: I'm quite angry about my suspension today. Just the other day I was fighting a toxic Caitlyn who was complaining in all chat about her Maokai who was afk vs me, Garen. I turret dived and killed her a few times and she said she was going to report me to Riot, which she quite obviously did. I didn't take her seriously, but I was suspended for 14 days when I logged on today. Of course I had been cussing quite often, and got angry at a Talon in another game who said he hadn't played in a while, but I still don't understand why I was suspended for the next 2 weeks.
> [{quoted}](name=Anttac221,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=eHGdgA3h,comment-id=0031,timestamp=2018-09-25T23:59:30.835+0000) > > I'm quite angry about my suspension today. Just the other day I was fighting a toxic Caitlyn who was complaining in all chat about her Maokai who was afk vs me, Garen. I turret dived and killed her a few times and she said she was going to report me to Riot, which she quite obviously did. I didn't take her seriously, but I was suspended for 14 days when I logged on today. Of course I had been cussing quite often, and got angry at a Talon in another game who said he hadn't played in a while, but I still don't understand why I was suspended for the next 2 weeks. If you feel like providing your chat logs I'd be happy to help you figure it out. Without them I can only guess.
: It seems I need to watch the entirety of Rick and Morty twice in order to get this joke because I really have no clue what's so funny about this.
> [{quoted}](name=Warlord Rhinark,realm=EUW,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=mXKW6WJE,comment-id=0004,timestamp=2018-09-25T06:08:38.051+0000)...I really have no clue what's so funny about this. Well, to start you off, you should know that most people assume crab has at *least* three steps. Laughable, really.
: Woah.
Mind. Blown.
: Taric aint even gay doe
I don't think anyone is definitively claiming that he canonically is. Conversely, we have no reason to believe he canonically *isn't*. Any assumptions or ideas about any of the champions that doesn't have definitive proof is just fan fiction -- in this case *any* assumptions about Taric's sexuality are just guesses.
: Riot, no
...where did that image come from? Haven't seen this anywhere yet!
: At the risk of complaining about free stuff, it would be nice not to get the ziggs skin shard twice
I think they generally acknowledged Ziggs was a bit of an afterthought, 'cause they put together the game mode in less time than the skin line, and so his was probably a bit rushed by comparison. Given that, it's still a pretty nice skin. The duplicate issue does suck though. :(
Mortdog (NA)
: That's correct.
> [{quoted}](name=Mortdog,realm=NA,application-id=A7LBtoKc,discussion-id=6J4vJkNs,comment-id=00100000,timestamp=2018-09-24T16:09:35.280+0000)That's correct. Well damn.
Mortdog (NA)
: THE ODYSSEY: EXTRACTION LEADERBOARDS [UPDATED SEP 24]
Whoa, wait. By **Total Augments** do we mean across the TEAM? So a group did Onslaught with less than 1 augment per person?
: > [{quoted}](name=The Djinn,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=4EiJugXf,comment-id=000100010001000000010000,timestamp=2018-09-24T13:34:26.036+0000) > > Yep. I'm not really super sold on the precise wording, but yes -- at some point we do need to put our foot down and say "we've heard what you're saying, but this particular rule is not changing at this time." There's definitely a balancing act between being open-minded about the fact that we may have messed up, and standing behind decisions when we have re-analyzed the situation and believe the outcome to be the correct one. > > Because yes -- at some point, the buck does stop here. I don't think there was any contesting on the rule itself, just how it was enforced. And it really looked like your team's mindset was in the minority on that issue, which leaves a subtext of "you must agree with us".
> [{quoted}](name=ShadowlordZerato,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=4EiJugXf,comment-id=0001000100010000000100000000,timestamp=2018-09-24T13:46:51.026+0000)And it really looked like your team's mindset was in the minority on that issue, which leaves a subtext of "you must agree with us." There are a few things at work here. * People who are angry about some ruling typically are more outspoken than those who don't care or think something is being done correctly. This leads to any individual thread often being a bad representation of the community's thoughts -- not that this one necessarily WAS, but it's still worth remembering. * Sometimes people want something we can't -- or aren't willing -- to give them, either due to Riot's rules or to the excess amount of moderation burden it creates. Good examples are social/political threads or, yes, mature content. When we relaxed the mature content rules a bit we KNEW it would create more issues surrounding removals, and, ultimately, the community's willingness to allow moderator discretion with removals is necessary for us to give more leeway in general. We're always happy to review removals or pre-approve content on the Moderation Discord, but when every removal becomes a major issue then its frustrating for everyone. * There's never a "you must agree with us" agenda. There is, ultimately, a "these are the rules, and you must abide by them." When we as a team make a call, that's the call that stands, until Riot personally decides to intervene. I can frankly tell you, however, that Riot (from my interaction with them) wouldn't mind if we cracked down HARDER on borderline mature images, so that's worth keeping in mind.
: > [{quoted}](name=The Djinn,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=4EiJugXf,comment-id=0001000100010000,timestamp=2018-09-24T13:18:00.624+0000) > > I happily admitted in that thread that we may need to review the language in our mature content rules, and that I'd happily get a second look taken at my previous decision to make sure I had made the right call. We simply happened to feel that the removal *specifically* in question was the correct ruling. > > Basically, we'll often admit that we're wrong, but we won't always agree with some subsets of the community. In this case we acknowledge that some people don't think we go far enough, and others think we go far too far, so realistically we can NEVER make everyone happy. And yet, in the pinned message is "this has gone far enough". That's outright dismissal. Add "show we are the enforcing party" to that and it feels exactly like "we aren't going to tolerate being told we were wrong so we're going to use our power to silence you". And that pinned message isn't you. I'm also talking in the context of the team, not anyone specific.
> [{quoted}](name=ShadowlordZerato,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=4EiJugXf,comment-id=00010001000100000001,timestamp=2018-09-24T13:28:55.928+0000) > > And yet, in the pinned message is "this has gone far enough". > > That's outright dismissal. Add "show we are the enforcing party" to that and it feels exactly like "we aren't going to tolerate being told we were wrong so we're going to use our power to silence you". Yep. I'm not really super sold on the precise wording, but yes -- at some point we do need to put our foot down and say "we've heard what you're saying, but this particular rule is not changing at this time." There's definitely a balancing act between being open-minded about the fact that we may have messed up, and standing behind decisions when we have re-analyzed the situation and believe the outcome to be the correct one. Because yes -- at some point, the buck does stop here.
: > [{quoted}](name=The Djinn,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=vvcjEUvf,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2018-09-24T13:24:46.496+0000) > > We agree -- necromancy is one of the coolest magics. The problem is that, back in '09, we had this huge surge of necromantic energy than animated an entire dead board, and we lost far too many good Summoners trying to fend off the armies of the undead. > > Every since then, thread necromany has been banned in their memory. "back in '09" was 9 years ago. My god.
> [{quoted}](name=WhiteUranium,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=vvcjEUvf,comment-id=00000000,timestamp=2018-09-24T13:26:21.557+0000)My god. RIGHT? I wrote it, did a double take, debated writing '15 instead, and realized that I've become to accustomed to saying "back in oh-nine" for jokes like this than I had to run with it anyway. Hell, people born in the year 2000 can VOTE now. O_o
: Why is Necromancy a Forbidden Art?
We agree -- necromancy is one of the coolest magics. The problem is that, back in '09, we had this huge surge of necromantic energy than animated an entire dead board, and we lost far too many good Summoners trying to fend off the armies of the undead. Every since then, thread necromany has been banned in their memory.
: > [{quoted}](name=The Djinn,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=4EiJugXf,comment-id=0001000100010000,timestamp=2018-09-24T13:18:00.624+0000) > > I happily admitted in that thread that we may need to review the language in our mature content rules, and that I'd happily get a second look taken at my previous decision to make sure I had made the right call. We simply happened to feel that the removal *specifically* in question was the correct ruling. > > Basically, we'll often admit that we're wrong, but we won't always agree with some subsets of the community. In this case we acknowledge that some people don't think we go far enough, and others think we go far too far, so realistically we can NEVER make everyone happy. It's called subtext and implication.
> [{quoted}](name=Calamitosus Cini,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=4EiJugXf,comment-id=00010001000100000000,timestamp=2018-09-24T13:19:41.865+0000) > > It's called subtext and implication. I'm sorry if my phrasing made you believe something else, but I was legitimate about the possibility that I had been too lenient with the prior thread, and about getting someone else to review my actions there. Everything I say (and every decision I make) as part of the Volunteer Team is something I'm ready to have the rest of the team look into at any time.
: > [{quoted}](name=The Djinn,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=4EiJugXf,comment-id=00010001,timestamp=2018-09-24T12:25:32.949+0000) > > ...we do? Where? Moderators are always on a schedule of "moderate when you have the time and mental space to do so," and are totally allowed to post casually whenever they want. https://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/general-discussion/tH49Zife-someone-on-moderation-needs-to-clarify-something?comment=0016 Comments like that do not show that your team is always in the right mindset or capable of accountability. Anyone outside looking at that would assume you were abusing power and saying "fall in line because we said so". Looking at the rest of the thread, it even looks like "we aren't going to be told we were wrong".
> [{quoted}](name=ShadowlordZerato,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=4EiJugXf,comment-id=000100010001,timestamp=2018-09-24T13:02:04.926+0000)Anyone outside looking at that would assume you were abusing power and saying "fall in line because we said so". Looking at the rest of the thread, it even looks like "we aren't going to be told we were wrong". I happily admitted in that thread that we may need to review the language in our mature content rules, and that I'd happily get a second look taken at my previous decision to make sure I had made the right call. We simply happened to feel that the removal *specifically* in question was the correct ruling. Basically, we'll often admit that we're wrong, but we won't always agree with some subsets of the community. In this case we acknowledge that some people don't think we go far enough, and others think we go far too far, so realistically we can NEVER make everyone happy.
: > [{quoted}](name=The Djinn,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=4EiJugXf,comment-id=00010001,timestamp=2018-09-24T12:25:32.949+0000) > > ...we do? Where? Moderators are always on a schedule of "moderate when you have the time and mental space to do so," and are totally allowed to post casually whenever they want. Do you not see the "looking for mods" post you guys make? Or do you just copy paste stuff and not read it?
> [{quoted}](name=Calamitosus Cini,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=4EiJugXf,comment-id=000100010000,timestamp=2018-09-24T12:57:02.185+0000) > > Do you not see the "looking for mods" post you guys make? Or do you just copy paste stuff and not read it? I *wrote* it. Nowhere does it say that applicants have to ALWAYS be moderating, or make moderating their top priority whenever they're on the boards.
: Riot moderator removed my post because
>I feel my comment was moderated simply because it doesn't resonate that well with people. Nope. It was moderated due to THIS rule: >Do not post or engage in discussions of religion, ethnicity/race, sexual orientation, gender, politics, or real-world social issues. Real-world emergency situations will be allowed as long as they do not relate to the issues above. If you are unsure if your content is permissible, ask us on the Moderation Discord prior to posting. There are places where discussing gender dynamics and biology as they relate to various industries is an acceptable and allowed topic of conversation. The *League of Legends* board is not really one. Additionally, you stated the following, which is another rules violation: >guess which gender tends to be better at all things computers and gaming. If you guessed non binaries and women, then congrats, you're mentally retarded.
: Same here. But for stuff posted days before no less in which mods engaged in the same discussion. I demanded consistency. The reply I got was "mods want to engage in the forums too." The funny thing is they make this huge deal about moderators having moderating come first then turn around to protect their own.
> [{quoted}](name=Calamitosus Cini,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=4EiJugXf,comment-id=0001,timestamp=2018-09-24T02:56:06.401+0000)The funny thing is they make this huge deal about moderators having moderating come first then turn around to protect their own. ...we do? Where? Moderators are always on a schedule of "moderate when you have the time and mental space to do so," and are totally allowed to post casually whenever they want.
: {{champion:136}} ?
You could also argue Khada Jhin (used as a weapon by a cabal in Ionia), Lux (effectively controlled by Demacia as she risks death/exile if exposed), and Sion (literally an undead weapon with a semi-trapped consciousness).
: Veigar Stuns Jarvan Through Unstoppable Ult
So **Unstoppable** is a bit weird -- you actually ARE affected by CC, but the CC is overridden for the duration of the effect. So this is expected functionality -- you're technically stunned by the cage, but the effect's duration ticks during the spell effect, which isn't stopped or prevented. You're then stunned for any remaining duration after the Unstoppable effect wears off.
BILLAY (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=The Djinn,realm=NA,application-id=6heBIhQc,discussion-id=v2mG0Gay,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2018-09-23T21:50:49.027+0000) > > I checked the thread, and I cannot find either message. It seems both were deemed unacceptable. > > Calling someone a crybaby is not okay though, which is why this was removed. Its nothing compared to caling someone cancer, reason why the game is "dying" Its nice his was deleted too but this was some serious bullshit
> [{quoted}](name=BILLAY,realm=NA,application-id=6heBIhQc,discussion-id=v2mG0Gay,comment-id=00000000,timestamp=2018-09-24T01:47:02.785+0000)Its nice his was deleted too but this was some serious bullshit I'm sorry you feel that way, but insulting other players just isn't something that will ever be okay here.
: How sensitive, much like the community you all at riot games are creating
> [{quoted}](name=AssassinsOnly,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=rbF980Uw,comment-id=00020002,timestamp=2018-09-23T23:56:29.715+0000) > > How sensitive, much like the community you all at riot games are creating *shrug* More that I'm always in favor of having actual discussion, and usually setting a non-biased opening post is a better way to get people to consider your point of view. If you just want to rant about something that frustrates you, that's fine, but you should just open by acknowledging that.
: While I don't know exactly how the boards system works, I picture it like a line queue. When something is reported it is added to the queue. The content reported comes up while they check, just the comment, not the entire thread. So in this case, your post came up and they may have brought the thread up because of the quoted text to manually remove if no one reported it. After removing yours, they continued through the queue. Eventually they either came across it or manually went back to the thread. Tldr: gotta give stuff time.
> [{quoted}](name=Imperial Pandaa,realm=NA,application-id=6heBIhQc,discussion-id=v2mG0Gay,comment-id=0001,timestamp=2018-09-23T22:00:16.708+0000)While I don't know exactly how the boards system works, I picture it like a line queue. When something is reported it is added to the queue. The content reported comes up while they check, just the comment, not the entire thread. Fairly accurate, although sometimes we'll check the whole thread if we have time and/or suspect there's a need from what we see in the post. Up to the amount of time we have available.
: POLL, first time -X- champion in ranked should be punishable
I've made a less biased poll that I'd recommend using next time if you want usable data without inherent bias: **Do you feel playing a champion for the first time in a ranked game should be punishable?** -- **Yes | No**
BILLAY (NA)
: Why do mods delete comments that aren't even toxic?
>I GET MY MESSAGE DELETED BUT NOOOOOO HIS IS OK?? I checked the thread, and I cannot find either message. It seems both were deemed unacceptable. Calling someone a crybaby is not okay though, which is why this was removed.
: > [{quoted}](name=The Djinn,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=tH49Zife,comment-id=000c00000000,timestamp=2018-09-23T20:00:11.407+0000) > > We will work on ensuring that the rules as we interpret them are followed, yes. This may not be exactly equal to the rules as you interpret them, and I apologize for any disappointment that results from those disagreements. Well, I've already outlined the 3 most likely outcomes I see as a result of me bringing up this situation. [It's on page 3.](https://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/general-discussion/tH49Zife-someone-on-moderation-needs-to-clarify-something?show=flat&comment=000a0001000000000000) Thing is, there still needs to be a common ground of interpretation of the rules on both ends. That means a line of clarity within the rules where "you know this is allowed by XYZ" and "this might be moderated via discretion on ABC". In other words, some parts need to be stuck to a uniform interpretation and you need to make sure everyone is clear on stuff that will fall under discretion.
> [{quoted}](name=Busty Demoness,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=tH49Zife,comment-id=000c000000000000,timestamp=2018-09-23T20:25:28.237+0000)That means a line of clarity within the rules where "you know this is allowed by XYZ" and "this might be moderated via discretion on ABC". In other words, some parts need to be stuck to a uniform interpretation and you need to make sure everyone is clear on stuff that will fall under discretion. Whenever the boundaries of the rules are being tested (and posted sexualized content IS pushing the boundaries), there will always be discretionary decisions made. I know you may not like that answer, but it's the reality of the situation -- part of the compromise of people being ALLOWED to push boundaries is that people need to be okay with being told when they've gone too far, and accept that it won't always be 100% "fair" in their eyes. Because believe me -- it would be FAR easier for us to say "anything that could be interpreted in any way as over PG isn't okay." We don't want to do that, and so we allow the boundaries to be pushed, but that means that sometimes they'll result in things that may not make individual posters happy.
: > [{quoted}](name=The Djinn,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=E7zE5lad,comment-id=0007,timestamp=2018-09-23T19:47:23.268+0000) > > We see things when we have time available to moderate, so sometimes this will happen, yes. I'd like to say we can reliably be faster, but it's simply not feasible with an all-volunteer team and a community this size. > > Yep. Sometimes we have time to post but not to moderate, sadly. > > Did you have an issue with a specific removal? If so I'll happily take a look. Look I get that you are volunteers. I get it. However, when you are on the site having these discussions don't you think you could be reading through the comments to moderate as well? I think it is cool that the mods are volunteers and I support it but I think that moderation on removed content need collective discussion between mods (except in instances of calls to violence of which I myself has reported.) If you want to look at a moderation on my account - Calamitosus Cini is the username. It was only for 24 hours but seriously seemed like a nitpick and the last comment I made which had "cupcakes" in it was literally meaning that pastries on a table to snack on would be there I wasn't calling anyone a cupcake. I like cupcakes.
> [{quoted}](name=Blighted High Ma,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=E7zE5lad,comment-id=00070000,timestamp=2018-09-23T20:05:58.911+0000)Look I get that you are volunteers. I get it. However, when you are on the site having these discussions don't you think you could be reading through the comments to moderate as well? Sometimes we do, but no, we don't always come into every discussion and read every post. Sometimes we just want to participate and aren't too worried with what other posters may have written unless it's in a post sequence that we're involved in. >but I think that moderation on removed content need collective discussion between mods We do this in situations where we are uncertain, and we regularly ask others to review our actions when concern arises. If we did this for every removal the pace of moderation would slow to a crawl. > If you want to look at a moderation on my account - Calamitosus Cini is the username. It was only for 24 hours but seriously seemed like a nitpick and the last comment I made which had "cupcakes" in it was literally meaning that pastries on a table to snack on would be there I wasn't calling anyone a cupcake. I like cupcakes. It would have been a nitpick if you hadn't had SEVEN warnings since the start of this month, and if you weren't joking around a social/political issue. We do take recent behavior into consideration.
: > [{quoted}](name=A Bad Varus,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=tH49Zife,comment-id=000c,timestamp=2018-09-23T19:50:35.762+0000) > > ITT: Virgins trying to defend posting borderline porn. Mods already did it for me, I'm just making sure they stick to it. {{sticker:sg-miss-fortune}}
> [{quoted}](name=Busty Demoness,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=tH49Zife,comment-id=000c0000,timestamp=2018-09-23T19:51:40.006+0000)Mods already did it for me, I'm just making sure they stick to it. We will work on ensuring that the rules as we interpret them are followed, yes. This may not be exactly equal to the rules as you interpret them, and I apologize for any disappointment that results from those disagreements.
: @theherald Mod we need to talk
> [{quoted}](name=Blighted High Ma,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=E7zE5lad,comment-id=,timestamp=2018-09-23T03:13:36.886+0000)I and others lately have been having content removed in which the content was literally posted DAYS ago. We see things when we have time available to moderate, so sometimes this will happen, yes. I'd like to say we can reliably be faster, but it's simply not feasible with an all-volunteer team and a community this size. >Regardless of context other mods ARE on the boards reading and partaking in these discussions of said which content is being removed SEVERAL DAYS LATER. Yep. Sometimes we have time to post but not to moderate, sadly. Did you have an issue with a specific removal? If so I'll happily take a look.
: > [{quoted}](name=The Djinn,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=tH49Zife,comment-id=000400000000000100000000000000000000,timestamp=2018-09-23T19:07:17.896+0000) > > And that's possibly valid, and why I will have someone else view it. The updated rules for GD specifically state (in regards to mature content): - No nudity, exposed or **hinted at genitalia** - No egregious upskirts or the like - No sexualized children or anything that could reasonably be mistaken as a child - No sexual acts or sexual situations - cropped pictures deemed too overt will be removed The bolded portion is why Ahri 5 would break the rules. And that's on the basis that her tail is blocking the imagery. My picture still doesn't fall under any of that so pick your poison on how you handle this.
> [{quoted}](name=Busty Demoness,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=tH49Zife,comment-id=0004000000000001000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2018-09-23T19:19:00.354+0000)The updated rules for GD specifically state (in regards to mature content): > > - No nudity, exposed or **hinted at genitalia** > - No egregious upskirts or the like > - No sexualized children or anything that could reasonably be mistaken as a child > - No sexual acts or sexual situations - cropped pictures deemed too overt will be removed. Point well taken that the rule on "upskirts and the like" could be more detailed. I'll run that by the team.
: > [{quoted}](name=The Djinn,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=tH49Zife,comment-id=0004000000000001000000000000,timestamp=2018-09-23T18:57:19.743+0000) > > And I have said I vetted the removal of your content with the rest of the team and, because it was upheld, I will ask them to vet the previous thread as well to make sure I didn't make a mistake with allowing those images. It's entirely possible that my decision there was not the one best in keeping with the board rules. > > I tend to be more lenient than less lenient, frankly (I checked prior to removing yours for that exact reason), so it's possible I let something go that I shouldn't have. As someone who has been here for quite a while, Ahri #5 technically should have been removed because of "evident nudity". By this, I mean "it's not showing important stuff but it's clear that there is nudity". It's not simply "implied" like seeing Miss Fortune in her Secret Agent with a some cleavage but otherwise showing no clothing because the cutoff is too high up. Or, Jessica Rabbit where you see her from the back and from the chest up (because she wears a backless/strapless dress as a cartoon character). That said, it still falls under PG13 ratings with examples I've given: > [{quoted}](name=Busty Demoness,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=tH49Zife,comment-id=00060000,timestamp=2018-09-23T18:46:11.736+0000) > > First one is risky even for a PG13 movie/series. However, there are plenty of precedents where it's tolerable. Bleach, My Hero Academia and Fairy Tale are all anime which are considered PG13 and have the same level of nudity (covered but required cover). This is where the first Ahri picture falls. > > Mine is no worse for PG13 even with the seductive pose and exaggerated curves because everything is covered. There was an early scene in Sword Art Online (fairly certain, might have been .hack) that dealt with this same problem and even involved a character's face slamming into an unnaturally huge rack. Still rated PG13. > > Care to bring up any reason why those examples don't count? So, regardless of whether you (as the moderation team in full) alleviate the rules on nudity/mature content from what they are now by basis of this precedent; I'm still fully aware that mine does not cross into anything that would warrant punishment under the current rules.
> [{quoted}](name=Busty Demoness,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=tH49Zife,comment-id=00040000000000010000000000000000,timestamp=2018-09-23T19:05:53.101+0000)As someone who has been here for quite a while, Ahri #5 technically should have been removed because of "evident nudity". By this, I mean "it's not showing important stuff but it's clear that there is nudity". It's not simply "implied" like seeing Miss Fortune in her Secret Agent with a some cleavage but otherwise showing no clothing because the cutoff is too high up. And that's possibly valid, and why I will have someone else view it.
: > [{quoted}](name=The Djinn,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=tH49Zife,comment-id=00040000000000010000,timestamp=2018-09-23T18:48:43.819+0000) > > And that's sort of the reason that this will *always* be discretion-based, frankly. Some people think that one is far out of line, others think it's Ahri's default with a different camera angle. At some point we have to make a call, and sometimes those calls upset people, but that's sort of what happens when you try to give more leeway than "if it's at all lewd, kill it." I'd LOVE to be able to set hard rules that we think won't lead to problematic content, but when we sat down to do that we STILL found edge-cases in pretty much every scenario we found. And there's reasons why I'm saying "discretion based" is bullshit justification right now. I've already listed OBJECTIVE reasons why my post should not be removed by comparison to pics you have left up under "it's borderline but we'll allow it". There's no way that call should have been made against me simply on the grounds of objectivity.
> [{quoted}](name=Busty Demoness,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=tH49Zife,comment-id=000400000000000100000000,timestamp=2018-09-23T18:55:58.311+0000) > > And there's reasons why I'm saying "discretion based" is bullshit justification right now. > > I've already listed OBJECTIVE reasons why my post should not be removed by comparison to pics you have left up under "it's borderline but we'll allow it". There's no way that call should have been made against me simply on the grounds of objectivity. And I have said I vetted the removal of your content with the rest of the team and, because it was upheld, I will ask them to vet the previous thread as well to make sure I didn't make a mistake with allowing those images. It's entirely possible that my decision there was not the one best in keeping with the board rules. I tend to be more lenient than less lenient, frankly (I checked prior to removing yours for that exact reason), so it's possible I let something go that I shouldn't have.
: > [{quoted}](name=The Djinn,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=tH49Zife,comment-id=000400000000,timestamp=2018-09-23T18:36:18.380+0000) > > Nah, I get that. I *personally* don't mind this sort of stuff, frankly, but I'm not single-handedly able to overturn the mature content rules. We relaxed them a bit with the understanding that there would be edge cases like this (and like some Evelynn art), and that's a price that comes with having more freedom. At some point we have to use our discretion to draw a line, because we're not able to say "all posts are fine," and whenever we relax rules people always push to find the next boundary. Yeah but the problem is that the 2nd image is literally splashart ahri with just a different camera angle and enlarged tits. Shes not any more nsfw than splashart ahri. The deciding factor is literally just the camera angle. If that image is deemed unsafe so should any that displays og splash art ahri cuz she in itself is designed to be nsfw, riot just double plays the safety with overabuse of nitpicky factors such as, you guessed it, camera angle.
> [{quoted}](name=Eternal Torment,realm=EUW,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=tH49Zife,comment-id=0004000000000001,timestamp=2018-09-23T18:41:13.559+0000) > > Yeah but the problem is that the 2nd image is literally splashart ahri with just a different camera angle and enlarged tits. Shes not any more nsfw than splashart ahri. The deciding factor is literally just the camera angle. > > If that image is deemed unsafe so should any that displays og splash art ahri cuz she in itself is designed to be nsfw, riot just double plays the safety with overabuse of nitpicky factors such as, you guessed it, camera angle. And that's sort of the reason that this will *always* be discretion-based, frankly. Some people think that one is far out of line, others think it's Ahri's default with a different camera angle. At some point we have to make a call, and sometimes those calls upset people, but that's sort of what happens when you try to give more leeway than "if it's at all lewd, kill it." I'd LOVE to be able to set hard rules that we think won't lead to problematic content, but when we sat down to do that we STILL found edge-cases in pretty much every scenario we found.
: > [{quoted}](name=The Djinn,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=tH49Zife,comment-id=0004,timestamp=2018-09-23T18:23:46.918+0000) > > So, first things first: in your previous thread I warned you against posting removed content without using the proper channels to contest it. This still stands, even when it frustrates you. **Discuss the Boards** and the Moderation Discord exist for this purpose, and further attempts to force your content through without using the correct channels for contesting a decision will not be tolerated. > > On this particular topic, those Ahri pictures posted are *right* on the line. The former is more nude, yes, but is also more covered, and isn't as egregious about *presenting* that nudity. The latter Ahri picture shows significantly less, and is already something we consider *very* borderline. I honestly almost removed it. > > Your image is barely clothed, makes sexuality the focus of the image far more, and is far more blatant about presenting the sexuality. This is what pushes it over the line. I've consulted with several moderators and some of our GD contacts, and the agreement was a fairly overwhelming "this is over the line." And I'm calling full bullshit. If you didn't remove that first pic, which is clearly worse in regards to the standards for mature content, you have ZERO cause to remove mine. I've submitted a ticket regarding my ban from the boards discord being lifted but until then you have a very clear set of double standards on your hands. I am sick of dealing with the double standards I've been force to endure from the moderation team for years now. I'm not letting it continue any more. So, as a community member who was unfairly wronged, get your shit together.
> [{quoted}](name=Busty Demoness,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=tH49Zife,comment-id=00040001,timestamp=2018-09-23T18:35:06.201+0000) > > And I'm calling full bullshit. > > If you didn't remove that first pic, which is clearly worse in regards to the standards for mature content, you have ZERO cause to remove mine. You may be right, and as such I will happily ask someone other than myself to re-review that thread, because I have checked with several other people about your content's removal, and it was upheld in all cases as a valid removal.
: > [{quoted}](name=The Djinn,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=tH49Zife,comment-id=0004,timestamp=2018-09-23T18:23:46.918+0000) > > So, first things first: in your previous thread I warned you against posting removed content without using the proper channels to contest it. This still stands, even when it frustrates you. **Discuss the Boards** and the Moderation Discord exist for this purpose, and further attempts to force your content through without using the correct channels for contesting a decision will not be tolerated. > > On this particular topic, those Ahri pictures posted are *right* on the line. The former is more nude, yes, but is also more covered, and isn't as egregious about *presenting* that nudity. The latter Ahri picture shows significantly less, and is already something we consider *very* borderline. I honestly almost removed it. > > Your image is barely clothed, makes sexuality the focus of the image far more, and is far more blatant about presenting the sexuality. This is what pushes it over the line. I've consulted with several moderators and some of our GD contacts, and the agreement was a fairly overwhelming "this is over the line." Both Ahri picture are way farther on the *other* side of the line than the picture in question.
> [{quoted}](name=DrCyanide,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=tH49Zife,comment-id=00040002,timestamp=2018-09-23T18:36:25.997+0000) > > Both Ahri picture are way farther on the *other* side of the line than the picture in question. This is a perspective some people will share, and I'll ask someone other than myself to re-review that thread to make sure I didn't make an error by not removing them.
: > [{quoted}](name=The Djinn,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=tH49Zife,comment-id=0004,timestamp=2018-09-23T18:23:46.918+0000) > > So, first things first: in your previous thread I warned you against posting removed content without using the proper channels to contest it. This still stands, even when it frustrates you. **Discuss the Boards** and the Moderation Discord exist for this purpose, and further attempts to force your content through without using the correct channels for contesting a decision will not be tolerated. > > On this particular topic, those Ahri pictures posted are *right* on the line. The former is more nude, yes, but is also more covered, and isn't as egregious about *presenting* that nudity. The latter Ahri picture shows significantly less, and is already something we consider *very* borderline. I honestly almost removed it. > > Your image is barely clothed, makes sexuality the focus of the image far more, and is far more blatant about presenting the sexuality. This is what pushes it over the line. I've consulted with several moderators and some of our GD contacts, and the agreement was a fairly overwhelming "this is over the line." Evelynn's base splashart is basically a full nude with just her shadow magic thingy as a pseudo cover. Evelynn even has dialogues about past victims having died over complaints to her nudity. But if we post pictures of her no one bats an eye. But if Ahri is drawn in her full atire but with the viewpoint from above rather than below like in most splasharts, she is deemed sexualizing and censored. Forgive my harsh words but that logic is borderline stupidity.
> [{quoted}](name=Eternal Torment,realm=EUW,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=tH49Zife,comment-id=00040000,timestamp=2018-09-23T18:32:14.678+0000)Forgive my harsh words but that logic is borderline stupidity. Nah, I get that. I *personally* don't mind this sort of stuff, frankly, but I'm not single-handedly able to overturn the mature content rules. We relaxed them a bit with the understanding that there would be edge cases like this (and like some Evelynn art), and that's a price that comes with having more freedom. At some point we have to use our discretion to draw a line, because we're not able to say "all posts are fine," and whenever we relax rules people always push to find the next boundary.
: Well yes, I understand that's what the League of Legends moderators currently exist to do, because that's basically the job description. That's undeniable. The point is that the fact that that's what the LoL mods exist to do is a completely arbitrary and voluntary list of rules. Other moderators for other websites don't necessarily moderate those kinds of behaviors, and there isn't some kind of recourse that's taken against the moderators or the website for that difference in the list of moderated content. I'm not sure you understand the scope of what I'm saying. It's not that the (moderators) shouldn't moderate those things, it's that the role of the (moderation team) shouldn't be to moderate those things. Which again, is why many people feel that the moderation team is over reaching and fling around the term "nazi mods". Most moderation work involves moderation of particular kinds of content for the sake of protecting players and the website. Where as the rules that I crossed out involve moderating player behavior offensively, rather than forum/board content defensively.
> [{quoted}](name=deadlychuck,realm=NA,application-id=6heBIhQc,discussion-id=x33gyE9U,comment-id=0003000200000000000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2018-09-23T18:14:26.822+0000)I'm not sure you understand the scope of what I'm saying. It's not that the (moderators) shouldn't moderate those things, it's that the role of the (moderation team) shouldn't be to moderate those things. I get that. I'm saying that we (and Riot) disagree. Moderating those things is part of why our team *exists*.
: Someone on moderation needs to clarify something.
So, first things first: in your previous thread I warned you against posting removed content without using the proper channels to contest it. This still stands, even when it frustrates you. **Discuss the Boards** and the Moderation Discord exist for this purpose, and further attempts to force your content through without using the correct channels for contesting a decision will not be tolerated. On this particular topic, those Ahri pictures posted are *right* on the line. The former is more nude, yes, but is also more covered, and isn't as egregious about *presenting* that nudity. The latter Ahri picture shows significantly less, and is already something we consider *very* borderline. I honestly almost removed it. Your image is barely clothed, makes sexuality the focus of the image far more, and is far more blatant about presenting the sexuality. This is what pushes it over the line. I've consulted with several moderators and some of our GD contacts, and the agreement was a fairly overwhelming "this is over the line."
: Obviously you feel that those are things that the moderators should be responsible for removing. That wasn't ever a question. The point is that these things are not something that's necessary for the moderators to moderate from a practical prospective. These things aren't illegal nor are many of them objectively defined, instead being left up to moderator subjective discretion. The result is that you end up creating substantially more work in attempting to moderate those listed behaviors under the predisposition that failing to remove them is going to lead to... well i'm not sure... less productive discussion? Chaos? Fighting? Not that it those don't still comprise the vast majority of the boards. But at the end of the day, your disagreement on these points, and the methods used to enforce them being the same that are used to enforce those of the list that I didn't remove, is why people are frustrated with the boards mods and consider them to be authoritarians. Though most people are more dramatic and just say "nazis".
> [{quoted}](name=deadlychuck,realm=NA,application-id=6heBIhQc,discussion-id=x33gyE9U,comment-id=00030002000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2018-09-23T17:58:09.485+0000)Obviously you feel that those are things that the moderators should be responsible for removing. That wasn't ever a question. The point is that these things are not something that's necessary for the moderators to moderate from a practical prospective. Again, we disagree. Many of those things are the things the moderation team exists TO handle.
: My Birdie Bag didn't give me all the skins !!!!!!!
Hey! This one is a little odd, but the Start Guardian skins are actually split into TWO skin lines -- the old school Star Guardians and the new team. It's due to the sheer size of that skin line. This is working as intended.
Ray 701 (EUW)
: > [{quoted}](name=The Djinn,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=b93IAyV7,comment-id=000000080000,timestamp=2018-09-23T14:06:44.834+0000) > > Eh. I stand by it. If you have five characters that have a potential individual damage output of 10, 10, 10, 10, and 2, and you reduce the damage of the 10 champions to 8 while INCREASING the damage of the 2 champion to 6, team damage potential still drops from 42 to 38, despite one character getting buffed. > > I'm not saying Riot is DELIVERING on a damage nerf across the board at this time: just that buffing a character here and there isn't good evodence they don't think damage IN GENERAL is too high. Why is Riot pulling a 12, 12, 12, 10, 6 though?
> [{quoted}](name=Ray 701,realm=EUW,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=b93IAyV7,comment-id=0000000800000000,timestamp=2018-09-23T15:15:44.184+0000) > > Why is Riot pulling a 12, 12, 12, 10, 6 though? That's a seperate question I can't really answer, save that my guess is that they're waiting until Preseason to do such a major shakeup, which makes some sense.
Phridolin (EUW)
: i again disagree. my comment was constructive criticism. i pointed out the good ones and the bad ones. the girl and you should be happy, when i make threads i most time get only dumb comments who either troll or bring NOTHING constructive to the table. i did there. so in my opinion you still fucked up. you forbid me to speak out my opinion which was NOT harassment. guys like you violate the freedom of speech. i appreciat the long feedback tho. about the report: i dont care anymore about this one. but i disagree and will continue writing my opinion into OFFICIAL threads - which are imo respectful (and for sure enough respectful for boobie-pic threads) so go on and delete them.
> [{quoted}](name=Phridolin,realm=EUW,application-id=6heBIhQc,discussion-id=PuQpE8uX,comment-id=00010000,timestamp=2018-09-23T04:26:21.175+0000)about the report: i dont care anymore about this one. but i disagree and will continue writing my opinion into OFFICIAL threads - which are imo respectful (and for sure enough respectful for boobie-pic threads) so go on and delete them. I should perhaps warn you, then, that continued posts like that one may lead to punishment, not just deletion. It was NOT the sort of content that is appropriate for the boards, and if you persist in posting in that style you may encounter future issues.
: > [{quoted}](name=The Djinn,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=b93IAyV7,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2018-09-21T23:01:17.206+0000) > > ...yeah? You CAN nerf damage overall while still giving a character more damage in their *specific* kit, and Riot has mentioned they're looking into overall damage, especially on items/runes. Proof that having any special position at riot or on the forums doesn't mean you know balance.
> [{quoted}](name=Slim Gragas,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=b93IAyV7,comment-id=00000008,timestamp=2018-09-22T21:59:48.977+0000) > > Proof that having any special position at riot or on the forums doesn't mean you know balance. Eh. I stand by it. If you have five characters that have a potential individual damage output of 10, 10, 10, 10, and 2, and you reduce the damage of the 10 champions to 8 while INCREASING the damage of the 2 champion to 6, team damage potential still drops from 42 to 38, despite one character getting buffed. I'm not saying Riot is DELIVERING on a damage nerf across the board at this time: just that buffing a character here and there isn't good evodence they don't think damage IN GENERAL is too high.
: > [{quoted}](name=The Djinn,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=qha3I0vf,comment-id=000f,timestamp=2018-09-22T17:25:34.417+0000) > > This is accurate. It takes a few months of good behavior to decrease a penalty, so we'll take a look and see if this log had that. > > Giving up (or threatening to give up) is not okay, not is blaming your team (let alone one person in particular). > > See above. > > Passive aggression towards the same individual. > > Passive aggression, blame-placing, and needless negativity. > > ------------------------------------------------ > > This log is borderline, and I understand how you might be surprised it earned you a punishment, but this behavior isn't a good indication that you've improved. You spend the entire game complaining about, chastising, or being passive-aggressive towards a teammate, and that's not the sort of goods sportsmanlike behavior or good teamwork that League asks of you, *especially* if you had a 14-day ban. > > I'd say this behavior was perhaps just not as far over the line as some, but I do think it was over the line and, after a 14-day ban, that unfortunately earns a permanent ban. i totally understand the chat was negative, but it was a result of retaliation. i know that 2 wrongs don't make a right but fully aware of the punishments i kept my words G rated because i didn't want to continue behaving inappropriately. i did start the game praising my teammate as well and my previous games since the ban have praiseworthy comments as well. with the amount of games played since 2012 i would have hoped it would have been taken into account when addressing if i should be permanently banned since its the smallest fraction of negativity. Passive aggressive behavior is just me truly caring about the game and upset when individuals go out of there way to ruin it for others, if i had no previous history i'm not sure if i would have even received the 10 game chat restriction because it was so borderline. do you know if there is any plans for the future to allow players to redeem themselves or prove that there behavior has changed, i honestly thought that when i was punished for chat it was because i had used one of the follow: profanity, acronyms of profanity, hate speech, racial slurs, derogatory comments towards unskilled players, etc. i'm honestly sorry i didn't want to become someone who needs to defend themselves as being not toxic, I've made improvements and played for so long, but will only be recognized and remember as someone who was passive aggressive at the end and cut off from the game. thanks for taking the time to look at my post and reply as well i know i commented on another thread and am glad you saw and looked into my post, much appreciated.
> [{quoted}](name=sneakers7,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=qha3I0vf,comment-id=000f0000,timestamp=2018-09-22T17:43:49.876+0000)i kept my words G rated because i didn't want to continue behaving inappropriately. Unfortunately it's not about the words you use (save hate speech) -- it's about the content. I can say "Holy fuck. That play was the shit!" and be just fine. I can't say "You're a stupid jerk and I hope you fall down a well," even though those words are all G-rated. >with the amount of games played since 2012 i would have hoped it would have been taken into account when addressing if i should be permanently banned since its the smallest fraction of negativity. Total games played do not contribute, because it's possible for behavior to change. What matters is patterns of behavior within a timeframe, not the past X years of behavior. If I started calling everyone trash in my next game I'd expect to be banned quickly, despite 8 seasons without a punishment. >if i had no previous history i'm not sure if i would have even received the 10 game chat restriction because it was so borderline. It *might* have earned a chat restriction. More likely it would have pushed you closer to one rather than triggering it by itself. You're held to a higher standard if you have received more warnings though, because you need to prove reform. > do you know if there is any plans for the future to allow players to redeem themselves or prove that there behavior has changed... At this time I am unaware of any specific plans to do this. It's always possible, of course. >i honestly thought that when i was punished for chat it was because i had used one of the follow: profanity, acronyms of profanity, hate speech, racial slurs, derogatory comments towards unskilled players, etc. Unfortunately it's not just this. Excessive complaining, passive-aggression, veiled insults, rank-shaming, or unsportsmanlike behavior can result in penalties as well. >thanks for taking the time to look at my post and reply as well i know i commented on another thread and am glad you saw and looked into my post, much appreciated. Any time!
: Taking down my post...
That thread is on the old boards, *looooong* before the current Volunteer Team took over moderation. It would be removed now if it were posted, but we can't do anything about anything on the old boards.
: Permanently Banned LMK what you think, thanks.
>After receiving my 2 week ban i noticed that message saying any acts will get you permanently banned henceforth. This is accurate. It takes a few months of good behavior to decrease a penalty, so we'll take a look and see if this log had that. > sneakers7: im done > sneakers7: ff > sneakers7: solo bc of you Giving up (or threatening to give up) is not okay, not is blaming your team (let alone one person in particular). > sneakers7: clearly ur inting > sneakers7: 0/2 in lane loses first turret than comes mid to grief cs from me > sneakers7: yea gg See above. > sneakers7: imagine playing a team game and trolling your teamates > sneakers7: why play? Passive aggression towards the same individual. > sneakers7: and she comes into my lane after she fed bot and lost turret > sneakers7: to steal my lane freeze > sneakers7: yea have fun with your L > sneakers7: why u griefing > sneakers7: noin stop > sneakers7: whats ur problem > sneakers7: all game this kai steals my lane freeze and my blue buffs Passive aggression, blame-placing, and needless negativity. ------------------------------------------------ This log is borderline, and I understand how you might be surprised it earned you a punishment, but this behavior isn't a good indication that you've improved. You spend the entire game complaining about, chastising, or being passive-aggressive towards a teammate, and that's not the sort of goods sportsmanlike behavior or good teamwork that League asks of you, *especially* if you had a 14-day ban. I'd say this behavior was perhaps just not as far over the line as some, but I do think it was over the line and, after a 14-day ban, that unfortunately earns a permanent ban.
: >any buff of any kind is a buff to damage, because it makes you live longer to deal more damage You really just missed my point, there's a difference in buffing an ultimate and buffing health/ resistance stats. We want champions to be able to have solid starting resistances and health. Rengar ult got buffed Lucian damage just got buffed Renekton got buffed We can agree to disagree if you want, but they fucking gut sejuani and buffed an already strong set of champions. Just say you don't care about balance and go.
> [{quoted}](name=Yandere GF,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=b93IAyV7,comment-id=000000050000000200000000,timestamp=2018-09-22T16:59:33.786+0000)We can agree to disagree if you want, but they fucking gut sejuani and buffed an already strong set of champions. Just say you don't care about balance and go. I don't disagree that those buffs happened -- I was merely responding to the point raised that Riot doesn't buff anything but damage by pointing out instances where they did exactly that. It's also a *little* disingenuous to say we can agree to disagree, but that if I don't agree with you than I clearly don't care about balance. I honestly don't really have the information I'd need to comment on Rengar, Lucian, or Renekton with any real confidence.
Blenos (NA)
: Weird question to rioters
You can request an account deactivation or an account deletion, which I think would be how they'd go about something like this.
: Why aren't .webm files allowed on Boards?
Mainly because the boards do not host anything but text and the built-in graphics. Anything else is hosted off-site because, quite simply, the boards do not have an upload or storage function for user-uploaded content.
Phridolin (EUW)
: So i got recently a warning/ report here cause of ... ? WHAT?!
If we have one rule on this board that sums up all others, it's this one: >Always be respectful to players, community members, moderators, and Rioters. Your first comment (_"I like the quick and short story! IMO Riot should add more stories to skins like Heroes of the Storm does"_) was great. After your second comment, things took a HUGE downhill turn. It is not okay to asking if someone is lying and then assume that, if they are, it might be "to show your already big boobs." It is not okay to ask if their picture (which was the majority of the creative content posted) was "clickbait" because it made you think it was a "naughty dude who posts big boobs for the lols and horny kids." It is not okay to imply they might be insecure than that this is an "Interesting step to work against it ... but better than try to be a cam girl on the other hand." In short, your post is insulting, unnecessary, and completely disrespectful of the fact that the poster had an idea to share. If you don't have something productive to add to the discussion, simply *don't comment*. This is, effectively, harassment of the individual posting, and delves into an attempt at completely inappropriate analysis of the reasons behind a post of creative content.
Ray 701 (EUW)
: > [{quoted}](name=The Djinn,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=b93IAyV7,comment-id=00000005000000000000,timestamp=2018-09-22T13:56:00.480+0000) > > I mean, I get that you don't like the changes, but I think that's a poor reason to attack the people responsible rather than disagreeing with the changes. > > That said, I personally believe the following: > > * Damage is a bit too high / defenses are a bit too low *in general*. > * Specific characters may be exceptions to this, due to their specific tuning. > * A character can have their damage buffed if a bit of power is needed, and this is acceptable if that character's damage is not already out of line. > > In this instance, Janna is a character whose damage output isn't worrying, nor does this buff make me worry about it. I think it is, instead, an interesting boost to her harassing power, and Janna's problem has always been that she makes lanes fairly passive, so I think it's a good chance for her gameplay. I'd still be happy to see damage in general drop, but I feel the places where it is most out of line are not on the auto-attacks of primarily-defensive supports. Your points sound reasonable. This thread wasn't really meant to discuss Janna in the first place though. It just seems so weird that Riot agreed about damage being too high weeks ago while still not doing anything to buff resistances or anything of the like. Instead, they keep giving champions that already have a huge damage output even more damage. Even granting an enchanter more lane damage (despite understanding your points) comes off as a complete joke and middle finger to the community at this point. I understand that Riot can't really experiment with defenses right before worlds, but their current changes completely baffle and frustrate me. It just seems they don't get what we want, despite the fact we are rubbing the answer right in their face for almost a year now, despite the playerbase decreasing rapidly compared to previous seasons and despite just having to copy seasons in which this game used to be so much fun.
> [{quoted}](name=Ray 701,realm=EUW,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=b93IAyV7,comment-id=000000050000000000000000,timestamp=2018-09-22T14:04:46.046+0000)It just seems so weird that Riot agreed about damage being too high weeks ago while still not doing anything to buff resistances or anything of the like. They've mentioned they're looking into it for the PreSeason though, and I think they (reasonably) want to avoid a huge shake-up right before worlds. As such, changes are made for what they think would benefit gameplay *now*, as well as in the future. >Even granting an enchanter more lane damage (despite understanding your points) comes off as a complete joke and middle finger to the community at this point. I get that, but there's also a bit of a misunderstanding on the boards (in general) about how maintaining and balancing a vast, shifting ecosystem like *League* works. While it's important to listen to the community they're not always right on the WHY or the HOW, and it takes time to figure out where to pull damage from or where to buff defenses to ensure that the game ends up in a reasonable, fun state. While yes, you could just reduce all damage by 20%, that would have significantly ramifications that I don't believe most people stop to fully consider, such as slowing the game down immensely, or removing poke as a realistically viable strategy, or bringing back a world of Season 2 Bruisers. If Assassins are too strong, is it because Duskblade's proc is too strong? Or is it because Duskblade is too cheap, or their base values are too high, or their ability scalings are too high, or because runes are too strong, or because armor/health aren't attractive buys, or because early defenses aren't strong enough, or their gold income is too high, or simply because their counters are undertuned and aren't being picked? You need to have a good idea of what the problematic contributions are, because you could nerf any one of those things, but if you nerf the wrong one you haven't holistically solved the problem -- just applied a bandaid that will probably start to become a problem again if something else changes. I'm not arguing that Riot is perfect by *any* means, but I think often people give them too little credit, *especially* when a change comes out that seems a little odd. In, say, Renekton were struggling top lane I'd *expect* him to get a damage boost, even if damage were too high. If Janna's struggling a bit but her utility is still S-tier and her defenses are frustrating to burn through, it's probably because she's not bringing enough lane power, and increasing her DPS with harass seems like a good way to target that without making her significantly more frustrating later in the game or pushing out other defensive picks.
Show more

The Djinn

Level 61 (NA)
Lifetime Upvotes
Create a Discussion