The game team has resolved this issue. Keys will be distributed via in-game messages and the quest timer will be extended.
More information and timeline here.
*This includes currently unclaimable keys as well*
As previously announced, the team will be distributing an additional point toward milestones to anyone who completed the Absorbing Man fight in the first step of the Winter of Woe.
This point will be distributed at a later time as it requires the team to pull and analyze data.
The timeline has not been set, but work has started.

Forced title for banned accounts



  • SummonerB2SummonerB2 Posts: 556
    I think the title should be like crystalised for cheating.
  • mum_m2mum_m2 Posts: 1,776 ★★★★
    In favor of "cheater" after proven guilty and no pending rebuttal
  • klobberintymeklobberintyme Posts: 1,345 ★★★
    It falls under the idea of discussing actions on Accounts. Now, there could be grounds for removing them from Allies, but I think labeling the Accounts is a bad idea.

    In all seriousness, slapping a "negative" label on a user is a bad optic for the company. You can always argue (from corporate view) that your userbase may have complaints about gameplay, content, etc. but to knowingly add a measurable component (media reporter can count the number of "banned" accounts in the game vs. "inactive") is never a positive. After all, if they're keen on keeping defunct accounts around to pad user base numbers, they don't need banned account numbers to be a metric for potential buyers to see.
  • B1gG4zB1gG4z Posts: 146
    edited September 2017
    Why not just label it as ‘This player is no longer active’ this could be because of a ban or simply that the player decided to quit. Automatically apply the status after 3 months of inactivity. Job done ;)
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 724 ★★★★
    This is something that we've discussed internally before, and the jury is still out. On the one hand, it's a good idea to provide better optics on accounts we remove from the game for breaking our rules. It can provide comfort to our honest players and let them know that we take our efforts to keep the game clean, seriously. It can make our constant efforts more visible (because we ban on a regular basis whenever it's warranted) and can also act as a deterrent to the less informed that think it's easy to get away with violating our rules or that it comes with no consequence. It would likely help reduce the # of players that think about using those 'pay for play' services that are completely against our terms of service.

    On the other hand, there are potential considerations that need to be made. Some activities come with a temp ban only, and we really want to give people the benefit of the doubt in assuming they are going to change their ways after they've been given a second chance. A few possibilities would be not implementing a tag for temp bans, and putting a delay on adding a tag to perm banned accounts, giving a chance for appeal first.

    It's not an easy answer and as much as many might think, if we were to settle on it it's also not a quick and easy implementation on the tech side of things :)

    We're a bit focused on higher priorities at the moment, but wanted to provide some insight into some of the conversations we have had on this topic so far! Ultimately, we ban people on a regular cadence because we want to keep things fair for those that play in a proper manner, and dedicate so much of their passion to The Contest.
  • I played last night, then just as this morning I got banned for 716 hours for no apparent reason. I roughly played for about 6 months and this happen twice to my account already. I havent violated any terms. Then why banned my account. 😢
Sign In or Register to comment.