Jeroen

The number of concurrent players on Simulation 1 has been hanging on and around 3000 players for the past few months, and according to testimonials (such as the one above) it doesn't take too long to get in either. As mentioned in a recent blog, we'll continue to monitor the demand and make adjustments where necessary. One weekend alone does not provide the necessary insights as of yet.

It would have been paradoxical if we took away the ability to play realistically, which is not at all the case. Anyone can still play in the exact same manner as before, and in addition to that there has been an extra server added to the roster due to popular demand. We continue to support the community, which includes diverse groups of players.

I'm sorry you feel that way, but understand where you're coming from. I'm aware that many players feel the same way. Our moderation team has set new guidelines since last month that should eliminate bans for accidents (see the blog section about game moderation for more information), so hopefully that also translates to practice. When it comes to the winter physics mod, I thoroughly agree with you that our moderation team should take a more lenient approach to accidents. We are all aware that the physics can be a little scuffed sometimes, but that is no different in real life with icy roads and – above all – part of the fun for players, right? Sometimes players intentionally use an exploit to become a fidget spinner on steroids, I would say acting upon that – especially when it affects other players – is a good thing to keep the game playable for everyone, but for most accidents I don't think a ban from our servers is all that necessary.

1. The group I am referring to advocates for lower speed limits as they want everyone else to play the game in the same fashion as them (i.e., realistically). Speed limits are restrictions and thus force players. 2. Very simple: they wish to play the game in a different way than what most players in highly populated areas are after. It is inherent to any MMO-based community that there are diverse groups of players with different interests. 3. The main uniqueness that TruckersMP adds to the community/communities that play these games is that we allow hundreds, thousands, of players to connect in an online environment. We are an inclusive and diverse community. While simulation is a core principle for many players, there are many players that wish to play more casually as well, and this update is a step towards accommodating both aspects. People play games in different ways. You may disagree with how others play a game and that's fine of course, but in my humble opinion (and that is also what I have interpreted from all these surveys and many personal conversations with players) that is not a legitimate reason to apply restrictions that a 'handful of people' support at the expense of everyone else; however, we still maintain Simulation 1 for those that prefer the 'old' configuration. At the end of the day, it is the community that makes the games what they are and everyone can play the game as they please. With regard to the latter, there are plenty of ideas out there (also by the likes of the simulation community) but it ultimately depends on what our development team can bring to the table; I am not comfortable sharing those ideas here and now, however, as we have previously done that only to run into practical issues down the line and having to delay or even cancel ideas. You can be rest assured that many people in our team got you covered and are motivated to continue working on the simulation experience. At the same time, we keep our eyes open for other trends among our community.

I don't believe their experience changes through this update. I am aware there is a (relatively small) group of players that aim for true simulation c.q. realism; that is generally speaking also the group that advocates for lower speed limits, as they want to make other users to play the game in the same fashion as them by force. As mentioned, we (but this applies to any MMO community) have different groups with different interests, and this was no different before – not before Road to Simulation was initiated, not yesterday, not today, and not tomorrow. Regardless of whether you limit players to drive at 90 km/h, 110 km/h, or 150 km/h, they will play the game in their own style, and that is also what more than 3 years Road to Simulation experience has shown. The ones that aim for more realism – or at least the ones that participated in the surveys – usually do not go near the highly populated areas (Calais, Duisburg, and environment). The game experience does thus realistically not change for them, especially not if they decide to play on Simulation 1, which still contains the exact server configuration many of those players advocated for. The way the game is played is what the community makes of it. Trying to force certain playstyles onto users does not work; the Road to Simulation failed in that aspect. While simulation is certainly part of the games, there are many, many other players that wish to play the games more casually. The community is therefore, evidently, about more than just simulation. Nevertheless, as mentioned in the blog: "We intend to use the Simulation 1 server as our basis where we continue to build on our unique simulation environment, for example with special 'live' events such as Operation HQ. We also hope that the Simulation 1 server provides a place where the more 'serious' and 'realistic' simulation enthusiasts can come together." This is all in line with the results from the surveys, in which collectively, more than 10,000 users participated.

As explained in the blog, we'll start with an equal amount of slots on both servers. Eventually the most popular server will be accommodated with the most slots; we are giving players a choice and will accommodate by demand. A real split will not occur regardless; the community has traditionally shown that most players join the server that is most active. When it comes to server slots, it's not a matter of simply counting numbers, but it rather depends on multiple factors how many slots we can allocate and where. To give you an example, adding 1 more player to Duisburg at peak time is >100x more heavy for bandwidth use than the same player alone in the middle of nowhere. Servers can also not be directly compared to one another given our infrastructure. Given what I mentioned above, we will most likely allocate 4000 slots to the most popular design at a later point in time. We initially anticipated to transform the Arcade server to the current Simulation 2 design. In other words, we would essentially enable collisions on Arcade. During the process, however, we had learned that there is a (not to be neglected) group of players that utilise the Arcade servers to 'escape' the servers where rules and collisions apply, e.g. to drive without having to pay too much attention, perform stunts, or drive carelessly with friends; often people also mentioned they use it to set up and design things such as convoy control profiles, which are often important element of community events. Transforming that server would impact that group of players. Likewise, players that have expressed their support for servers with collisions enabled and a higher speed limit also tend to support the enforcement of road rules; this finding suggests that simply enabling collisions on Arcade would not have made a meaningful impact. We have internally also talked about a possibility of designing opt-in collisions, which would essentially allow people to enable and disable collisions locally. This is currently not feasible, but could be an option in the future. I think what this update primarily emphasises is that nothing is set in stone and we adapt to changing circumstances. That also implies that the current 'reality' is not set in stone either and that we keep our eyes open for new trends. This update was also discussed with and agreed upon by our partners from ProMods. It's a reality we have to face that there will always be people happy and likewise unhappy with updates, no matter what we do. This update aims to accommodate for a strong desire among a significant share of our players. At the end of the day, and as is the reality of any MMO-based community, there are players with different interests. I thoroughly understand there is a group of players that desires the true core of the games, namely pursuing simulation, but at the same time we also have to face that this is a virtual game and that other players wish to play the game in a different fashion; it is unreasonable to expect players to play in the exact same manner as you want to play the game. There is definitely a group that takes simulation seriously, and that's great, nobody wishes to put an end to that either. But there's also a group that wants to drive more casually and have fun in that way; one could wonder what is wrong about that and why those two groups cannot co-exist and each pursue their own interests. The speed limit is a maximum, not a minimum; that means that players can decide for themselves how fast they wish to drive. It is often mentioned that players that enjoy higher speed limits only drive on CD road. Good for them, right? They apparently have their own environment and if you don't like what happens around there, then you can simply take one of the other hundreds, if not thousands, other roads that are in the game and have fun by playing in your own style. Likewise, the Simulation 1 server – which enjoyed much support in the Community Survey – is still a thing as well. All that has happened here, realistically, is that players gained more liberty.

Sometimes, major updates are necessary to change course, adapt to challenges, or address unsustainable situations. In March of 2020, a significant update was made regarding save editing. The team had received widespread criticism for enforcing (too) restrictive save editing rules that were considered unhelpful and unclear to many users. Additionally, many team members responsible for enforcing the rules lacked the technical knowledge required to make informed judgments. As a result, it was decided to allow any form of save editing that did not adversely affect others. Today, three years later, we make another major project decision, this time regarding server configuration, specifically with regard to speed limits. After observing an extremely high demand for higher speed limits and having seen unprecedented participation in one of our survey, we have decided to adjust our server offerings to meet the community’s wishes. This decision was not made lightly and, instead, was the result of a lengthy, multi-step process. In this blog, I will take you through those steps. A brief history of our 'Road to Simulation' To fully appreciate the context of this decision, we must go back to 2018 and 2019 when the EU1, EU2, EU3, and EU4 servers were available. These servers offered players a choice in terms of conditions on the server. Specifically, EU1 had a speed limit of 110 km/h with collisions enabled, EU2 had no speed limit with collisions enabled, EU3 had no speed limit with collisions enabled but no cars, and EU4 had no speed limit with collisions disabled. Among the community, EU2 was the most popular server by far. During the summer of 2019, the decision was made to place a greater emphasis on simulation by offering two distinct server types: Simulation and Arcade. The EU1 and EU4 servers at that time were the equivalent to today's Simulation and Arcade servers, respectively. It was determined that a speed limit of 110 kmh would be most appropriate for a truck simulation environment, while an 'Arcade' server with no speed limit and no collisions would appeal to those who wanted to drive faster. Additionally, save editing rules were tightened to prevent 'unrealistic' modifications (although these restrictions were later lifted in 2020 in response to community feedback, as mentioned earlier). In August of 2019, further changes were implemented to take a more stringent stance against users who engaged in 'unrealistic' driving. This involved significantly longer punishment lengths than before, as well as the introduction of rule 2.9, which allowed the game moderation team to issue permanent bans against users they deemed unsuitable for driving on our servers. Furthermore, in February 2020, further enforcement measures were put in place to increase the strictness of game moderation. The 'Road to Simulation' initiative has been underway for over three years now, with ongoing debate among our user base about our direction. Particularly in regards to our game moderation, there are many comments about it across our community, as well as in other sub-communities, TruckersMP reviews, social media posts, and YouTube videos, among other sources. Our vision has remained consistent throughout this whole time: we strive towards providing a fun and entertaining massively multiplayer online (MMO) environment where players can meet and play together. Along with the aforementioned changes to servers and game moderation, we also pushed map updates to enhance traffic flow (such as a complete rework of Duisburg city and the intersection on the road between Calais and Duisburg). Despite all these changes and the evident debates among the community, we however have never really reached out to community what your thoughts on all this is. Towards community-driven insights When I became the Project Manager in May last year, this was one of the key elements I wanted to address, considering that this project ultimately depends on its community; you guys are what makes this multiplayer mod flourish. It was my aim to involve players more in the decision we make and to learn from their needs and wishes. Instead of deciding for the community, my vision was to decide with the community. The first step in this direction was the Community Survey in the summer of 2022. This survey was taken by 2,153 users, a respectable number. I mentioned in the previous section that we had implemented map changes to improve traffic flow, but users were never asked for input, and after the fact signals reached me of players indicating that their 'fun factor' had been taken away and that we had made things more 'boring'. Through the survey, we learned that 65% of the respondents preferred driving in highly populated areas, and that 81% did not mind traffic jams. In fact, many pointed out that dense traffic (or, as others coined it, 'chaos') is what makes our multiplayer environment so enjoyable for them. One of the key reasons players mention why they play on our servers is because they like the interaction with other users, and that highly populated areas make it challenging and interactive. This thus raised the question whether traffic flow improvements is something we should have strived for; efficiency at the cost of fun!? We also asked users to indicate their preferred server configurations based on three options: collisions enabled/disabled, speed limit enabled/disabled, and road rules enforced/not enforced. A majority of 66% indicated a preference for the current Simulation 1 server, while at the same time half of the respondents (50%) also expressed their support for a Simulation-like server without a speed limit! Only 9% supported the current Arcade server, while a slightly larger group of 12% preferred an Arcade-like server with collisions enabled. In the open-ended questions, we additionally received hundreds of comments regarding our game moderation and the speed limit. Note: Total number of participants: 2,153. Participants could vote for multiple server types. Interpreting the results and follow-up surveys To discuss the survey findings with a select group of community representatives and dive deeper into player sentiments that are difficult to capture through surveys, we asked interested users to apply for a User Panel. After reviewing roughly 600 submissions, we invited around 20 candidates to participate in a pilot program that was initiated in December 2022. During the pilot, we discussed the survey results and exchanged thoughts and point of views, and panel members also sought feedback from their own networks to share with us. The pilot concluded earlier this month, and we are grateful for the panel's participation and input. We may consider starting a new panel in the future if we need input on another issue. After analysing the results of the initial survey and panel discussions, we conducted a series of follow-up surveys in February of this year. The first survey (with 1,954 participants) focused on various aspects of our game moderation based on feedback we had received. The second survey (with a very impressive and unprecedented 8,912 participants!) delved into server configurations in more detail, with a particular focus on speed limits due to the highly divided opinions we had received. Finally, the third survey (with 954 participants) was not in response to any specific feedback but rather an internal audit of engagement on our community platforms, seeking to gather user perspectives beyond raw data. Community platforms When we first started this project, most of our services were provided through our forum. However, as time passed, various systems have migrated from the forum to the website, including support, events, and VTCs. In addition, platforms like Discord have become essential for many online communities, and forums have lost some of their appeal. We have found that many users prefer Discord for real-time communication, while the forum is better for structured discussions. Users also use the forum to react to our news, blogs, and development updates, or for social networking activities like posting and responding to status updates. Discord is suitable for active discussions or 'hot topics', while the forum is better for elements that require structuring, such as suggestions and guides. Game moderation As mentioned before, we had received numerous negative comments about our game moderation practices and rule enforcement. In response, we decided to focus on specific areas of game moderation to gain more insight. While 73% of respondents believe that the official rules are sound, only 51% are satisfied with rule enforcement, and 49% are satisfied with the quality of our game moderation team. Although not the end of the world, these results highlight a certain level of dissatisfaction with our rule enforcement and game moderation team. One factor that could be contributing to this dissatisfaction is our strict approach to game moderation as part of the Road to Simulation initiative. About 68% of respondents would prefer us to be more forgiving towards minor infractions: many players indicate they would prefer a more relaxed approach to game moderation, particularly in situations that don't impact others. In addition to forgiveness, the community has raised concerns about the fairness of bans, the strictness of our game moderation, and the length of bans. Half of the respondents believe that bans are issued fairly, but a third disagree. Similarly, half believe that ban durations are reasonable, while a third do not. When it comes to the issue of being too strict, 39% agree, 31% disagree, and 30% are neutral. These results show that the community is highly divided on the topic of game moderation, but it is clear that many players would appreciate a more 'casual' approach, especially in situations where it doesn't matter. Our game moderation management has endorsed the results and and has adopted new, more lenient guidelines that align with the survey findings, including overall shorter ban durations and a greater degree of forgiveness. These new guidelines were pushed earlier this month, and we hope that they will have a positive impact on the community. Game server configuration As shown before, the 2022 Community Survey showed a strong desire for a Simulation-like server without a strict speed limit. We had also previously received many comments from users requesting a reconsideration of the speed limit. These insights prompted us to rethink our server offerings. The survey about game server configurations clearly demonstrate the importance of involving our users in our decision-making processes, considering that we received a record high engagement (an unprecedented 8,912 responses), which indicates high demand for certain basic needs. A large majority of respondents favour higher speed limits, with an overwhelming majority preferring a limit of 150 km/h for both ETS2 and ATS. Additionally, our User Panel also suggested implementing a regional speed limit around Calais and Duisburg, but the idea did not receive sufficient support with 43% in favour and 50% against. Another idea that was raised by our panel was applying speed limits by road type, so a rural road would have a different speed limit than a freeway, for example. We investigated the feasibility of this idea and while the game does label certain roads, not all roads all labelled as such, and thus we would not be able to apply speed limits to 'unlabelled' roads; that idea was therefore not deemed feasible for application. Our primary goal is to provide a fun and enjoyable online gaming environment for our users. Although we introduced a speed limit of 110 km/h in 2019 to create a more realistic simulation environment, we understand that there is also a need for more casual gameplay. When the Road to Simulation was pushed in 2019, we assumed that the Arcade server (no collisions, no speed limit, no road rules) would be able to meet that demand. However, we now know from internal data and reports that our Arcade servers are underutilised even during peak hours, and user testimonials have indicated that the vast majority of players do not believe servers without collisions or road rules are enjoyable. Indeed, our surveys revealed that 48% of respondents would prefer collisions on Arcade servers, and servers without collisions or road rules received only little support. There is, however, a small but not negligible group of users that do utilise our Arcade server, e.g. to get away from all the traffic or to set up convoy control profiles for events. Someone recently said that "what the game is supposed to be is what the players make it out to be", and another reflected on the relation between driving style and speed limits by stating that some "people will be reckless regardless of their speed" and that the Road to Simulation did not change the way people play the game, but was rather a restriction of the options players have. Having a diverse group of players, each playing the game in their own respective style, is the charm of a MMO environment. Not everyone has the same interests and therefore forcing a one-size-fits-none solution is not fruitful, while a solution that only favours one group of players will antagonise the other. Our community can be roughly divided into a relatively small group of ‘hardcore’ simulation players and a larger ‘casual’ player base – each with very different preferences. We recognise that it is not possible to meet the demands of both groups simultaneously. Therefore, we have decided to offer the best of both worlds: a server where people can come together to drive in a more realistic manner, and a server where people can be more casual. We therefore go 'back to basics' by returning to similar server offerings as those that we provided in 2018/2019: Simulation 1 (similar to EU1), Simulation 2 (similar to EU2), and Arcade (similar to EU4). Specifically, the speed limit will globally be increased to 150 km/h and it will be up to players themselves to adapt to the conditions on the road. Should you not wish to worry about any rules, then we will still have an Arcade server available. This gives players the ability to drive faster should they wish to, while others that wish to drive slower (e.g., by completing World of Trucks deliveries that are limited to 90 km/h or by completing 'real miles' in external companion apps) have that ability as well. We will maintain the current "Simulation 1" configuration as well, in a similar fashion as back in 2018/2019. "Simulation 1" will be the equivalent of EU1 (collisions, road rules, 110 km/h speed limit), a new server coined as "Simulation 2" will be the equivalent of EU2 (collisions, road rules, 150 km/h speed limit), and "Arcade" will be the equivalent of EU4 (no collisions, no road rules, no speed limit). We intend to use the Simulation 1 server as our basis where we continue to build on our unique simulation environment, for example with special 'live' events such as Operation HQ. We also hope that the Simulation 1 server provides a place where the more 'serious' and 'realistic' simulation enthusiasts can come together. Finally, we were also informed that there are many users who believed that our automated AFK kick timer was too strict. This timer was set to 10 minutes and some felt the need to use external tools to bypass that timer. In the survey, we asked our players what they believe would be a more user-friendly timer. 95% of the respondents stated that a timer of 30 minutes or less would satisfy their needs. We have decided to go for a dynamic timer, that will automatically adjust based on how busy the server is. In the infographic below, you can see our new timers. By default, the timer will now be 30 minutes in case less than 90% of the slots are used; in case the server is busy, the timer will go back to 10 minutes. Patrons (Master Trucker tier) have received additional benefits. For them, the AFK timer will be disabled, unless more than 90% of the slots are utilised, in which case their timer will be set to 30 minutes. This change was already pushed back in February; check this infographic for an overview. The new server configuration will be applied to all our servers, including the ProMods servers with consent from our partners. The overview will be as described in the table below. Initially, slots for Simulation 1 and Simulation 2 will be divided equally as the Community Survey showed a large body of support for both configurations and we do not wish to steer where the demand goes; this is up to you guys. We will adjust the slots to favour the most popular server as soon as we have witnessed where the demand goes. The slots for arcade servers have been adjusted as well to distribute capacity better across a range of servers; the amount of slots is based on our server data from 2022 and meets peak demand. Servers with a 150 km/h speed limit have city speed limits of 80 km/h (50 mp/h) Closing remarks For TruckersMP, this is the beginning of a new chapter and I understand that not everyone may support this change. In fact, this is and has been a controversial topic within our team. However, I believe that sometimes it is necessary to listen to the community's voice and look beyond our own vision to meet their desires. We have carefully worked to consider our options and hope the new servers should satisfy both ends of the spectrum – those who prefer a more realistic gameplay experience and those who are more casual. Ultimately, our most important function is to enable players to have fun, and I hope this update contributes to that. For me personally, this also marks the beginning of a new chapter as I will soon be stepping down from my role in project management and transferring to a role that combines accounting and consultant responsibilities. Representing both the community and the team has been an honour, and I hope that my contributions and philosophy endure. However, it is now time to make place for others to take the lead due to less time to dedicate as a result of real-life obligations and a desire to focus primarily on the technological aspects of this project rather than the people management and politics that come along with project management responsibilities. I thank the thousands of users that have provided their input and everyone who has worked closely with me to make things possible; your contributions have been tremendously helpful. Enjoy and see you on the road! With regards, Jeronimo Project Manager --> View post on homepage

[ADD-ON MANAGER] @Nika_ steps down to Add-On team member.

[COMMUNITY MODERATION MANAGER] @Critical has left the team due to lack of time.

[COMMUNITY MANAGER] @Stan has been promoted to Head of Community. The Head of Community is a new position and oversees the strategic direction of multiple departments that cater to the community by guiding the management teams from Community Management, Community Moderation, Translation, and Media. To ensure effective and engaging community-centric approaches, the Head of Community works towards harmonising and aligning practices across these departments. The Head of Community serves as a composite of the senior positions that we used to have for each of the individual aforementioned departments.

That was one of the key areas I was aiming for when I got into this position. Add more clarity as to what we work on and what not, maybe even a little roadmap, which may sound relatively easy but is actually quite complex. As you can see in the suggestions section, there are a lot of ideas from users. On top of that, we of course also have our own ideas and vision. And not everything that we would want are feasible due to practical limitations. All in all, there are way more great ideas than we can implement, and we have limited resources; the majority of our developers are e.g. volunteers who do things in their spare time. The danger in sharing roadmaps is that our situation does not allow us to provide guarantees. In the past, features (the best known example is probably AI traffic) have been teased/announced, but have never seen the light as we would run into obstacles or other priorities. As our partner at ProMods say "It's ready when it's ready", the same principle very much applies to us, and shaping expectations may (and has) inevitably get back at us sooner or later. We should soon publish a dev blog about a major project in relation to our coding backbone that one of our game developers has been working on for over a year now, which should provide some more insight into what we have been up to. We have made some changes to the suggestions section. Particularly in relation to your comment, new suggestions are now visible instantly (no more post approval), restrictions have been removed (users used to need a certain post count before they could submit a suggestion), and all new suggestions are "open for discussion" by default so that you can discuss and co-create with others

[SERVICE & DATA ANALYST] @Prime transfers to the role of Advisor to better reflect his activities within the team.

I have shared your feedback with our community and community moderation managers

Any particular sections you wish to highlight? Absolutely, and this has been on my to-do for a while. In the near future, I'll restructure the sections in status buckets (e.g., "New", "Accepted", etc.) rather than categorise them based on the topic area (e.g., "game", "web", etc.), and suggestions that are not decided upon yet will be open for discussion immediately so that others can chime in and co-create and refine ideas.

The scope was indeed expanded. First it was only focussed on the forum, but since we currently use a combination of both the forum and Discord it made sense to take both into account at the same time.

We've extended the deadline for the server configuration survey with a week to the 28th. The number of responses have been consistently high and above average, and have not started to flatten out yet.

Data from previous surveys indicate that 80-90% of the responses are recorded in the first 48-72 hours after publishing. After that, it flattens rather quickly; beyond 5-7 days there is no significant gain anymore. Moreover, while a longer duration may result in more responses (in absolute numbers), data also indicates that the answer models (i.e., the relative distributions for e.g. answer A or answer B) do not alter in a significant manner anymore. It's always a balancing act based on such expectations patterns, the purpose of surveys, and other factors. I agree that ~2,100 respondents may not seem much compared to the number of regular users, however, industry standards consider a response rate of roughly 5-30%. In the light of that knowledge, the number of responses may not be unusual. I also agree that it would have been beneficial if the community was involved more before 'Road to Simulation' was rolled out, however, I can of course not change the past and can only influence the present.

Some people have requested whether they can see the images in the survey. Here they are.

The results were not publicly published as the purpose was to identify trends and establish a baseline for future benchmarking.

The data comes from the community survey. A basic presumption for any public survey is that the results are representative for the entire community. The survey demographics were in line with the demographics on other platforms. Apart from that, we have no indication of reason to believe that the results are not representative. We welcome everyone to participate. An another note, the discussion in this topic appears to be very black-and-white and thinking in extremes, as if there are only two categories of players: simulation-minded players and arcade-minded players. In reality there are several shades of either. Within the spectrum of simulation-minded players, for example, you can have casual players that do enjoy collisions and enforcement of rules but would like to have freedom to also be playful; and on the other hand you can have 'hardcore' simulation players that expect everyone to stop at every red light and adhere to every local speed limit. The extremes in our community are the latter, 'hardcore' simulators, and those that are identified as racers or NFS/GTA players, while I believe the vast majority is in between: players that enjoy structure and order to an extent, but don't want to be overly 'serious' but rather play casually. As most players tend to go to the most populated server, no server will always meet everyone's needs or wishes, as an one-size-fits-all solution does not exist.

I see some hasty conclusions based on assumptions. If it's not clear from the blog, in the community survey, we observed certain trends but the analysis of thousands of written feedback was performed through generalised text analysis, hence we couldn't quantify those sentiments well. Thus, we do know which trends are present within the community, but we can't accurately gauge how the "community" collectively thinks about them. Additionally, much of the feedback was general, while some topics (such as game moderation or speed limits) consist of many facets. With the surveys this month, we are trying to delve deeper into the matter and get a better picture. We will then take the results into consideration. Furthermore, a majority of the community supports the values and focus on simulation (78%), and the setup of our current simulation servers is the most popular (66%), so there's no sudden lack of importance of simulation within the community. I recommend participating in the surveys; only in that way can we get a good sense of opinions. Not doing so and then complaining that your opinion is not heard is nothing more than a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Last Summer, we conducted a community survey, to which we received many responses – thank you for sharing your views! Some of the things you shared with us required additional information to interpret. In order to do that together with the community, we invited community representatives to the user panel we announced along with the survey. Some productive discussions have followed since then, including topics about game moderation and server configuration (which entails settings such as collisions and server speed limits). As we move forward, we would like to gather more insights from the wider community to refine our approach. We are aware of dissatisfaction regarding our game moderation and have taken note of numerous complaints and concerns from within and beyond our community. Furthermore, we have received much feedback about our server configuration, particularly with regards to the server speed limits we enforce on the Simulation servers. In short, a lot of the feedback we have received has challenged the 'Road to Simulation' initiative we launched in 2019 (see blogs below). Road to Simulation blog 1 | July 2019 Road to Simulation blog 2 | August 2019 Road to Simulation blog 3 | February 2020 Announcing a series of short surveys The feedback from the community survey provided mere indications for the most part. In order to align our practices with the community's needs, we hope you can help us by providing more specific insights. Throughout February, we will therefore be conducting short 5-minute surveys every 'long' weekend on a specific topic, with the surveys opening Friday afternoon and closing Tuesday night (UTC time zones). Surveys will be posted on the following dates: Feb 10-14 | Game moderation Feb 17-21 | Server configuration (has been extended to the 28th due to high interest) Feb 24-28 | Community Platforms: Forums and Discord Stay updated! Please keep an eye on the Polls & Surveys page this month if you wish to participate and voice your opinion. You can also stay updated by joining our Discord server or following our Twitter, Facebook, or Instagram. The results will be shared via a blog post later in March. Thank you in advance and see you on the roads! --> View post on homepage

[SUPPORT MANAGER] @NeonLeon leaves the team due to lack of time and motivation. [EVENT MANAGER] @MsMist leaves the team due to lack of interest and motivation.

[SENIOR TRANSLATION MANAGER] @InvisibleRaptor leaves the team due to lack of time and motivation.

[RETIRED TEAM MEMBER] @_Skinner rejoins the team as an Event Manager.