: quick boards question for staff
As Djinn said, it's just the way the programming works. I personally don't mind it because I use it as a gauge for my number of posts. Take the number of upvotes, take away like a third, and you've got a pretty solid number. Like I've got 57.5K upvotes. If I take away a third of those, maybe a bit more just to be safe, I've probably made about 30K - 35K posts on the Boards in total.
: > [{quoted}](name=Jikker,realm=NA,application-id=6heBIhQc,discussion-id=k2GE8PY0,comment-id=00050000,timestamp=2019-04-15T18:15:40.367+0000) > > Please do not attempt to mislead the community. The images you posted had names in them which is no different than if you typed their names out. Your responses to the thread also consisted only of additional images to provide evidence of a player trolling. > > I do believe that the reason for the removal was maybe not as clear as it could have been, so I will clarify a bit more. While Name & Shame was part of it due to the names in the images and description of the player in the thread, there were also violations to the [**Player Behavior Rules & Guidelines**](https://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/player-behavior-moderation/OjEUxbwH-player-behavior-rules-update). We've recently updated the guidelines for Player Behavior and are moving the sub-board into a direction of feedback and reform regarding in game violations. One of those guidelines states: > > Your thread read more as a rant about trolls taking over games given you were venting without much positive feedback or suggestions on fixes. It would more appropriately belong in the [**Rant**](https://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/rant) sub-board. However, due to the fact that you posted an image showcasing a player you accused of trolling, said you would later post a video, and posted two times in your thread additional images of the trolling Teemo with names attached, I can understand that the mod in question would definitely see this more as a vent or name and shame against this Teemo player rather than actual feedback. > > I hope this helps clarify your removal for you. If you have additional concerns, I would recommend taking them to your own thread or contacting us on the Discord so we don't hijack this thread. Never said I would post a video here, just said ‘YouTube was the answer’ Additionally this protection of trolls and demonization of me for talking about a real problem that is not being efficiently dealt with is absurd. Remove the picture sure, the rest is no less than what I often see others say about trolls and yet their entire content is not removed in the way mine was. I mislead no one The issue is the draconian type rules here. I can’t be honest with anyone without someone getting offended
Please do not necro a thread (which is a violation of the rules) to respond to something I already said was hijacking another person's thread (which is not generally permitted on the Boards). If you have concerns or wish to discuss your removal, please create your own thread or go to the Discord.
: > [{quoted}](name=Jikker,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=pAfaoURe,comment-id=0009,timestamp=2019-04-26T03:01:19.279+0000) > > Ezreal should never have been a Star Guardian. Mostly he should _**never**_ have gotten a PJ party skin either. I hate both with an absolute burning passion. Riot lost a bunch of sales -- I was collecting his skins before, but once they made those, I stopped bothering. I love the pajama guardian line, I think you're crazy :P Every Sailor Scout knock off needs their Tuxedo Mask.
> [{quoted}](name=CamedInYourBoi,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=pAfaoURe,comment-id=00090000,timestamp=2019-04-26T03:02:37.432+0000) > > I love the pajama guardian line, I think you're crazy :P Every Sailor Scout knock off needs their Tuxedo Mask. Since when does a young man need to be in a onesie pj set at a slumber party filled with girls basically cause he has a crush on one of them? It just screams major creeper/stalker to me. I hate the whole "girly" and "weeby" mentality they've given to him. I want a serious skin, not a bunch of weeb girl skins.
RR8Rosie (NA)
: On your main champion which is your least favourite skin?
Ezreal should never have been a Star Guardian. Mostly he should _**never**_ have gotten a PJ party skin either. I hate both with an absolute burning passion. Riot lost a bunch of sales -- I was collecting his skins before, but once they made those, I stopped bothering.
: > [{quoted}](name=Jikker,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=VAvpyEnX,comment-id=00070000,timestamp=2019-04-25T19:55:22.712+0000) > > I don't see how you could compare Ez to Lulu or Neeko. He's cocky and humourous, but not in a fun bubbly hyper way, more in a....normal but slightly dark(?) way. It's hard to describe but his humour is very different from the humour of the others mentioned. > > I think the idea is, where's our male Lulu? A crazy, fun, hyper, giggly dude. I can describe him. Narcisist, self-centered, cocky, petulant, arrogant, privileged, prissy. Bubbly often has child-like innocence, bright eyed natures, a sense of wonder and curiosity, maybe even a touch of stupidity because they don't understand how the world works yet. Basically SpongeBob Squarepants, Timmy Turner, Billy Ed, Edd, and Eddy, Finn (Adventure Time), Steven (Steven Universe), Dexter (Dexter's Lab), and so forth.
> [{quoted}](name=Oleandervine,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=VAvpyEnX,comment-id=000700000000,timestamp=2019-04-25T20:11:27.929+0000) > > I can describe him. Narcisist, self-centered, cocky, petulant, arrogant, privileged, prissy. You got a hate for Ez? Besides, most of his tendencies can be completely explained by his upbringing, but I won't get into that debate again. > Bubbly often has child-like innocence, bright eyed natures, a sense of wonder and curiosity, maybe even a touch of stupidity because they don't understand how the world works yet. Basically SpongeBob Squarepants, Timmy Turner, Billy Ed, Edd, and Eddy, Finn (Adventure Time), Steven (Steven Universe), Dexter (Dexter's Lab), and so forth. Exactly and that's not how Ez is at all. He's not what we're looking for.
: Arguably {{champion:81}} fits the role even if he's not as bubbly as Lux or Zoe. He's pretty much the silly, cocky, anime protagonist and he's very humor centric. Also as pointed out, literally all the yordles. If we're looking for a child mage that's male that could be a good role, but someone seeking maturity/enlightment/growth is often how these characters are played. Anyone who's played a Fire Emblem game knows how high value the Villager class and the weak kid Mages are late game. They have the best stat growth and I think if you focused on someone who's weak and is excited to grow could be an angle to tackle this. Though that fantasy isn't necessarily bubbly in itself, but it has room for that.
> [{quoted}](name=TwitchInMyPants,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=VAvpyEnX,comment-id=0007,timestamp=2019-04-25T18:40:00.510+0000) > > Arguably {{champion:81}} fits the role even if he's not as bubbly as Lux or Zoe. He's pretty much the silly, cocky, anime protagonist and he's very humor centric. I don't see how you could compare Ez to Lulu or Neeko. He's cocky and humourous, but not in a fun bubbly hyper way, more in a....normal but slightly dark(?) way. It's hard to describe but his humour is very different from the humour of the others mentioned. I think the idea is, where's our male Lulu? A crazy, fun, hyper, giggly dude.
: Why become a mod if you dont play the game?
I play bots with my husband on a regular basis. As we both use League to reduce stress, we tend to go for the more relaxed atmosphere of bots. It's a nice evening experience for us and we're having fun with League of Legends so what does it matter what we play? I've played Ranked and gotten Gold before. I've had my fun with PvP. For now, I prefer not to get involved in PvP. We both are avid Esport watchers though and regularly follow both EU and NA. Even if we aren't playing competitively ourselves, we like to keep up with updates and stats because of how they affect the pro scene and compare that to feedback and statistics we see regarding Ranked. Not to mention I've also really enjoyed the recent lore releases and am coming to appreciate some of the things Riot is doing with the lore. You don't need to play Ranked to enjoy and want to discuss that aspect. I've actually found myself wandering over to SA&S a bit more often because of this. Ultimately, I have posted on these ~~Boards~~ Forums (I'm old school) for well over 6 years and there are many friends and community members I know here. I like hanging around in GD and being a part of the community still. There are plenty of people that post and don't play PvP or Ranked and I don't see why Mods have to be any different. I'm a community member that decided to give back by modding and communicating with Riot about the community. Other than that I'm no different than any other Boards member that plays bots only, ARAM only, quit 4 years ago, and so on and so forth. tl;dr - I love League and I love GD. I just don't play PvP right now.
: Stealth Rocks.
It's obnoxious. I don't even play competitive and I know it's an obnoxious ability.
: Any guesses on the unknown vs. event this year?
Leona v. Diana or Kha'Zix v. Rengar Please, these are so obvious they need to happen!
Balathar (EUNE)
: I had a certain moderator ban me for only mentioning the name of a song that he thinks is offensive. It was "Serbia Strong".
> [{quoted}](name=Balathar,realm=EUNE,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=FXr6Gg5E,comment-id=0003,timestamp=2019-04-24T20:33:33.542+0000) > > I had a certain moderator ban me for only mentioning the name of a song that he thinks is offensive. > > It was "Serbia Strong". I have checked your violation history and find no evidence of a removal for a song name or anything that contained the name of that song. If this occurred on a different account, I will be glad to look into it for you.
: how are club tags like these legal?
Report offensive club tags to Riot via a support [**ticket**](https://support.riotgames.com/hc/en-us/requests/new). It is surprising when something like that makes it through, but I guess you can never account for every variation people may come up with.
XcomegaX (NA)
: Low Quality Content
Alright. I'm packing to leave for my seasonal position over the summer so that's always a bit tedious. Nice weather though and the bill to fix my car came back much cheaper than I expected so that's a nice little perk =) How you doing?
JuiceBoxP (EUNE)
: > [{quoted}](name=Jikker,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=NzL1I9x9,comment-id=00010000,timestamp=2019-04-24T13:59:05.094+0000) > > I have several times. It does happen which is unfortunate because, even if Rioters should have a bit of a thicker skin, they still deserve respect and civility same as any other poster on the Boards. > > I personally believe that there needs to be changes in communication on both ends -- players need to be more constructive in their communications and not be a brick wall that refuses to communicate on the issues based on Riot's feedback (i.e. "I don't care the reasons, you need to delete Zoe") and Rioters need to communicate a bit more with the salty people and respond in ways that do make us feel like we're being listened to, even if the answer is "no". Well, as of right now there literal no communication between riot and the boards. Thinking to myself, like what the hell am i even doing here anymore
> [{quoted}](name=JuiceBoxP,realm=EUNE,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=NzL1I9x9,comment-id=000100000000,timestamp=2019-04-24T14:22:15.730+0000) > > Well, as of right now there literal no communication between riot and the boards. > Thinking to myself, like what the hell am i even doing here anymore We have some Rioters that are showing up, just depends on the section (I see some decent Rioter interactions in Story, Art, & Sound for example and Bazerka has been frequenting GD). More constructive comments and civil discussions will probably draw more eventually.
: > [{quoted}](name=Jikker,realm=NA,application-id=6heBIhQc,discussion-id=ur1Oi4rb,comment-id=000e0000000000000000,timestamp=2019-04-24T14:17:49.399+0000) > > Yes we have, but just like you didn't spend 24 hours at the charity shop, we can't spend every waking moment moderating the Boards. > > Volunteering is giving of your time to perform a task without compensation. I work with a lot of volunteers in my actual job and if there's one things that's true, it's that volunteers only have to give of the time they want to give. When I volunteered at a state park many years back, I signed up to work in the Nature Center for several days. I blocked out that 3 hours of time and made sure I had no other commitments so I could take the time. However, even if someone was coming into the center, when the 3 hours I had committed were done and I had to leave for other responsibilities, I said "Sorry" and closed up. No one went and complained that "The volunteer had no excuse to leave and should've let us in! It's their job!" That would be silly. The people knew that I was a volunteer and had completed the time I had been able to give that day and had another life and job to get back to. > > The Boards are a unique place to volunteer because, in many ways, we're expected to be on duty 24 hours a day and any time I come on the Boards, I'm expected to moderate. It's not like driving to a shop, park, or zoo. We have access to the internet practically all day and so it becomes a thought that we have to be active all day. I can't do that and the days I do, I fall behind in my work. I have other real life responsibilities and work that take priority as do the rest of the volunteer team. This isn't my job, or any of our jobs; that's what we mean when we say we're not paid employees or Rioters. We are gladly taking of our _**free time**_ to moderate and keep these Boards clean. However, we're not working 8 hour days at a time so we may not be able to hop on everything immediately. In the end, we are just volunteers with only so much time to give. I am not going 2 read all of this essay but what it comes down too In my opition mods on board shouldnt be volunteer as its a full time job. It should be payed staff who work full time. Use still have to go by gidlies give and mod posts. If other mods post on a thread and they havnt deleted/ closed it then use all need to be on same page
Riot has decided to go with a volunteer program of community members to better address the Board Community rather than being nameless mods that shadow remove things. That "essay" explains how the volunteer team works and why sometimes the community expectations of a volunteer team are not plausible.
: > [{quoted}](name=AngusBoomPants,realm=NA,application-id=6heBIhQc,discussion-id=ur1Oi4rb,comment-id=000e00000000,timestamp=2019-04-24T06:16:57.313+0000) > > No that's a pretty valid excuse. When someone at Red Lobster asks me why I didn't bring their drink, the reply, "I'm not employed here" is a pretty good excuse. they maybe unpaid volunteers but they have decide to mod the boards. I have volunteers a charity shops before (wasnt offical staff) but I still had to keep to there standards
Yes we have, but just like you didn't spend 24 hours at the charity shop, we can't spend every waking moment moderating the Boards. Volunteering is giving of your time to perform a task without compensation. I work with a lot of volunteers in my actual job and if there's one things that's true, it's that volunteers only have to give of the time they want to give. When I volunteered at a state park many years back, I signed up to work in the Nature Center for several days. I blocked out that 3 hours of time and made sure I had no other commitments so I could take the time. However, even if someone was coming into the center, when the 3 hours I had committed were done and I had to leave for other responsibilities, I said "Sorry" and closed up. No one went and complained that "The volunteer had no excuse to leave and should've let us in! It's their job!" That would be silly. The people knew that I was a volunteer and had completed the time I had been able to give that day and had another life and job to get back to. The Boards are a unique place to volunteer because, in many ways, we're expected to be on duty 24 hours a day and any time I come on the Boards, I'm expected to moderate. It's not like driving to a shop, park, or zoo. We have access to the internet practically all day and so it becomes a thought that we have to be active all day. I can't do that and the days I do, I fall behind in my work. I have other real life responsibilities and work that take priority as do the rest of the volunteer team. This isn't my job, or any of our jobs; that's what we mean when we say we're not paid employees or Rioters. We are gladly taking of our _**free time**_ to moderate and keep these Boards clean. However, we're not working 8 hour days at a time so we may not be able to hop on everything immediately. In the end, we are just volunteers with only so much time to give.
JuiceBoxP (EUNE)
: I had literally never seen anyone talk shit directly to a rioter when they comment on the boards. On the contrary, infact, people are always delighted when rioters post. Yes, there are many anger threads cursing rioters. Yes, there are many stupid, immature kids on the boards. But i think you're a bit exaggerating. We could use more rioter comments on the boards.
> [{quoted}](name=JuiceBoxP,realm=EUNE,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=NzL1I9x9,comment-id=0001,timestamp=2019-04-23T21:26:39.924+0000) > > I had literally never seen anyone talk shit directly to a rioter when they comment on the boards. I have several times. It does happen which is unfortunate because, even if Rioters should have a bit of a thicker skin, they still deserve respect and civility same as any other poster on the Boards. I personally believe that there needs to be changes in communication on both ends -- players need to be more constructive in their communications and not be a brick wall that refuses to communicate on the issues based on Riot's feedback (i.e. "I don't care the reasons, you need to delete Zoe") and Rioters need to communicate a bit more with the salty people and respond in ways that do make us feel like we're being listened to, even if the answer is "no".
SanKakU (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=Mortdog,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=FA8HwyQe,comment-id=0003,timestamp=2019-04-23T16:20:31.805+0000) > > Hey everyone. Let me see if I can offer more insight. > > We see all the polls, upvate threads, and requests to bring bans back to ARAM. We understand that a very large group of players feel this way. We get the benefits it brings, feeling like you have some agency to remove particular champs you don't enjoy facing. That's super valid. (I personally banned Teemo every game because trying to push into shrooms is pain.) We understand the desire and the need bans fill. > > HOWEVER, they also come with draw backs. Whether or not you agree with them, there are players that enjoy and have a high affinity for champions like Veigar and Brand. There are players that don't want to think about bans and just want to get in the game quick. There are players that enjoy the high and low rolls of a pure random mode. And believe it or not, most of them aren't "ARAM accounts". Discounting and downvateing them doesn't make them not real. > > FOR NOW, we'd like to see if we can solve some of the pain points through other methods before considering re-instating bans. Balancing has proven to work quite well, as we've seen Sona/Ziggs go from 68% win rate to 57%. We still have some more adjustments that can be made, but the champions are more fair to face than they have ever been. There's still more work to be done though, and more adjustments will be coming more often. (I've already got a batch ready for approval.) > > Bans are a very strong hammer we aren't quite ready to slam down yet. If you look at the ban rates I posted on twitter, for a few champs it was basically the equivalent of deleting them from the mode. If we made a poll saying "Should we delete Zoe from SR?" I'm sure it would have a ton of upvates...but we still wouldn't do it because it's not the right call. Game design isn't always about the popular opinion. > > That being said, we are STILL OPEN TO BRINGING THEM BACK if our other methods don't solve the issues. If after a few months, Fiddle/Veigar are still a pain to play against, then we'll reconsider. I'm sure this post hasn't changed many peoples minds, but hopefully at least shows you where we're coming from. > > > Other common thoughts: > *Look we had 5 melee and they had the perfect comp. This shows we need bans and they were ARAM accounts* - No...this happened either way, regardless of bans and they very likely were NOT ARAM accounts. The thing about random is that highs and lows exist. With all champs unlocked in our internal playtests, we still managed a Lux/Morg/Blitz/Jhin/Alistar comp. It was terror. It happens. > > *Why not just unlock all champs* - This would help for sure, but has side effects we aren't comfortable with. It's no secret that Riot does need to make money in order to continue as a business, and this would impact that quite a bit. However, I do think we can make improvements in this area. 42 F2P champs isn't enough. More on this hopefully soon-ish. What is your opinion on my idea of giving to every player their own 42 champion random selection pool to work with or whatever number you think is good...? This would effectively give veteran players, new players, and ARAM only account player all access so some sort of control that ARAM only account players have now. Is this idea being discussed/dismissed at Riot or has it been disregarded/ignored so far? I've been commenting about this idea in many posts and even made my posts regarding the idea, but I feel like it hasn't received any real Riot attention and I'm not sure why.
> [{quoted}](name=SanKakU,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=FA8HwyQe,comment-id=0003001e,timestamp=2019-04-24T10:04:36.958+0000) > > What is your opinion on my idea of giving to every player their own 42 champion random selection pool to work with or whatever number you think is good...? This would effectively give veteran players, new players, and ARAM only account player all access so some sort of control that ARAM only account players have now. Is this idea being discussed/dismissed at Riot or has it been disregarded/ignored so far? I've been commenting about this idea in many posts and even made my posts regarding the idea, but I feel like it hasn't received any real Riot attention and I'm not sure why. Actually, this made me come up with a possible other solution -- what if, in ARAM, all champions that were 450 or 1350 were available for free? It would definitely add more to the general rotations, especially of ARAM accounts, and being so cheap, Riot won't loose much money over them. Heck, most are given away for free at every level up via ~~IP~~ BE ######(I did accidentally type IP so I decided to leave it in to show how my mind still defaults to that lol)
Haziv (EUW)
: Mordekaiser was the last of the "pizza feet" champions...
Pretty sure Riot flat out forgot about Mundo Or More likely, Riot put so much time into updating old champions last year that for numerous reasons related to creativity/ideas, balance, and interest in the game, they are going to focus on new champions this year. I guess I only wish that they would've at least said that a bit more clearly.
Mortdog (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=Jikker,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=FA8HwyQe,comment-id=000300090001000000000000,timestamp=2019-04-23T17:59:56.777+0000) > > Yes, but you said that ARAM accounts aren't that popular which is why bans aren't really necessary because those "ARAM accounts" are more like myths. That's at least what I'm reading you saying. > > So, if that's true and there aren't many ARAM accounts, then you aren't really making it available to that many players. If there are more ARAM only accounts though, then isn't that more reason to bring in bans to make it fair for other players? > > I'm getting mixed messages here. > > And, again, someone playing only ARAM is going to want skins eventually. Sorry my bad, let's clear up our definitions. "ARAM Account" - Person who only buys the OP champs to maximize their chance of getting them and winning. ARAM only player - Person who plays mostly or only ARAM but gets champs normally.
> [{quoted}](name=Mortdog,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=FA8HwyQe,comment-id=0003000900010000000000000000,timestamp=2019-04-23T18:03:08.379+0000) > > Sorry my bad, let's clear up our definitions. > > "ARAM Account" - Person who only buys the OP champs to maximize their chance of getting them and winning. > ARAM only player - Person who plays mostly or only ARAM but gets champs normally. Again, what about skin, chest, and mastery incentives? I mean, there are plenty of people that outright never buy champions with RP. I'm one of them and I show my support via skin sales. Do you have any statistics on percentage of accounts that play only ARAM that you could share? I'm genuinely interested in knowing since it feels like SR is the massively more popular option.
Mortdog (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=Jikker,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=FA8HwyQe,comment-id=0003000900010000,timestamp=2019-04-23T17:55:37.649+0000) > > While we can understand that, I would like to hear the thoughts on using it as a means to advertise. It'd be like McDonald's offering a free milkshake as a promo if you by a certain item. If you love that milkshake and want to have it with another meal, you're going to buy that milkshake. If you love playing a champion in ARAM, you're gonna buy them for your SR games. I'd love to see some released statistics on ARAM games played daily vs. SR games played daily. > > ARAM with all champions unlocked can be a fun mode that is more random and has advertising opportunities for champion sales built in. I cannot believe that the majority of champion sales are for ARAM when Summoner's Rift and Ranked exist. Plus, as I mentioned earlier, if you want a skin (and the skins team is churning out great skins) you need to own the champion. This assumes ARAM players play both modes. If ARAM players only play ARAM...
> [{quoted}](name=Mortdog,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=FA8HwyQe,comment-id=00030009000100000000,timestamp=2019-04-23T17:57:38.639+0000) > > This assumes ARAM players play both modes. If ARAM players only play ARAM... Yes, but you said that ARAM accounts aren't that popular which is why bans aren't really necessary because those "ARAM accounts" are more like myths. That's at least what I'm reading you saying. So, if that's true and there aren't many ARAM accounts, then you aren't really making it available to that many players. If there are more ARAM only accounts though, then isn't that more reason to bring in bans to make it fair for other players? I'm getting mixed messages here. And, again, someone playing only ARAM is going to want skins eventually. EDIT: And mastery + chests from S ranks. Can't forget about those. You need to own champions for that. There are lots of incentives to buy champions that I really strongly doubt that one game mode having all unlocked is going to change that.
: > [{quoted}](name=Busty Demoness,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=FA8HwyQe,comment-id=00030009,timestamp=2019-04-23T17:02:24.166+0000)Saying "hey, we need the sales" is bad on two counts. As said, it comes off as players coming second and it also implies fiscal trouble for the company. Maximizing profits is good from a business standpoint, but doing it at the expense of your customers is only going to backfire long term. Personally, I find it honest, which is helpful. "We can't reasonably give away this much stuff for free without hurting our bottom line more than is acceptable" is a somewhat refreshing thing to do instead of trying to put out some other reason that says the same thing without saying it. It doesn't mean you're in financial trouble any more than, say, McDonald's saying they're not giving you free fries with every meal is saying McDonald's is having financial trouble or not respecting their customers.
> [{quoted}](name=The Djinn,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=FA8HwyQe,comment-id=000300090001,timestamp=2019-04-23T17:22:21.935+0000) > > Personally, I find it honest, which is helpful. "We can't reasonably give away this much stuff for free without hurting our bottom line more than is acceptable" is a somewhat refreshing thing to do instead of trying to put out some other reason that says the same thing without saying it. It doesn't mean you're in financial trouble any more than, say, McDonald's saying they're not giving you free fries with every meal is saying McDonald's is having financial trouble or not respecting their customers. While we can understand that, I would like to hear the thoughts on using it as a means to advertise. It'd be like McDonald's offering a free milkshake as a promo if you by a certain item. If you love that milkshake and want to have it with another meal, you're going to buy that milkshake. This is a common tactic employed by companies and this would be like free champion rotation on steroids. If you love playing a champion in ARAM, you're gonna buy them for your SR games. I'd love to see some released statistics on ARAM games played daily vs. SR games played daily. ARAM with all champions unlocked can be a fun mode that is more random and has advertising opportunities for champion sales built in. I cannot believe that the majority of champion sales are for ARAM when Summoner's Rift and Ranked exist. Plus, as I mentioned earlier, if you want a skin (and the skins team is churning out great skins) you need to own the champion.
Bazerka (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=Oleandervine,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=XQj6eART,comment-id=00000000,timestamp=2019-04-23T16:33:35.692+0000) > > So are you saying the roadmap could drop anytime this year, instead? That's cruelty after just announcing it with a news page. OH lol, my bad didn't know thats what you were referring too. Fwiw I just shared that feedback with the community team so hopefully it gets fixed asap. Edit - its getting fixed now
> [{quoted}](name=Bazerka,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=XQj6eART,comment-id=000000000000,timestamp=2019-04-23T16:37:23.421+0000) > > OH lol, my bad didn't know thats what you were referring too. Fwiw I just shared that feedback with the community team so hopefully it gets fixed asap. > > Edit - its getting fixed now Good. I want my road map to see what's coming next! Thanks for forwarding to the team =)
Mortdog (NA)
: Hey everyone. Let me see if I can offer more insight. We see all the polls, upvate threads, and requests to bring bans back to ARAM. We understand that a very large group of players feel this way. We get the benefits it brings, feeling like you have some agency to remove particular champs you don't enjoy facing. That's super valid. (I personally banned Teemo every game because trying to push into shrooms is pain.) We understand the desire and the need bans fill. HOWEVER, they also come with draw backs. Whether or not you agree with them, there are players that enjoy and have a high affinity for champions like Veigar and Brand. There are players that don't want to think about bans and just want to get in the game quick. There are players that enjoy the high and low rolls of a pure random mode. And believe it or not, most of them aren't "ARAM accounts". Discounting and downvateing them doesn't make them not real. FOR NOW, we'd like to see if we can solve some of the pain points through other methods before considering re-instating bans. Balancing has proven to work quite well, as we've seen Sona/Ziggs go from 68% win rate to 57%. We still have some more adjustments that can be made, but the champions are more fair to face than they have ever been. There's still more work to be done though, and more adjustments will be coming more often. (I've already got a batch ready for approval.) Bans are a very strong hammer we aren't quite ready to slam down yet. If you look at the ban rates I posted on twitter, for a few champs it was basically the equivalent of deleting them from the mode. If we made a poll saying "Should we delete Zoe from SR?" I'm sure it would have a ton of upvates...but we still wouldn't do it because it's not the right call. Game design isn't always about the popular opinion. That being said, we are STILL OPEN TO BRINGING THEM BACK if our other methods don't solve the issues. If after a few months, Fiddle/Veigar are still a pain to play against, then we'll reconsider. I'm sure this post hasn't changed many peoples minds, but hopefully at least shows you where we're coming from. Other common thoughts: *Look we had 5 melee and they had the perfect comp. This shows we need bans and they were ARAM accounts* - No...this happened either way, regardless of bans and they very likely were NOT ARAM accounts. The thing about random is that highs and lows exist. With all champs unlocked in our internal playtests, we still managed a Lux/Morg/Blitz/Jhin/Alistar comp. It was terror. It happens. *Why not just unlock all champs* - This would help for sure, but has side effects we aren't comfortable with. It's no secret that Riot does need to make money in order to continue as a business, and this would impact that quite a bit. However, I do think we can make improvements in this area. 42 F2P champs isn't enough. More on this hopefully soon-ish.
> [{quoted}](name=Mortdog,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=FA8HwyQe,comment-id=0003,timestamp=2019-04-23T16:20:31.805+0000) > > Other common thoughts: > *Look we had 5 melee and they had the perfect comp. This shows we need bans and they were ARAM accounts* - No...this happened either way, regardless of bans and they very likely were NOT ARAM accounts. The thing about random is that highs and lows exist. With all champs unlocked in our internal playtests, we still managed a Lux/Morg/Blitz/Jhin/Alistar comp. It was terror. It happens. It may happen, but not as often. You cannot deny that ARAM accounts exist. People openly admit in ARAM games that they are ARAM only accounts. And those melee vs. perfect happen more often than just random, at least to me. My husband openly will not play ARAM (a supposed "fun" mode) because of this very reason. He says it's not fun, unfair, and never goes in his favour. And he's right! Most ARAMs are decided in champ select and having the ability to at least remove some antifun champions would help a lot in stopping that. ARAM is frustration, not fun and more changes need to happen to change that. > *Why not just unlock all champs* - This would help for sure, but has side effects we aren't comfortable with. It's no secret that Riot does need to make money in order to continue as a business, and this would impact that quite a bit. However, I do think we can make improvements in this area. 42 F2P champs isn't enough. More on this hopefully soon-ish. If I may, I find it hard to believe that people having all champions unlocked for one mode which is popular, but I highly doubt it is more popular than Summoner's Rift, would cost Riot that much money. If anything, it would be great advertising. Look at it this way -- you play an ARAM and get a champion and have a blast with them. Suddenly you want to try them in Ranked and decide to shell out the money to buy them so you have them right now! If all champions were unlocked instead of just larger free rotations, then there would be many more opportunities to have something like that happen. Plus, people would still have to buy champions to get skins.
: > [{quoted}](name=Oleandervine,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=7fEHA25k,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2019-04-23T14:44:48.434+0000) > > Well, for starters, Wukong's kit isn't inherent unhealthy, and it's got plenty of points where it can be modified to balance him out. Old Aatrox didn't have this luxury. > > Secondly, Wukong apparently has a very high playrate in China, so it would be highly disruptive for a larger portion of their playerbase to just overhaul him without good reason. > > Thirdly, there are much worse eyesores than Wukong in the game at current - {{champion:36}} {{champion:42}} {{champion:31}} {{champion:9}} {{champion:79}} {{champion:24}} {{champion:85}} {{champion:54}} {{champion:33}} {{champion:80}} {{champion:56}} {{champion:27}} {{champion:17}} {{champion:45}} {{champion:106}} {{champion:77}} {{champion:26}} > > So in the grand scheme of things, Wukong isn't in dire need of any changes that would place him on any of the update lists above any of the other champions. I can simply list any champion in the game whether performing worse or better in terms of gameplay and call it a day. Anyone who plays Wukong knows well he has even higher priority than the champs that you listen above. know the fact that all of those champs you listen have received significant changes to their gameplay/mechanics in the last 3 years, whereas Wukong has received couple of number changes following by massive nerfs which leaves him out of any lethality meta. The china playerbase argument was proven wrong, but I would like to see new statistics that prove he has a "high playrate", and incase he has more than 5%, its not a solid reason to keep the opinion of 5+ regions out of the equation.
> [{quoted}](name=Wukong Airlines,realm=EUNE,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=7fEHA25k,comment-id=00000000,timestamp=2019-04-23T14:51:01.924+0000) > > know the fact that all of those champs you listen have received significant changes to their gameplay/mechanics in the last 3 years Udyr, to my knowledge has received basically didsquat outside of bug fixes and some balance changes (about as much as Wukong) while having a very outdated kit with outdated visuals and animations (something Wukong just got updated), so not all of those champions have received significant changes. Not to mention that Wukong has received several nice skins recently whereas Udyr is just ignored (I know that has nothing to do with balance, but it does have something to do with Riot's opinion on visuals and popularity). I feel like they did plan on doing a major kit change for Udyr, but it never happened or turned into basically new numbers and some minor new effects. Wukong looks fairly decent compared to some (Mundo springs to mind) and every time I've seen him played he plays solidly. He may not be as popular as some and I will agree with that, but he is sitting at a healthy winrate overall (about 51% in NA according to op.gg). I think he needs some reworks and some minor VGU changes, but there are others that definitely need it as well and Riot is going to prioritize which they think need it first probably based on feedback, play rate, appearance, healthiness of kits, etc....
: So I Was Looking through Old Games And Turns Out Sivir Her Hair Used To Be Pink
Sivir with pink hair looks weird. Probably because I'm so used to it being black. I wonder if they changed it because Annie had pink hair too and they wanted variety?
: > [{quoted}](name=Jikker,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=FA8HwyQe,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2019-04-23T14:46:00.331+0000) > > Also, the image of the pancake dancing syrup is broked. RIP =( Yeah idk what's going on with it When I used it for an example a couple of days ago it was working fine and when I edited the body text on that thread, then it would work just fine but for whatever reason, it's just busted rn All I can guess is Imgur is being screwy again ¯\\\_(ツ)_/¯
> [{quoted}](name=2nd Chance,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=FA8HwyQe,comment-id=00000000,timestamp=2019-04-23T14:51:42.035+0000) > > Yeah idk what's going on with it > > When I used it for an example a couple of days ago it was working fine > > and when I edited the body text on that thread, then it would work just fine > > but for whatever reason, it's just busted rn > > All I can guess is Imgur is being screwy again ¯\\\_(ツ)_/¯ http://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/GD/Z73h4Oof-how-2-new-imgur-and-not-tilt-me I still have it favourited Not that it will help much here
: On the recent issue of "UPVATE IF YOU WANT BANS IN ARAM RETURNED" threads
Honestly, the best option is to unlock all the champions on ARAM, but I just feel Riot will never do that. Bans make ARAM at least a bit tolerable because we can fight back against the ARAM only accounts. Who hasn't had this awful experience: Your Team: {{champion:106}} {{champion:77}} {{champion:33}} {{champion:72}} {{champion:48}} Their Team: {{champion:99}} {{champion:54}} {{champion:37}} {{champion:45}} {{champion:81}} And you just know that you are facing 5 ARAM accounts? It happens all the time and champions that could still be fun or interesting in ARAM against a truly all random team suddenly become worthless because the enemy is perfectly lined up with endless strong poke, CC, teamfight, tankiness, etc... just because most are accounts that only own the best ARAM champions. You know, if I had bans, I might ban champs I would love to play (like my freelo explorer) just because I know how painful it can be to face them? I really want to talk with a Rioter on this and hear exactly what they are thinking and seeing from ARAM (beyond the stats they gave) that would make them not want to unlock all champions and/or introduce bans. Also, the image of the pancake dancing syrup is broked. RIP =(
XcomegaX (NA)
: UPVATE IF YOU WANT BANS IN ARAM RETURNED
I agree, bans should come back to ARAM. Only alternative is to have all champions unlocked to stop the obnoxious, anti-funness that is ARAM only accounts. Have an upvate. ######As this is in GD which has different guidelines for low effort, there's no problem with it and I am glad to lend my support to the cause. Hope for a Rioter response soon!
CLG ear (NA)
: If you have to preface what you are saying with "I don't mean to offend you"
: Bug made me lose 40 lps
First off, let's stay respectful here. Second, have you submitted a support ticket to get technical help? Be sure to not attempt to play anything except customs until you are sure you are working again. Are you receiving any error messages?
: Diamond opinion _NO BACKTALK_
> [{quoted}](name=A Bad Varus,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=7ryj2Oz9,comment-id=0009,timestamp=2019-04-22T18:28:10.235+0000) > > Diamond opinion _NO BACKTALK_ Rackier smurf detected :^)
radetari (EUNE)
: > [{quoted}](name=Jikker,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=eeU1WWHM,comment-id=0004,timestamp=2019-04-22T13:33:42.329+0000) > > Udyr has a confirmed rework? Idk but to me it would be the best option after Morde
> [{quoted}](name=radetari,realm=EUNE,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=eeU1WWHM,comment-id=00040000,timestamp=2019-04-22T14:17:24.333+0000) > > Idk but to me it would be the best option after Morde While I agree, I don't think we have any confirmation on that yet.
: Thank you for restoring ARAM despite the troll requests
Hey guys, Let's stay respectful here and lay off on insults like calling people idiots or assuming that they are not able to perform math. I know that feelings are strong about ARAM, but we still need to adhere to the Golden Rule when we post. {{sticker:poppy-wink}}
Saezio (EUNE)
: > [{quoted}](name=Jikker,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=FxFt7sV6,comment-id=00030000000000000000,timestamp=2019-04-22T14:35:38.819+0000) > > You're not wrong on Vel'Koz either. I just find it a bit easier to CC him/dodge his CC. That's strange. Do you play a decent amount of ARAM? I find velkoz extremely harder to pin down and kill, because of his amazing range.
> [{quoted}](name=Saezio,realm=EUNE,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=FxFt7sV6,comment-id=000300000000000000000000,timestamp=2019-04-22T14:43:03.840+0000) > > That's strange. Do you play a decent amount of ARAM? I find velkoz extremely harder to pin down and kill, because of his amazing range. I used to; I mostly play bots with my husband now. In general I found I could avoid his E usually and while he may have been a bit harder to pin down depending on my champion, if we had any sort of hard engage or return poke, he became manageable. A pain, but manageable.
Saezio (EUNE)
: I don't disagree with any of that. But, Meanwhile, if velkoz lands ONE E........ HURDUR LAZORBEAAAAAAMMMMMMMM TRUE DAMAGEEEEEEEEEE
> [{quoted}](name=Saezio,realm=EUNE,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=FxFt7sV6,comment-id=0003000000000000,timestamp=2019-04-22T13:41:47.281+0000) > > I don't disagree with any of that. But, > > Meanwhile, if velkoz lands ONE E........ HURDUR LAZORBEAAAAAAMMMMMMMM TRUE DAMAGEEEEEEEEEE You're not wrong on Vel'Koz either. I just find it a bit easier to CC him/dodge his CC.
EPöXY (NA)
: Still not sure how early surrender works
I've edited out an offensive term from your thread. We do not tolerate the use of pejorative language on the Boards or the use of that terminology in any negative or joking way. You may think what you want of the community, but you may not "call the community exactly what it is" in your opinion here on the Boards. If you have any questions about this edit, don't hesitate to reach out to the Boards Moderation Team via: * The [**NA Boards Discord**](https://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/community-moderation/7rtKBZLi-boards-moderation-discord-verification) * The [**Discuss the Boards**](https://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/community-moderation) sub-board {{sticker:poppy-wink}}
: WHERE'S KAYLE BOT?!
Glad we got this resolved. Since it is a 2 month old thread and technically is in the wrong sub-board ([**Ask the Community**](https://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/ask-the-community) would have been better), I'm going to go ahead and lock it up. Have fun fighting new Kayle in bots =) {{sticker:poppy-wink}}
Saezio (EUNE)
: > [{quoted}](name=Jikker,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=FxFt7sV6,comment-id=0003,timestamp=2019-04-22T13:09:11.028+0000) > > Yes, bring back bans. Ideally I'd like both options to ban and to have all champions unlocked. I'd personally ban Ziggs or Veigar a lot. Yordles with way too much control and damage. I personally don't see a reason for bans if all champions are open. Because the chances for stale arams are much lower. Ziggs and veigar are strong but in my eyes they have counterplay in buying MR. Vel'koz on the other hand did 2,3k true damage in less than 3 seconds to me yesterday
> [{quoted}](name=Saezio,realm=EUNE,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=FxFt7sV6,comment-id=00030000,timestamp=2019-04-22T13:27:52.836+0000) > > I personally don't see a reason for bans if all champions are open. Because the chances for stale arams are much lower. > > Ziggs and veigar are strong but in my eyes they have counterplay in buying MR. Vel'koz on the other hand did 2,3k true damage in less than 3 seconds to me yesterday Ziggs has more consistent and long range poke plus he can execute towers and has mobility. His minefield can be used to zone and control the enemy movements very consistently. Not to mention, the range on his ult. Viegar's cage is super controlling for the map in a small, one lane game. He can use it to position the enemy team way more consistently than some other threatening CC because it literally takes up a nice chunk of the map in a giant, AOE stun cage. His ult being targeted, his gaining AP passively, and just the sheer damage he can put out onto anyone that isn't going tanky is pretty ludicrous.
radetari (EUNE)
: I like how all my fav champs are getting reworked soon
VaIimar (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=Jikker,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=hfGfxjel,comment-id=0009,timestamp=2019-04-20T03:23:16.791+0000) > > It wasn't removed by Riot to silence the desire for bans to come back. Personally, I _want_ bans in ARAM so there's no reason I'd want to silence that! However, the reason for the removal appears to be that it was low effort/spam and didn't really do much for discussion. > > If I had made the removal, I would've redirected you to General Discussion, but I can understand the choice the moderator in question made. It didn't really provide much in the way of discussion which is something we are aiming to see more of on Gameplay versus just "upvote this" (excuse me, I mean "upvate") type threads. > > I can understand the frustration in seeing the removal though after it received much support. However, we don't judge removals based on votes or number of comments; we remove based on rules and guidelines for the Boards and the specific sub-board. > > EDIT: I'll add in that a good thread with plenty of substance for discussion such as mentioning why bans made ARAM a better experience and why you want it back would probably be allowed to stay and, given the support for the subject, will receive the same amount of support for Riot to see. what was the offence then?
> [{quoted}](name=VaIimar,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=hfGfxjel,comment-id=00090017,timestamp=2019-04-22T03:14:02.193+0000) > > what was the offence then? I mentioned it in that very post: > However, the reason for the removal appears to be that it was low effort/spam and didn't really do much for discussion. It was low effort spam that is not permitted on the Boards. There are some exceptions in General Discussion, but this was posted in Gameplay where low effort is not permitted.
: If your so against constructive criticism and can’t stand to be treated the same way your treating your own community then why do you even have boards? Why don’t you even remove boards as such? Because by your responses you’ve made it clear you don’t care about the community who’s been funding your game for the past 11 years now and quite frankly your gameplay is the worst of the lot so I honesty don’t see why this post should be shifted to general discussion. I’m probably certain there have been many useful threads that were already mentioned here that were removed just like this even if they made sense or had a lot of upvotes, and probably there is a logical explanation as to why they were supported by so many people at the first place. Handpicking stupid and idiotic posts like the ones you mentioned above like ‘gibberish, hate-speech or explicit content’ does not require skills, I could probably do the same that goes against your facts. Also at this point I don’t even trust your rules and regulations you might just be changing that too everyday to fit your own fancy needs. Also, there is no need to get defensive about this owning up to the fact that you fucked up and listen to your community will go a long way. It’s disrespecful when you remove a thread that had 300 votes and of course to those 300 people.
> [{quoted}](name=Ilovecheesecake,realm=EUW,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=hfGfxjel,comment-id=0009000900000002,timestamp=2019-04-21T22:50:47.028+0000) > > If your so against constructive criticism and can’t stand to be treated the same way your treating your own community then why do you even have boards? Why don’t you even remove boards as such? Because by your responses you’ve made it clear you don’t care about the community who’s been funding your game for the past 11 years now and quite frankly your gameplay is the worst of the lot so I honesty don’t see why this post should be shifted to general discussion. I have been a part of this community for over 6 years. I am from the old yellow forums back when GD was a feral scream. I am not a Rioter, I am a community member, player, and volunteer. I became a mod because I cared about this community _so much_ that I wanted to try to help make sure it was moderated consistently and encouraged to grow as a community. GD is the place for low effort and fun. That's how our community works. We're more of a generic chat area versus a sub-board for discussing things about the game in a serious way. That's what Gameplay should be and it is the direction we are trying to move Gameplay in. We hear that the community hates that Rioters are not coming to discuss things, but like you said, Gameplay can be seen as the worst of the lot. There are lots of good ideas on Gameplay buried beneath rants, spam, low-effort, etc.... threads that do not belong there. We are currently looking at improving the guidelines to make Gameplay a place for constructive, solid discussion about the game where Rioters can feel comfortable to hop in to chat while the community can make productive discussion on the ideas. > I’m probably certain there have been many useful threads that were already mentioned here that were removed just like this even if they made sense or had a lot of upvotes, and probably there is a logical explanation as to why they were supported by so many people at the first place. Handpicking stupid and idiotic posts like the ones you mentioned above like ‘gibberish, hate-speech or explicit content’ does not require skills, I could probably do the same that goes against your facts. Also at this point I don’t even trust your rules and regulations you might just be changing that too everyday to fit your own fancy needs. We do not change the rules except when we are reevaluating how to better word them or updating old ones to better fit the community. If we do change things, we make announcements or pin the new guidelines/rules to the top of the corresponding sub-board. We are _**not**_ just changing the rules to fit our whim. However, we are human and volunteers with only so much time in our day and the number of reports we shift through is much higher than you may think. Sometimes, things may stay up way longer than we'd like simply because we are unaware it's there and have not yet been able to see the report. If you see something that has hate-speech or explicit content, bring it to our attention ASAP via the report feature or, if we are not reaching the report quick enough, via the Discord. We have zero tolerance for such things and the only reason it may be left up is we are not aware of its existence. > Also, there is no need to get defensive about this owning up to the fact that you fucked up and listen to your community will go a long way. It’s disrespecful when you remove a thread that had 300 votes and of course to those 300 people. The thread was violating the rules, that is plain and simple. I am not going to go back on the guidelines set forth for this community. In Gameplay, a thread just asking for upvotes with little to no content is spam. That's why it was removed. Recreate the thread in GD and I will gladly support it, but just because the community upvotes something 300 times (especially when upvote bots have been very active again on the Boards) does not mean we will not take action.
Saezio (EUNE)
: Give us ARAM bans back. (poll)
Yes, bring back bans. Ideally I'd like both options to ban and to have all champions unlocked. I'd personally ban Ziggs or Veigar a lot. Yordles with way too much control and damage.
y0r1ck (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=Jikker,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=hfGfxjel,comment-id=0009000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2019-04-20T16:39:22.158+0000) > > Generally I classify spam or low effort as something that does not provide meaningful discussion points. Just a ambiguous statement or a single sentence that has no good context or support would be spam/low effort on Gameplay in my eyes. Those kinds of threads I gladly welcome on GD since that's how our community works, but on Gameplay where we are actively trying to get Rioters involved, we want more substance. > > Threads that are just expressing frustration or upset regarding something may not necessarily be low effort, but do belong in the Rant sub-board over Gameplay. I'll try to give some self-made examples. > > **Spam/Low Effort** > > > **Rant** > > **Good Gameplay Thread** > > Hope that helps clarify a bit. We are actively looking for feedback about how to make changes to Gameplay and the rewriting of the guidelines since we want to make it a good place for the community and Riot to discuss the game. If you have feedback or ideas, we'd love to hear them! Thanks so much, this is exactly what I was looking for. If you could post something like this somewhere more visible to the gameplay community, such as sticking it at the top of the sub-board, I think it'll be a great way to get feedback on your ideas and show that the mod team is really on everyone's side.
> [{quoted}](name=y0r1ck,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=hfGfxjel,comment-id=00090000000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2019-04-20T16:47:22.139+0000) > > Thanks so much, this is exactly what I was looking for. If you could post something like this somewhere more visible to the gameplay community, such as sticking it at the top of the sub-board, I think it'll be a great way to get feedback on your ideas and show that the mod team is really on everyone's side. I'll see what I can do. Unfortunately I'm running out of time for today, but I'll pass your suggestion along to the rest of the team.
y0r1ck (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=Jikker,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=hfGfxjel,comment-id=00090000000000000000,timestamp=2019-04-20T16:08:32.865+0000) > > If you see a spam thread, please report it. I've already removed a couple this morning that were brought to my attention. I appreciate that you guys are doing this now. But holy shit what a way to start... talk about sending a message... Can you guys clarify what spam is? Like should we report the third Riven thread that adds nothing new? The 99th thread saying riot sucks?
> [{quoted}](name=y0r1ck,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=hfGfxjel,comment-id=000900000000000000000000,timestamp=2019-04-20T16:20:17.288+0000) > > I appreciate that you guys are doing this now. But holy shit what a way to start... > > talk about sending a message... > > Can you guys clarify what spam is? Like should we report the third Riven thread that adds nothing new? The 99th thread saying riot sucks? Generally I classify spam or low effort as something that does not provide meaningful discussion points. Just a ambiguous statement or a single sentence that has no good context or support would be spam/low effort on Gameplay in my eyes. Those kinds of threads I gladly welcome on GD since that's how our community works, but on Gameplay where we are actively trying to get Rioters involved, we want more substance. Threads that are just expressing frustration or upset regarding something may not necessarily be low effort, but do belong in the Rant sub-board over Gameplay. I'll try to give some self-made examples. **Spam/Low Effort** > _Remove Riven's Shield_ > > She doesn't need that much protection. Upvote if you agree. **Rant** > _Remove this piece of garbage matchmaking system!!!_ > > I'm sick and tired of being matched with players that are three tiers or more below me. If I'm Gold 2, I should be playing with Gold 2's, not f'ing Silver 3s! Riot fix this!!! **Good Gameplay Thread** >_Riot should not have removed ARAM bans_ > > Riot recently reverted the change that had given ARAM matches bans. I think this is a big mistake and is just pandering to the ARAM accounts that ruin the ARAM experience for the average player. ARAM is supposed to be a fun mode, but that fun is completely ruined when you are stuck rolling a champ like Udyr and the enemy always has some combination of Lux, Ziggs, Veiger, Sona, Blitz, and other just unfun champions to play against. Bans at least allowed you to remove a chance of facing one of these champions and discouraged the creation of ARAM accounts as what's the point if the champs you own are always being banned? > > Riot needs to implement the bans back for the sake of keeping this game mode fun for others. Alternatively, as we've been saying for years, they need to have all champions unlocked. That way there are no ARAM accounts and rolls are a true random selection from a group of champions. > > Who else agrees that bans need to come back? What are your thoughts on how to fix ARAM? Hope that helps clarify a bit. We are actively looking for feedback about how to make changes to Gameplay and the rewriting of the guidelines since we want to make it a good place for the community and Riot to discuss the game. If you have feedback or ideas, we'd love to hear them!
: > [{quoted}](name=Jikker,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=hfGfxjel,comment-id=00090001000100010001,timestamp=2019-04-20T16:06:46.247+0000) > > Votes do not matter; violating the rules is all that matters and in this case the thread was low effort and violating the rules. The upvate thread was up for 3 days, almost 4. If it truly violated the rules you would have taken it down on day 1. No. Im not buying it. Im sure someone higher up asked for its removal and board mods complied.
> [{quoted}](name=Packun Flower,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=hfGfxjel,comment-id=000900010001000100010000,timestamp=2019-04-20T16:16:15.852+0000) > > The upvate thread was up for 3 days, almost 4. If it truly violated the rules you would have taken it down on day 1. > > No. Im not buying it. Im sure someone higher up asked for its removal and board mods complied. I cannot make you believe anything, but given the number of reports we've had over the last few days, I can guarantee this wasn't handled until later because we did not reach it in the queue until later. It's as simple as that. When we have hundreds of reports to go through, sometimes it might take a day or two. If you wish to believe this is a Riot conspiracy, even though I've stated that personally myself (and possibly other mods) completely agree with the thread's sentiments regarding ARAM bans, there is nothing I can do to change your mind.
: > [{quoted}](name=Jikker,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=hfGfxjel,comment-id=000900000000,timestamp=2019-04-20T04:50:02.125+0000) > > In the Universal Rules, under Spamming and Trolling it says -- "Posting repetitive non-constructive or low-effort content." This was considered low effort content since it did not provide any discussion and was more troll like with it not even spelling upvote correctly. Again, that'd be more accepted in GD over Gameplay. > > I can't go into details of the removal, but we attempt to make things clear to the creator of the threads/comments we remove. We don't necessarily make things clear to the community since the removal is between Riot/Mods and the poster whose content was removed. We'll clarify a bit if a thread like this is made, but we're not going to make a statement necessarily "this is why x thread was removed". > > Obvious the creator of the thread could also come to us on Discuss the Boards or the Discord if they had questions about the removal. > > When the new guidelines for Gameplay are posted, we'll make it as clear as possible what we expect from the sub-board. And yet other spam threads go untouched, why remove the ONE "spam" thread that served a purpose?
> [{quoted}](name=TheSingularity,realm=OCE,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=hfGfxjel,comment-id=0009000000000000,timestamp=2019-04-20T05:31:25.080+0000) > > And yet other spam threads go untouched, why remove the ONE "spam" thread that served a purpose? If you see a spam thread, please report it. I've already removed a couple this morning that were brought to my attention.
Colte (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=Rowanstar,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=hfGfxjel,comment-id=000900010001,timestamp=2019-04-20T08:23:44.594+0000) > > You hate us for doing our jobs? Also some of us are new so you have no idea who or how we are. Don't judge us all because of your experience with a few. rEmOvInG a HiGh UpVoTeD tHrEaD iNsTeAd Of LoW vOtEd ThReAdS iS dOInG oUr JoB
> [{quoted}](name=Colte,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=hfGfxjel,comment-id=0009000100010001,timestamp=2019-04-20T09:29:42.502+0000) > > rEmOvInG a HiGh UpVoTeD tHrEaD iNsTeAd Of LoW vOtEd ThReAdS iS dOInG oUr JoB Votes do not matter; violating the rules is all that matters and in this case the thread was low effort and violating the rules.
: > [{quoted}](name=2nd Chance,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=hfGfxjel,comment-id=0008,timestamp=2019-04-20T03:22:47.046+0000) > > because "upvote if x" threads are low-effort as heck and pretty sad honestly? > > You could honestly make that entire thread without the upvote begging and it would work > > Also Riot doesn't even moderate this place, and the volunteer staff wouldn't pull a reddit thread shadow removal on you guys :^) > > Also to show you I have different opinions from them - Yes, Riot removing bans from ARAM was really dumb > > edit - lordy lu ignorance is bliss and I'm actually kinda frustrated by the sheer amount of it Moderator: _Agree's with opinion while explaining reason for removing post_ People on the Boards: "bUt yoU REMovED OuR ThRead, sO YoU'Re agAinsT uS"
> [{quoted}](name=Gentleman Gems,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=hfGfxjel,comment-id=00080000,timestamp=2019-04-20T12:13:43.151+0000) > > Moderator: _Agree's with opinion while explaining reason for removing post_ > > People on the Boards: "bUt yoU REMovED OuR ThRead, sO YoU'Re agAinsT uS" It's cause mods r murder nvr 4get
Guzergus (EUW)
: > [{quoted}](name=Jikker,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=hfGfxjel,comment-id=000900000000,timestamp=2019-04-20T04:50:02.125+0000) > > In the Universal Rules, under Spamming and Trolling it says -- "Posting repetitive non-constructive or low-effort content." This was considered low effort content since it did not provide any discussion and was more troll like with it not even spelling upvote correctly. Again, that'd be more accepted in GD over Gameplay. > > I can't go into details of the removal, but we attempt to make things clear to the creator of the threads/comments we remove. We don't necessarily make things clear to the community since the removal is between Riot/Mods and the poster whose content was removed. We'll clarify a bit if a thread like this is made, but we're not going to make a statement necessarily "this is why x thread was removed". > > Obvious the creator of the thread could also come to us on Discuss the Boards or the Discord if they had questions about the removal. > > When the new guidelines for Gameplay are posted, we'll make it as clear as possible what we expect from the sub-board. Here are just a couple of examples of threads with even lower effort: https://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/gameplay-balance/yWHVsUsj-zed-is-still-oppressive-as-fuck https://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/gameplay-balance/tEiITtLO-hey-vayne-is-gross-and-overtuned-can-she-get-a-nerf https://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/gameplay-balance/7Iqn3stU-matchmaking-quality You either delete them or admit you're inconsistent and therefore are either completely incompetent or just lying.
> [{quoted}](name=Guzergus,realm=EUW,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=hfGfxjel,comment-id=0009000000000004,timestamp=2019-04-20T09:11:45.510+0000) > > Here are just a couple of examples of threads with even lower effort: > > https://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/gameplay-balance/yWHVsUsj-zed-is-still-oppressive-as-fuck > https://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/gameplay-balance/tEiITtLO-hey-vayne-is-gross-and-overtuned-can-she-get-a-nerf > https://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/gameplay-balance/7Iqn3stU-matchmaking-quality > > You either delete them or admit you're inconsistent and therefore are either completely incompetent or just lying. Did you report these threads? We can't necessarily know a thread exists which is why some of those may still be up. I know that the community may think that we can see every thread all the time and have nothing else to do but sit and mod all day, but unfortunately we are limited in what we see. We rely on posters to bring concerns to us or report threads/comments for us to review since our daily browsing won't reveal all violations to us. And we are human beings with lives that take precedence. Remember, we're volunteers, not paid employees. I will personally take a look at the threads you linked and deal with them accordingly.
: > [{quoted}](name=Jikker,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=hfGfxjel,comment-id=0009,timestamp=2019-04-20T03:23:16.791+0000) > > It wasn't removed by Riot to silence the desire for bans to come back. Personally, I _want_ bans in ARAM so there's no reason I'd want to silence that! However, the reason for the removal appears to be that it was low effort/spam and didn't really do much for discussion. > > If I had made the removal, I would've redirected you to General Discussion, but I can understand the choice the moderator in question made. It didn't really provide much in the way of discussion which is something we are aiming to see more of on Gameplay versus just "upvote this" (excuse me, I mean "upvate") type threads. > > I can understand the frustration in seeing the removal though after it received much support. However, we don't judge removals based on votes or number of comments; we remove based on rules and guidelines for the Boards and the specific sub-board. > > EDIT: I'll add in that a good thread with plenty of substance for discussion such as mentioning why bans made ARAM a better experience and why you want it back would probably be allowed to stay and, given the support for the subject, will receive the same amount of support for Riot to see. Hey Jikker, I appreciate your response. The topic in question _did_ have the typical amount of lower-effort posts, but there were some posts that provided genuine passion in their posts. I don't think this required the topic getting removed because I'm a firm believer that some peoples negligence shouldn't punish the conversation as a whole. This phenomena is synonymous with the internet and found all over- from Reddit, Youtube, to Facebook. If anything needed to be done, it should have been deleting the low-effort posts to save the topic. To generalize a whole topic as useless enough to delete is insulting to the people who have put in sufficient energy in their posts. My regards.
> [{quoted}](name=SpiritOfOdysseus,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=hfGfxjel,comment-id=0009000b,timestamp=2019-04-20T13:41:11.218+0000) > > Hey Jikker, I appreciate your response. > > The topic in question _did_ have the typical amount of lower-effort posts, but there were some posts that provided genuine passion in their posts. I don't think this required the topic getting removed because I'm a firm believer that some peoples > negligence shouldn't punish the conversation as a whole. This phenomena is synonymous with the internet and found all over- from Reddit, Youtube, to Facebook. If anything needed to be done, it should have been deleting the low-effort posts to save the topic. To generalize a whole topic as useless enough to delete is insulting to the people who have put in sufficient energy in their posts. > > My regards. I sincerely thank you for your kind and polite response. Let me clarify that in this instance the thread itself, not just the responses, was considered low effort. We didn't remove the thread to remove the low effort responses, we removed the thread to remove the low effort thread itself. Again, I would be perfectly fine with that topic being in GD and encourage the thread creator (or others) to post the thread in GD or add additional substance to their Gameplay thread. I'll gladly go and add my support to the cause!
Show more

Jikker

Level 76 (NA)
Lifetime Upvotes
Create a Discussion