New Ban System

[MartinV90]

Suggestion Name: New Ban System

 

Suggestion Description: Change the way ban lengths work, so people who break rules days/weeks after their previous ban, get a more harsher ban the next time! 
My idea is: 

1st Offense: 7 Day Ban

2nd Offense: 14 Days (but if this is issued within two months of your last ban, this should automatically become 28 days)

3rd Offense: 28 days, (but if this is issued 3 months from last ban, this becomes 60 Days)

4th Offense: 60 Days (but if this is issues with ban in last 6 months, it becomes 90 days)

 

Any example images:  No

Why it should be added: TMP Simulation 1, especially around C-D is just getting frustrating for those of us try to drive normally and realistically. And every time you go on it, you just feel like there are even more reckless drivers than last time. The current ban lengths don’t work (clearly) for repeat offenders. What my suggestion offers is still a punishment for drivers, who commit offenses 2/3 times a year BUT The big differences, if you are being reported within a certain amount of time of your previous ban, your length of ban actually increases! I personally think this is a way that you have still got a fair ban system, but it is giving longer bans to the people that get banned to close together. 

 

 

 

 

 

['Matheja]

the times are too much, i think the current ban system is nice

[MartinV90]

3 minutes ago, 'Matheja said:

the times are too much, i think the current ban system is nice

It is more about sending a clear message that repeat offenders will not be tolerated which is why they get a Harsher punishment. If you are one of these people that don’t get banned very often, then, of course you have nothing to worry about, you are typically only going to disagree with this suggestion. If you are one of these reckless drivers that gets banned within days of your ban been lifted.. 

[Bеаn]

 

Initial Reaction

 

The first three bans have lengths determined by a moderator's discretion and internal ban guidelines — a structure I believe should remain unchanged. A one-month duration for a 4th active ban appears adequate; again, there seems to be no compelling reason to alter this. You haven't addressed 5th bans, which is where much of the controversy lies. In the past, aligned with the "Road to Simulation" ideology and generally stringent ban guidelines, the 5th ban resulted in a permanent ban. However, this type of indefinite ban was removed as part of an effort to adopt a more lenient approach.

Should you be considering a return to stricter ban enforcement, I recommend focusing your proposed revisions on the 5th ban instead of unnecessarily tampering with the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and 4th bans.

A ban should be considered a last resort, when all other means of punishment are not applicable or deemed too lenient. Bans shouldn't be handed out willy-nilly. 

How the community feels

Pay attention to the community, as they believe that the number of bans issued for trivial incidents should be reduced, and this adjustment has been made. There's also positive support that ban durations are "generally reasonable." Only a total of 31% of participants felt that ban durations were not "generally reasonable." Some of these participants probably believe that ban durations are too long and not too short, further diminishing support for longer ban lengths.

31% of participants agree with the statement "Ban durations are generally reasonable".
21% of participants neither agree nor disagree with the statement "Ban durations are generally reasonable".
18% of participants fully agree with the statement "Ban durations are generally reasonable".
18% of participants disagree with the statement "Ban durations are generarlly reasonable".
13% of participants fully disagree with the statement "Ban durations are generally reasonable". 

There are more participants in support of the statement than there are opposing it. Therefore, I would say that the general consensus is that people feel that ban durations are generally reasonable. There is a number of participants who are "on the fence"; these participants don't feel that ban durations are generally reasonable, but they also do not disagree that ban durations are generally reasonable.  


taken from Project Update: Back to Basics

Conclusion

 

I don't see a need to modify the system, especially not to make it stricter. I believe the current system is appropriate and satisfactory. I don't think I'm alone in holding this view, given the community feedback shared above.

[Lamb Sauce III]

3 hours ago, Bеаn said:

 

Initial Reaction

 

The first three bans have lengths determined by a moderator's discretion and internal ban guidelines — a structure I believe should remain unchanged. A one-month duration for a 4th active ban appears adequate; again, there seems to be no compelling reason to alter this. You haven't addressed 5th bans, which is where much of the controversy lies. In the past, aligned with the "Road to Simulation" ideology and generally stringent ban guidelines, the 5th ban resulted in a permanent ban. However, this type of indefinite ban was removed as part of an effort to adopt a more lenient approach.

Should you be considering a return to stricter ban enforcement, I recommend focusing your proposed revisions on the 5th ban instead of unnecessarily tampering with the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and 4th bans.

A ban should be considered a last resort, when all other means of punishment are not applicable or deemed too lenient. Bans shouldn't be handed out willy-nilly. 

How the community feels

Pay attention to the community, as they believe that the number of bans issued for trivial incidents should be reduced, and this adjustment has been made. There's also positive support that ban durations are "generally reasonable." Only a total of 31% of participants felt that ban durations were not "generally reasonable." Some of these participants probably believe that ban durations are too long and not too short, further diminishing support for longer ban lengths.

31% of participants agree with the statement "Ban durations are generally reasonable".
21% of participants neither agree nor disagree with the statement "Ban durations are generally reasonable".
18% of participants fully agree with the statement "Ban durations are generally reasonable".
18% of participants disagree with the statement "Ban durations are generarlly reasonable".
13% of participants fully disagree with the statement "Ban durations are generally reasonable". 

There are more participants in support of the statement than there are opposing it. Therefore, I would say that the general consensus is that people feel that ban durations are generally reasonable. There is a number of participants who are "on the fence"; these participants don't feel that ban durations are generally reasonable, but they also do not disagree that ban durations are generally reasonable.  


taken from Project Update: Back to Basics

Conclusion

 

I don't see a need to modify the system, especially not to make it stricter. I believe the current system is appropriate and satisfactory. I don't think I'm alone in holding this view, given the community feedback shared above.

100%. The majority of the community are clearly happy with the way things are, therefore the ban lengths do not need to be changed. Only the duration of the 5th ban may be one that could cause controversy, although I don't see any need to alter it.

[MartinV90]

3 hours ago, Bеаn said:

 

Initial Reaction

 

The first three bans have lengths determined by a moderator's discretion and internal ban guidelines — a structure I believe should remain unchanged. A one-month duration for a 4th active ban appears adequate; again, there seems to be no compelling reason to alter this. You haven't addressed 5th bans, which is where much of the controversy lies. In the past, aligned with the "Road to Simulation" ideology and generally stringent ban guidelines, the 5th ban resulted in a permanent ban. However, this type of indefinite ban was removed as part of an effort to adopt a more lenient approach.

Should you be considering a return to stricter ban enforcement, I recommend focusing your proposed revisions on the 5th ban instead of unnecessarily tampering with the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and 4th bans.

A ban should be considered a last resort, when all other means of punishment are not applicable or deemed too lenient. Bans shouldn't be handed out willy-nilly. 

How the community feels

Pay attention to the community, as they believe that the number of bans issued for trivial incidents should be reduced, and this adjustment has been made. There's also positive support that ban durations are "generally reasonable." Only a total of 31% of participants felt that ban durations were not "generally reasonable." Some of these participants probably believe that ban durations are too long and not too short, further diminishing support for longer ban lengths.

31% of participants agree with the statement "Ban durations are generally reasonable".
21% of participants neither agree nor disagree with the statement "Ban durations are generally reasonable".
18% of participants fully agree with the statement "Ban durations are generally reasonable".
18% of participants disagree with the statement "Ban durations are generarlly reasonable".
13% of participants fully disagree with the statement "Ban durations are generally reasonable". 

There are more participants in support of the statement than there are opposing it. Therefore, I would say that the general consensus is that people feel that ban durations are generally reasonable. There is a number of participants who are "on the fence"; these participants don't feel that ban durations are generally reasonable, but they also do not disagree that ban durations are generally reasonable.  


taken from Project Update: Back to Basics

Conclusion

 

I don't see a need to modify the system, especially not to make it stricter. I believe the current system is appropriate and satisfactory. I don't think I'm alone in holding this view, given the community feedback shared above.

Firstly, There is absolutely no reason any player should get banned 5 times! 
 

Secondly that survey was only completed by 1,970 people, a VERY small number considering TMP has 5 million registered users! Also it shows me that the people that did vote are mixed on Ban lengths, it also shows me that only 6% of people know what they can/can’t do on TMP! This means the people that are getting banned know exactly what they are doing. 
 

Thirdly, lets looks at Q2 Stats, average daily players is 34,700+, Web reports is up 28% to 53,000 and in-Game reports almost doubled at 40% increase to 260,000!!! So why the big increase of reports if almost 80% Of people understand what they are and aunt allowed to do? 
 

It is clear to me that as TMP gets even more popular, it is vital they have a band system, which works to not only improve the reputation of TMP, but also improve the experience for every single driver. 
 

my suggestion shows clear ban lengths for ALL players, which get more severe, if you’re being banned too close together which is cutting down on repeat offenders 

[El Reja]

14 hours ago, MartinV90 said:

Firstly, There is absolutely no reason any player should get banned 5 times! 
 

Secondly that survey was only completed by 1,970 people, a VERY small number considering TMP has 5 million registered users! Also it shows me that the people that did vote are mixed on Ban lengths, it also shows me that only 6% of people know what they can/can’t do on TMP! This means the people that are getting banned know exactly what they are doing. 
 

Thirdly, lets looks at Q2 Stats, average daily players is 34,700+, Web reports is up 28% to 53,000 and in-Game reports almost doubled at 40% increase to 260,000!!! So why the big increase of reports if almost 80% Of people understand what they are and aunt allowed to do? 
 

It is clear to me that as TMP gets even more popular, it is vital they have a band system, which works to not only improve the reputation of TMP, but also improve the experience for every single driver. 
 

my suggestion shows clear ban lengths for ALL players, which get more severe, if you’re being banned too close together which is cutting down on repeat offenders 

Having 5 million accounts regirested on the website doesn't mean that there are 5 millions of users actively playing on the community. There many many players who:

• Uninstalled TruckersMP
• Do not pay attention to the website nor forum
• Have deleted their account
• Are ban evaders (which is probably one of the points that make the numbers increase a lot since 2014)

Usually, TMP has around 6-7k players every day simultaneously playing on the servers, and again, many of them do not pay attention to the forum, which means that will probably not participare in said survey.

 

The ban lengths are fine as they are right now. We have rules (internal and public) we must follow, and for now they are working very well. Keep in mind we also issue bans under the rule 2.9, which means that even if you have 3 active bans only, you can get banned for 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 months or even permanent.

[MartinV90]

11 hours ago, El Reja said:

Having 5 million accounts regirested on the website doesn't mean that there are 5 millions of users actively playing on the community. There many many players who:

• Uninstalled TruckersMP
• Do not pay attention to the website nor forum
• Have deleted their account
• Are ban evaders (which is probably one of the points that make the numbers increase a lot since 2014)

Usually, TMP has around 6-7k players every day simultaneously playing on the servers, and again, many of them do not pay attention to the forum, which means that will probably not participare in said survey.

 

The ban lengths are fine as they are right now. We have rules (internal and public) we must follow, and for now they are working very well. Keep in mind we also issue bans under the rule 2.9, which means that even if you have 3 active bans only, you can get banned for 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 months or even permanent.

If ban lengths are fine right now, then please explain why “Web reports is up 28% to 53,000 and in-Game reports almost doubled at 40% increase to 260,000!!!” (In latest stats by TMP) 

 

Surely the aim of the game is to increase players, but decrease the number being banned and the number of reports? The fact both are up, clearly shows something isn’t working. Of course literally nobody is going to vote for tougher bans, but surly thats the only way to make the streets on tmp safer for everyone! 

[[VIVA] [BG] Vinnie P.B.]

1st of all: Truly support @MartinV90's suggestion (opinions).

 

2nd: As much as all the popular multiplayer games in the world are full of all kinds of problems about bad players and their behavior, here it is a game of calmness and attention, of rules and attitude, of collegiality and gratitude. Of being among people from all over the world or an entire continent, and at the same time enjoying the pleasure of riding properly. Not being almost constantly pushed, punched, dumped, cursed at, insulted, etc. And no matter how calm someone will be, eventually, the player gets fed up.
After all that, how many times will some have to report each one individually? Should good players be doing this first and foremost, all the time, or do him/her just want to enjoy the game with friends?

 

3rd: The more offenders are punished harshly and often, the more good/well-behaved players will stick around, return and stay which have left already or will leave because of the above.
This means a quality and large population of the 2 games in the TMP servers.
This means:

- full pleasure and delight to play often

- an almost complete absence of any annoyances
- calm C-D roads
- a pleasure to pop in often for rides around Calais and its busy surroundings 
- lack of nerves
- rarely swearing and quarrels
- significantly reduced presence of Admins/Moderators in the game
There are other reasons in general for an even more serious working penal system, but the main one is this.
It's a fact, and there are countless threads about it, that it's filled with all kinds of trolls and inappropriate brats whose sole purpose is to destroy the peace of the few decent players left...

 

and 4th: Yes, I would love to see such a working system in the future. I hope someday. Indeed...

[Interstate Nomad]

On 8/19/2023 at 10:25 AM, Lamb Sauce III said:

100%. The majority of the community are clearly happy with the way things are, therefore the ban lengths do not need to be changed. Only the duration of the 5th ban may be one that could cause controversy, although I don't see any need to alter it.

 

Naturally, the majority is happy with things as they are.

It's the same group of users who voted for higher speed limits and softer punishments in the last survey. And the TruckersMP team didn't waste any time to implement their will.

 

But that doesn't mean that things are good as they are.

Nobody would eat sh** just because 1 million flies claim that it tastes fantastic. At least I hope so.

 

[30maes]

Anyway, if all the durations of the ban are judged by the first, second or third time the player has been banned, this is unfair. Sometimes, he is just only Reckless Driving, this can sometimes only be a 7 day ban, but in your suggestion, it can be more than 7 days a lot. You cannot judge the ban's duration only by the person's ban chance, you also need to see what is the situation at that point, is it a very major issue or only a tiny issue? This is my point here.

[MartinV90]

3 hours ago, 30maes said:

Anyway, if all the durations of the ban are judged by the first, second or third time the player has been banned, this is unfair. Sometimes, he is just only Reckless Driving, this can sometimes only be a 7 day ban, but in your suggestion, it can be more than 7 days a lot. You cannot judge the ban's duration only by the person's ban chance, you also need to see what is the situation at that point, is it a very major issue or only a tiny issue? This is my point here.

If people just drive properly, they wouldn't need to worry about the ban length for reckless driving. This is my point, if you make rules harsher, people will actually feel the punishment and decide to start driving properly. Ofc minor reports that don’t warrant a ban will still be down to moderators discussion. People want rules and bans to be more lenient, but they aren’t in charge! Its basically just saying “Go do what you want as your ban wont be that bad” 

 

if people want to drive recklessly, speed etc, there is literally a server for that! So ban lengths from other servers should be harsh! 

[lIIlIlllIlIlIIlIlIlIlII]

personally i think they should be even harsher for repeat offenders, ban evaders, trolls, idiotic children who drive reckless etc.

everyone makes a mistake from time to time, let's be honest, whether you want it or not, we all face some bad luck, bad timing situations in which we can crash if we don't pull over, brake asap, or etc u get my point

 

but if you:

-purposely engage in a risky situation and you don't care abt it you should get a 3 months ban, followed by a 6 month ban if repeated and then permanent ban + ip ban

-troll (blocking, entering and leaving gas station just to create traffic bc trust me i've seen it before i even have a video of it xD, crash into others or cut them off bc u wanted to) you should get instant permanent account ban

-think you are one of those guys from the russian tik tok edits where they drive recklessly in AMG's or M's or RS's instant permanent account ban

 

idk its just my opinion

 

i'd also implement a system where you get banned for a certain amount of time based on your driving history (how clean your ban record is, how many hours you spent on truckersmp, how old and active of a player you are) where i'd do something like this:

 

-say a veteran player, 1k hours+ on TMP decides to overtake, someone pops up ahead, they risk it and cut off the guy they are overtaking and accidentaly ram them (and they feel sorry for it) i'd give someone in this situation a 48 hour ban, or something easy like that bc accidents happen to everyone,not saying you should be let off with a warning, not saying you should get a 1 month ban for a simple mistake, you know what i'm saying?

[El Reja]

On 8/19/2023 at 9:02 PM, MartinV90 said:

If ban lengths are fine right now, then please explain why “Web reports is up 28% to 53,000 and in-Game reports almost doubled at 40% increase to 260,000!!!” (In latest stats by TMP) 

 

Surely the aim of the game is to increase players, but decrease the number being banned and the number of reports? The fact both are up, clearly shows something isn’t working. Of course literally nobody is going to vote for tougher bans, but surly thats the only way to make the streets on tmp safer for everyone! 

Do you really think that having longer ban lengths will actually decrease those numbers? We used to ban for MINOR mistakes even 3 WEEKS, which is extremely harsh and solved nothing. The report system was still in "HIGH - HEAVY" and nothing changed in those times. You are talking about the recent numbers with the current punishment standards, but... Have you seen how it was in the past? For doing a really dumb mistake you could get banned for WEEKS, isn't that unfair? Everyone can make mistakes and even more in a high populated place such as C-D. And no, i'm not defending rule breakes at all, i'm defending people who makes mistakes (as i did twice when i was a player in 2016) and have to be banned for a ridiculous amount of time that isn't fair for them at all. 

 

We currently are stricts with trolls and people who breaks the rules intentionally and in a short frame of time, so, there's no point in changing our current system as this is also internal and decided by Management.

7 hours ago, MartinV90 said:

If people just drive properly, they wouldn't need to worry about the ban length for reckless driving. This is my point, if you make rules harsher, people will actually feel the punishment and decide to start driving properly. Ofc minor reports that don’t warrant a ban will still be down to moderators discussion. People want rules and bans to be more lenient, but they aren’t in charge! Its basically just saying “Go do what you want as your ban wont be that bad” 

 

if people want to drive recklessly, speed etc, there is literally a server for that! So ban lengths from other servers should be harsh! 

No, it doesn't work like that at all. We used to have a really HARSH system in the past and again, solved nothing but caused a lot of people complaining (in many cases, i agreed with many of them) for being banned for weeks due to committing a dumb mistake. We had that and it was even worse than what it is now.

[MartinV90]

3 hours ago, lIIlIlllIlIlIIlIlIlIlIIl said:

personally i think they should be even harsher for repeat offenders, ban evaders, trolls, idiotic children who drive reckless etc.

everyone makes a mistake from time to time, let's be honest, whether you want it or not, we all face some bad luck, bad timing situations in which we can crash if we don't pull over, brake asap, or etc u get my point

 

but if you:

-purposely engage in a risky situation and you don't care abt it you should get a 3 months ban, followed by a 6 month ban if repeated and then permanent ban + ip ban

-troll (blocking, entering and leaving gas station just to create traffic bc trust me i've seen it before i even have a video of it xD, crash into others or cut them off bc u wanted to) you should get instant permanent account ban

-think you are one of those guys from the russian tik tok edits where they drive recklessly in AMG's or M's or RS's instant permanent account ban

 

idk its just my opinion

 

i'd also implement a system where you get banned for a certain amount of time based on your driving history (how clean your ban record is, how many hours you spent on truckersmp, how old and active of a player you are) where i'd do something like this:

 

-say a veteran player, 1k hours+ on TMP decides to overtake, someone pops up ahead, they risk it and cut off the guy they are overtaking and accidentaly ram them (and they feel sorry for it) i'd give someone in this situation a 48 hour ban, or something easy like that bc accidents happen to everyone,not saying you should be let off with a warning, not saying you should get a 1 month ban for a simple mistake, you know what i'm saying?

Yes, this is also not a bad suggestion, it is these repeat offenders that I want to see harsher punishments also, like literally how many times are you Saturday in traffic you see somebody inappropriately overtaken, cause a collision (or almost) say sorry in chat, yet CONTINUE TO DRIVE ON THE WRONG SIDE OF THE ROAD, while everybody else is just sitting there, waiting patiently in the queue. 
 

It is these types of players should get extremely harsh punishments. 
 

Of course, accidents happen, I have had a few near misses myself! 

[Lena']

This is not a solution, most of the reports come from Calais duisburg, and believe me, even if the game moderator monitors and punishes this place 24/7 live, you will not be able to reduce the burden of the reporting system easily. There are over 5 million registered users and even the smallest bugs are reported by players.
Game moderators may have difficulty keeping up with this situation, and by reducing the number of reports to 10, they want to reduce unnecessary reports and this is a very logical decision.

[CLUSTERTRUCK]

focus less on banning...

[Interstate Nomad]

9 hours ago, lIIlIlllIlIlIIlIlIlIlIIl said:

-say a veteran player, 1k hours+ on TMP decides to overtake, someone pops up ahead, they risk it and cut off the guy they are overtaking and accidentaly ram them (and they feel sorry for it) i'd give someone in this situation a 48 hour ban, or something easy like that bc accidents happen to everyone,not saying you should be let off with a warning, not saying you should get a 1 month ban for a simple mistake, you know what i'm saying?

 

Neither a title, the number of hours spend in the simulator, nor regret should be taken into consideration for a punishment, as it would create an unbalanced treatment of users.

Accidents don't happen, they are always caused by somebody, something, or a combination of both.

 

An unsafe overtaking maneuver is covered by the in-game rules "§2.4 - Incorrect Way / Inappropriate Overtaking" and "§2.5 - Reckless Driving".

[Interstate Nomad]

6 hours ago, Lena' said:

There are over 5 million registered users and even the smallest bugs are reported by players.
Game moderators may have difficulty keeping up with this situation, and by reducing the number of reports to 10, they want to reduce unnecessary reports and this is a very logical decision.

 

The number of registered user accounts doesn't relate to the number of active users and is irrelevant in that matter.

Reducing the number of reports to 10 doesn't reduce the number of rule violations. It only restricts the user in reporting them which might give the wrong impression that the number of rule violations has decreased.

 

Many TruckersMP team members have repeatedly stated that even with significant more Game Moderators and Report Moderators and a 24/7 surveillance of the infamous area it would be impossible to get in control of the situation.

Well, TruckersMP team, have you actually ever tried? Or do you prefer to lay back, rely on assumptions and watch the chaos evolve?

[FernandoCR [ESP]]

3 hours ago, blabberbeak said:

Or do you prefer to lay back, rely on assumptions and watch the chaos evolve?

It would seem that this is the case, it was even mentioned in the previous survey. A majority of players enjoy the chaos and most of the recent changes are clear proof that there's no will to take any actions that could solve it, quite the contrary, in fact.

[Fezz]

On 8/18/2023 at 11:57 PM, MartinV90 said:

Suggestion Name: New Ban System

 

Suggestion Description: Change the way ban lengths work, so people who break rules days/weeks after their previous ban, get a more harsher ban the next time! 
My idea is: 

1st Offense: 7 Day Ban

2nd Offense: 14 Days (but if this is issued within two months of your last ban, this should automatically become 28 days)

3rd Offense: 28 days, (but if this is issued 3 months from last ban, this becomes 60 Days)

4th Offense: 60 Days (but if this is issues with ban in last 6 months, it becomes 90 days)

 

Any example images:  No

Why it should be added: TMP Simulation 1, especially around C-D is just getting frustrating for those of us try to drive normally and realistically. And every time you go on it, you just feel like there are even more reckless drivers than last time. The current ban lengths don’t work (clearly) for repeat offenders. What my suggestion offers is still a punishment for drivers, who commit offenses 2/3 times a year BUT The big differences, if you are being reported within a certain amount of time of your previous ban, your length of ban actually increases! I personally think this is a way that you have still got a fair ban system, but it is giving longer bans to the people that get banned to close together. 

 

 

 

 

 

Hi,

Thanks for taking the time to suggest a new ban system in order to improve the experience of TruckersMP. Unfortunately on this occasion, I have to agree with the comments that are already said within this post. Currently, the ban system that we have is more than fair, and if we deem that players are joining for the sole purpose to break the rules, then we do apply permanent bans to players that deserve it in extreme cases. Unfortunately the idea of making the rules more stricter, won't work on this occasion. Currently, the rules are more than fair, and even 1 month bans or 3 months ban are quite long. We really don't want to be banning anymore stricter then what we are at the moment as it crosses the line between a being banned fairly, and unfairly on a game. Even 3 months is a long time to wait so we don't see it being beneifical to change this to 60 days at present. With this being said, I'm going to decline this suggestion however, thanks for taking the time to suggest and start the discussion.

Kind Regards,

Fezz98
TruckersMP Game Moderation Manager