to the ban, and backed off because they saw "off-meta" on the surface and didn't want to harass a player just for playing off-meta. It's reasonable to say that Nubrac's intention was to simply "expose his image" to become more popular, regardless of how it affects other players or the community. > > The match including NightBlue3 was basically the tipping point, where NB3 pursued the issue further by submitting a ticket to support (which ***ANY*** player can do) and, when that didn't turn up results, pursued the issue further again by contacting a Rioter directly (again, something ***ANY*** player can do). NB3's behaviour isn't any more acceptable than Nubrac's, they were ***BOTH*** in the wrong, and the Rioter employee who reviewed the case was simply *doing their job*. I don't know what Riot is going to do about NB3, last I heard they were still reviewing his case, but I personally hope he gets *at least* a "next tier" punishment. > > ---- > > #***TLDR*** Nubrac got banned for griefing consistently and repeatedly. It would have happened sooner or later, NB3 just sped up the process by pursuing the issue with Riot, which any player can do. But his strat was viable and it worked. It got Irelia a lead. The guy is also highly ranked with a positive win ratio. This is proxy singed all over again. It's a stupid ban and only went through because streamers cried. Nightblue was AFK for 1 minute and 30 seconds typing his report in the fountain instead of playing. Where is his punishment? He single-handily lost that game. That was an instant ban, too. He didn't fill out a report, he contacted a staff member directly. You don't have to communicate with your team. You can legit mute everyone at the start of the game. Also, WookieeCookie has no idea of how the rules work. Anything that person posts is null and void because they are clueless. lol. No point playing nanything but meta these days, tbh. Disregard the fact that people rbeaking the meta has changed the game.
he had already been investigated and cleared. so not sure how you can claim he was banned for consistently griefing and that it was just sped up. besides, his ban card or whatever you called it specifically only shows the game he played with nb3 as being the game/s that caused the ban. it's very convenient that the past now is considered 'incorrect' as soon as a popular content creator who apparently has 'riot friends' has an issue. but we already know riot backflips on these kind of things whenever it will suit them, whether it be for public image or for financial reasons.
: > so using your logic, anyone with a 50 or lower win rate should be banned, because whatever play style/strat/champ they are playing is not working and can be construed as griefing their teammates. You are pushing passed what I've said by a LARGE margin. No, that is not the point am making. Those who've played with him, the majority of them hate to be his team mate. And whenever Nubrac play style is being criticised; The narcissistic side come out and he override their concerns with, they're not giving him a chance, they are not doing what he want them to do, and list of reasons of what he is doing will land the team victory. Do you understand the different between a bad player, and one who act like he is the main character and he know best, therefor whatever he does should be taken as the holy grail?
you act like both of those things (being a bad player and narcissistic) don't go hand in hand. being a bad player can include being a bad teammate, team player etc. it's not just about micro and macro skill.... point is, it's not bannable and shouldn't be. like you can't just start banning people because of their personality lmao. it's a game where you are matched with randoms, you are going to come across people who have egos and think they are good when they aren't. this happens pretty much every match anyway lol. point is the 'strat' or whatever u want to call is legit. legit in terms of, it's something this person is trying to do in order to win. he isn't doing it purely for shits and giggles and to specifically troll and grief people. him thinking he's god and that everyone should listen to him is irrelevant. he does make a great point that, people sperging out because it's different, is on them. again, it's a game with randoms. you are going to play with people of different playstyles, skill, temperament, mental game etc. like i could argue that my support who likes to play passively, when i like to play aggressively is tilting, therefore im being griefed because this is not a desirable team mate. but obviously that is not how it works and would be stupid to say. besides, riot themselves said they had already 'investigated' and concluded he wasn't doing anything wrong. but you know, when a content creator with a sizeable following complains the rules change. even more questionable when he says shit like "my riot friend". but we all know how inconsistent riot is and how they massively back flip on things if they think it will suit them. (cough tyler1 cough)
F4R W3ST (OCE)
: Unequal access to PBE
you really need to ask that? pretty obvious why. because it's free advertisement for their new 'game'.
: https://na.op.gg/summoner/userName=nubrac What kept him in the ELO bracket is his Amumu and Leona. **Not Teemo**. Take a glance at his stats on those 2 champs, and you will understand why. His game play contribution on Teemo is no more than a coin toss. The game is decided on which team mate can carry him. If he only play Teemo, he would be much lower.
so using your logic, anyone with a 50 or lower win rate should be banned, because whatever play style/strat/champ they are playing is not working and can be construed as griefing their teammates. the owner of echo fox should be banned, mains lucian with a horrible win rate. the guy is griefing his teammates.
: Wait, streamers can get people banned?
Riot: The Faceless; discover playstyles others wouldn't dare to try next minute: banned
HeartVine (OCE)
: > But his strat was viable and it worked. You're missing the point. Nubrac's "strat" is not the main point of contention here, his *intention* is, and it's been made clear that his *intention* was to grief other players by using "off-meta" as a platform for such behaviour and a shield to protect himself from the consequences. It doesn't matter if the strat itself works, because it's not about the strat. > That was an instant ban, too. No, it wasn't. It took *three days* for the ban to be issued *after* the game in question. You can see the game itself [here on Nubrac's twitch channel (time-frame 4 hours 58 minutes)](https://www.twitch.tv/videos/436538419?t=04h58m15s) which occurred on the 8th of June (which you can see here on his match history: https://matchhistory.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/#match-details/NA1/3062531855/41863402?tab=overview ), and you can see the moment he received the ban [here also on his twitch channel (time-frame 53 minutes)](https://www.twitch.tv/videos/438067393?t=00h53m13s) which occurred on the 12th of June. > He didn't fill out a report NightBlyue3 did, at the end of the match in question when he had 2 team mates AFK in base from all the bullshit, he used his time to submit a ticket to Support. You can see his perspective of the game on [his twitch channel here (time-frame 32 minutes)](https://www.twitch.tv/videos/436591028?t=00h32m07s). If you refer to the[ screenshot of the discord conversation between NB3 and Zephyr](https://imgur.com/a/dVw6HcF#YEwGir7) that is circulating, it becomes evident that that conversation occurred at 4am (their local time) the morning of June 12th and, as per Nubrac's twitch vids, you can see the ban wasn't applied for approximately 10 hours (around 2pm on June 12th, their local time), also evidence that it wasn't an "instant ban" as you and so many others claim. > You don't have to communicate with your team. You do, though. Communicating is an actual requirement in-game, and barring unusual circumstances (such as largely off-meta strategies that require effective communication to work properly) such communication is possible entirely using pings.
> [{quoted}](name=HeartVine,realm=OCE,application-id=Ntey9fRZ,discussion-id=z9tuNHiV,comment-id=000000000000,timestamp=2019-06-18T06:04:09.025+0000) > > You do, though. Communicating is an actual requirement in-game, and barring unusual circumstances (such as largely off-meta strategies that require effective communication to work properly) such communication is possible entirely using pings. so that means you need to ban streamers that mute all chat and pings and don't ever communicate with their team as they are focusing on commentary and interaction with their stream
: Wait, streamers can get people banned?
"If you want to play off meta, we think that's great! If you want to play off meta only to spite other players and reap the negative reactions and attention from their viewers while they are streaming then we don’t consider that a good faith use of off meta play." so basically it is just because of it being for streamers lmao. there's no way this person would get banned if it was regular folk reporting him for griefing them by playing roaming teemo support.
: More the only one that actually crossed the deletion line. It's all pretty borderline.
Socon (OCE)
: Ironically it was deleted by riot, do what you will with that information.
that's pretty hilarious really. that means you are the only one deemed to be toxic in this conversation LUL
: I can't say I've ever seen a case where it was only a single statement, it's always no tolerance language either multiple times or in conjunction with other chat offences. If a person got into game, was completely normal in chat for the duration and just threw a random 'kys' in at the last minute, I honestly couldn't say exactly how the system would treat that. From what I know of the system I would say it would be definitely be punished (if it's reported), but I couldn't guarantee that a single keyword would prompt escalation given the systems capacity for context and the fact that it specifically *doesn't* use keywords. It also depends on the source of punishment. If an account was manually punished the agent that issued that punishment may have chosen to only give a chat restriction for the reasons HeartVine mentioned, though I am unclear if this hypothetical actually reflects the situation you found yourself in. Your best bet would simply be to submit your report in a support ticket and it can be manually reviewed (though do be aware they won't give you *any* information about another player's account).
ok i reported another player for using the N word with a hard r. this was over 24hrs ago and he is still playing as of 31 minutes ago. the previous player was reported for calling people F*****s 18 days ago. his last game was 9 days ago. so he is either banned now or hasn't played. either way he was still playing for 9 days after the fact. i think that it has now happened on 2 separate occasions in a short time frame shows that either your information on this system is now obsolete or the system is not working properly. if simply not typing anything else the rest of the game let's you get away with it, then the system is pretty flawed and legitimizes all the posts you see perceiving 'they didn't get punished'. in regards to it being manually punished. i thought this kind of thing is always reviewed by the bot. why even have the bot if it's not being used for 100% of the cases. also, if manual review is going to yield different results, well that opens up a huge can of worms in terms of consistency. basically anyone that has ever been banned or suspended by the bot should either be unbanned or have their account standing fixed, if this is the case. edit: ill add that the 2nd guy i reported told me in post game "nothing will happen, the most ive ever had was a 14 day ban".
Socon (OCE)
: Your need for constant insults at the end of making your point proves you're toxic and likely an instigator of toxicity on your team, you'd deserve a chat ban just as much as him.
whats your point? have i ever claimed to be or not to be something? im referring to very specific use of certain language that gets you suspended/banned in my question. again, if you actually read properly, you'll see my question is more to do with riot's system and how it works, rather than calling anyone out for 'toxicity', so your insinuation of hypocrisy here is moot. yet again, i would suggest reading properly. grats on deleting your original comment btw
HeartVine (OCE)
: It's also important to consider that *everyone* can have a slight outburst from time to time, even the best behaved members of a community are prone to that, and I think that's why it makes sense for it to be like that. After all, if it's a *single* statement that is being looked at over a period of several months and/or several dozen games then it would be a bit harsh to escalate to a 14-day ban if the person in question had never been punished before. A chat restriction, sure, but a ban in that kind of scenario would be a bit of an overreaction, just because it could happen to *anyone* as a singular, abnormal act. Like I said though, that's my understanding of the system, and I'm not entirely sure if it does work *exactly* like that. You can feel free to ask via Support, but I'm not sure what they'll be inclined to tell you on that.
sure i would agree with you but i can show you posts from your fellow 'volunteer' that, without a doubt, states that the use of that word will always skip chat restriction and trigger either a 14 day suspension or permanent ban depending on the account's standing. they didn't cleverly hide the word, it was clear. so either something has changed and y'all didn't get the memo or riot's glorious bot isn't working properly. and if it is because the bot isn't working properly, then this gives some legitimacy to all the threads/comments you see of people perceiving 'people not getting punished' that you see. my point being, if riot is going to be harsh, then it better work properly. if it isn't going to work properly, might as well not be quite as harsh.
Socon (OCE)
: I'm just demonstrating your flawed philosophy. Not everyone who you report deserves to be punished. Someone would see what I quoted as being passive-aggressive, which is toxic, and believe its punishable. At one point this kind of passive aggression in high MMR games would easily get you a chat ban. Not so much now days.
it is not my philosophy though. it is literally riot's rules, according to the 'volunteers' statements in the past. again, what the person typed is, without a doubt, punishable unless their rules have changed. i don't see why you are getting so butt hurt about this question i asked to them. all you have demonstrated is your flawed reading comprehension.
HeartVine (OCE)
: As far as I know, Riot's stance hasn't changed, nor has anything changed about how the systems in place deal with this kind of behaviour. A few things to consider, however. Firstly, it's my understanding that a single use of zero-tolerance language wont *necessarily* escalate to a ban, as it doesn't indicate any consistency for the behaviour. It can often escalate when grouped in with other behaviours, but generally "single use" cases are walking the line. Secondly, the system isn't perfect (no system is), so it's possible that it could miss things from time to time, and if you feel like the standard post-game report isn't sufficient, you can feel free to submit a ticket to [Support](https://support.riotgames.com/hc/en-us/requests/new) directly. Lastly, while the IFS notifications are a great feature, there's a couple important details to keep in mind about them. For one thing, they were never designed to notify more than one person, only sending out a notification based on the *most recent* report that contributed to a punishment, and it even seems like the system fails to do that on more than a few occasions. Point being, a lack of the IFS notification doesn't indicate a lack of punishment. One final note; you shouldn't feel like you *have* to report a behaviour just because it's something Riot punishes. A large part of how "punishable behaviour" is determined comes down to how the community *reports* behaviours in-game (beyond their normal functions, reports are essentially used by Riot as feedback on what kinds of behaviours the community doesn't want to see). It's always good to help identify punishable behaviours, but if it's something you don't feel *needs* to be punished you should also consider that in how you choose to utilise the report system.
> [{quoted}](name=HeartVine,realm=OCE,application-id=Ntey9fRZ,discussion-id=hzup1m2Q,comment-id=0001,timestamp=2019-05-18T06:48:05.163+0000) > > > > Firstly, it's my understanding that a single use of zero-tolerance language wont *necessarily* escalate to a ban, as it doesn't indicate any consistency for the behaviour. It can often escalate when grouped in with other behaviours, but generally "single use" cases are walking the line. fair enough but that does kinda contradict what has been stated here in the past and contradicts the term 'zero-tolerance'.
Socon (OCE)
: "maybe if you tried reading properly" Toxic. You deserve to be punished.
lmao you're getting really desperate now. why has this thread triggered you so hard?
Socon (OCE)
: ***
according to riot, use of certain words when they are clearly directed at someone (not just repeating or quoting what someone else said) means you definitely do deserve a punishment. so idk how you twist that into me having a ego trip. it is not my policy or stance. maybe if you tried reading properly you would see im asking if/why things have changed according to their stance.
Rioter Comments
: I refuse to buy Invictus Rakan.
the real issue is the fact that they are charging an extra $10 for an icon. we have got to the point that an icon costs 2/3rds of the price of the skin it is connected to....
: Inactive for 6 Months, Gets Permanently Banned.
still no 2fa btw. multi billion dollar company btw.
: Do you expect your boss to turn off your emails because you can't think a bit about how you respond to them? Reform is encouraged, but at the point of perma-ban the system isn't there to hold your hand, it's there to stop you badly affecting other players. The rest...well you lost me, but it doesn't seem there's any value in responding so, goodnight I suppose.
so if it's more about not affecting other players then the best way is to mute their account rather than ban their account.... (if their behaviour is largely chat based) this person says they spent 10k (probably an exaggeration but still) on it so they are likely to continue playing it even if muted rather than just go onto a new account and be even angrier, now with nothing to lose. you yourself have said the numbers show that someone that is perm banned is very unlikely to change their behaviour long-term on a new account.
: It's only for April Fool's it'll be gone soon. It's not like there's strategic value in all chat, so it's just a fun little joke for a day dedicated to fun little jokes. If it bothers you that much, just disable your all chat for the day.
actually, bming your opponents has a lot of strategic value, especially in a game like this that is full of rage and tilt.
: lol,you should speak it out in Chinese characters. I am not destroying this land by the way.
you are wishing for it to be destroyed as soon as possible. that is literally what you said. you are not the kind of person the australian tax payer should be subsidising. don't be surprised if 1 day you find yourself having to defend your scholarship and visa.
: Do you know there is one degree called PhD? Do you know there is one scholarship called IPRS which is granted from your government? It is really funny that you cover your ears, fear of admitting the fact that you lack of talents to represent native Australians to win either LOL world championship or anything else. You do not care political sovereignty because your government taught you not to. Think the American way, who are Australians to Americans? Puppet, marionette, probably. Your history is just a joke. I do have a lot of fun reading it. No one cares, me, Chinese, British, American, and yourselves. What a joke. You have basically no significance to the world, so no one likes to say about you. To win the respect, you need to show basic skills and talents. Therefore there is no respect for me to do with your LOL players as they have both no talents and no skills. If you can understand Chinese, followed are my final comments: 你们这些高傲却无能,叫嚣却软弱的垃圾,也配和我比较?一群玩家,犯了错承认都不敢承认,一句“我不关心”就当万事大吉?自己被虐杀了还给自己找这种借口,无非就是阿Q精神。我只是把这个事实讲出来而已,你们就高潮了,多么可笑的意识形态。祝你们这些垃圾早日毁掉这片土地。
there is no longer a scholarship called IPRS. so maybe get the name correct if you're going to flex about useless degrees and scholarships. but i guess the main point went over your head? you are spewing such hatred for australia and trying to promote your own country as superior, but you are in this country to get a qualification. that speaks volumes about your own. you talk about IQ but your life seems to be about paper qualifications and how powerful, politically and militarily, one's country is and how good you are in a video game or not. your last words are roughly "destroy this land as soon as possible". sounds like something to report to the federal police and get your ass deported. all this because you got punished for being a racist in a video game lmao. another nod to your so called high IQ. cao ni ma
: > [{quoted}](name=Alpha Tyrone,realm=OCE,application-id=T8eq2lFQ,discussion-id=f0qHEEKg,comment-id=00010000000000000000,timestamp=2019-03-26T14:27:29.859+0000) > > 动态网自由门 天安門 天安门 法輪功 李洪志 Free Tibet 六四天安門事件 The Tiananmen Square protests of 1989 天安門大屠殺 The Tiananmen Square Massacre 反右派鬥爭 The Anti-Rightist Struggle 大躍進政策 The Great Leap Forward 文化大革命 The Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution 人權 Human Rights 民運 Democratization 自由 Freedom 獨立 Independence 多黨制 Multi-party system 台灣 臺灣 Taiwan Formosa 中華民國 Republic of China 西藏 土伯特 唐古特 Tibet 達賴喇嘛 Dalai Lama 法輪功 Falun Dafa 新疆維吾爾自治區 The Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region 諾貝爾和平獎 Nobel Peace Prize 劉暁波 Liu Xiaobo 民主 言論 思想 反共 反革命 抗議 運動 騷亂 暴亂 騷擾 擾亂 抗暴 平反 維權 示威游行 李洪志 法輪大法 大法弟子 強制斷種 強制堕胎 民族淨化 人體實驗 肅清 胡耀邦 趙紫陽 魏京生 王丹 還政於民 和平演變 激流中國 北京之春 大紀元時報 九評論共産黨 獨裁 專制 壓制 統一 監視 鎮壓 迫害 侵略 掠奪 破壞 拷問 屠殺 活摘器官 誘拐 買賣人口 遊進 走私 毒品 賣淫 春畫 賭博 六合彩 天安門 天安门 法輪功 李洪志 Free Tibet 劉曉波动态网自由门 That doesn't work like you think it does.
: Fine cotton, The Fitzgerald Inquiry, Sir Billy Snedden, Christopher Skase, The Lizard of Oz, Alan Bond, Rose vs Gina, Matt Brown's spectacular underwear escapades, Bob Hawke hosted nude meetings, Mal Colston. Do you know your history of scandals? Do you know your ancestors are lieterally a group of criminals and prisoners? Do you know your ancestor worship is acturally pathetic and stupid? Do you know that Australia has basically no political sovereignty at all? US warships stop everywhere in Australia, what a funny and humiliating story.
the fact you dont understand that it's a 'scroll of banishment' and a meme and think it actually has anything to do with talking shit about history says a lot. it's more to do with your censorship laws. how have you not come across it in games by now lmao besides, i am not british so no my ancestors are not the group of criminals and prisoners you are referring to, therefore there is no worship in regards to those ancestors either. who gives a shit about "political sovereignty"? you're either actually playing on oce server from china, or my guess, you are here because daddy sent you here to get a degree. either one says a lot more about you than it does us lmao.
: At least much better than Australians in this game, right?
动态网自由门 天安門 天安门 法輪功 李洪志 Free Tibet 六四天安門事件 The Tiananmen Square protests of 1989 天安門大屠殺 The Tiananmen Square Massacre 反右派鬥爭 The Anti-Rightist Struggle 大躍進政策 The Great Leap Forward 文化大革命 The Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution 人權 Human Rights 民運 Democratization 自由 Freedom 獨立 Independence 多黨制 Multi-party system 台灣 臺灣 Taiwan Formosa 中華民國 Republic of China 西藏 土伯特 唐古特 Tibet 達賴喇嘛 Dalai Lama 法輪功 Falun Dafa 新疆維吾爾自治區 The Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region 諾貝爾和平獎 Nobel Peace Prize 劉暁波 Liu Xiaobo 民主 言論 思想 反共 反革命 抗議 運動 騷亂 暴亂 騷擾 擾亂 抗暴 平反 維權 示威游行 李洪志 法輪大法 大法弟子 強制斷種 強制堕胎 民族淨化 人體實驗 肅清 胡耀邦 趙紫陽 魏京生 王丹 還政於民 和平演變 激流中國 北京之春 大紀元時報 九評論共産黨 獨裁 專制 壓制 統一 監視 鎮壓 迫害 侵略 掠奪 破壞 拷問 屠殺 活摘器官 誘拐 買賣人口 遊進 走私 毒品 賣淫 春畫 賭博 六合彩 天安門 天安门 法輪功 李洪志 Free Tibet 劉曉波动态网自由门
: What is your judgement then? Who are the feeders? What is your "bright future" then? You get high when I speak out the truth? If you Australian LOL players are good, then why do you have no championship? You cannot even get into group stage in world final. If these words are exactly the ones that get me suspended, I will never mention any related to those. If not, point it out. Funny logic.
: No tolerance language (hate speech like racism, sexism, ableism and things like suicide encouragement) will net you an instant 14-day ban. Inappropriate names typically will only result in a forced name change, however, hate speech names can also apply the instant 14-day, usually with respect to past offences and names. Any offences after a 14-day will result in permanent suspension.
are terms such as 'cracker", 'gringo', 'wog', 'greaseball', 'goy', 'shegetz' etc on auto ban list?
Streeserz (OCE)
: > [{quoted}](name=Lord Sesshomaru,realm=OCE,application-id=Ntey9fRZ,discussion-id=lBE1WTHb,comment-id=0001,timestamp=2019-03-17T02:39:31.781+0000) > > Name one, just one, sport on the international stage, where quitting halfway through a game is an acceptable thing. You play a game to the bitter end, whatever the outcome. Out of respect for your team, the enemy team, and yourself. I agree with this. Although the game is strategy based, one should not disrespect the sporting element of it. By adding a surrender option, it has lead players to use this as a strategy in itself, and devalued the respect for player's time invested in the game.
you ever watch snooker? they concede frames all the time even though they can theoretically still win it if they try and get x amount of snookers. but it isn't worth it most of the time. it's the same concept.... in a game like league, there comes a point where it is literally not worth investing the time and effort for such a low chance of success. ranked is a grind just like a snooker match. in our case 1 match is like a frame. the exceptions may be a promo match that is going to decide whether you go up a division, just like a match deciding frame in snooker (although in professional snooker even in this situation players concede the match quite often). besides, don't act like in professional sports, a team doesn't ever give up. sure they don't just walk off and forfeit, but that's because sport is a bit different to the concept of being able to just queue up for the next match with randoms immediately after. look at NBA for example. if a team is really far behind, what do they do? they sit their top, ie most valuable/highest paid players, put on their rookies and reserves and see the game out. they've accepted the loss and have given up (then the winning team usually does the same). it's not worth risking injuries and using the energy for such a low chance of a win. of course, in the playoffs, especially if it is a do or die match in the series, they will still try. but the regular season is a grind.
: Yea, snowballing is a thing. It plays the same role as endurance in a real game. Players don't get faster/stronger/taller as they score, like you say. But as the game progresses, they do get tired and slower and sloppier, and those people who train for those times, get less slow and less sloppy than the other players. So the same thing happens just in reverse. Also league has a power ceiling. With a few exceptions like Veigar. No champ gets stronger than a 6 item build. So even if the enemy is snowballing, you can ALWAYS catch up in the end. It doesnt matter how much of a gold/xp/item lead they have. You can always catch up. The trick is just to know how to stall out the game long enough to reach that ceiling. Funnily enough, a thing you don't get to practice if you surrender. If your argument is about people who AFK, then just make the surrender vote unanimous. AFKers get kicked from the vote anyway, so it shouldn't be a problem. But I've still won tons of games that were 4v5 from the beginning. > if you were to give 100% in every single game that is incredibly 1 sided against you Except that it's not an actual grind. It's not an RNG chest at the end of some raid. Sheer number of games won't necessarily advance you. Play 2 games of ranked a day, give them your all. Do that every day of the year, play normals to chill and practice. You'll be much better off than throwing hours and hours of average playing into ranked. Its a quality over quantity thing. In my experience, you advance more by playing 10 and winning 8, than by playing 40 and winning 20.
sure endurance can be a thing depending on the sport, but that does not apply to a league match (i guess unless the match goes for over 1hr or something) so it's not really a comparison. besides, team sports generally have a thing called substitutions, but this convo isnt about that. remember, we're talking about seriously 1 sided games (or at least i was) so if you catch up that much in that kind of a match, it's because the enemy team allowed you to more so than anything you did. this is entirely possible to happen, especially in low elo for sure. not as likely in higher elos. either way, i feel it's generally not worth it betting on that outcome. but it is a grind. not sure how anyone can argue that a ranked season isn't a grind. the amount of games you play doesn't change that. even you said games are a coin flip. playing less games isn't necessarily going to mean you will win more. you're still grinding your way to whatever rank you want (assuming your goal is to climb) by playing 2 games a day, especially as long as the system is entirely about win/loss ratio when playing with randoms. in terms of afk. i just got done playing a game where a duo d/c pretty early in the match. im assuming they live in the same house. it was a 3v5. we tried because it was a norm. but as you can imagine we still lost. why should 1 person be able to hold the other 2 hostage in a situation like this? like you said ranked isn't about fun. you even talk about trying to play higher quality games rather than quantity. so how can you want it to be unanimous in a situation like that?
: There definitely shouldn't be a surrender vote in ranked. Quite simply, you go to ranked to win. If you're not prepared to try your hardest to win, even in a bad situation, then you don't really deserve to climb. You don't see the All Blacks just walk off the field at half time and go down to the pub because the game is looking like they won't win. The whole argument of "Oh well its so I can get into another game and not waste my time in a game thats already lost." is just an excuse for people not willing to try. I have won countless games where it looked absolutely impossible to win. Theres always a chance _(hey, the enemy might even disconnect for some reason, it's all happened before)_. Playing into a losing game isn't fun, if you don't want to do that, fair enough, the game is supposed to be fun, if you're not having it, stop playing, I won't fault you for that. But, if you want fun, play normals. If you want to do the absolute best you can to win, then play ranked, but don't give up as soon as shit hits the fan. Quite frankly, I don't give a f*ck what dodging or surrendering strategy the challengers/pros do. Name one, just one, sport on the international stage, where quitting halfway through a game is an acceptable thing. You play a game to the bitter end, whatever the outcome. Out of respect for your team, the enemy team, and yourself. If league wants to be a game where dodging and surrendering is an acceptable strategy to climb the ranks. Then maybe it doesn't deserve to be on the world stage. Think about that next time you press that button. My friend and I almost never surrender. And because theres two of us, no one else can pass the vote. And we win SO MANY games that are 'certain' losses. Because we don't quit when everyone else does, we have so much experience playing uber defensively, we know _**exactly**_ how our champs feel when behind and under-farmed/fed, we know how they will perform, and when they will spike again. And we manage to pull games back quite often. If I actually played ranked, then we would probably win a solid 30/40% more 'lost' games than most people we play with. You always see that one Zed that is 0/9 and leaps into battle in exactly the same way as if he was 9/0. Thats what you become when you don't play out your losses. You get really really good at playing well when you're winning. But don't know **** about how to play when you're behind. Don't be that guy. _______________ To look at it from the other side. Yes I can appreciate that statistically in terms of pure numbers, I can see why it's appealing to cut losses and begin the next game. League is a coin flip, most of the time its a 50/50 chance wether you win or lose. If you see the coin about to land on tails, catch it and throw it again right? No need to suffer through the process of having it land and everyone look at your defeat. It makes sense, you can fit more games into less time, more chances to win _(although people don't realise that you have equal chance of losing again as well, in which case you have crammed in more losing games by surrendering)_. But you really have to decide what you play ranked for. Do you play ranked to see the best you yourself can achieve, and be proud of? Or do you just want a shiner border than everyone else? It doesn't matter how. Another of my friends was boosted, he has a far shiner border than the rest of us, but you know what. It doesn't mean anything. Because we know he didn't get it, and he knows he didn't get it. It's not an accurate representation of his skill. But he does have a nice shiny profile and a nice flash skin to keep, no denying that. A skin that I will never have now, and he always will. And it doesn't matter how he got those things, he has them and I don't. **So if it's purely the outcome that you want, then by all means do whatever you can to achieve that. Dodge and surrender and play only the most broken and in meta champs. But don't you dare say that it was you and your hard work that achieved that reward. You exploited the system and thats how you got your edge.** If you quit when things look rough, you're not playing to the best of your ability, whatever rank you achieve, isn't the rank you deserve. Maybe you deserve higher, maybe lower. You may have the rewards, but can you look at them and think _"I sweat and bled for this!"_ I you can, good for you. But don't ruin other people's games just because you can't be bothered trying when things get difficult. This is all just my opinion of course, But I don't believe in the mindset of: _"Oh I'm losing, this one doesn't count! The next one counts!"_ If you don't accept and play out your losses, then your wins are meaningless too.
the difference is, league has a thing called snowballing. real life sports generally don't. enemy players on the field/court don't get stronger/faster/taller as they score. you 100% can still win the next quarter or half or set even though you lost the first. doesn't really work like that in league. as you suggested, there comes a point when there is nothing you can do. it really is up to the team that is way ahead to lose it (by dcing, doing really dumb shit etc). also you say ranked is to win more so than to have fun. that is true, but what is 'winning'? it's more than a single game, it is a grind. as you said, it's generally a coin flip. if you were to give 100% in every single game that is incredibly 1 sided against you, you would get exhausted and simply also run out of time to actually grind. flip side is also true. when you're way ahead, and it is just a matter of time before you win, you appreciate the surrender as it saves you time. also, you are not going to gain and learn much by playing those extra 5 minutes in a game that is 1 sided in your favour. as long as xp, gold, items and, therefore, snowballing are a thing, then FF should always be a thing. not to mention things like people afking etc.
FatSmoke (OCE)
: RP prices are based off the NA prices. Since the aus dollar is getting weaker, we gotta pay more to compensate.
ok sure, but will they do the reverse?
Todgins (OCE)
: They announced it a few weeks back, for nearly all regions. (Not that I agree with it, it's digital currency with no value outside the game, but hey it's their game) https://oce.leagueoflegends.com/en/news/store/store-update/rp-update-cost-and-refunds
Rioter Comments
Show more

FPB Atreus

Level 127 (OCE)
Lifetime Upvotes
Create a Discussion