5 ms·

Your points are covered by League's blog post that goes into the underlying reasoning: https://www.leagueoflegends.com/en-au/news/dev/dev-vanguard-x-lol/ https:

• xeonmc 2y ago
  It really did not. The blog described insufficiency of the prior detection method, and statistics of the rate of cheating. It did not address the point that the game, by inherited design (of the genre), already places a ceiling on the effectiveness of automated actions. What's particularly irksome about the blog, besides the gratuitous language throughout, are expedient omissions of context in statements such as: > When piloted optimally, scripter win rates hover around 80% in Ranked games without contextualizing what elo it's measured at or how it compares to a smurf which you'd also expect to have an anomalous winrate before reaching their equilibrium elo. This is then immediately followed by the discussion of the cheating statistics for above-Masters tier, misleading the uncareful reader to draw the conclusion that cheaters can manage 80% winrate in Masters+. One might be inclined to dismiss this as carelessness in writing, however these kinds of patterns are common throughout Riot's various "technical blogs", especially those posts on valorant's initial release that claimed some earthshattering netcode innovation, then described various bog-standard multiplayer practices without further elaboration, implicitly passing them off as their own invention without actually claiming so. I'd suggest others here to also spot these patterns for themselves by taking a read at some of these other riot blogposts masquerading as technical deep dives that really are self-promotion aimed to beguile "gamers".