Mavi~
Posts posted by Mavi~
-
-
41 minutes ago, L-DragO* said:
Naaaaaaaaaaaa
Not 95% please
35% is what it is....
When it comes to appeal been accepted..
Yes . It changed... because we can't complain no more ..
As the mod who got us ban is anonymous
Now you take what you get...that's the situation currently...
Needing the staff name is very important to me .
so yes in such scenario...
So you don't make such mistakes again..
And feel comfortable about it...
My purpose...in the subject
I don't like it.... QED
Well, it is clear from your ongoing messages that your goal is nothing more than to create a lot of drama and keep the discussion going. The necessary explanations have been given more than once and you insist on not understanding.
-
1 hour ago, L-DragO* said:
My Right to no the Moderator who Rightfully or wrongfully got me banned..
That's what I lose
You haven't lost anything. Imagine that before this anonymization change you received a ban, justified or not. During the game you see the name of the staff member who banned you and you want to appeal your ban. Your primary course of action is to send an appeal, the necessary information about your ban and the evaluation of your appeal will be done at this stage, and 95% of the time the situation will be resolved without even sending a secondary message. With the remaining 5% chance, if your appeal was not resolved at the first stage, you can open a feedback about your ban and the suspicion about the issue will be completely resolved at this stage. Now go back to the beginning of this scenario and read it again, assuming you do not know the name of the staff member who banned you. Has anything changed? No. Did you need the name of the staff member in this scenario ? No. So what is the purpose of your insistence on this subject?
-
4
-
-
1 minute ago, LillefixHD said:
But that was the results of that survey
Was that not what you were asking for, if not then i am sorry 
There is no problem. Thanks for your intention to inform.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, LillefixHD said:
If you were reading the forum actively you would'v seen it.
https://forum.truckersmp.com/index.php?/topic/111663-project-update-back-to-basics/I'm actively reading the forum, but I guess you don't, because you should have noticed that this message you replied to was written 1 day before the topic in the link you gave.
-
Good and supportable idea.
-
This way can be brought for Sim 2, but I do not agree with Sim 1. Still, a parking area on the normal c-d road and alternative solutions should be brought, especially at gas station points where traffic increases.
-
2
-
-
Integrating it into mp is a complicated task as there are AI dynamics involved. it might be nice to do.
-
The old version is better but it needs also somethings like rework for gas station areas to prevent traffic jam.
-
I don't think so. Maybe drivers who are not accustomed to driving at 150 kms may be more likely to have an accident.
-
2 hours ago, Stones8000 said:
If this vehicle were permanent it would be conceivable but it is not.
-
It can give a purpose to the community. Can be done.
-
I don't see any negative points in this idea. Can be done.
-
The feeling that they both give is nice, but I can say that it is usually daytime. As an added bonus, driving at sunrise and sunset can also give you beautiful sky views.
-
The game moderator role is designed by tmp to both intervene in-game situations and evaluate reports sent from the website. The requirements are also determined by tmp. I find these requirements appropriate. The point I agree with you is that there should be more moderators in the game. For example, if the road is blocked in an accident by someone, the perpetrator may continue to block the road for minutes. Getting more game moderators will enable faster response to such events.
-
1
-
-
I do not think that the interest in the road will decrease, but the change has some negative aspects. The fact that the road passes from two lanes to a single lane creates a huge traffic.
-
1
-
-
I don't have a very special memory, but I can tell the times I drove with my friends.
-
Until recently it was definitely 6 but with the new 150 speed limit I might consider using 12 gear.
-
This is something that would be nice if done, but not as easy to do as thought. It is difficult to integrate into multiplayer because it contains AI.
-
Over time sim 2 will be crowded, but as you said, the limit for sim 1 can be 3500 until this process is completed.
-
A well thought out suggestion that can contribute to the quality of the game. It must be done but of course it will require very good optimization and with it a lot of new things.
-
1 hour ago, HENGYA said:
I think you're right, and in a few days I think things will be different
You're right, I do see the number of Sim2 players increasing every day
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, P h o e n i x said:
Players just don't know about what's going on with the servers yet, this happens every time the servers have massive configuration changes. First day 200 players, earlier today 300 players and now almost 1000 players.
Most of the playerbase will find out about stuff through their friends or VTC's they are part of, it will just take a few days.
Sim1 is maxing out on players now, pushing people into Sim2.
Yes this is the case. It seems that the transition from sim 1 to sim 2 will be faster than expected, but there will still be a crowd remaining in sim1.
-
1 minute ago, Aventurin said:
anyway thanks for your answers mate
You're welcome. Safe travels.
-
1 minute ago, Aventurin said:
I oppose this decision partly because I am tired of drivers hitting me at high speeds. I want a comfortable ride.
I understand you. TMP has already made this limit change by separating the servers in order to avoid this problem.
-
1
-
Update to our Game Moderation Strategy
in News Archive
Posted
I don't think you need this information.