Bеаn

Your opinion is already communicated to game admins when you make a report. What you're suggesting is that players unite to expedite the punishment process, potentially relying on general, untrained opinions. The comparison you've made is irrelevant. Nondescript '10 player games' offer no useful basis for comparison, especially when there is little to no equal comparison to be drawn between TMP and any other game. Moderation by general opinion isn't how I believe TruckersMP intends to operate. If it were, they would issue all punishments based on the opinions of untrained players rather than relying on trained moderators. Just because Fred says Wilma has done something doesn't mean she actually has. However, the fact that she is entirely innocent doesn't stop Fred from fooling others into thinking she's guilty. This can already be observed in-game, with people spamming 'everyone report 343,' even though they know that only one person can report another at a time. If there has to be a solution to this problem, I would suggest something more along the lines of grouping reports together. In other words, removing the inability to report someone who has already been reported, effectively allowing reports to accumulate. Perhaps then, players with more accumulated reports will rise to the top of the list of reports yet to be addressed, thus allowing them to be seen sooner. However, the likelihood of this occurring is slim, as it would completely abolish the principle of 'first come, first served' and would be open to mass, ineffective reporting.

Its called turning chat off

Not your worst idea. But I can't see it being added - because its not that big of a problem.

I completely disagree, @InsanoDeath. An inactive VTC doesn't impede the growth of another VTC. The development of a VTC relies entirely on its reputation. Specifically, if the owner or management actively takes steps to promote the VTC's name, then that VTC has a greater chance of acquiring members compared to one that remains idle, merely awaiting people to join via the click-through rate. In my experience, the currently most popular VTCs are either demographic-specific or large. Some individuals prefer to join a VTC with 200 members rather than one with only 10, while others favour a smaller VTC of 5, preferring it to be smaller. If a VTC is inactive, people aren't likely to join it; therefore, it's in no way competition to yours or any other VTC—unless you're, for some reason, an inactive VTC trying to compete against other inactive VTCs. The key to success is recognition and a good environment—nothing less, nothing more. I consider smaller VTCs, of which there are many, that are closed for recruitment, as 'time-capsule' VTCs—simply there to retain the memories of what was, not to impede the success of another VTC. Therefore, I see no reason why they should face deletion. Furthermore, smaller VTCs that are actively recruiting are, by recruiting, not inactive. VTCs sitting idle without reason or justification are indeed inactive, and thus, they don't pose any threat to new or existing VTCs. Those who remain in the VTC can join or leave as they wish—however, the entire VTC shouldn't be forcibly deleted, and all members forced, against their will, out. The VTCs that pose the most threat or challenge to newer or smaller VTCs are larger and well-established VTCs.

I don't understand why you think this is worthy of discussion, correct. However, having to solve a puzzle is indeed a security measure. I'd assume it's to ensure it's actually a human trying to delete the account, and second, to give you a barrier to actually proceeding with deletion. If you have to solve a puzzle before your account is deleted, it prevents people mis-clicking and that one click instantly deleting their account. It's also probably to slow people like hackers down. Just for clarity, as I don't fancy testing it myself, was it TruckersMP asking you to solve the puzzle or a third-party like Cloudflare? I'm thinking that maybe you triggered some kind of Cloudflare challenge.

Hey, thanks for reaching out for help, I'll try my best to help you. To begin with, the description you've given isn't exactly explanatory: Because of this, my accompanying answer will address generic issues. Firstly, have you checked the folder you've placed the mod into is called mod and not mods? Secondly, I'd suggest ensuring you have downloaded the latest version, and have installed it in the correct folder - C:\Users/user/Documents\ETS2MP\mod. Thirdly, I'd suggest checking you have put the .scs files directly into the folder. You shouldn't extract the files, simply move the downloaded folder(s) into the mod folder. If you've checked the above and you're still struggling, I'd suggest you check out this more in-depth guide. If after checking this guide, you're still struggling, I suggest opening a support ticket. I hope you resolve your issue, Bean

I don't really see what's up for discussion here. If someone has hacked your account, you can log in and delete their session, which will log them out. Afterward, enable two-factor authentication (2FA), and you should be okay. If your issue is with the apparent ease of account deletion, I suggest you make a suggestion for how it could be improved.

If the mod had any semblance of realism, we wouldn't encounter players in cars and trucks blocking the road for several minutes. Thus, the suggestion that we don't need such commands because they render the game unrealistic is solely the fault of the unrealistic players the game attracts. It's a catch-22. If we had realistic and sensible players, there would be no need for commands to address the unrealistic and immature behaviours.

I have 1,523 hrs logged, whereas, you have 1,044 hours. Does my hours advantage make me a better driver or a better moderator compared to you?

Nice suggestion, but it'll get probably rejected because you've written in French and not English. You may want to check out this.

The freeroam server sounds like the answer here. It's not restricted to players with the winter mod, but it does allow you to have some fun with people without any road rules and without having to use Arcade. And sometimes, they even retain collisions, so you can bump into people. That's if it gets added this year.

With the solution I've outlined, I assumed that people possess sufficient intelligence to create a save and reload using that save. However, evidently, I was mistaken. Therefore, I will re-explain my solution to cater to those for whom intelligence isn't their strongest trait. Stage 1 - Open the chat and type /disconnect. Stage 2 - Drive forward until you can be sure you've cleared the blockage. Stage 3 - Pull over somewhere safe. Stage 4 - Press ` to open the game console and type 'save' or save in the conventional way. Stage 5 - Press ` to open the game console and type 'game' or use the launchpad to reconnect. the links on game console is the first post I could find related to the console, there may be an updated version.

Hey, No. While searching for VTCs, people can specify both a 'min members' number and a 'max members' number. If the member count is a key indicator of activity, people can use these filters to ensure they are only finding the 'active' VTCs. A better way to find active VTCs is by searching for verified or validated VTCs. As explained here, eligible VTCs must meet the respective requirements of 20 active members or 50 active members. Becoming validated or verified is challenging, but with enough commitment, any VTC can achieve it. Advertising your VTC and fostering growth is the responsibility of VTC management, not TMP. Removing non-active VTCs won't have any impact on your chances of growth. It's a well-known fact that the majority of people join VTCs due to their associated recognition, member count, or advertising. The VTC you're currently in has 495 members. Based on my rough calculations, only 79 members have played in the last 2 weeks. This indicates that only 15% of your VTC is currently active, with a ratio of 79:416. Considering your events as well, it appears that you have a low turnout from your VTC. If your VTC is, by scale, this inactive, I can't comprehend why you'd want to remove smaller VTCs that, in comparison, have more active members relative to their size than your own. Seems to me that you want the smaller VTCs to make way for the bigger VTCs. Without giving the smaller VTCs a chance of growth, or consideration of their wishes and circumstances. In my experience, I've seen a bunch of smaller VTCs that wish to remain at their current size because they're just a bunch of mates having a laugh and driving together. On the other hand, there're some VTCs that're really struggling for recognition. Those struggling for recognition are struggling at the hands of VTCs like yourself. If TruckersMP came along and wiped out all these communities, things wouldn't improve, we'd only end up losing a bunch of friendship groups and up and coming dedicated VTCs. Before I conclude, I'll just talk about events. Why shouldn't a VTC with a couple of members be able to organise their own events? Hosting events is an excellent way for VTCs to attract members, and as mentioned earlier, some VTCs may simply want to organize events to drive together with their mates. With an average of 100+ sign-ups for your events (estimated), I find it hard to believe that you're 'facing issues'. In conclusion, from my understanding of your proposal, I cannot endorse such a suggestion. You're advocating for the removal of VTCs that you deem inactive, yet the VTC you represent is, in terms of size, inactive. Moreover, you express displeasure that smaller VTCs and groups are organising their events. Personally, I don't see any issue with individuals hosting events, and I don't believe VTC member count holds significance in that regard.

Most CD drivers aren't honest players. If such a defence mechanism were in place, you'd have to have x amount of honest players witnessing whatever incident everyone is upset about. Which, on roads like CD, could take some time. There's no foolproof solution. The only real attraction of a system like this is to reduce blockages. But as countless people say time and again, if you're that bothered about a blockage, why do you sit behind it? If people were that annoyed at being blocked, they'd do something about it, i.e., disconnect. For now, the best way to combat trolls blocking is: /disconnect, drive past, and reconnect. The moment more people start doing this, the fewer blockages there will be. People only block because they enjoy annoying others. If you don't let them get to you, they'll give up blocking because they're not getting their desperation for satisfaction fulfilled.

Admins with active bans is a no go. You can't exactly have someone going around enforcing the rules when, in the last year, they haven't followed them. I also don't see how account age affects activity levels. Older accounts tend to mean older people. Older people tend to have day jobs. People with day jobs are known not to have the most time. What stops one person convincing 24 others to report someone for the fun of it? If one person says report someone, you can pretty much bet that people will try to. Also, if your suggestion was to go ahead, there'd have to be consideration given to blocking other report options if a report for that user has already been submitted.

If there's no-one oncoming, they pose no threat. They may well be on the incorrect side of the road, but this is necessary to complete the overtake. The way I've outlined my suggestion ensures that only roads where overtaking doesn't involve going on the opposite side of the road are considered. It is near-impossible to automatically police inappropriate overtaking, and this suggestion doesn't try to do so.

Sounds like something you should suggest to scs.

While the concept may seem appealing in theory, in reality, it is riddled with flaws. Vote kick/punish systems are frequently abused, serving as tools for targeting and various malicious activities. The only situation where someone can genuinely be considered as causing a blockage is if they obstruct the full length of a road with a central reservation. For instance, when a driver spans across all lanes approaching the Calais intersection. In such cases, if an admin isn't available, you have two options: report them or use '/disconnect' to navigate around and then re-join, continuing your journey. Many users often linger behind a blockage, repeatedly typing "rec x in chat" or "ADMIN SLEEPING," waiting for someone to provide a solution. A more proactive approach would be, as mentioned, to /disconnect and drive past them, then re-join and continue. If the area you plan to re-join is busy, it's strongly recommended that before reconnecting, you pull over to a safe location. This ensures you won't be impeding traffic upon respawn.

Hiya, If you have a video of them hitting you, then surely that video will have their name in it? If you have a name, you can use https://truckersmp.com/user/search?search= to find their id. Hope this helps, Bean

Implemented well, It'd be great. Give trolls a way to abuse it in anyway, it'll be hellish. Overall, if enough time and consideration is given to it, I think it'd drastically improve the playing experience in the less-populated areas (most of the map).

Am I the only one who had a hard time understanding this?

Ah. Maybe making other objects "cops" would be easier - lampposts, for example, as you've hinted too.

In my mind, it'd work by checking for "wrong way" traffic offence events, and then resolving the player's current position relative to known roads. The game already knows if you're in a city, as it adjusts the speed limit - so setting it for cites won't be a problem.

Suggestion Name: Automatically issue punishments for people who are detected to be driving the incorrect way. Suggestion Description: This has been suggested previously, but my suggestion is slightly different. For an offense to have been committed, multiple factors must be determinable. Key among these factors is whether a player is merely overtaking or driving on the incorrect side of the road. To achieve this, I'd suggest limiting this system to cities (like Dover) and to motorways with and without a central reservation. This could also apply to dual carriageways or any road with a central reservation. Possible punishments include, but are not limited to: TPR, TPRK, kick. continuation of suggestion description Additionally, a key factor is whether the player has traffic offenses enabled or not. To combat this, there would have to be a way to ensure that the "wrong way" traffic event is permanently enabled. This falls in line with numerous suggestions to enforce all traffic offenses. Any example images: No. Why it should be added: If the system can detect a wrong-way driver before they hit someone, it'll reduce the number of people being rammed. Most incidents of this, from my experience, result in a kick unless a collision occurs. So, issuing a TPRK or kick wouldn't be any different from an admin doing it.