Archive

Posts Tagged ‘harlequin jinx’

 

May 25 News Banner

Note: No TL:DR today (sorry), I’m wrapping up a fun article that would be the start of a series on this website. Stay tuned!

 

Red Post Collection

Single Posts

Fan Art Showcase: Vega Colors

 

Recent News

 

Riotchun-Patch-4-point-9-Forecast-Banner

PBE-23-May-Banner 

Morello-Upcoming-Soraka-Rework-Banner 

 

 

Lyte WookieeCookie Chat Restriction Bans Banner


 

The conversation regarding the recent chat restriction wave continues!

 

Relevant Red Post Collections

 

Ymir-Chat-Restriction-Banner

Lyte-Chat-Restrictions-Banner

 

 

Q: Without numbers backing up your findings, how can we believe player behavior is an actual study?

 

Lyte Button Rioter Lyte: You know, it’s a bit unfair to call out researchers at Riot in this fashion. Most players haven’t worked with data of this scale, nor the problems that come up when dealing with online player behavior; in fact, most scientists haven’t worked in this space before either.

For example, you talk about sample sizes, p-values and hypotheses. You really think revealing those values are the problem and if we did, we’d convince players that we conduct strong, robust science here? Do you understand why calculating p-values might not be the best approach when your sample sizes are over 1 trillion? You get a “significant” effect with almost every pair-wise comparison. That’s meaningless. So how do you analyze an experiment with millions of interactions? What kinds of multiple-comparison techniques are appropriate? Do we need to develop new ones because this scale of data has never been analyzed before? Are effect sizes of 1% meaningful when you have 1 billion samples of data? Maybe, maybe not. If you knew that 1% of games were worse because of a feature or experiment, and look at the millions of games played every hour… that’s a pretty big practical impact isn’t it? These are tough questions, and there are rarely easy or straight-forward answers. The researchers at Riot are some of the best in their respective fields whether it’s neuroscience, aeronautics, bioinformatics or economics. They’ve published papers in Nature and the top journals in their fields. They’ve worked with former Nobel Prize laureates and their proteges. We still spend some time reaching out to top institutions like Harvard, MIT, Stanford, York, USC and more to collaborate on studies, and review papers for journals.

We ask researchers at Riot to have even higher standards than academia. Why? Because we value players and their experiences. In academics, some scientists are OK with 95% confidence intervals or 99% confidence intervals–do you laugh at their suggestion that they are 99% confident about a result? Yet here, whether we choose 95% or 99% confidence intervals is a big deal. One mistake here could impact a player forever if they lose Ranked Rewards or lose their accounts and we treat that responsibility extremely seriously. There was one time where an analysis could have provided a negative experience for 6 players. Just 6. However, 6 is 6 too much and we went back into the analysis to clean it up. Do we make mistakes? Of course. Mistakes are always going to happen. But, to give researchers at Riot **** for not being “scientists” and not strongly adhering to scientific standards is bull****.

Is the problem really the science? Or, is it that some players are angry they got a punishment, and maybe deserved it? A negative player can disagree with what we believe is “OK” in League of Legends, but it’s never been just Riot’s opinion of what’s OK or not OK–it’s been the community’s decision and we back the community 100%. A negative player can disagree with the community’s subjective perspective on what’s OK or not OK, but that doesn’t make the science bad. If the problem is actually the science, let’s talk about it.

 

 

Q: Isn’t the issue here that players don’t understand why they’re being Chat restricted?

 

Lyte Button Rioter Lyte: Completely agree that players currently are not getting the “Reform Card” equivalent to see what exactly they said to earn a restrictive chat game; however, this is because we’re currently running temporary experiments versus launching a permanent feature.

In the old days, we used game bans often. We had data before Reform Cards, after Reform Cards, before Justice Reviews, after Justice Reviews, etc. However, we didn’t really have as much data about restricted chat bans alone. How effective are restrictive chat bans without a reform card of sorts? How effective are they for handling issues that may not be related to communication? These are the types of questions that (hopefully!) are answered in these experiments so we know what features to incorporate into the new Tribunal.

 

 

Q: Why aren’t you publishing your team’s studies as proof the numbers are accurate?

 

Lyte Button Rioter Lyte: Do players want us to focus on publishing papers, or making new features? If the resource of time wasn’t a concern, then of course we’d just do everything. To add to this, we could publish papers and we’d still have to deal with skeptics–scientists deal with that every single day.

We’ve already revealed more data and methodology than most studios–check out GDC talks and talks at MIT, Harvard, York, USC, etc. Players have long been able to download and run their own analyses on Tribunal data too (when it was up)–not surprisingly, they often had the same results we talked about regarding its accuracy.

 

 

Q: Is it true some players deserving punishment don’t currently have Tribunal cases?

 

Lyte Button Rioter Lyte: I could probably write entire blogs about this topic, and maybe we’ll touch on some in the future. Basically, there were multiple factors related to what you were seeing:

1) The Tribunal was conservative in many cases, so people who may have deserved punishment earlier were often playing games far longer than they should until Tribunal gathered more evidence.

2) The Tribunal didn’t benefit from a lot of the research we developed while we were building Team Builder. One consequence is that a Tribunal case takes a lot longer to ‘close’ then it should. For example, let’s say a Tribunal case typically requires 1000 votes. We now have a lot of data that we can look at patterns of votes to determine when a case should be closed early with really high accuracy, so we could close cases in as little as 20 votes and expedite the penalty (or reward, in the future).

3) The Tribunal didn’t upgrade its tech overtime and wasn’t very scale-able. This is why players often saw the system go up and down, trying to build cases and close cases as fast as it could but the scale League operates at is just unprecedented.

 

 

Q: Why was I banned after being Chat Restricted?

 

WookieeCookie Button Rioter WookieeCookie: On Friday we decided to review the data we collected after placing chat restrictions on accounts with high levels of recorded toxicity. We were pretty pleased with the results, a large majority of players actually showed signs of less harassment and toxic behavior. Unfortunately a small % of accounts actually increased in recorded levels of poor behavior. For these players we decided to place a 3 Day Suspension on their account.

As a lot of you are probably aware, the Tribunal is currently in extended recess while the Player Behavior and Justice dev team works on some upgraded features for it. During this time we’re not going to sit idle while some players try to exploit others in game. Even without the Tribunal we have numerous tools at our disposal to find and take action on high offenders.

In this particular case, we sent e-mails to those affected. I am bee bee sea you might want to check that the e-mail on your account is up to date, as this is the primary way you’ll receive messages on the status of your account from us.

To help you out here, I decided to take another look at your account. In your case, during the period of chat restrictions your account continued to receive reports in over 40% of the games you played.


During your chat restricted period you had a habit of passively aggresively treating your team mates poorly. Either by feeding the enemy, rambo’ing on your own, or just waiting around not contributing until your team surrendered. Even with chat restrictions you did manage to say quite a few terrible things that I wouldn’t repeat here. But I’m pretty sure that Lee Sin jungle in one of your games didn’t appreciate being called that terrible racial slur just because he wasn’t performing well.

Everyone has bad games, it’s how we deal with them that we excel and grow as players at League of Legends. Calling someone names doesn’t help them get better and it certainly doesn’t help you win.

 

 

Q: Is the system completely automated now?

 

WookieeCookie Button Rioter WookieeCookie: The system is not automated at all currently. This wave of bans, and the wave of chat restrictions prior have been the result of close collaboration between a number of teams including Player Behavior and Justice, Business Intelligence, Player Support, and our regional offices. Human interaction has been a core component of each step the entire way through.

 

 

Conclusory findings for Chat Restricted players

 

WookieeCookie Button Rioter WookieeCookie: The observed behavior of those which were banned was that they used what little chat they had in game to harass and berate others. In other cases they decided to feed or play against their own team in order to “prove a point”.

But what I find most interesting is that of the players we chat restricted last week (and there were a lot!)we only had to place manual suspensions on less than .05% of the players. By and large, the vast majority of players had no problem adjusting their behavior in game with limited chat.

 

 

Single Posts banner

 

 

Q: Is Banner of Command viable?

 

Riot Peaches Button Rioter Riot Peaches: Banner of Command is extremely powerful for supports, imo. I like to use it to promote top or bottom and then tell the entire team to group in the opposite lane. It is almost guaranteed to force a lane to push to tower, which will probably cause a 4v5 or result in a free objective. You also get free gold for every enemy minion slain by the promoted minion. The stats are awesome on caster supports, especially on Zyra since it buffs her plants, and it’s cheap enough to build after core (which I consider Frost Queens (2200), Sightstone(800), Tabi(1000), and Crucible(1600) — so BoC is done at 8k give or take consumable cost, which is about 25 mins in on an average game). However, if I’m trying to rush it I’ll convert my Codex into BoC before finishing Frost Queen’s which gives me Banner 1335 gold earlier. 

I build it if bot has a huge early lead and I want to prevent their other laners from grouping to shut us down in teamfights, or if we are losing badly and desperately need some lane presence. If it’s an evenish game I’d probably just build more defense (locket/randuins). 

I don’t see it anywhere in your recent history so I suggest building it next time you’re a caster support. Don’t knock it til you try it!

 

 

Mystery Gifting re-enabled on EUW

 

Riot tmx Button Rioter Riot tmx: We have verified that the migration was completed and Mystery Gifting was re-enabled. Have fun.

 

 

 


Q: Why is the jungle so hard to balance properly?

 

Phreak Button Rioter Phreak: The goal has always been to have a mix. In the first few seasons, it was basically impossible to carry from the jungle because there wasn’t any gold in it. We upped the gold, a little too much, and the junglers who carried became massively overpowered, so we have to tune it back down. We’re happy that guys like Wukong and Kha’Zix can jungle now, but we want Nautilus to be able to be picked, too.

As an example, saying, “Yeah, you know we’d really like Rumble to get played” then giving him 5,000 damage on Flamespitter, nerfing it next patch, and players going, “WTF I thought you wanted to buff Rumble, Riot!” And the answer is yes we do, but we don’t want it broken in the other direction.

 


Follow-up Q: Why wasn’t the jungle fixed during testing and instead has to see nerfs on live servers?


Phreak Button Rioter Phreak: Quite simply, it’s because this game is complex.

We do everything we can in internal testing, but a few dozen bros compared to millions of players playing millions of games is just massively different.

Why didn’t people realize Twitch was really good all along? Why did it take four months for mid lane Lulu to catch on? Why did people think Zed was underpowered on release?

People don’t figure stuff out right away. Us included.

 

 

Q: Will Nidalee’s Javelin toss be completely nerfed?

 

RiotRepertoir Button Rioter RiotRepertoir: It will probably just see straight up nerfs. It’s important to the spell’s identity that the spell varies quite meaningfully in damage from point blank to max range, so the more that is true, the better players will feel about those long range snipes. The problem with increasing the base damage on Javelin Toss is that it deals immense damage at level 9 when maxed first.

 

 

Fan Art Showcase Vega Colors Banner

 

Some artists are just too incredible to skip. I’d like to revive the fan art showcases in news posts and this is an awesome opportunity for it.

 

Like the Series? Check out some of the previous showcases:

 

Fan Art Enijoi

Fan Art Erina Topic

Fan Art School Designers

 

 

Artist: VegaColors

 

Dog Walker Thresh

Dog Walker Thresh

Soul Reaver Aatrox

Soul Reaver Aatrox

Harlequin Jinx

Harlequin Jinx

Rogue Quinn

Rogue Quinn

 

 

If you have any questions, feel free to ask me at @NoL_Chefo.