Project Update: Back to Basics

[FernandoCR [ESP]]

1 hour ago, _raffaele_ said:

This survey showed once again that "road to simulation" never made sense for what is the TMP user base, so we need to see on what basis they decided to implement "road to simulation" in the past, for me, the fact is that it should never have existed; but as you know, it happens that sometimes policies do not go in favor of the community demand.

Road to Simulation was implemented because something similar had been suggested, because the situation with EU#1 and EU#2 had become unmanageable for the game moderation team and mainly because, at that time, the changes were in line with what the TruckersMP management wanted their mod to be. I hope you now have at least an idea about the "basis".

 

1 hour ago, _raffaele_ said:

If we really want to be true, TMP could only keep the sim 1 server and raise the speed limit to 150, but instead they kept the server with 110 and added a separate server with the new limit; so don’t worry they haven’t forgotten about you guys as explained in the post.

This doesn't make any sense as a reply to what I posted. They could have kept everything as it was too. And from what we are seeing, nothing would have changed in the number of players. But they didn't. They added the new server that apparently more than 5K players wanted, based on the survey results, and this server is heavily underused. That's what I was referring about.

 

2 hours ago, _raffaele_ said:

Whatever the limit is, it’s irrelevant to you too in the end, but you are here still complaining even if you don't play anymore on TMP

And again, no relation to anything I posted. I asked questions in my first post today. Then, seeing that the answer by Jeronimo wasn't good enough for me, I replied to try and make a bit clearer what/why I was asking. None of my questions have been answered. I'm trying to make sense of what I see. If you're not going to help with that, please stop quoting my posts. You can of course, keep sending whatever NEW posts you want.

[_raffaele_]

1 hour ago, FernandoCR [ESP] said:

Road to Simulation was implemented because something similar had been suggested, because the situation with EU#1 and EU#2 had become unmanageable for the game moderation team and mainly because, at that time, the changes were in line with what the TruckersMP management wanted their mod to be. I hope you now have at least an idea about the "basis".

 

Often what a few want, is not what many want, that is the reality. This survey proves this even more (they did something similar in the past? i can't find nothing, maybe you have something), it is not that in the past it was different what players wanted; probably lacks clear evidence like this survey. In fact if the past management decided for that because that is what they wanted TMP to become, but not the players. Jeronimo also wrote this regarding the implementation of "road to simulation"; if it was in the past unmanageable, it is not the fault of the community:

 

On 4/6/2023 at 8:51 PM, Jeronimο said:

This is an argument that I have seen multiple times now, but when we compare data from before Road to Simulation to after, there is no evidence to support that claim. The type of policy is insignificant to the number of reports we receive (p = 0.108, adjusted R-squared = 0.00118), while a factor such as playtime (i.e. the amount of time that users collectively play on the servers in a given period of time) does highly correlate with the influx of reports (p < 0.001, adjusted R-squared = 0.7561). It is of course possible that a certain policy attracts more users (thereby contributing to a higher playtime), but it does not directly result in more reports according to what we measure.

 

 

 

 

 

1 hour ago, FernandoCR [ESP] said:

This doesn't make any sense as a reply to what I posted. They could have kept everything as it was too. And from what we are seeing, nothing would have changed in the number of players. But they didn't. They added the new server that apparently more than 5K players wanted, based on the survey results, and this server is heavily underused. That's what I was referring about.

 

1 hour ago, FernandoCR [ESP] said:

And again, no relation to anything I posted. I asked questions in my first post today. Then, seeing that the answer by Jeronimo wasn't good enough for me, I replied to try and make a bit clearer what/why I was asking. None of my questions have been answered. I'm trying to make sense of what I see. If you're not going to help with that, please stop quoting my posts. You can of course, keep sending whatever NEW posts you want.

 

You wrote yourself regarding the traffic in the servers after these changes. By the way in the various replies around, you also wrote the reasons of why this happen, i don't understand why you are amazed that sim 2 is "unused", when you know exactly why it's happening at the moment; having only one simulation server or 2 changes things

 

Jeronimo also explained to you this, more than telling you that players go to the most populated server regardless, what does he have to tell you? That's something you would have noticed as well if you had looked over the years at how the traffic moved between the various servers after the changes. It's not that nothing changes for them, it's that there is a scale of preference,

 

The last addition is because i found it ironic to read a user who hasn't played TMP for years telling that for those who do play that it doesn't change anything, that's all,

 

6 hours ago, Jeronimο said:

 

The known phenomenon of joining the server with most players, as it is interaction with other players that many users are ultimately after. 

 

[FernandoCR [ESP]]

3 hours ago, _raffaele_ said:

Often what a few want, is not what many want, that is the reality. This survey proves this even more (they did something similar in the past? i can't find nothing, maybe you have something), it is not that in the past it was different what players wanted; probably lacks clear evidence like this survey. In fact if the past management decided for that because that is what they wanted TMP to become, but not the players. Jeronimo also wrote this regarding the implementation of "road to simulation"; if it was in the past unmanageable, it is not the fault of the community:

This is just nonsense, I can't think of any other word to describe it better. There's no way to know what players wanted in the past, there were no surveys in the past. But surprise! I never mentioned any of that! And yet, you used a quote to blabber about it. The past management decided to do what they wanted TMP to be because that's (or should be) their privilege. And who said that "not the players"? Do you have any survey or hard evidence that "the majority" in 2019 didn't want Road to Simulation? So again, nonsense. 

 

About what Jeronimo said there, I have to admit that I have no idea what all of that policy and R-Square thing is about. All I know is what game moderators used to say, before and during RtS and what they are saying now. That the situation in the reporting system used to be collapsed, that it improved with RtS and that it will likely be collapsed again.

 

3 hours ago, _raffaele_ said:

You wrote yourself regarding the traffic in the servers after these changes. By the way in the various replies around, you also wrote the reasons of why this happen, i don't understand why you are amazed that sim 2 is "unused", when you know exactly why it's happening at the moment,

I speculated about the reasons. I assumed, you could say, but I was told that assuming is a terrible thing to do, so I was trying to get confirmation or other people's opinions about what, IMO, is a total contradiction between the so proclaimed survey results and the current situation. 

 

3 hours ago, _raffaele_ said:

Jeronimo also explained to you this, more than telling you that players go to the most populated server regardless, what does he have to tell you? It was not directly an answer to you, but it's still valid, just need to read. That's something you would have noticed as well if you had looked over the years at how the traffic moved between the various servers after the changes. It's not that nothing changes for them, it's that there is a scale of preference,

 

These were my questions: Where are those 5258 "players" who so badly wanted to have a server with 150 Km/h limit? Why did they "vote" for a server that they didn't intend to use? Were those 8912 answers really TruckersMP players? Or were they just TruckersMP accounts? Is it possible that players with multiple accounts (we know that there are plenty of them) sent multiple answers, being actually one single person? Was this possibility even considered?

 

You would know that if you had read.

What Jeronimo replied ("directly" after quoting part of my post): "The known phenomenon of joining the server with most players, as it is interaction with other players that many users are ultimately after".

Do you see any of my questions answered in that reply?

 

3 hours ago, _raffaele_ said:

The last addition is because i found it ironic to read a user who hasn't played TMP for years telling that for those who do play that it doesn't change anything, that's all,

I'll tell you what is not ironic, but funny: I've said (several times), that I stopped playing TMP in 2019, started again in 2019 with RTS and decided to stop again now with Back to Basics.

 

You would know that if you had read.

 

3 hours ago, FernandoCR [ESP] said:

I'm trying to make sense of what I see. If you're not going to help with that, please stop quoting my posts.

And what's the next thing you do? The exact opposite of what I asked for. Reply, quote, no help whatsoever. Just your usual mantras defending your position and a new show of your inability to read or understand.

 

Seeing how it's most likely that my questions will not be answered and that this situation that I'm starting to see as plain harassment is likely to escalate badly, I will once again stop posting about this matter.

[_raffaele_]

1 hour ago, FernandoCR [ESP] said:

This is just nonsense, I can't think of any other word to describe it better. There's no way to know what players wanted in the past, there were no surveys in the past. But surprise! I never mentioned any of that! And yet, you used a quote to blabber about it. The past management decided because that's (or should be) their privilege. And who said that "not the players"? Do you have any survey or hard evidence that "the majority" in 2019 didn't want Road to Simulation. So again, nonsense. 

 

 

Just the fact that there is no evidence of what people wanted proves what i am saying; i mentioned it on purpose, because i know that there is no more effective method than surveys to gather many opinions on different topics, this makes you understand the "basis" of the past. Also an indication to know what people wanted just remember that when the server was made with limit 90, all escaped on sim2; plus other 2 polls, one from last year and the last recent, always on the same topic server configuration,

 

Nobody says that the decision-makers shouldn’t have done it; but to get a feedback from what the community wanted, what methods they used in the past, you know? because "road to simulation" goes against of what are the evidences,

 

 

 

 

 

1 hour ago, FernandoCR [ESP] said:

About what Jeronimo said there, I have to admit that I have no idea what all of that policy and R-Square thing is about. All I know is what game moderators used to say, before and during RtS and what they are saying now. That the situation in the reporting system used to be collapsed, that it improved with RtS and that it will likely be collapsed again.

 

People say many things but the numbers speaks clearly, what Jeronimo shared makes you understand that there is no relationship between the change in reports ratio before and after the implementation of "road to simulation", very simple,

 

 

 

 

 

 

1 hour ago, FernandoCR [ESP] said:

 

I speculated about the reasons. I assumed, you could say, but I was told that assuming is a terrible thing to do, so I was trying to get confirmation or other people's opinions about what, IMO, is a total contradiction between the so proclaimed survey results and the current situation. 

 

 

That’s not assuming, but simple common sense, in TMP history there has always been this behavior in server traffic, it’s not new thing, also staff members confirmed that,

 

 

 

 

 

1 hour ago, FernandoCR [ESP] said:

These were my questions: Where are those 5258 "players" who so badly wanted to have a server with 150 Km/h limit? Why did they "vote" for a server that they didn't intend to use? Were those 8912 answers really TruckersMP players? Or were they just TruckersMP accounts? Is it possible that players with multiple accounts (we know that there are plenty of them) sent multiple answers, being actually one single person? Was this possibility even considered?

 

You would know that if you had read.

 

Thank you for assuming that i can't read; we’re going back to conspiracy theories, i answer immediately to you, probably a part of them are still on sim 1 because it is currently more populated; this refers to what Jeronimo also said, that people prefer generally however the most populated server at the moment,

 

 

 

 

 

 

1 hour ago, FernandoCR [ESP] said:

What Jeronimo replied ("directly" after quoting part of my post): "The known phenomenon of joining the server with most players, as it is interaction with other players that many users are ultimately after".

Do you see any of my questions answered in that reply?

 

I'll tell you what is not ironic, but funny: I've said (several times), that I stopped playing TMP in 2019, started again in 2019 with RTS and decided to stop again now with Back to Basics.

 

You would know that if you had read.

 

 

On 3/31/2023 at 12:45 PM, FernandoCR [ESP] said:

And it's nothing like threatening. Back in 2019 I'd already stopped using TMP because I found it completely unsatistying for what I wanted.

 

That’s the answer you need, summarize the reason of the whole list of numbers you posted before that post,

 

In one of your answers you wrote that you stopped using TMP in 2019, so you stopped but you didn't? Did you keep playing even if it didn’t satisfy you? but "road to simulation" wasn’t what you wanted, was it? i'm confused, you’re only for the 90 speed limit for everyone? 

 

 

 

 

 

 

1 hour ago, FernandoCR [ESP] said:

And what's the next thing you do? The exact opposite of what I asked for. Reply, quote, no help whatsoever. Just your usual mantras defending your position and a new show of your inability to read or understand.

 

Seeing how it's most likely that my questions will not be answered and that this situation that I'm starting to see as plain harassment is likely to escalate badly, I will once again stop posting in this topic.

 

You have the answers, also from the staff, but you don’t like them because they’re not the answers you want, no need to be a victim

 

 

 

[FernandoCR [ESP]]

 

Gods, all is clear to me now! Thank you! "probably a part of them are still on sim 1", that answers fully my first question about the "lost" 5258 players.

 

I must have missed all of the other answers from the staff that you mention and that surely explained where "the other part" of the 5258 "probably are" and how they managed to stop players from using alt accounts to send multiple answers to the survey, but that's on me, I guess.

 

So now, I will try to return the favour:

On 3/31/2023 at 12:45 PM, FernandoCR [ESP] said:

Back in 2019 I'd already stopped using TMP because I found it completely unsatistying for what I wanted. Now, TMP went back to what it used to be, I've just done what I already did back then.

I did say that. And I get that it's hard to understand that "I had stopped..." is not the same as "I stopped". That someone can't stop using TMP now (in 2023) if they haven't been using it since 2019. Sorry that I made it so difficult. Allow me to elaborate, for the sake of clarity:

 

First months of 2019: I had stopped using TMP because I found it (the EU#1 and EU#2 situation) completely unsatisfying for what I wanted.

 

Mid-2019, Road to Simulation was implemented. I started using TMP again. It's what I was referring to in this same topic with this comment:

On 4/1/2023 at 1:12 PM, FernandoCR [ESP] said:

The last few years I did have a server that catered (more or less) to my playstyle, no need to ask for anything.

Sorry that I also phrased this in a way so difficult to understand.

 

Now (in 2023) TMP went back to what it used to be (the situation with EU#1 and EU#2, only with different names), I've just done (now, 2023) what I already did back then (in the first months of 2019) = I have stopped using TMP again.

 

Now, my next questions: Am I the only one who doesn't see ONE SINGLE answer (from users or staff) to any of the questions I asked? Am I not being quoted constantly with useless comments?

 

I definitely don't need to be a victim, I just don't want to be the target of someone who seems only focused on having a flame war, by insistently doing what they were asked to not do, by cropping quotes or ignoring other posts to make it look like they are 100% right about something when the truth is that they simply didn't understand (or read) the whole thing, by trying to make others look like idiots who just refuse to accept the (non-existing) answers, and so on.

 

P.S: This was an example of a reply post without quoting others. And answering to what those others actually asked/posted. If I can do it, anyone can. Hopefully.

[RiceOfBravery]

17 hours ago, chaotic-control said:

No one mentioning how cars are the menace... In my experience 9 / 10 cars drive recklessly.

We should have a survey regarding them.

A few hours ago I sent a report in which a Skoda does a breakcheck and rams the trucks for 3 minutes streight (much longer in fact, but I don't have a record)...

But it makes no sense to remove them from the game.
Take away their cars, they will do the same on the trucks. The trucks also accelerate very fast without a trailer.

[whitE19]

New Rules New Life New Fun

[_raffaele_]

9 hours ago, FernandoCR [ESP] said:

 

Gods, all is clear to me now! Thank you! "probably a part of them are still on sim 1", that answers fully my first question about the "lost" 5258 players.

 

I must have missed all of the other answers from the staff that you mention and that surely explained where "the other part" of the 5258 "probably are" and how they managed to stop players from using alt accounts to send multiple answers to the survey, but that's on me, I guess.

 

 

Not everyone who voted plays at the same time, what kind of question is that? some went to sim 2 and some stayed on sim1 for the reason mentioned from Jeronimo, why is that hard to understand?

 

 

 

 

9 hours ago, FernandoCR [ESP] said:

So now, I will try to return the favour:

I did say that. And I get that it's hard to understand that "I had stopped..." is not the same as "I stopped". That someone can't stop using TMP now (in 2023) if they haven't been using it since 2019. Sorry that I made it so difficult. Allow me to elaborate, for the sake of clarity:

 

First months of 2019: I had stopped using TMP because I found it (the EU#1 and EU#2 situation) completely unsatisfying for what I wanted.

 

Mid-2019, Road to Simulation was implemented. I started using TMP again. It's what I was referring to in this same topic with this comment:

Sorry that I also phrased this in a way so difficult to understand.

 

Now (in 2023) TMP went back to what it used to be (the situation with EU#1 and EU#2, only with different names), I've just done (now, 2023) what I already did back then (in the first months of 2019) = I have stopped using TMP again.

 

Now, my next questions: Am I the only one who doesn't see ONE SINGLE answer (from users or staff) to any of the questions I asked? Am I not being quoted constantly with useless comments?

 

 

This not what you wrote before, so from your other answer you didn't mention that you played again, it is not that others never read, but maybe it's what you say that is not coherent,

 

If you don't want to be quoted, don't post on a public forum, instead go via dms. Everything that is not like your expectations/will is useless; even the staff's answers are not good for you ,

 

 

 

 

9 hours ago, FernandoCR [ESP] said:

I definitely don't need to be a victim, I just don't want to be the target of someone who seems only focused on having a flame war, by insistently doing what they were asked to not do, by cropping quotes or ignoring other posts to make it look like they are 100% right about something when the truth is that they simply didn't understand (or read) the whole thing, by trying to make others look like idiots who just refuse to accept the (non-existing) answers, and so on.

 

P.S: This was an example of a reply post without quoting others. And answering to what those others actually asked/posted. If I can do it, anyone can. Hopefully.

 

 

I don't know where you see war. If you don't know, there is a link next to the quote, where you can go to the original answer, i just cropped because i didn't want the whole wall of text,

 

"the truth is that they simply didn't understand (or read) the whole thing" - in fact in the answer i quoted whole there is no mentioning about playing again in TMP after you wrote that you quitted in 2019, you also quoted another answer that is not related to the quoted answer i linked to you. Is it me who doesn't understand or what you write is found to be different?

 

It's not trying to look others like idiots, it's just that, a bit of commons sense that sometimes it's missing in your answers,

 

 

 

Keep waiting for your answer, you got them, you will wait forever for the aswers you want 

[[23]ThunderSky]

I'm sorry but all I can see is: - let's please peoples who drive fast - and - divide the already low ammount of peoples into 2 servers, so wherever we drive we won't see a soul -

I want to ask you guys, what's the purpose of a - simulation - server on a - Truck Sim game - if not even the speed limit (90km/h) is applied? Don't call - Simulation - a server which isn't..

A 90km/h speed limit with 3000 players on Sim1 could have made some peoples change theyr mind and drive like normal peoples, or they would have left and let the community have a nice drive without worry about people crashing everywhere.

I think I see another problem for TMP with "people leaving" which had a huge impact on the things that have been choosed, if you (reader) understand..

 

With this last "Road to Simulation" type topic, hopes for TMP are gone.
Have a good day and see you on SCS Convoys MP

 

 

[Senad (BIH)]

Hello everyone, a suggestion as well as an opinion about all this speed increase for ETS2, I would slow down and drive according to the speed limit, those who exceed the speed limit are automatically kicked from the server because this is not Need For Speed to drive that speed, who wants to enjoy the beauty of ETS2 he has to be afraid of someone hitting him because he is set to drive at that speed, which for some ETS2 fans is badly done and then they have to drive on Singleplayer. Thank you for your understanding

[SPARTA 33]

Thank you for listening to the community...
1_ Why did I choose the racing mode ??? simply because since 2019 I stopped playing racing simulations (Need for Speed, Assetto Corsa, Project Cars or F1 GP), I much preferred the feeling of speed with a truck and deliver trailers without accidents and damages... I think you understood my reasons now ??? (a way to play)
2_ BUT... between 2019 & 2020, I was in the management of a French company (RTE) and I was playing in Role Play, with all the rules & speed limits (with only 1 infraction at 101 Km/h)...
What I wanted to say is that when I go on convoys in Role Play, I play and respect all the rules applied TMP, because I also like this way of playing, and I respect it totally, and without being pretentious, I am also known to be someone who respects the RP rules... so I have 2 ways of playing on ETS & TMP.
(My information given is factual and verifiable on my TB logs, just in case)
Thanks for reading and have a good trip friends, keep & stay safe !!!

Best & King Regards to TMP Team...

 

[X_Zoltz4n_X]

Not going to lie I quite like the majority of these changes has made the game that extra bit better

[Foobrother]

On 4/6/2023 at 7:51 PM, Jeronimο said:

 

This is an argument that I have seen multiple times now, but when we compare data from before Road to Simulation to after, there is no evidence to support that claim. The type of policy is insignificant to the number of reports we receive (p = 0.108, adjusted R-squared = 0.00118), while a factor such as playtime (i.e. the amount of time that users collectively play on the servers in a given period of time) does highly correlate with the influx of reports (p < 0.001, adjusted R-squared = 0.7561). It is of course possible that a certain policy attracts more users (thereby contributing to a higher playtime), but it does not directly result in more reports according to what we measure.

Thanks for spending some time to provide your contribution.

 

I assume (and hope) we will agree on these 2 statements:

1. If you don't change ANY parameter but the speed limit, and some people drive faster, you will automatically see more crash/collisions, reckless driving and offenses in general. Because the faster you go the harder it is to control your truck in any situation. Adding this quote:

   Quote

   The exact relation between speed and crashes depends on many factors. However, in a general sense the relation is very clear: if on a road the driven speeds become higher, the crash rate will also increase. The crash rate is also higher for an individual vehicle that drives at higher speed than the other traffic on that road. As speeds get higher, crashes also result in more serious injury, for the driver who caused the crash as well as for the crash opponent.

   US Department Of Transportation: https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/speedmgt/ref_mats/fhwasa1304/Resources3/08 - The Relation Between Speed and Crashes.pdf

2. The more offenses, the more reports people will send. I'm not saying it's a linear progression but it's a progression.

I'm not a statistician but the above statements look pretty logic and probable (like in real life).

Now these are when you don't change ANY parameter but the speed. The problem is that you're not providing any explanation. Just p and r-squared which don't show how you ended up to these values. But you mention that the playtime has a bigger impact. Obviously if we consider that the average playtime of 1 single player isn't changing much, the number of players playing will have a great impact. Guess what, over the last 2 years the number of players decreased! That might be why you find that the number of reports isn't impacted by the rules changes? Less players = less playtime = less (or stagnation if the number of offenses per player increased) of reports.

 

But surprisingly you're saying that's not the case according to the data and what you're seeing.

Does that mean that people stop sending reports after a certain number of offenses undergone? Is it because people are reaching their limit in terms of number of reports and cannot submit more until some get processed (that would be a shame and would completely bias your results!!).

Would be great to have your logical explanation about these results. To have the root cause of this strange illogical behaviour. 

BTW do we have a graph somewhere showing the number of reports over time?

 

[partyaap]

52 minutes ago, Foobrother said:

Thanks for spending some time to provide your contribution.

 

I assume (and hope) we will agree on these 2 statements:

1. If you don't change ANY parameter but the speed limit, and some people drive faster, you will automatically see more crash/collisions, reckless driving and offenses in general. Because the faster you go the harder it is to control your truck in any situation. Adding this quote:

   US Department Of Transportation: https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/speedmgt/ref_mats/fhwasa1304/Resources3/08 - The Relation Between Speed and Crashes.pdf

2. The more offenses, the more reports people will send. I'm not saying it's a linear progression but it's a progression.

I'm not a statistician but the above statements look pretty logic and probable (like in real life).

Now these are when you don't change ANY parameter but the speed. The problem is that you're not providing any explanation. Just p and r-squared which don't show how you ended up to these values. But you mention that the playtime has a bigger impact. Obviously if we consider that the average playtime of 1 single player isn't changing much, the number of players playing will have a great impact. Guess what, over the last 2 years the number of players decreased! That might be why you find that the number of reports isn't impacted by the rules changes? Less players = less playtime = less (or stagnation if the number of offenses per player increased) of reports.

 

But surprisingly you're saying that's not the case according to the data and what you're seeing.

Does that mean that people stop sending reports after a certain number of offenses undergone? Is it because people are reaching their limit in terms of number of reports and cannot submit more until some get processed (that would be a shame and would completely bias your results!!).

Would be great to have your logical explanation about these results. To have the root cause of this strange illogical behaviour. 

BTW do we have a graph somewhere showing the number of reports over time?

 

5 players that play for 5 hours each will generate more reports than 10 players playing 1 hour each.

Increasing the speedlimit will not directly generate more reports, because an increase in speed does not correlate to more playing hours necessarily.

 

You need to see crashes/collisions seperately from generated reports. More crashes/collisions does not mean more reports if the people involved in the incidents do not report it.

 

Why is this? Because someone who does not play TruckersMP that often does not feel it is worth his time to report stuff. Whereas people who do dedicate a lot of their free time on TruckersMP do feel it is worth to report.

 

At least this is my understanding of their measurement. It's honestly the first time I have learned of its existence as well, so I am not familiar with it.

[Random_Truck_Driver]

After reading this thread, i'm baffled by the fact that some people who didn't like this change have stated that they've deleted TMP. Back in 2019, we literally had no server to play with our settings of preference and we sticked around. To be fair, there was no other multiplayer option back then, but i'm still here. I guess many others are too. And while you guys still have Sim1, you've already deleted the Mod. This is pathetic...

 

I wish this change had come way sooner before TMP had lost so many players to the Road To Simulation.

[Foobrother]

37 minutes ago, StateCA [NL] said:

5 players that play for 5 hours each will generate more reports than 10 players playing 1 hour each.

You can't guarantee that result I'm afraid. There are many parameter that result into the opposite. i.e. by definition, if you play on the same space (size), 10 players means more interactions with other players on the road which means more chances of crashes/offenses. And maybe in 1h you generate as much reports than 5 players in 5h ?!

 

But you are out of subject because in my reply I mentioned that I was assuming that the average playtime per player wasn't changing much.

 

37 minutes ago, StateCA [NL] said:

Increasing the speedlimit will not directly generate more reports, because an increase in speed does not correlate to more playing hours necessarily.

 

You need to see crashes/collisions seperately from generated reports

The number of reports doesn't ONLY depend on the number of hours played! You can play 24/7, if nobody isn't doing any offense, the number of report will remain at zero. However, the opposite isn't really true! If you play 10min but have 10 offenses in that time you might see 10 reports generated. That's simply because by definition, a report = one or more offenses (which includes crashes/collisions)

 

37 minutes ago, StateCA [NL] said:

More crashes/collisions does not mean more reports if the people involved in the incidents do not report it.

 

Why is this? Because someone who does not play TruckersMP that often does not feel it is worth his time to report stuff. Whereas people who do dedicate a lot of their free time on TruckersMP do feel it is worth to report.

Again, you're out of subject. With Jeronimo we are discussing the impact of rules changes (the current one being the speed limit increased to 150Km/h) in the number of reports. We are not talking about the type of players changing over time. Imagine, for example (wrong numbers here), today we have 4000 players who generate 222 reports per day. If tomorrow you change the speed limit from 110Km/h  to 150Km/h would the same players (and same number of players) generate more reports or not as they start driving faster? (again I'm assuming people play the same amount of hours on average and it doesn't change over time).

 

But your observation is probably valid in the long term! And because we have much less faithful profiles of players in the last 2 years, they would not open as many reports as the more simulation hardcore profiles we probably had more 2+ years ago. And while I don't see that as an improvement, it can explain why there has not been an increase of reports over the last 2 years (but I don't have the data )

[_raffaele_]

1 hour ago, Foobrother said:

Thanks for spending some time to provide your contribution.

 

I assume (and hope) we will agree on these 2 statements:

1. If you don't change ANY parameter but the speed limit, and some people drive faster, you will automatically see more crash/collisions, reckless driving and offenses in general. Because the faster you go the harder it is to control your truck in any situation. Adding this quote:

   US Department Of Transportation: https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/speedmgt/ref_mats/fhwasa1304/Resources3/08 - The Relation Between Speed and Crashes.pdf

2. The more offenses, the more reports people will send. I'm not saying it's a linear progression but it's a progression.

I'm not a statistician but the above statements look pretty logic and probable (like in real life).

Now these are when you don't change ANY parameter but the speed. The problem is that you're not providing any explanation. Just p and r-squared which don't show how you ended up to these values. But you mention that the playtime has a bigger impact. Obviously if we consider that the average playtime of 1 single player isn't changing much, the number of players playing will have a great impact. Guess what, over the last 2 years the number of players decreased! That might be why you find that the number of reports isn't impacted by the rules changes? Less players = less playtime = less (or stagnation if the number of offenses per player increased) of reports.

 

But surprisingly you're saying that's not the case according to the data and what you're seeing.

Does that mean that people stop sending reports after a certain number of offenses undergone? Is it because people are reaching their limit in terms of number of reports and cannot submit more until some get processed (that would be a shame and would completely bias your results!!).

Would be great to have your logical explanation about these results. To have the root cause of this strange illogical behaviour. 

BTW do we have a graph somewhere showing the number of reports over time?

 

 

point 1., the fact that you cite real life and government articles you can tell that you are completely out of touch with reality and the community, the bulk of the community will be under 16/18 years old probably, and we are talking about a game, it is absurd to even make a comparison,

point 2., it is not always true that the more offenses there are, the more reports will be sent; because you have to count that there are many "duplicate" reports that will be related to the same player, and useless reports that could have been avoided to be sent. Jeronimo shared that the ratio of reports did not change before and after "road to simulation."

Before and after the implementation of "road to simulation" is the historical period when TMP was much more populated than now, the number of players started to drop so much only since summer 2021, so many years after the implementation of "road to simulation", whatever the number of reports was in the past, is definitely much lower now. Whatever logic you are looking for, will never be contrary to the fact that by logic the number of reports will always be lower than in the past, based on the number of active players on the servers after summer 2021,
 

 

The higher limit of 110 was before "road to simulation" and when TMP was much more popular than now, do the math...

 

 

You don't need to know what those numbers mean, you only need one sentence to understand the evidence:

 

 

On 4/6/2023 at 8:51 PM, Jeronimο said:

 

The type of policy is insignificant to the number of reports we receive

 

 

 

 

data and what you're seeing -   i cant 

[partyaap]

1 hour ago, Foobrother said:

You can't guarantee that result I'm afraid. There are many parameter that result into the opposite. i.e. by definition, if you play on the same space (size), 10 players means more interactions with other players on the road which means more chances of crashes/offenses. And maybe in 1h you generate as much reports than 5 players in 5h ?!

 

But you are out of subject because in my reply I mentioned that I was assuming that the average playtime per player wasn't changing much.

 

The number of reports doesn't ONLY depend on the number of hours played! You can play 24/7, if nobody isn't doing any offense, the number of report will remain at zero. However, the opposite isn't really true! If you play 10min but have 10 offenses in that time you might see 10 reports generated. That's simply because by definition, a report = one or more offenses (which includes crashes/collisions)

 

Again, you're out of subject. With Jeronimo we are discussing the impact of rules changes (the current one being the speed limit increased to 150Km/h) in the number of reports. We are not talking about the type of players changing over time. Imagine, for example (wrong numbers here), today we have 4000 players who generate 222 reports per day. If tomorrow you change the speed limit from 110Km/h  to 150Km/h would the same players (and same number of players) generate more reports or not as they start driving faster? (again I'm assuming people play the same amount of hours on average and it doesn't change over time).

 

But your observation is probably valid in the long term! And because we have much less faithful profiles of players in the last 2 years, they would not open as many reports as the more simulation hardcore profiles we probably had more 2+ years ago. And while I don't see that as an improvement, it can explain why there has not been an increase of reports over the last 2 years (but I don't have the data )

Yeah I misread his comment

[Random_Truck_Driver]

2 hours ago, _raffaele_ said:

Before and after the implementation of "road to simulation" is the historical period when TMP was much more populated than now, the number of players started to drop so much only since summer 2021, so many years after the implementation of "road to simulation", whatever the number of reports was in the past, is definitely much lower now. 

 

That's not exactly accurate. The period after the initial speed limit & RTS the mod's playerbase hardly grew.  (EDIT: I'd personally argue that it didn't). The only growth depicted by stats was during the 2020-2021 period and that was circumstancial since it was because of the quarantine & covid where every single game saw an increase in playerbase at the time.

[_raffaele_]

8 minutes ago, Random_Truck_Driver said:

 

That's not exactly accurate. The period after the initial speed limit & RTS the mod's playerbase hardly grew.  (EDIT: I'd personally argue that it didn't). The only growth depicted by stats was during the 2020-2021 period and that was circumstancial since it was because of the quarantine & covid where every single game saw an increase in playerbase at the time.

 

Yeah you right, i worded like that because i wanted to put emphasis on the fact that it's a reference period when tmp was more popular than it is now, not on the growth; without a growth in the number of players that could have influenced the results, this proves even more that the policy change did not affect the ratio of reports, so RTS did not lead to a decrease in the reports ratio 

 

From the summer 2021 TMP average about 4/5000 players, at that period TMP averaged 8/9000 players with high and downs, almost twice as many as now, even before covid, RTS came in july 2019; i agree with you that the covid has inflated the numbers, but the numbers that TMP did during the covid are slightly higher than in the past, during the covid averaged 10/11000

[Random_Truck_Driver]

1 minute ago, _raffaele_ said:

Yeah you right, i worded like that because i wanted to put emphasis on the fact that it's a reference period when tmp was more popular than it is now, not on the growth; without a growth in the number of players that could have influenced the results, this proves even more that the policy change did not affect the ratio of reports, so RTS did not lead to a decrease in the reports ratio 

 

From the summer 2021 TMP average about 4/5000 players, at that period TMP averaged 8/9000 players with high and downs, almost twice as many as now, even before covid, RTS came in july 2019; i agree with you that the covid has inflated the numbers, but the numbers that TMP did during the covid are slightly higher than in the past, during the covid averaged 10/11000

 

Are we discussing website reports, in-game reports or both? I wouldn't be surprised if RTS was proved utter useless in reducing reckless driving, as all it did was ban a large chunk of players, kill remote driving even in western europe areas around C-D and make everyone focus on the C-D road where they can still have fun without being affected by the speed limit.

[_raffaele_]

5 minutes ago, Random_Truck_Driver said:

 

Are we discussing website reports, in-game reports or both? I wouldn't be surprised if RTS was proved utter useless in reducing reckless driving, as all it did was ban a large chunk of players, kill remote driving even in western europe areas around C-D and make everyone focus on the C-D road where they can still have fun without being affected by the speed limit.

 

I think reports in general, both; if Jeronimo was referring to something specific, i think he would have specified it,

 

I agree with you about the rest, you can change the limit, but the reckless players will always remain the same

[Random_Truck_Driver]

On 4/9/2023 at 12:04 PM, Jeronimο said:

The known phenomenon of joining the server with most players, as it is interaction with other players that many users are ultimately after.

 

Are there any plans of removing the speed limit entirely in the Simulation 2 server. As far as i understand, when people voted in server settings they voted on a no speed limit server, not one with 150 km/h. And although the 150 km/h speed limit was the most popular there was no option for no speed limit. That would finally solve the highway driving problem where you hardly ever meet people in your side since you all go at the same speed.

[Random_Truck_Driver]

On 4/5/2023 at 3:54 PM, blabberbeak said:

But do not despair!

 

The Truckers MP has resigned to the whining of their racing drivers and increased the speed limit.

 

That's funny because once a new server was introduced with a higher speed limit, the hardcore simulation drivers started whining and complaining and quitting.

[Foobrother]

On 4/2/2023 at 7:14 PM, Foobrother said:

...in a few months people will start complaining that 150km/h is boring on the motorway and we need to increase the speed limit.

 

3 hours ago, Random_Truck_Driver said:

Are there any plans of removing the speed limit entirely in the Simulation 2 server. [...] That would finally solve the highway driving problem where you hardly ever meet people in your side since you all go at the same speed.

Looks like we didn't have to wait that long. But to be honest as long as we have 2 servers and they rename the second one to "racing" or "arcade", I don't mind it. As explained previous I'm just worried this will attract more players with a racing profile (rather than pure simulation) who will regularly switch to other servers and continue to race on the other servers (causing problems). Also not happy to have Promods speed limit set to 150Km/h