: So Lulu's dragon's name is basically [this?](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oH9oOwe9bsE)
I think it's more like [this](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dQw4w9WgXcQ).
: First, love the name :p Second, when it gets implemented, would we be likely to see a Red post to let us know that the improved detection has been implemented? I think it would be helpful for the players so they know when exactly to expect less bots popping up and help you incase we are still seeing too many bots and can let you know sooner that the problem is persisting.
Yeah, as soon as the new detection tests show that we're catching bots early enough to show noticeable improvement to players, I'll be happy to provide that update in a post.
: Thank you for the clarification! It is good to hear that you are moving towards catching bots in only a few games. And I agree that the captcha idea isn't a very good solution, I was more thinking of ways to prevent botting before the match even starts. As a follow up, does Riot place special emphasis on catching bots in non-SR modes? Because it is pretty common knowledge that if you are going to play ARAM, old Dominion, or TT you need to have a good number of wins in hand before you can play a game with no bots. I get the sense that newer players think that Riot just lets those bot-infested modes stay that way since it doesn't impact SR, which is Riot's crown jewel.
We target bots across all modes. They do behave differently depending on the mode though, so the model varies depending on the game mode.
: I am curious, are you allowed to give us an idea of how quickly your systems are supposed to catch a botting account? E.g. detection within X amount of games. I ask because I wonder whether Riot would ever think of client-side means of inhibiting bots. To give an extreme example, needing to enter a captcha code before entering any queue.
We've recently made some improvements on our data pipeline (work on that front is still ongoing), which will enable us to detect bots sooner. I'm striving toward a model that would only require a few games to be confident enough that an account is worthy of a ban for botting, and we'll need to monitor this as botters adapts. On the captcha idea, this is something that's commonly brought up, but is not an idea we're entertaining at the moment. For one, we have a captcha on account creation and we still see botting on new accounts (i.e. we know there are ways around captcha). Secondly, as a human it's really annoying to have to put in captcha codes. Bots make up a very small percentage of all players, so by implementing a captcha in order to queue up for a match (which we know bots can circumvent), we're likely just causing annoyance for human players. That's not to say we couldn't put in some logic to only present a different challenge to suspected bots using certain criteria, which is why we haven't dismissed that idea completely.
: Riot, It's Time for You to Take Action. Now, Not Later
Hi Mounting Dread, Thanks for the thoughtful post. You're spot on with how serious this problem is for new players, and I'm hoping I can solve it. We do run retroactive ban waves against bots today. They can level so quickly though, that we're often too slow in banning them before they affect a bunch of real players. I've been working on improved detection that should catch more bots as well as detect them more quickly. I've got a candidate model that looks promising, but it needs some thorough testing before we start running ban waves. The last thing we want is a bunch of false positive readings that result in real players getting caught in the ban waves. I'm shooting for larger retroactive ban waves in the next couple of weeks. Once that tests well and we don't see too many false positives, we'll automate it in a way that can issue bans closer to real-time.
: @The Wolff/Riot, My proposal for a solution to IP farming bots (and subsequently low level smurfing)
I agree with your analysis of the problem space and why botting exists. However, I don't agree that the best solution is for Riot to sell new accounts to players who are already level 30. I'd rather see us come up with solutions that support the use cases you've outlined while still allowing you to play from your main account. Ghostcrawler wrote about this same topic yesterday [here](http://ask.fm/RiotGhostcrawler/answer/132331857291).
wente123 (EUW)
: Whats funny is that its the same like the Music Industry had with Napster and the Movie Industry with their Movies 10 years ago. You dont adress the issue u just make it worse. There is a Market for Accounts because People dont want to lvl up their Smurfs or whatever just because it is time consuming for no real reason. Plus the fact that there were multiple Posts on Forums and Reddit about how Smurfs make it hard for newer Players to get into the Game. So why dont u just adress the issue and make a purchasable Option urself? You gain Money, have less Botters (Because People dont want their accounts to be banned anyway) and new People are mostly playing with new ones as well aside from some Bots maybe. The only point i think that is any valid is because u want to punish People that are banned for their behaviours but they will get a new Account so or so. I dunno its just not the best solution in my mind.
The best answer I can give you right now is "It's complicated." We hear that players want secondary accounts. As for the reasons why, we're sympathetic to some (e.g. "I want to play with my friends who just signed up"), but not others (e.g. "I want to stomp noobs"). We're not sure that selling level 30 accounts is the best solution. There may be other ways we can support the 'good' use cases for smurfing in a way that doesn't require creating a secondary account.
: Are there any other ban waves incoming? Or that's it ;p
There will be regular ban waves for bots going forward :)
: Are you also banning accounts that were bought and leveled up through botting?
We're focused on detecting and banning botted accounts before they can be sold. This doesn't mean that buying a botted account makes you innocent (our Terms of Use prohibit the buying and selling of accounts). That being said, let me answer your question directly: yes, accounts that were botted and sold are in-scope for these ban waves.
: Thanks for the hard work. Any chance you guys can add an option to the report feature for people that we suspect are cheating or botting so we can weed them out faster for you?
Getting community support to identify bots can be helpful for investigations, and I'm excited to hear you want to help. We've thought about this feature, but aren't sure if we want to add it yet. One reason is that we can't simply ban bots off of reports alone...we need to be able to identify and ignore false reports. For now, I'd suggest using an existing category that most closely matches the bot's activity (usually players use 'Intentional Feeding' or "Refused to Communicate with Team'). In the report comments, tell us that you're reporting a suspected bot and describe the activity that tipped you off.
  Rioter Comments
: Credit Card limit 24 hours?!?!
Hey AirForceJuans, I took a look at your account and there were some other reasons it was getting blocked behind the scenes, which is why you were unsuccessful even though you waited a couple days. I've cleared those other blockers and you should be good to go again. Depending on how many times you've tried today, it's possible you might hit the max attempts again, in which case you should wait 24 hours. If you still have no luck after 24 hours, go ahead and submit a support ticket and we'll get some more information from you so we can provide better assistance.
: I think it this is a safe question: Is the ban wave going to hit bots? Some people have been very vocal about wanting something done about the bot situations in Twisted Treeline and Dominion, and I'm sure they want to know if this is the fix they're hoping for or if another team is working on that.
> [{quoted}](name=DrCyanide,realm=NA,application-id=cIfEodbz,discussion-id=AEVP3NMA,comment-id=0002,timestamp=2015-06-11T00:04:21.687+0000) > > I think it this is a safe question: > > Is the ban wave going to hit bots? Some people have been very vocal about wanting something done about the bot situations in Twisted Treeline and Dominion, and I'm sure they want to know if this is the fix they're hoping for or if another team is working on that. Great question! As someone who has seen plenty of bots in games, I feel your pain. This ban wave will not include bots, but we'll be doing ban waves for them soon. I can't say exactly when, but this is more "as soon as possible" rather than "soon(tm)". As much as we strive to stop cheaters, we're just as passionate about giving bots the boot.
: > [{quoted}](name=BananaBrad,realm=NA,application-id=osqw6G4M,discussion-id=260UTbq3,comment-id=00020000,timestamp=2015-04-27T19:53:17.315+0000) > > We currently don't suspend accounts solely for sharing. When we do suspend accounts that are being shared, it's usually a result of other activities (e.g. compromise, Elo boosting, etc.). Often times, one person using the account will do something shady without the other person's knowledge. Ultimately, the account creator is responsible for all activities occuring on an account. We know this is frustrating, and this is why we discourage account sharing. So, hypothetically speaking, if me and my brother were to share an account, both leveling it to level 30, and it eventually became one of our main accounts, there would be no suspensions provided that is all that happened? Beyond the fact that elo boosting is an incredibly vague term which might constitute the sharing of an account between me and my brother, one of us being better than the other, ergo "boosting" the account's mmr, this doesn't really matchup with how Riot has handled this in the past. It has always been, "Even if you share your account with your best friend, it is considered against the ToS." Are you positive about this, that accounts aren't suspended simply for being shared between friends? From the ToS section D: [Any distribution by you of your Account and/or your Login Credentials (except as expressly provided herein or otherwise explicitly approved of by Riot Games) may result in suspension or termination of your Account.](http://na.leagueoflegends.com/en/legal/termsofuse) BananaBrad, I just want to be clear. You are saying that Riot will not suspend an account, that has been shared between two people. It has not been sold, boosted, or otherwise used for shady services. It was simply an account where two people had access to the login information? **This is not a bannable offense?**
It is a bannable offense, and sharing accounts is against our Terms of Use. To clarify, we're currently choosing not to pursue suspension of accounts _for this reason alone_. When you share an account, you're taking a huge risk. I see a lot of cases where a player put a lot of time and money into an account, then they permanently lost it because they shared it with a friend / relative who then did something to get the account banned.
: It's nice that you're attempting to reach out to the playerbase, but in all honesty this is kind of a joke. Saying account sharing is bad is common sense and reminding people that purchasing an account is 1) a poor financial decision and 2) risks that account being permabanned is totally self-evident; but more than anything it doesn't address two critical issues which demonstrates a total lack of awareness from Riot as a company. First, the fact that there's a black market for level 30 accounts to begin with. Black markets arise when there is a good or service that cannot be easily obtained through legal methods, and as it stands, levelling multiple accounts to level 30 requires a huge investment in time and effort. It takes about 300 to 400 games to reach level 30 and the IP earned almost certainly is not sufficient to purchase a sufficient amount runes, rune pages or champions to enter and feasibly be competitive in Ranked play. Second, while it is nice that you're willing to have a dialog about account sharing, what is actually being done about it? To speak to your three points: > First, we want the Fields of Justice to be a place of competitive integrity. There's no competitive integrity when a player disconnects, AFKs, ragequits, or trolls in champion select and I am almost 100% certain those things happen more often than say, a Bronze IV player purchasing an account that has Diamond II MMR. But there is no recompense for lost time, MMR or LP when you're forced into a 4v5 or have a teammate that flat out refuses to cooperate and feeds. So where is the effort from the "Many teams at Riot [who] strive to ensure that competitive fairness in League in maintained"? Why is effort being put into stopping account sharing or purchasing when there's a much more pertinent and damaging issue? >Additionally, account trading clouds the issue... Trades cause a lot of pain when it comes to ownership and recoveries. Again, this affects only players who purchase accounts, which I'm sure is a minority. >Finally, account trading indirectly harms everyone, just by existing. The "black market" incentivizes people towards tons of toxic activities - botting, phishing, Elo boosting, and hacking to name a few. Slippery slope argument aside, this is probably the most contentious thing about this post. It shows that Riot is aware of these problems, which is good... but at the same time, when players/accounts are reported for any one of these activities, almost nothing is done about it, which is bad. There are plenty of threads made on Reddit highlighting this (leaving alone the fact that going to Reddit is the default for trying to get Riot's attention, which is shameful enough) and almost all end with little to nothing being done about the account unless it was incredibly egregious: Challenger DDOSing, the BoRK active bug a few months ago and more recently, the new account friend request spam. For players in lower tiers and divisions of ranked play, or players trying out the Twisted Treeline or Dominion, there is plenty of evidence of illegal activity and nothing is done about it. In all honesty, I don't have any faith in Riot to do anything that doesn't involve the LCS or new skins, especially since it's been close to or over a year since the Tribunal was removed.
> reminding people that purchasing an account is 1) a poor financial decision and 2) risks that account being permabanned is totally self-evident We should not assume that this is self-evident. One of the reasons we chose to post about this topic is because a lot of players are unaware of the risks of buying/trading/sharing accounts. > First, the fact that there's a black market for level 30 accounts to begin with. Black markets arise when there is a good or service that cannot be easily obtained through legal methods, and as it stands, levelling multiple accounts to level 30 requires a huge investment in time and effort. It takes about 300 to 400 games to reach level 30 and the IP earned almost certainly is not sufficient to purchase a sufficient amount runes, rune pages or champions to enter and feasibly be competitive in Ranked play. I don't disagree with this. When I see third-party solutions pop up, it signals to me that there's either a player need we aren't meeting, or there's something we could be doing better. The leveling process is a topic that comes up occasionally, but I don't have any news to share with you re: leveling at this time. > There's no competitive integrity when a player disconnects, AFKs, ragequits, or trolls in champion select and I am almost 100% certain those things happen more often than say, a Bronze IV player purchasing an account that has Diamond II MMR. But there is no recompense for lost time, MMR or LP when you're forced into a 4v5 or have a teammate that flat out refuses to cooperate and feeds. So where is the effort from the "Many teams at Riot [who] strive to ensure that competitive fairness in League in maintained"? Why is effort being put into stopping account sharing or purchasing when there's a much more pertinent and damaging issue? Putting effort into this discussion about account sharing does not mean there isn't effort put into the other issues you've identified (there is). One of the "many teams" referenced is our player behavior team, and Lyte discusses progress on AFK / toxic behavior from time to time.
: Riot messes up a bit, but they do try their best, and I can't ask for anything more. luv u rito
I just wanted to pop in here and say thanks to everyone for being patient with us. We know this has been a pain point for a while. There's still a lot of work to be done on the botting front, but we're hoping this will eliminate a significant chunk of them so you can get back to playing with other humans. Together, we can put an end to bot-on-bot violence.

The Wolff

Level 107 (NA)
Lifetime Upvotes
Create a Discussion