: but... don't we all get a reset to honor 2 when the new season starts in February?
Pretty much what [KVbqbFsC8e](https://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/player-behavior-moderation/09HvI1qu-im-currently-honor-1-checkpoint-23-will-my-honor-level-progress-during-the-preseason?comment=0001000100000000) said; at the start of the new Season, everyone who was Honor Level 2 or higher has their Honor Level reset back down to 2, with an extra checkpoint for each level above 2. The reset does not, unfortunately, affect players who are Honor Level 0-1.
: I'm currently Honor 1 checkpoint 2/3, will my honor level progress during the preseason?
As long as you're playing games and not getting validly reported, your Honor will progress at any time of the year; including Pre-Season.
Y4hL (EUW)
: Honor 5 before season end
There's a chance, though you'd be cutting it real close. Just play plenty of games and make sure to Honor someone each time for that Team Honor Bonus, and don't put negativity into the chat. Keep at it, and here's hoping you get it.
Hwke94 (NA)
: Can you moderators make a rule about censorship?
If you want to discuss Moderator actions (such as thread/comment removals), you'll want to create a thread in _[Discuss the Boards](https://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/community-moderation)_, which is a subforum dedicated to Moderator action as well as guidance in using the Boards. _Player Behavior_ is more intended for discussing the player behavior systems (IFS, LeaverBuster, Honor) and individual player behavior. As an aside; > ...without a bunch of moderators spamming down vote... To my knowledge, most of the Moderators tend to err on withholding downvotes out of respect to discussion. I haven't seen any outstanding cases to the contrary, so I'd reckon if you're getting downvoted a lot, it's by other players who just disagree with you for one reason or another, not Moderators. > This is the place where you want people to ask for game play changes and yet it is highly restricted on what people can actually post. If you're talking about the _[Gameplay](https://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/gameplay-balance)_ subforum, the biggest restrictions there to my knowledge are that you have to remain respectful and you have to actually present a discussable argument; you can't just call for "nerf x" or the like. There are of course more general guidelines to follow, but, as someone who never really looks at _Gameplay_, those are the two biggest rules I know apply.
: > [{quoted}](name=Umbral Regent,realm=NA,application-id=6heBIhQc,discussion-id=akYyOYBT,comment-id=000200000000,timestamp=2019-11-17T10:49:21.081+0000) > > The first comment in question aught to be removed. I'm not sure if it was incidentally overlooked when the thread was locked or what, but I do know that I reported both. Yes. Thus, my conclusion of "an odd removal." Wouldn't you agree with that assessment? > Whatever the case, commenting with just the RANT subforum link after someone else already did doesn't make it any better; in point of fact, it only makes it worse. Someone already went ahead with the disrespect, and then you decided to drive the nail in further with redundancy. That's not great, dude. Actually, I posted that reply before reading the other replies. > And the Moderator comment in question had much more to it than simply calling the post a rant; and even if it had exclusively been _this line:_ > > It would still have been far better than simply linking the RANT subforum with literally no other content. > > And the Moderator comment was more than just calling the OP's thread a rant. It was two whole paragraphs, and calling the thread a rant was the very _least_ of it. That just means that a bare link is not acceptable and we need copy-paste boilerplate. Okay! I can totally do more copy-paste. I've updated my PB copy-paste file to include that. > So, if you're drawing the conclusion that the removal of your comment was simply for calling the thread a rant, you're drawing the wrong conclusion. To that end, here's a relevant section from the [_Player Behavior Rules_.](https://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/player-behavior-moderation/OjEUxbwH-player-behavior-rules-update) > > I italicized the most important line from the rule. It's also worth pointing out that simply posting links to the RANT subforum is functionally "low-effort taunts" as listed in the actionable offenses. The good intent we assume until proven otherwise by a Rioter is that they haven't been misrepresenting their behavior, such as e.g. claiming that the entirety of their logs was "good job, everyone" when they were actually spamming slurs. When the post itself is nothing but an insult and a dismissal, linking to RANT is a statement not about their in-game behavior, but about their post. And it's not wrong, nor is it a taunt. It's a pointer to the correct Board for their post, just like a mod would provide when they delete the thread. Same goes for Gameplay, too, which now has higher standards than it used to.
> Yes. Thus, my conclusion of "an odd removal." Wouldn't you agree with that assessment? No. The removal of your comment was not an odd one; the other same-such comment remaining is the odd part. > Actually, I posted that reply before reading the other replies. Then nix the insult to injury; incidental redundancy aside, it's still a zero-effort, zero-content dismissal. > That just means that a bare link is not acceptable and we need copy-paste boilerplate. Okay! I can totally do more copy-paste. I've updated my PB copy-paste file to include that. I'm going to be frank, though I've run the topic with you before; I personally loathe seeing copy-paste responses. I'm not going to grill you about it, since you and the Moderation Team came to a middle-ground about versatile response templates, but I'll still voice my displeasure. Set up your templates as you will, just try not to lean too hard on it. > The good intent we assume until proven otherwise by a Rioter is that they haven't been misrepresenting their behavior, such as e.g. claiming that the entirety of their logs was "good job, everyone" when they were actually spamming slurs. When the post itself is nothing but an insult and a dismissal, linking to RANT is a statement not about their in-game behavior, but about their post. This brings up the issue of "The Letter of the Rules" versus "The Spirit of the Rules", and in this case, the spirit of the rules is what's been broken. Yes, the description for the "Be Helpful" rule notes to assume good intent on the part of the poster regarding the self-assessment of their behavior, but that's not the important part of the rule. > It is important that our responses remain positive and come from a genuine desire to help them understand what happened and why. _Replies that are overly negative, dismissive or combative are not appropriate and may be removed._ This part here is what encapsulates the spirit of the rule, which is to engage posters and try to help them; not tell them off. > And it's not wrong, nor is it a taunt. It's a pointer to the correct Board for their post, just like a mod would provide when they delete the thread. Same goes for Gameplay, too, which now has higher standards than it used to. It is still overly dismissive and low-effort, especially when accompanied by no other statements. As for it not being wrong, that's something that's very frequently brought up and answered in PB itself, and the best analogy comes from Imperial Pandaa, IIRC; "Calling a fat person fat isn't wrong, but it's still an insulting thing to say." - roughly paraphrased, of course. Honestly speaking, if a post is so lacking in any meaningful content to discuss that your only response would be to link the RANT subforum and say nothing else, then it's probably best to just not comment at all and report the thread for **Incorrect Board**. If it's not worth your time to comment, don't.
: > [{quoted}](name=Umbral Regent,realm=NA,application-id=6heBIhQc,discussion-id=akYyOYBT,comment-id=0002,timestamp=2019-11-17T10:25:02.012+0000) > > When the comment is quite literally just linking the OP to the RANT subforum, then it's not really adding anything to the discussion. It's needlessly curt, and frankly disrespectful. > > Imagine if all I did was respond to this thread with that same link. Y'know what that'd tell you? "This thread isn't worth my time to legitimately respond to, and you're better off going somewhere where the explicit goal is to yell ineffectually into the void". > > And that kind of implicit disrespect is definitely something I would consider worth removal - and generally, the Moderation Team seems to have the same idea, since this isn't the first time comments have been removed for doing nothing further than linking the RANT subforum. My post came after another post with the _exact_ same content (not removed), as well as a mod post calling the thread a rant (not removed).
> My post came after another post with the exact same content (not removed)... The first comment in question aught to be removed. I'm not sure if it was incidentally overlooked when the thread was locked or what, but I do know that I reported both. Whatever the case, commenting with just the RANT subforum link after someone else already did doesn't make it any better; in point of fact, it only makes it worse. Someone already went ahead with the disrespect, and then you decided to drive the nail in further with redundancy. That's not great, dude. > ...as well as a mod post calling the thread a rant (not removed). And the Moderator comment in question had much more to it than simply calling the post a rant; and even if it had exclusively been _this line:_ > If you want to actually discuss your ban and not just rant then please post your entire unedited chat logs here. It would still have been far better than simply linking the RANT subforum with literally no other content. And the Moderator comment was more than just calling the OP's thread a rant. It was two whole paragraphs, and calling the thread a rant was the very _least_ of it. So, if you're drawing the conclusion that the removal of your comment was simply for calling the thread a rant, you're drawing the wrong conclusion. To that end, here's a relevant section from the [_Player Behavior Rules_.](https://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/player-behavior-moderation/OjEUxbwH-player-behavior-rules-update) > **Be Helpful** > > In general, all responses should assume good intent on the part of the poster, even if there is strong evidence to the contrary. The only exception is when Riot officially presents evidence of misbehavior. > > Most people who come to Player Behavior after a ban or chat restriction are frustrated, angry or upset. It is important that our responses remain positive and come from a genuine desire to help them understand what happened and why. _Replies that are overly negative, dismissive or combative are not appropriate and may be removed._ > > These include (but are not limited to): > > - Telling people you’re glad they’re banned. > - Low-effort taunts such as the Rammus “ok”. > - Saying the community is better off without them. I italicized the most important line from the rule. It's also worth pointing out that simply posting links to the RANT subforum is functionally "low-effort taunts" as listed in the actionable offenses.
: Well that was an odd removal
When the comment is quite literally just linking the OP to the RANT subforum, then it's not really adding anything to the discussion. It's needlessly curt, and frankly disrespectful. Imagine if all I did was respond to this thread with that same link. Y'know what that'd tell you? "This thread isn't worth my time to legitimately respond to, and you're better off going somewhere where the explicit goal is to yell ineffectually into the void". And that kind of implicit disrespect is definitely something I would consider worth removal - and generally, the Moderation Team seems to have the same idea, since this isn't the first time comments have been removed for doing nothing further than linking the RANT subforum.
: Last season they extended it and said people who climbed back to Honor 2 by the start of the next season would qualify. If they do that again, you should have no problem. https://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/developer-corner/TGYs0hwO-2018-end-of-season-rewards-and-honor
> If they do that again, you should have no problem. As it were, they won't be doing that again. Keyru mentioned a good few times throughout the post that they won't be repeating the extended deadline; > ...so we’ll be offering a _**one-time only re-grant of in-game rewards**_ in February 2019. > > **To be clear:** we will be keeping the Honor eligibility in place for future ranked seasons, and going forward the results of this _one-time exception_ may be helpful if we decide to explore possible tweaks to the to the Honor 0 and 1 experience in the future. > > **Q: Does this mean Honor requirements are gone?** > > **A:** No, we'll still have Honor requirements next season. _This is a one-time deal._
Triple3T (NA)
: Riot needs a better way to report people who flame people for not ffing
> **Riot needs a better way to report people who flame people for not ffing** Not really. Just report them with the same category you'd use for any other flame; **Verbal Abuse**. The reason that people flame doesn't change anything, it'll still get reviewed and punished all the same.
: the player behavior section of the boards are a cesspit
> Welcome to the place where people have a legitimate reason to be unbanned... I'd honestly like to see a couple cases that fit that description. Very rarely does it ever even _seem_ probable that someone who got banned would have a legitimate reason to be unbanned, and even in those rare few cases, it very often turns up that their ban was properly placed and that they should stay banned. > ...and are just downvoted to hell... Complaining about downvotes does nothing. People have their own reasons for downvoting, and it usually resolves to disagreement or the OP in question being disagreeable. Regardless, downvotes don't matter. > ...by [players] who use retrospect as a way of making their point. I don't understand what you mean by this. Are we just not supposed to judge the players actions that led to the punishment? > I mean, alot of the people here trying to get unbanned are actually toxic... This seems to run completely counter to your opening statement. So people have a legitimate reason to be unbanned...But a lot of them actually don't? > ...but most the chat logs are from the typical regular league game. Define "typical" and "regular". > trolls and feeders are everywhere... Legitimate trolls and intentional feeders are rare, despite what you may think. Unless you're running with a premade who go out of their way to troll and int-feed, that kind of behavior isn't actually typical. What _is_ typical, however, is people crying "wolf" over a pug. Consider, perhaps, that the people you're calling trolls and intentional feeders aren't actually that - and that they may well just be suffering an off-game. We all have them. > ...and when you are on a hard grind, of course you will be enfuriated. Getting angry is no excuse for breaking the rules. If you know you're getting angry, _take breaks_. People have ample tools to prevent themselves from going overboard and breaking the rules, if you don't use them, that's _your fault_. > ...its so undermining to say "lol just report dont be mad"... Only a rare few people will be so unhelpful as to say "don't be mad". The majority of us _understand_ anger, and we know it's not something that can be readily controlled, but that still doesn't excuse breaking the rules. > ...because the game itself instigates toxicity by encouraging competitiveness... Seriously, this whole rigmarole? No, the game does not instigate or encourage toxicity in its design. If you're getting super frustrated in League, the odds are high that its _your own playing habits_ and _your own nature_ that's causing you to get frustrated, _not the game_. Trying to deflect the problem and blame the game isn't going to help you in any respect. > ...who are simply mad that their teammate is a chimpanzee. Remember what I said about "players crying 'wolf' over pugs"? This is pretty much exactly that. You're getting mad because a teammate is underperforming, so you'll do anything to vilify them, calling them a troll, an intentional feeder, acting like they're out to sabotage your game... I'm using "you" in the figurative sense, of course, but regardless, the point stands. And, I will repeat what I said earlier: **_If you're getting angry, take breaks._** Continuing to play while angry is only likely to make that anger build up, and then it'll reach that tipping point, and you'll explode and break the rules and get yourself punished. > its so easy to judge someone else for getting banned when you dont put yourself in their shoes and just look back in retrospect criticizing their every decision. It's also easy to ignore that **we play the same game. We deal with the same situations, and we understand the frustration.** It's easy to ignore the fact that, despite being forum-goers and having this detached, unbiased perspective that fundamentally seems opposed to anyone who gets punished, _we don't have these fundamentally different experiences._ We deal with trolls, we deal with intentional feeders, we deal with bad games and players who are having bad games. We deal with unwinnable matches, frustrating match-ups, not getting our roles, our pick intents, everything. Don't act like we've never run into a troll or experienced the frustration of getting demoted straight after a hard climb up to a promo series. We play the same freakin' game.
: I talked to riot and they said I have to bring it to the boards. NEVER DID I GET A MESSAGE SAYING THE DEMOTION OF MY HONOR. How am i supposed to know how honorable must I be to have progression? Perhaps I am mildely toxic but the failure of riot in telling me so is unfair. Furthermore, I really have played so many games! Check my account, the game count is definetely in the hundreds.
> NEVER DID I GET A MESSAGE SAYING THE DEMOTION OF MY HONOR. Your Honor gets stripped when you receive a punishment, such as your 25-game Chat Restriction. I haven't myself been punished, but I'm 90% sure they straight-up tell you that the punishment also incurs an Honor penalty. > How am i supposed to know how honorable must I be to have progression? Well, the chat logs associated with your chat restriction would've been a good start. The chat you got punished for is bound to be chat you should avoid. Beyond that, excessive negativity, defeatism, passive-aggressive remarks, detrimental arguing, etc. are other behaviors you should avoid. > Perhaps I am mildely toxic but the failure of riot in telling me so is unfair. I am inclined to agree that the Honor System not telling you that you're not progressing due to continued misbehavior is definitely an issue, however it's a rough line to tread to try and maintain clarity while also preventing players from trying to game the system. I'm not sure what I'd really like to see in regards to that for the Honor system, beyond possibly an infrequent pop-up message explaining vaguely that your behavior is still below average and that you're not progressing in Honor, but that could be misconstrued to some degree, so I'm not even 100% on it. Either way, yeah, I'm largely in agreement on this. I'd say a good 65% of the issue lies with no clear feedback being given, though the other 35% is your own behavior and seemingly not noticing that you weren't progressing. > Furthermore, I really have played so many games! Check my account, the game count is definetely in the hundreds. Those hundreds of games don't really count if you're still misbehaving in them. Honor is, after all, related to your behavior and not how frequently you play League. How do you normally act and react in your matches? Knowing how you chat could help in pointing out what behaviors are holding you back from Honor progress.
: Low Honor level no ranked rewards
If you're still Honor Level 0 after 6 months of playing since your 25-game CR, then odds are high that you're still behaving poorly - just not poorly enough to merit a punishment outright. Consider that there may well still be some issues in your communication with other players; 'cause frankly, there's no way you'd be stuck at Honor Level 0 for 6 months if you had reformed. > How is this fair? Ranked play is meant to be a more competitive experience than Normals, and with that competition comes the expectation of good sportsmanship. If you're not sportsmanlike, then you should not be entitled to competitive rewards. > Being honor 2 doesn't mean I have to be AMAZING each game but I am for sure not toxic anymore at all. If you were not toxic, and did not break the rules, you would not still be Honor Level 0. Perhaps you mistakenly believe that certain negative behaviors or examples of poor sportsmanship are fine, which isn't an uncommon mistake, but regardless, the fact remains: you've not been honorable enough to regain Honor. > Can riot please give me a ranked reward for the end of this season? Honor Level 2 has been explicitly stated to be the prerequisite for End-of-Season rewards both at the beginning and here at the tail-end of the year. They're not going to do another extended cutoff date like 2018, so if you're not Honor Level 2 by the 19th, then, hate to be the bearer of bad news, but no, they're not going to give you rewards you don't qualify for.
: Why is it even if you never actually say anything toxic people can still 9x you successfully?
[9x-reporting isn't a thing.](https://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/player-behavior-moderation/9VrUtrJo-being-solo-and-having-a-team-report?comment=0000000000020000000000000000) It doesn't matter if you're reported only one time or by every other player in the match, all reporting does is trigger a review, and the review process does not care how many reports are filed. If you got chat restricted, then the odds are high that you _did_ break the rules, even if you yourself do not think that you did. You should submit your chat logs for peer review, because doubtless, you had to have said _something_ to merit a chat restriction - the IFS will never punish _you_ for something someone else did.
Atreju (EUW)
: Make banning teams pick reportable already
It's not a bannable offense because bans take priority over picks; specifically; if a player does not wish to play against a Champion (due to said Champion being particularly strong, a hard counter, or having mechanics that frustrate them) or with a Champion (due to not synergizing well, not enjoying the playstyle, the Champion is too new, or they simply don't want to risk the enemy getting them first), it is their right to use their ban to remove that Champion from the pool for that specific match. Does this still leave the possibility for players to maliciously ban other players' Champions? Unfortunately, yes. But, such behavior _does_ get punished when proven to be with the intent to upset another player or otherwise serve a detriment to the team. And, ultimately, Riot designed the Draft Pick system so as to allow players to, in some small way, dictate their game. The rare case of maliciously banning other players' pick intents is unfortunately the price that has to be paid for overall satisfaction and game agency.
: obviously its stupid to think riot would allow a system that would ban players if they just get mass reported in a game where every game someone cries for reports. all i said was there isnt much difference between posting a code line (even IF the code would work if you insert it) and just saying yeah our report did this and that.
> all i said was there isnt much difference between posting a code line and just saying yeah our report did this and that. Like I said. Tantram presented all the necessary information front-and-center. He says that more reports != greater weight, and provides a line of code that follows that same logic in design. The OP here provides vague information at best, that can't be looked at beyond taking whatever he says at face-value. He doesn't legitimately have any proof that _that_ specific player got punished (because the IFR doesn't tell you _who_ got punished, just that someone _did_ get punished), they only vaguely suggest that the player in question wasn't breaking the rules (which is doubtful at best; odds are high that he and his 4-man premade flamed or trolled the player to elicit a reaction, or something to a similar effect), and the only detail that _can_ be taken at face-value isn't even roughly verifiable on its own, being the 4-man report. Even _assuming_ that the story has any truth to it, it comes into question, _how_ did the player in question behave? Did the 4-man premade flamebait or something similar? Was the IFR strictly pertaining to the player in question, or did it pop up for another match entirely? Tantram provided a line of code that you can look at and understand, and to any small degree, verify. The OP is giving a story that favors their own narrative that _can't_ be verified and they're saying "look, trust me, it happened". If there isn't much difference there, then I don't know what to say.
: im not saying tantram is lying but saying if (reports > 0) { review(); } isnt evidence of him showing us the code. i could also say "i hacked riot and found the REAL CODE and it looks like this" if (reports > 4) { ban(); } this doesnt confirm anything. if he posted a video of him actually opening the code on a computer in the riotgames headquarter thats something else. but you said it yourself and i quote you from your own comment "An anecdote with no real content is not proof." OP did the same as tantram. post something without any evidence saying that it is true. again i know this community so id like to stress IM NOT SAYING TANTRAM IS LYING im just saying why is no real content fine when a rioter does it but when a normal player does it you call him out for it?
> im just saying why is no real content fine when a rioter does it but when a normal player does it you call him out for it? The thing is, the line of code _is_ content. And that pretty much makes the biggest difference here. The OP is claiming "I got someone banned by 4-man reporting them even if they did nothing wrong", and that claim is dubious at best. The content is essentially; - The player in question was 4-man reported - They didn't break the rules apparently, and that's something you just have to take the OP's word on. - The OP and his premade got an Instant Feedback Report, and you just have to trust that it's strictly related to the 4-man report and nothing else. It's too open-ended and vague with zero legitimate detail. Meanwhile, Tantram's snippet of IFS code is content enough; it may not look like much, since it's essentially an If statement with a single function call in its block, it _is_ enough for someone with a basic understanding of programming to look at it, read it, and understand how it works. And, as someone who picked up and screwed around with Python for a while, I can stand as proof; > if (reports > 0) This is an If statement, where _if_ the criteria is met (the reports variable containing a value greater than zero - so anywhere from 1-9 reports), then the program will step into the block of the if statement, which is contained in the curly brackets. That's a boolean flag, meaning that the requirements of the If statement can resolve only to either True or False - False if 0, True if a value higher than 0. Coding it in this way makes it so that every report has the same weight or value, since, ultimately, all they do; > { > review(); > } Is trigger a call to the review() function. That appears to be the only thing in the If statement's block, which indicates that that is the only purpose of checking the value stored in the reports variable; triggering the IFS to review the match. It is also worth pointing out, that the function call says "review()", not "review(reports)". If a function call is intended to make use of a variable or other piece of data, it would pass that variable as an argument to the function call (I.E., placing the variable in the parentheses appended to the function call.), so since the reports variable is _not_ passed as an argument to the review() function call, that's another piece of evidence that the number of reports has no influence on whether or not a player gets punished. And, if being able to read and understand a line of code is not substance enough, then I should also point out that substance of character holds weight. Who is more believable; a random player who just got punished and would doubtless try to argue that it's unfair for any reason they can, or a Riot Employee who would have access to the code and would have no reason to lie about how it works? What's more believable - that Riot would build a system designed to allow 4-man premades to leverage punishments over anyone they don't like, or that Riot would build the system to hold all reports at equal value, and only look to see _if_ someone was reported, not how much, and then evaluate their behavior with a review through a machine-learning system?
: > [{quoted}](name=Imperial Pandaa,realm=NA,application-id=6heBIhQc,discussion-id=Hc0KxOJU,comment-id=000000000000,timestamp=2019-11-15T07:30:29.641+0000) > > In one post? No. I might post it again if you refused to acknowledge I already supplied the link in a previous post. But what if I don't read it again?
Then you're probably not going to read it if it's supplied a third, fourth, or fifth time. You'd be considered obstinate, and it'd prove to be of no use trying to discuss things with you, since you're clearly not going to listen. This isn't a case of being supplied a link twice - once initially, and then a second time when it seems you missed it the first time around - this is a case of you just dropping the same link, five times in a row, as though somehow seeing it five times will be any different from seeing the link once. Also, for Imperial Pandaa's sake; the sarcastic remark was "I can't read, so it's Riot's fault" - which, to you, Esdeath, you should know full well that that statement is disrespectful. It shouldn't have to be said that implying idiocy or illiteracy is disrespectful.
c133dude (NA)
: You can get ANYONE a punishment for no reason
> Literally if four people report you get a punishment. Literally untrue. [Riot Tantram has openly shown the code detailing how reports trigger a review](https://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/player-behavior-moderation/9VrUtrJo-being-solo-and-having-a-team-report?comment=0000000000020000000000000000), and it shows that if four people report you, you get reviewed. If one person reports you, you get reviewed. If literally **any number of people report you**, you get reviewed. This review does not automatically ensure a punishment. > Regardless of whether you violated terms of service. If you didn't violate the ToU or break the Summoner's Code, you won't get punished. > I've proven it by 4 man reporting someone who lost a lane and didn't do anything wrong but we all clicked the same report and got a notification that we'd gotten someone punished within minutes. An anecdote with no real content is not proof. You're saying "I know it happens because I did it once and it worked, I swear". > It just happened to me, with a 4 man premade that decided to flame me for asking for a gank. Yeah, and I'm certain the chat logs you were provided in your reform card can show that you didn't break the rules in any way, shape, or form. Provide the full, unedited chat logs (or match history link, if the punishment was for trolling/intentionally feeding), and we'll see whether or not the punishment was warranted.
: Not really, "some time" is super vague. Like if theres any possibility I can grind out enough games and beg for Honor in 5 days I'll attempt it, but what you're saying is there's no hope, so I guess I won't bother.
Yeah. The best anecdotes have placed Honor progress at a checkpoint a week, so if you were punished a month ago, were on your best behavior, and always Honored someone post-game, you'd've had a chance, but...That's the _best_ anecdotes. More often than not, reclimbing Honor usually takes a few months, roughly 3~. Would that I had any better news, but, c'est la vie. Better luck next year.
: Yeah I'm not seeing the part where I lose a years work without warning, but maybe I'm reading it wrong.
Then consider looking at the [Honor FAQ](https://support.riotgames.com/hc/en-us/articles/115008474148-Honor-FAQ) on Riot's Support website; > ##PENALTIES AND LOCKS > > **How do I drop a level in Honor?** > > You’ll only drop if you receive a [penalty](https://support.riotgames.com/hc/en-us/articles/209939463). A chat restriction knocks your Honor level to 1, or 0 if you’re already at level 1. A two week suspension will drop your level to 0 (even if you were higher). In both cases, your honor progress will be locked, making your account ineligible for hextech crafting rewards. Your honor progress will unlock some time after your restriction as long as you show signs of reform. They have answers, you just need to look for them.
: Well it would've been nice to get a warning had I known this was a thing I just wouldn't have bothered even playing. I've never had an issue before so this has never been brought to my attention. It was my understanding players were warned before having the entire years rewards taken away last second... This incentivizes not playing at end of season for risk of tilting in one bad game. What a bizzare way of doing things 0 warning strip rewards at the end of the season.
The warning was sent out 21 days ago with the announcement of the End of Season date; "[Be Victorious - 2019 Ranked Rewards](https://na.leagueoflegends.com/en/news/community/promotion/be-victorious-2019-ranked-rewards?ref=rss)" > Season 2019 is coming to a close, but there’s still time for one last push. One-tricks, meta monsters, and Fill mains unite—before **the clock strikes 11:59 PM (PST) on November 18.** > > You must be Honor level 2 to be eligible for ranked rewards with the exception of TFT. If that screams to you as incentivizing not playing at the end of the season, then, that's your deal. It's been that way for years now, and it's not like they keep it a secret.
: account in good standing since season 1
Short version; you're just screwed. With all of five days left before season's end, you're just gonna have to do better next year. As KVbqbFsC8e pointed out, this isn't new. It was first implemented in 2017 with the Honor System rework, and it's been consistently applied in the years after (2018, 2019), so it should be well-known by this point that Honor Level 2 is a prerequisite for End of Season rewards. And the principle concept behind it has been around even before the Honor System rework; before Honor 2.0, if you got punished at the tail end of the year, or otherwise had an active punishment at the cutoff date (which was separate from the actual end of the season, about a month or so back), you'd lose Ranked reward eligibility. And I've been playing the game for a good 4-5~ years now, and it has been a thing since I started playing, doubtless even before that. You can climb Ranked all year long, but if you get punished at the tail end of the season, that climb is effectively meaningless. The only thing the Honor System did was streamlined it. It's tied to the actual end of the season instead of a behavioral cutoff date a month or so before, and players who are consistently dishonorable can be disqualified even before the season nears its end. You may think it's overkill, but it's a fair expectation: A competitive mode comes with the expectation of sportsmanlike behavior. Display unsportsmanlike behavior, and you don't get rewards for the competitive mode.
: Add additional report reasons to state in the post game report module
> **Add additional report reasons to state in the post game report module** > > **What would they be?** > > Troll Picking - Picks a champion that does not fit the given role, with the intention to ruin one other's game. > Lack of Game Knowledge - The player is incorrectly placed in a higher bracket of the ranked system. "Troll Picking" is such a nebulous concept, and adding the stipulation "with the intention to ruin someone else's game" doesn't really change the fact that I doubt anyone would care if the person picking the off-meta Champion is playing it straight or not. If someone is deliberately ruining the game, "troll picking" would just be an aspect of it, and ultimately, you'd just report them for **Intentional Feeding** (since that category covers the breadth of gameplay-related offenses already). Otherwise, people are allowed to pick any Champion for any role; there's no guarantee that it'll work from match to match, but there's no rules saying that they need to strictly play whoever's meta for whatever role. As for "Lack of Game Knowledge"...That's neither something you can really detect nor something that's in any way punishable. If someone lacks game knowledge, their rank will drop. Iron and Bronze tiers exist for a reason, after all. If they're at a higher tier, then there's a probability that they got to that tier with a variant of game knowledge that you do not recognize. > **What would they do as punishments?** > > **Troll Picking:** 1. Ranked game restriction for 5 games. This means the player has to win 5 normal draft games to play Ranked again. 2. Ranked game restriction for 25 games. This means the player has to win 25 normal draft games to play Ranked again. 3. Ranked game restriction for 100 games. This means the player has to win 100 normal draft games to play Ranked again. 4. Ranked game restriction for one season. This means the player cannot play ranked during this season again. If there's less than 1 month left of the season, this will include the next season as well. 5. Account suspension for 14 days + limiting XP gain on account (to make level ups harder) and closing the opportunity to play Normal Draft and Ranked for the next 100 games. Only TFT, Blind Pick and ARAM will be available. 6. Permanent account suspension. First of all, "Ranked Restrictions" are not legitimate punishments. What they are is shirking off the player and letting them continue to misbehave in Normals, ARAM, or wherever else; so ultimately, you're not disincentivizing the behavior, you're just encouraging them to do it elsewhere for a little while. Second, "limiting XP gain" wouldn't do anything. Even if Riot decided that it was worth their time to see about sussing out a player's alts/smurfs, limiting XP gain on one account would not do anything. As for locking out Normal Draft; read above. **If they're still ultimately allowed to play on other modes, then it's not a punishment. It's an encouragement to keep misbehaving in other modes.** The current punishment track for trolling is fine as it is; 14-day suspension > permanent ban. No extraneous fluff, no conditional punishments that only affect a subset of players, just straight bans. > **Lack of Game Knowledge:** 1. Decrease MMR slightly to reduce LP gains and increase LP losses. (reduce MMR by 50) 2. Reduce MMR more significantly, add a ranked restriction for 10 games and a low priority for 5 games of 5 minutes. 3. Demote the player with one division lower than their current one and restrict them for playing ranked for the next 25 games. 4+. Drop the player at the exact same division with exactly a tier lower than their current one. Ranked restriction for 35 games. Again; **Lack of game knowledge isn't punishable.** Additionally, there's no way Riot would consider giving players any ability to fudge another player's MMR, and they're not going to allow you to force-demote other players either. If they got to that rank, they very likely got there through their own skills, which are bound to be greatly different from your own. Just because they lack _your_ specific skills or game knowledge does not mean they belong in a lower rank.
: Sorry but what is ur argument? I said that it's my first season playing the game and i was never informed about this requirement before i got my suspension and so we're many others that only started playing this season... It's just so unfair that they made an exception for People last year but not this year...
Even if it's your first Ranked Season, don't you think you'd look round for details about reward eligibility? Would you not pay attention when they make posts and announcements as the Season nears its end, explaining that "the season ends on x date, make sure you're Honor Level 2 and the Rank you want to be by then"? I'm an anecdote, certainly, but when I first started doing Ranked (2017), I went and checked, double-checked, triple-checked to make sure I understood the requirements for Ranked rewards, and I paid extra attention as the season came to a close because I wanted to make _sure_ I got my rewards. I know it's unrealistic to expect everybody to share my frantic re-reading of Support articles and Ranked Play Announcements, but surely, with rewards on the table, you'd at least look to see about how you'd be eligible (or ineligible) to get them, wouldn't you?
: Honor level 2 deadline extension for season rewards eligibility ?
When they had the extended deadline last year, they made it abundantly clear (stating it three times) that it was a one-time only deal. And, to be fair, people should have already been prepared for Honor Level 2 being a prerequisite for end-of-season rewards; it was explained _and_ implemented in 2017 when the Honor System was reworked, explained again at the beginning of 2018, and even still people didn't seem to catch onto it. Sorry to say, but there's no chance they're going to repeat the extended deadline. You'll just have to do better next year.
: > [{quoted}](name=Umbral Regent,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=70BdRpiG,comment-id=000200000000,timestamp=2019-11-13T15:23:47.781+0000) > > Then there's probably your problem. You don't seem to care about your behavior, dismissing it as people simply "get(ting) offended by whatever (nowadays)". > > It might help if you stopped trying to attribute it to something so arbitrary as "I'm just not playing enough to match a no-lifer"; I've already pointed out to you twice now that continued misbehavior can validate reports, which can slow your Honor progress. > > And it's probable that you're misbehaving more than you believe you are, if, again, it's taken you over a year and you still haven't reached Honor Level 2. If you really want to regain Honor Level 2, you have to stop and think "what am I doing wrong that's making this take so long?" > > And the longer you keep brushing it off as "Everyone's offended by everything" or "I just need to play like a no-lifer", the longer you'll take to progress in the Honor System. Well, what else it is? It only increases when I play games. It decreases if I use chat and someone reports me. So, to increase my honor I should play a lot and not use chat. That's pretty much the definition of nolifer...
> It decreases if I use chat and someone reports me. Not "if you use chat and someone reports you", it's "if you break the rules in chat and somebody reports you". Simply using the chat will not validate reports; it's breaking the rules that does. > So, to increase my honor I should play a lot and not ~~use chat~~ break the rules. FTFY. > That's pretty much the definition of nolifer... Unsurprisingly, a quick Google search comes up with something completely different. "Noun. no-lifer (plural no-lifers) (slang, derogatory) One who has no social life; a friendless introvert." Perhaps mindlessly playing match after match of a game without talking to anybody is an _aspect_ of that, but it's not the definition. And it's also not the prerequisite for Honor Progress. But, seeing as how you don't seem to be taking what I say into consideration, I can't imagine there's much more to discuss. I've outlined the problem to you, so it's up to you to solve it. If you don't manage to get to Honor Level 2 by the 19th, then I'm sorry for the loss of your rewards, and wish you better luck next year. Good day to you.
: > [{quoted}](name=Umbral Regent,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=70BdRpiG,comment-id=0002,timestamp=2019-11-13T15:05:10.066+0000) > > Because Honor isn't just a measure of "have I been punished in x amount of time", it's tied to your behavior. > > Here's some questions for you; > > 1) How often have you played since getting punished last year? > 2) Have you been using the chat during that time? > 3) Have you been using the chat negatively during that time? > > Your Honor level isn't going to automatically increase over time. You need to play games, and you need to show good behavior for it to increase; if you're still misbehaving (even low-key misbehavior like defeatism and passive aggressive remarks will validate a report, BTW), valid reports _will_ stall your Honor progress. > > So ultimately, if you're not Honor Level 2 after more than a year since your last punishment...Odds are high that the problem is you. 1) Ranked stats show 209 games this season, I would estimate maybe 300 total since last November. If TFT counts then close to 400? 2) Ofc 3) Maybe a few times, I don't know since nowadays people might get offended by whatever It looks like this system is designed for a nolifer who plays 2000 games per season or something.
> 3) Maybe a few times, I don't know since nowadays people might get offended by whatever Then there's probably your problem. You don't seem to care about your behavior, dismissing it as people simply "get(ting) offended by whatever (nowadays)". > It looks like this system is designed for a nolifer who plays 2000 games per season or something. It might help if you stopped trying to attribute it to something so arbitrary as "I'm just not playing enough to match a no-lifer"; I've already pointed out to you twice now that continued misbehavior can validate reports, which can slow your Honor progress. And it's probable that you're misbehaving more than you believe you are, if, again, it's taken you over a year and you still haven't reached Honor Level 2. If you really want to regain Honor Level 2, you have to stop and think "what am I doing wrong that's making this take so long?" And the longer you keep brushing it off as "Everyone's offended by everything" or "I just need to play like a no-lifer", the longer you'll take to progress in the Honor System.
: Why it says my honor is too low for ranked rewards when I haven't been punished for over a year?????
> **Why it says my honor is too low for ranked rewards when I haven't been punished for over a year?????** Because Honor isn't just a measure of "have I been punished in x amount of time", it's tied to your behavior. Here's some questions for you; 1) How often have you played since getting punished last year? 2) Have you been using the chat during that time? 3) Have you been using the chat negatively during that time? Your Honor level isn't going to automatically increase over time. You need to play games, and you need to show good behavior for it to increase; if you're still misbehaving (even low-key misbehavior like defeatism and passive aggressive remarks will validate a report, BTW), valid reports _will_ stall your Honor progress. So ultimately, if you're not Honor Level 2 after more than a year since your last punishment...Odds are high that the problem is you.
: Except they said I've only been reported 7 times in 20 games. So if 7 people reported me that game then what?
> Except they said I've only been reported **7 times in 20 games.** So if 7 people reported me that game then what? Notice the bolded section. "7 times _**in 20 games**_". That means that across 20 games, you've been reported 7 times, not that you've been reported by 7 individual players in one of your most recent 20 matches. While I disagree with Jennifer17's idea, they are right that it's not something that's already in place.
: > [{quoted}](name=Umbral Regent,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=f088MIeO,comment-id=0001,timestamp=2019-11-12T05:49:55.343+0000) > > You're right, there is further misbehavior beyond simply calling someone a dog. Such as; > > Frankly, I'm not surprised that you got punished for one game. You spent a good majority of that match being negative, toxic, and all-around awful. You flamed more than anything else, and your behavior isn't just below standard, it's unwelcome. > > I really don't know what to tell you, besides that you can either just, not use chat from here on out, seeing as how ready you are to flame and harass, or you can leave League altogether - you clearly hate the game, and your behavior isn't welcome in it, so while I'm generally disinclined to suggest leaving, this case I believe is an exception. > > Though, if you continue behaving like you did to receive this Chat Restriction, it eventually will come to a point where you'll be forced to leave. Know that your behavior is far below the standard Riot expects from you, and they will not hesitate to ban you if you keep it up. yet there are people like moe who flames harder than me that dont get ever. yes very fair. obviously you play the game....
> yet there are people like moe who flames harder than me that dont get ever. If they get reported, they'll get punished. If they're somehow managing to go unpunished despite flaming a lot, then odds are high people just aren't reporting them for one reason or another. Regardless, them misbehaving does not excuse _you_ misbehaving, and their punishment or behavioral status is irrelevant to your own. You broke the rules, you got punished, so; > yes very fair. If you don't like the rules, don't play the game. Simple as that.
: There is no way I got chat restricted for calling someone a dog, only from 1 game ...
> **There is no way I got chat restricted for calling someone a dog...** You're right, there is further misbehavior beyond simply calling someone a dog. Such as; > Krakerz633 : inter > Krakerz633 : small mental > > Krakerz633 : wintrader mf > Krakerz633 : ff 15 > Krakerz633 : report mf > > Krakerz633 : shouldve hit leave game > Krakerz633 : we lost champ select btw > Krakerz633 : stop wasting my time > Krakerz633 : and ff > Krakerz633 : we lost > Krakerz633 : stop wasting my fucking time so i dont waste yours either and ff boomer > > Krakerz633 : im not going in > Krakerz633 : idiot > > Krakerz633 : DOG GET OFF LEAGUE > Krakerz633 : GO PLAY AT THE PARK > Krakerz633 : WOOF WOOF > Krakerz633 : wait you understood that? > Krakerz633 : what does > Krakerz633 : woof woof mean? > Krakerz633 : kd players > Krakerz633 : sooo insecure > Krakerz633 : bye bye buddy > > Krakerz633 : dog shit coompany > Krakerz633 : autofilled > > --- > > **...only from 1 game ...** Frankly, I'm not surprised that you got punished for one game. You spent a good majority of that match being negative, toxic, and all-around awful. You flamed more than anything else, and your behavior isn't just below standard, it's unwelcome. I really don't know what to tell you, besides that you can either just, not use chat from here on out, seeing as how ready you are to flame and harass, or you can leave League altogether - you clearly hate the game, and your behavior isn't welcome in it, so while I'm generally disinclined to suggest leaving, this case I believe is an exception. Though, if you continue behaving like you did to receive this Chat Restriction, it eventually will come to a point where you'll be forced to leave. Know that your behavior is far below the standard Riot expects from you, and they will not hesitate to ban you if you keep it up.
: > But bear in mind, Riot typically does not overturn punishments unless they were truly given in error, and as far as I know (which is very little, admittedly, due to not having seen your chat logs), there's nothing to suggest that this punishment was in error. is this true tho ? I remember when I had my main account perma banned due to bieng kept hostage in a gamee by the other 4 man que, they all reported me for toxicity because I was toxic since they were holding me hostage and trolling on purpose and I had no say in anything since they were a 4 man que. I still got reported and was perma banned and I appealed to the riot support and they did overturn my ban into a 14 day still, not that I was gonna complain tho. I was toxic, I was annoyed and mad but they did overturn their decision on my ban. Or it just depends on which rioter u are talking to ?
It is true, as a general principle. Riot Support has overturned the rare deserved punishment at their own discretion a few times, but such cases usually involved innocuous or otherwise atypical, one-off bouts of misbehavior by the appealing players in question. One example that came to my mind (though it bears warning; _this was a rare case of Riot's benediction;_ beyond that the punishment would have otherwise remained) being a player who got a 14-day ban for telling someone to "kys" in ARAM, not as an actual encouragement to real-life self-harm, but to tank a death under the turret so they could respawn and buy items. They were unbanned with a warning that they shouldn't use that initialism in any context, innocuous or otherwise. But, as it stands, these cases are ultimately rare, and Riot tends not to overturn just punishments the vast majority of the time.
: got chat banned by nothing
> i got chat-banned when i wasn't using a curse word. You don't have to curse to merit punishment. In fact; swearing is perfectly allowed, so long as it's within reason and not leveled at other players. > ...but because i tell her what she did wrong on play league(rank) i got chat banned and lost rank reward and everything. And how, exactly, did you tell whomever that they played wrong? 'Cause, if you spent much of the game harassing them and being negative, that would naturally be grounds for a punishment. You should provide your full, unedited chat logs for peer review, because the community isn't going to simply take your claims at face value. Otherwise, if you really want to appeal your punishment, you should file a [Support Ticket](https://support.riotgames.com/hc/en-us/requests/new). The community (who you are reaching out to by using the boards) can't do anything beyond explain the reason for your punishment and discuss your behavior. But bear in mind, Riot typically does not overturn punishments unless they were truly given in error, and as far as I know (which is very little, admittedly, due to not having seen your chat logs), there's nothing to suggest that this punishment was in error.
Alaanhii (NA)
: Riot, wtf?
When you attempt to log into the Client, you should be greeted with a reform card with details relating to your punishment. What does it say? Does it provide chat logs, or a link to match history? > you admins do this because im mexican playing on NA? thats the problem? I can guarantee you that this isn't the problem. A strawman, almost certainly, but not the problem.
FURRY V2 (EUNE)
: > [{quoted}](name=CharDeeMcDenniz,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=VfawbmcQ,comment-id=0001000000000000,timestamp=2019-11-11T15:26:05.835+0000) > > this is misleading, swearing will not get you punished, swearing AT SOMEONE ELSE is where the punishments come from Well, could you make a video about writing kiss (with y and with one less s) and some racial slurs into all-chat ? You know, not saying at anyone, just writing it cuz it is funny. If you didn't get banned the next day, I will buy you a pizza of your choice.
Strange how you went from "bans for swearing" to "bans for hate speech and encouragment of self-harm". If you're going to say "99% of bans happen for swearing in chat", you should stick to that claim rather than immediately rephrasing to something a great margin different.
: Will this actually get me in trouble?
I don't think you're in any danger of being punished. I'd reckon Corki would be, if reported for deliberately AFK-farming all game, but you? You made the best of a bad situation. There's no rule stating that a Support has to stick by their bottom laner, much less when that bottom laner insists that the Support is somehow "ruining his farm/freeze/etc." And, at the end of the day, you were ultimately playing to win, not to put your team at a disadvantage. That alone is enough to ensure you won't get punished.
: Will you get ranked rewards if you're honor 0?
From Riot Support; ["What League Rewards Will I Get? - 2019 End of Season"](https://support.riotgames.com/hc/en-us/articles/360038152893-What-League-Rewards-Will-I-Get-2019-End-of-Season) > For Summoner's Rift and Twisted Treeline, **season ends exactly at midnight on November 19th**, so your last ranked game must start before 11:59 PM (local time). For Teamfight Tactics, **season ends exactly at midnight on November 5th**, so your last ranked game must start before 11:59 PM (local time). Any games started before this time will be counted as your last ranked game for the season. Rewards will begin going out the next day, on Nov 20th, and we have a lot of players to grant rewards to, so please give us up to a week to grant out all items! > > ... > > Reminder: **You MUST be Honor 2 to receive any of your ranked rewards for Summoner’s Rift or Twisted Treeline.** (Psst! There is no Honor requirement for TFT rewards!) So, if you're not Honor Level 2 by the 19th, you will unfortunately not be eligible for _any_ of your Ranked rewards. These include and are not limited to; - Ranked Banner Flair - Ranked Summoner Icons (Solo/Duo, 3's, 5's) - Victorious Aatrox & Victorious Aatrox Amber Chroma (where applicable) - Any other potential End-of-Season Ranked Rewards
BBKong (NA)
: Why do so many people want us to get rid of permabans?????
Basically, Pyrosan's got the gist of it. Although, it does fall into a few more categories than just players who've been permabanned. I'd reckon there's maybe three camps of players who want to see permabans removed; 1) Toxic players who were permabanned and would insist that the system is at fault rather than themselves (the types of players who will typically mislabel their flaming and misbehavior as "banter" or call others snowflakes for not enjoying being flamed) 2) Players who reform after their permanent ban, but endear themselves to the idealistic thought that they could somehow get their account back 3) Players who play within the bounds of the rules, but insist that the rules are overly strict and that permabans should only ever be placed for Gameplay offenses rather than Chat offenses (they typically level the same arguments as toxic permabanned players; "you have the mute feature, so why report", in the most basic sense.) Barring the second camp, most of those players who disagree with permanent suspensions largely disagree with it in use against chat misbehavior, since, as it were, they believe that chat misbehavior doesn't actually affect the game, and that even if it does, other players have the ability to mute them or otherwise "grow up" and tough it out; that the onus is on everyone else to accept the misbehavior rather than on themselves to follow the rules. Some naive players will of course go the extra mile and argue "free speech" (despite that only really applying to the Government, and even then having its own limitations), but by and large, through my experience talking with players from all camps, I can say with general confidence that the previous paragraph encapsulates their main problem point with the system and permanent bans pretty well.
: Is it justified to permaban without showing evidence?
From the [Terms of Use](https://na.leagueoflegends.com/en/legal/termsofuse#account-termination)... > **2.1. How can my account be suspended or terminated? (If you break the rules, Demacian Justice will be visited upon your account!)** > > ~~Three~~ Two different people/entities can suspend or terminate your account: > > ... > > 2.1.2. Us.We may terminate or suspend your account if we determine, in our sole discretion, that: > > (a) you have violated any part of this Agreement; > > (b) we have stopped offering the Riot Services in your region; or > > (c) doing so would be in the best interests of our community, the Riot Services, or the rights of a third party. > > We may make such determinations, among other ways, by using automated systems and machine learning tools. It isn't stipulated anywhere in the Account Termination section that they are required by any means to provide evidence or reasoning to accompany a punishment. And, as Yin Yang Taoist _and_ Riot Support themselves both pointed out to you, they will not disclose details of how they came to find out that you had botted or otherwise used third-party software since doing so could lead to the bot/script/TPS makers finding out what exactly is tripping detection so that they can make their software harder to catch. > If they want to keep their system from being compromised, they should make more robust algorithms rather than doing black box in this way. Things are _never_ that simple. In an ideal world, it's probable that they could code a bot detection program that is completely impervious and foolproof...And in an ideal world, people wouldn't make or use bots or third-party software in the first place. But, until that ideal outcome comes to pass, the best course of action would be to _not disclose_ how their system detects botting since, obviously, that would lead to bot-programmers working around it and forcing Riot to work around making new detection methods.
: > [{quoted}](name=Boppas,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=QV5TxB9w,comment-id=0003,timestamp=2019-11-09T23:12:16.971+0000) > > Let me quickly explain how Riot works really quick pal > > Riot: You must have Honor 2 or above and be ranked Gold or above to get the free rewards > > You: *does something unhonorable* > > Riot: *doesnt give you skin* > > You *surprised pikachu face* > > > As much as I dont agree with everything on Riots punishment system I can understand how this works it even tells you WHAT YOU NEED to get the skin if you paid attention of course. I'm not pissed about me not having honor. I get it, I acted out of line. I'm pissed that the reform phase to get from mastery locked to mastery 2 takes almost the entire damn season just to get there.
> I'm pissed that the reform phase to get from mastery(sic) locked to mastery(sic) 2 takes almost the entire damn season just to get there. If it's taking you nearly the entire season to regain Honor Level 2, then here's something you'll need to consider: _You are probably the problem, not the system._ If you are getting validly reported, you're going to progress much slower through the Honor Levels, and the only way you can get _validly reported_ is if the following two criteria are met: 1) You break the rules in some way, shape, or form (regardless of whether or not the behavior warrants immediate punishment) 2) Someone reported you for breaking those rules So if you're taking the entire season just to go from whatever Honor Level you were brought down to by your most recent punishment to Honor Level 2, then the probability is high that _you are still misbehaving, being unsportsmanlike and dishonorable, and validating reports made against you._ Your behavior is still below the standard Riot expects from the playerbase, and _that_ is the reason it's taking you so long to regain Honor Level 2.
Matmarus (EUNE)
: Riots way of NOT giving u season end rewards are really REALLYi rritating..
Since there are a fair number of issues and misconceptions and arguments brought up across the whole of this post, I want to at least point out one thing in specific before actually discussing anything else, and that's this: This fundamental punishment of having your End of Season rewards revoked if you got punished at the end of the season _is not new_. It wasn't randomly introduced with Honor 2.0, it's been there since even before it. The only difference is that before Honor 2.0, it was tied to a specific cutoff date where if you got punished after it or had an active punishment during it, you'd lose rewards, whereas with Honor 2.0 it's tied to your Honor Level at the end of the season. And just to make it abundantly clear: **_This is not new. It has always been a thing, and it was not some random extraneous "haha fuck you" punishment tacked on with the Honor System; getting punished at the tail-end of the season has, as far as I've seen in my roughly 5~ years of playing, always resulted in loss of End-of-Season rewards._** --- Now that that little clarification is out of the way, let's get on to actual meat of the post; > Soo i have been muted for 4-5 days of chat restriction i was about sevral honors away from honor 5 and just because i was getting tilded because i was getting targeted. okay i get its bad but over all is the sistem of BANNING and PUNISHING someone have to be that cruel to players honor system > > i paniced because i cant get NOW in 10 days honor lvl 2 since riot has their way of saying that you are a terrible person for this community.. No; it's their way of saying "look, Ranked play is supposed to be competitive, and competition requires a degree of sportsmanship." They don't require much of people; just be Honor Level 2 (the _baseline_ Honor Level) by Season's end, and you'll be eligible for rewards. And, at the end of the day, if you start cracking under pressure and becoming toxic when the end of the season comes around, then frankly, you're not a sportsmanlike player. Yes, it sucks to be constantly targeted by other players, but that does not excuse you from breaking down and breaking the rules. You have the mute feature, you have the report feature, _use them_. If people start flaming you or targeting you or whatever else, _**mute them**_. If you're finding yourself getting bent out of shape over a rough string of matches, _**take breaks**_. You have ample tools to keep your composure at your disposal, if you don't use them and wind up letting everything get to you, then, sorry to say, that's your fault. > i dont understand that the SLIGHTEST of the punishments lead to you losing ur honor to 0 like no matter what you still lose Typically, the first Chat Restriction (10 games) will only drop you to Honor Level 1. It's often the second Chat Restriction (25 games) or a temporary ban that would put you immediately to Honor Level 0. > A small punishment like a very small punishemt, even a warning would lead to you losing ur honor level... 1) They don't do warnings. 2) As above; the first punishment (unless it's a temporary ban, in the event of behavior that would warrant an escalated punishment) will only drop you to Honor Level 1. You don't get dropped to Honor Level 0 unless you're either continuously misbehaving or behaving _seriously_ poorly. > Riot doesn't want to ballance it... > > ...and as in ballancing i mean to next to a small punishement you go one honor lvl down or two but WHOLE 4 OR 5 FOR A CHAT RESTRICTION Would it be better - or, at the very least, more satisfying - if you only lost one Honor Level per punishment? Maybe. But, for some players, that kind of punishment would lose its impact. They wouldn't have some potent sting to remind them "oh, fuck, I should probably do better about that" - if they're already Honor Level 4-5~, they're just going to shrug, take the Honor loss, and reclimb straight back up without concern for their behavior because such a minimal Honor drop wouldn't matter to them. Dropping them to Honor Levels 0-1, though (depending on the punishment), making them "Dishonorable" and having them deal with the potential consequences thereof (inability to access Clash, ineligibility for End of Season Rewards if they don't reclimb to Honor 2 in time) gives a much, much more palpable sting. It'd give them pause when they realize "wait, I can lose my Ranked rewards because of this?" or even "Holy shit that's a huge drop". And that's kind of the whole point of the punishment in the first place. To give players pause for their poor behavior, to make them realize that breaking the rules and being toxic _has_ consequences.
D4V1D B (EUW)
: Honor system is broken for ranked rewards
> ...it just punishes way too harshly one bad game in dozens if not hundreds of games... It is very rare to get punished off of one game alone out of hundreds; and if you _did_ get punished for just one game, then you'd have to have flamed _pretty hard_ in order to warrant it. More often than not, it's a streak of misbehavior that builds up to a punishment, not one-off instances. > ...anyway I'm asking if it is at all possible to reach honor level 2 before the end of the season... Short answer; no. Even the fastest cases of Honor Climbing went one checkpoint per week, and there's only eleven days left 'til season's end. That's not enough time to climb from Honor Level 0, Checkpoint 1. Would that there was any better news, but, sadly, you'll just have to do better next year. > ...and how exactly does it work... As far as I know, the Honor System works as follows; As long as you're _not_ being validly reported (be aware, reports can be validated for even low-key offenses such as defeatism, passive-aggressiveness, etc.), you gain Honor for the following: - Playing matches (you will _always_ gain a degree of Honor progress for playing matches.) - Being Honored (the amount gained is small, but it's definitely a tiny boost.) - Getting the Team Honor Bonus (it's been said that this in particular plays the largest role in Honor progression, so it's good to _always_ make sure to Honor at least someone post-game.) If you get validly reported in a match, though, your Honor progression in that match will be slowed, potentially even ignored, which can result in a much longer climb in Honor. > ...is there anything i can do better... The best advice I can really give is, play plenty of matches, put your best foot forward to be honorable (and no; you don't have to be a "cheerleader". Some light positivity and even just general chatting can be plenty enough.), and always make sure to Honor someone post-game, since the Team Honor Bonus matters quite a bit. > ...is there any way to farm it... No, not really. Considering that 2/3 of the potential Honor gains are ultimately up to other players (whether they Honor you or not, and whether or not everyone Honors someone for the Team Honor Bonus), there's no legit way to "farm" Honor. Which is as it should be. > ...exactly how much less does premade honor count... From the [Honor FAQ](https://support.riotgames.com/hc/en-us/articles/115008474148-Honor-FAQ)... > **Can I game the system and boost to level 5 by constantly playing with a premade and honoring each other every game?** > > Nice idea. We had it too. So we specifically built Honor so potential exploits like this give you (and your friend) literally no benefit. Basically, Premade Honors are worth zilch. I've seen it posed somewhere that they are potentially worth _something_, but even if it _is_ a non-zero amount, it's still negligible, and piggybacking off of Premade Honors is effectively pointless. > ...because the lack of information about honor and how it goes up is astounding this system has been here for years... I suppose I come from a point of bias, having seen a fair bit of the Honor system explained here on the PB boards by Riot employees, but I still wouldn't say that there's a lack of information about the system. Is it all in one place where it's easy to find? Not really, no, but take a little time to look and you'd be surprised as to what you'll find about it.
: trolls would wear that clown like a badge of honor
To add onto this, I remember an anecdote of something similar. I can't remember which game it was, I think it was an Uncharted game or something, but the developers had it coded to recognize if the game was pirated, and would mark the player character with an eyepatch with a skull-and-crossbones to show their piracy. It didn't really change anything, and ultimately kinda gave game pirates an incentive to pirate the game in the first place, since "oh cool i get this neat little eyepatch of recognition". Punishing misbehavior by giving some sort of cosmetic "mark of shame" generally won't help reduce the misbehavior.
rujitra (NA)
: Your reply is based on your interpretations which are a stretch. I never said the person was abnormal. If that’s what you’re away from it, then I’m not sure what to do because that’s nowhere near what I said. It seems you and The Djinn are being clouded by your own bias against the OP of that thread, thus reading my response with no insults as having insults because that’s how you *want * to interpret them. When you have to preface things with “it’s pretty clear that” and “you basically point-blank” then those things aren’t true. Those are “escape phrases” - things your mind uses to justify to yourself that you’re correct and to try and convince others that you’re correct without actually providing any arguments.
> It seems you and The Djinn are being clouded by your own bias against the OP of that thread... I haven't even seen the thread in question, and you're seriously gonna act like I'm trying to project my own opinion of the OP onto your comment? C'mon dude. > I never said the person was abnormal. It is implied. When you posit that "normal people would do x instead", you're marking the OP as someone who isn't normal. And the solution to that problem is simple: Don't make statements that openly imply the person is abnormal.
rujitra (NA)
: I strongly disagree that a simple statement of “normally this” implies the opposite. That is, to me, an improper conclusion that stems from reading meaning into the words other than their most common one. Furthermore, the OP may not have caused the other player’s **actions**, but they did cause the situation. The OP would not have been frustrated in the first place had the OP not had this idea that everyone must play around them. That is the true problem here, because as I’m sure you know, a player is not going to be punished just because they don’t play the way this OP wants them to. I think this removal is a result of trying to find a problem where one does not exist by putting the obviously unintended and very thinly reasonable meaning into the words. Lastly, if it’s considered an insult to make a statement completely unrelated to someone (by saying what’s normal, without commenting on the other player at all), or to call out inappropriate and harmful attitudes by players in a way that, while blunt, is not insulting unless the OP chooses to be insulted by seeing their behavior discussed in a thread they posted... if this is the case, then the PB boards will simply become a place where players fear telling people the truth and the reality because “oh no, telling them they’re wrong is an insult”. Bottom line is that if an OP is posting a thread about their actions, it is not insulting to tell the Op what a normal person would do in the situation.
> I strongly disagree that a simple statement of “normally this” implies the opposite. That wasn't a statement of "normally this", though. You weren't saying "most players have no issue not being toxic" or anything to that effect, you basically point-blank said "You acted in a way that makes you distinctly abnormal". > Instead of doing what a normal person would do... It's one thing to say "most people tend to respond x way", it's another thing altogether to say "normal people would do x" and imply that they aren't a normal person. > Lastly, if it’s considered an insult to make a statement completely unrelated to someone (by saying what’s normal, without commenting on the other player at all), or to call out inappropriate and harmful attitudes by players in a way that, while blunt, is not insulting unless the OP chooses to be insulted by seeing their behavior discussed in a thread they posted... You made a pointed statement implying they weren't a normal person and point-blank called them a know-it-all; more specifically, "[People] who think they know everything and their teammates must listen to them..." etc., and it's pretty clear that you intended to say "You are this kind of person, and you're the problem with the League community." So, yes, that's insulting. > ...if this is the case, then the PB boards will simply become a place where players fear telling people the truth and the reality because “oh no, telling them they’re wrong is an insult”. I tell people they're wrong all the time. I point out their misconceptions with the systems and I seldom mince words about it. A fair number of people, point-blank, do not know much about the behavioral systems despite their claims to understand it. And, as with getting chat logs, getting this content removal should be a sign that perhaps you need to reevaluate how you approach discussions with other players here. There's a fine line between blunt and pointedly insulting, and I gotta agree with The Djinn; you crossed it in this case. > Bottom line is that if an OP is posting a thread about their actions, it is not insulting to tell the Op what a normal person would do in the situation. The bottom line is, as long as you consider a particular person abnormal, you're inevitably going to tinge your comments directed to them or about them with insults. They _are_ a normal person, and if you can't see them as such, then my best advice would just be to bow out and avoid discussion with them.
rKRex (NA)
: Trolled by support
> I said nothing in-game, mind you, because I know how riots stupid fucking system works. Clearly, you _don't_ know how the system works, because you can still absolutely get punished for misbehavior in the post-game lobby. > I wouldn't be surprised if riot still gives me a chat ban... It's highly probable, all things considered. > because of their...discipline system that can't accurately see who the true bad people are. > > I just spam pinged and then called him an inbred degenerate in post game. Yes, because spam-pinging and calling people "inbred degenerates" exclusively in post-game lobby in the vainglorious hope that you can evade punishment are the hallmarks of good, sportsmanlike players. /s. If you reported them, their behavior will be reviewed. This does not exempt you from the rules, and if you get punished, it is not due to a fault in the system, but _because you broke the rules._ > It's complete nonsense to be expected to calmly say nothing and "just play to win" when you're getting trolled by your laning partner, and 3 other people are flaming you for something you didnt do. You have the mute feature - if people are flaming you, _use it_. Yes, it is difficult to play around a troll/intentional feeder; oftentimes nigh-on impossible, but flaming them (and consequently, giving them _the very reaction they **want** out of you_) isn't going to magically make them stop trolling or fix your situation in any way, shape, or form. All flaming does is get you punished on top of your already shitty experience and encourage the troll to troll _more_. Nobody expects you to be calm; but Riot expects you to at the very least abide by the rules you agreed to.
: wellt he idea behind the rewards is so people would actually spend time reviewing, if people are willing to do it for technically free with a few rewards and improve the community why not? i mean i dont want the reports removed, keep it but when someone gets reported too much then it gets sent into a 5 day period where people can review, after that itll take action based on the review , if you and others agreed at a majority vote you get a reward, iff you voted against it then you will be on track to lose the power of taking action
> ...keep it but when someone gets reported too much then it gets sent into a 5 day period where people can review... In other words, taking the rare edge cases that already have a procedure and arbitrarily handing it off to players. > ...if you and others agreed at a majority vote you get a reward, iff you voted against it then you will be on track to lose the power of taking action And this incentivizes fair reviewing...How? You're incentivizing a reward for majority vote (which, as stated earlier, will just lead to people mass-voting to punish regardless of circumstance) and _disincentivizing people disagreeing with that majority vote_ by threatening to revoke Tribunal privileges if someone disagrees with the majority. All you're doing is proposing a system that allows Diamond players to arbitrarily punish players without reason and _get rewarded for doing so_. You're taking a system that has already been proven ineffective, and are making it _worse_. I see nothing further to discuss about this, so I'll be taking my leave. Good day to you, and happy Halloween.
: well have both report and tribunal for playres above d4, if a player gets reported heavily and is going to get punished, a diamond player can view it and put judgement and rewarded, if they gave prizes and reward i wouldnt mind doing some
> ...a diamond player can view it and put judgement and rewarded, if they gave prizes and reward i wouldnt mind doing some So, it's not really about behavior, it's about giving Diamond players leverage and rewards. Let me reiterate; > the Tribunal was iceboxed because it was horrifically slow with a low participation rate, and wound up being horrifically inaccurate when participation was incentivized via Influence Points. So, the Tribunal was _slow_ because of a _**low participation rate.**_ You are suggesting to bring back the Tribunal and essentially _force_ a low participation rate by having it open exclusively to a _small portion of the Ranked playerbase_. And you're also suggesting that it _reward_ said players for participating, which, as stated above; _they tried in the past with the original Tribunal, and that made things worse._ Participation may have spiked, but so did inaccurate votes; specifically, people mass-voting punish no matter the reason to gain free shit. If people are going to participate in the Tribunal, they should be doing it for the sake of bettering the community, _not_ for the sake of rewards. And if you're going to exclude the vast majority of the playerbase, _**you cannot add rewards period, because that would be unfair to literally everyone else who isn't Diamond.**_ And, of course, you don't address the initial concern; you conflate game skill with behavioral understanding without any solid reason for the correlation. And there is none. You can be good at the game and know basically nothing about behavior-related things, just the same as you can suck at the game but be able to accurately determine intentional feeding or poor sportsmanship. **Rank != Behavioral Knowledge.**
: Should riot allow Tribunal for players above Diamond?
Individual player skill shouldn't be confused with the ability to discern misbehavior. Just because they're Diamond doesn't make them any better at sussing out what is or isn't good sportsmanship or deliberate trolling than people at Gold, or Silver, or those who are unranked. Beyond that; the Tribunal was iceboxed because it was horrifically slow with a low participation rate, and wound up being horrifically inaccurate when participation was incentivized via Influence Points. You're suggesting that they add the Tribunal back, but limit it to a _very specific, very **small** subset of players_ in the community, who have to actually climb to that point as well before the Tribunal can actually come online. Which, sure, for most Diamond players, it'll probably be child's play ripping their way through to Diamond, but the point remains; there's at least one day of downtime for the Tribunal if it's being tied to something that players have to climb to/unlock. That in and of itself makes it worse - albeit marignally - than the IFS that we have now. > ...and the highrer your rank, the more efective the punishment is... This would be legitimately unfair. Why put greater power in the hands of a small subset of the community just because they can play well? Why have basically everyone else's reports/reviews/whatever matter substantially less just because they, for one reason or another, aren't in Diamond?
: If you read more than just the title of my post you would of realized that i'm not posting from the account that was banned. And people don't have multiple accounts just because they were banned on others. I got this account so i could tryout ranked before i played on my main. - The only person lying or trying to mislead is you, my ban has nothing to do with this account at all. So why even bring it up. You're just trying to attack me with whatever excuse you can come up with.
> If you read more than just the title of my post you would of realized that i'm not posting from the account that was banned. Okay, seeing this, now I'm a bit more curious about the situation. I had glossed over (rather; read the body, but not the screenname) of your Support Ticket image, and had mistakenly assumed you were referring to this account. Looking at the account in question, there _are_ a good couple games on Monday, the 28th, and there are a lot more questions raised now. I'd still say to wait on Riot's response via the Support Ticket, but now the likelihood of this being an unmerited punishment is a bit more dubious.
Exibir mais

Umbral Regent

Nível 170 (NA)
Total de votos positivos
Criar uma discussão