Solution for blocking.

[Zak'S]

Suggestion Name: Solution for blocking.

 

Suggestion Description: From time to time we encounter blocking in the game. We see this especially on the Calais-Duisburg road. On such a crowded road, when a player blocks the road, there is incredible traffic and players have to wait for that person. Most of the time, those who try to bypass the blockage somehow make the traffic even worse. I thought of something like this: Other players should be able to vote for the blocking player. When the required number of votes is reached within a certain period of time, the system should open the no-collision zone for the blocking player. This way I think we can avoid this problem.

 

Any example images: Nope

 

Why should it be added?: We have to admit that admin interventions in the game are insufficient, players suffer from blocking issues. Such a method creates an instant solution in the game. Moreover, players can do it themselves.

 

[The Next Station]

I support your suggestion, and I also think that abuse will doesn't harm as opposed to a system of kick with a vote.

[Juliia]

The idea has potential, it could free up time of GM ! For the moment only reloading your save can allow you to pass through a person blocking the road...

['MaRtY]

Hehe I offered my suggestion on this issue, but it was not liked very much.

[Zak'S]

15 minutes ago, Juliia said:

The idea has potential, it could free up time of GM ! For the moment only reloading your save can allow you to pass through a person blocking the road...

Yes, I know that, but there are people who don't. And it's ridiculous that everyone has to do it for one person. So I came up with this system in my mind.

17 minutes ago, 'MaRtY said:

Hehe I offered my suggestion on this issue, but it was not liked very much.

We thought almost the same, but I can understand that people don't like it. Kick can be abused by players, but there is nothing abusive about this system. It doesn't harm anyone. By the way, I like how you supported the suggestion with a visual

[Juliia]

5 minutes ago, Rfh* said:

Yes, I know that, but there are people who don't. And it's ridiculous that everyone has to do it for one person. So I came up with this system in my mind.

Of course I understand it, if it's only you who is blocked you do it it's okay but 10/15 see 20 people actually this kind of thing would be better hence the fact of having said that the idea was Good ^^

[Interstate Nomad]

Before introducing such a feature, it is necessary to meet certain requirements.

Some things that came to mind:

 

1. Define the term blocking.
    
2. As not every blocking is caused intentionally, the player in question must be given a certain time to clear the way, e.g. teleport.
    
3. Furthermore, players may abuse this system by voting against others for personal reasons.
    
4. How to avoid this feature being used in simple traffic jams?

[Zak'S]

16 minutes ago, blabberbeak said:

Before introducing such a feature, it is necessary to meet certain requirements.

Some things that came to mind:

 

1. Define the term blocking.
    
2. As not every blocking is caused intentionally, the player in question must be given a certain time to clear the way, e.g. teleport.
    
3. Furthermore, players may abuse this system by voting against others for personal reasons.
    
4. How to avoid this feature being used in simple traffic jams?

1-) Deliberately blocking a road or arbitrarily occupying a road.

 

2-) If in the reporting system, when someone is reported, they are not reported by other players, there can be a small waiting period for each vote in this system. In this way, the traffic jam can be solved by itself until there is an absolute majority, but my suggestion is to solve the congestion anyway, this voting does not harm anyone, so it would be at the discretion of TMP whether to add a waiting period or not.

 

3-) For some reason the question of "abuse" is always the only answer to such proposals. How can this be misused? Let's say it was used, what harm can it do to whom? We don't ban or kick anyone.

 

4-) I have already mentioned the details in my article. You need to get a certain amount of votes within a certain period of time. A period of time will already pass until there is an absolute majority here. In addition, each time a vote is cast, a certain time cooldown is added. This period is extended for the absolute majority to be formed. Other than that, I don't see a problem since the system will be used to eliminate the element that creates traffic.

[Interstate Nomad]

@Rfh*,

 

thank you for your answers.

Please note that my post is not intended to discredit your idea. I'm just thinking out loud.

 

How does one know if an action by another person is done on purpose or by neglect, and does a person's intention actually matter if the requirement of an offence is fulfilled?

 

The question of a possible misuse of a feature that gives others power over another person must always be asked.

 

How long do you suggest the non-collision mode for a blocking player should be be activated, respectively when should it be deactivated?

How can it be avoided that the non-collision mode deactivates while another player is passing?
How can it be avoided that a player with a vehicle in non-collision mode starts driving into traffic to cause mayhem?

[Zak'S]

28 minutes ago, blabberbeak said:

@Rfh*,

 

thank you for your answers.

Please note that my post is not intended to discredit your idea. I'm just thinking out loud.

 

How does one know if an action by another person is done on purpose or by neglect, and does a person's intention actually matter if the requirement of an offence is fulfilled?

 

The question of a possible misuse of a feature that gives others power over another person must always be asked.

 

How long do you suggest the non-collision mode for a blocking player should be be activated, respectively when should it be deactivated?

How can it be avoided that the non-collision mode deactivates while another player is passing?
How can it be avoided that a player with a vehicle in non-collision mode starts driving into traffic to cause mayhem?

I certainly didn't think so, the suggestions are open for discussion. I am answering in response to your questions so that there is no ambiguity in the proposal.

 

How long the anti-collision device remains active is open to debate. Any time frame can be suggested, but the best results come from real trials. So I will not give a time frame.

 

The duration of the no collision can be written in the player's name and an alert can be sent to the player receiving the no collision so they can see it on their screen. This way, everyone can see that the person is in no-collision mode and when it will end.

 

My advice would be not to make it too long, because we want to maintain collision immunity as long as the player is blocking. So it should be neither too short nor too long. It should be enough to eliminate traffic stress. As I mentioned, a time suggestion can be made for this, but ideally it would be trial and error.

[Be4rdy]

or how about that he person ghosts after x amount of time of non movement.

[Zak'S]

5 minutes ago, Be4rdy said:

or how about that he person ghosts after x amount of time of non movement.

For slow-moving or stationary traffic, it causes many people to go into ghost mode at the same time. Having so many people in this mode in one area can cause chaos. If players identify the troublemaker themselves and put them into ghost mode, it will both create a control mechanism and the process will take place on 1 person.

[_Enes]

15.01.2024 saat 19:06'da Rfh* şunları söyledi:

Öneri Adı: Engelleme çözümü.

 

Öneri Açıklama: Oyun içerisinde zaman zaman engellemelerle karşılaşıyoruz. Bunu özellikle Calais-Duisburg yolunda görüyoruz. Bu kadar kalabalık bir yolda bir oyuncu yolu kapandığında aşırı bir trafik oluyor ve oyuncular ya da kişiler kalmak zorunda kalıyor. Çoğu zaman başarısızlıklar aşmaya çalışanlar bir şekilde kablolamayı daha da kötü hale getiriyor. Şakayı bir şey sıcaklığım: Diğer oyuncuların blok yapan oyuncuya oy verebilmesi. Bir süre içinde gerekli oy verildiğinde sistem, blok yapan oyuncu için çatışmanın yasak olduğu yerde açılmamalıdır. Bu şekilde sorunun önüne geçebileceğimizi düşünüyorum.

 

Herhangi bir örnek resim: Hayır

 

Neden Eklenmeli?: Oyunda yönetici müdahalelerinin yetersiz olması, oyun engelleme sorunlarının yaşanmasını kabul etmeniz gerekiyor. Böyle bir hareketle oyun anında çözüm yaratır. fazlası oyuncular bunu kendileri de yapabilirler.

 

In fact, not every obstruction is intentional. Players can block the path for many reasons. To be realistic, there will be many people and teams who will abuse this system. After all, the criterion during the voting will not be 50 players, logically it will be lower. The solution is actually simple. The question must be asked: Why is there so much traffic on the road between Duisburg and Calais, where are all the game managers? When you ask the admins, instead of saying nonsense like we have a life or we do it voluntarily, people who can do this job should come. Because if you got this title, you won't have such excuses. This is my opinion, have a nice day.

[TACCOO]

Sounds good but,

However, in such a system, it will be more inaccessible to open a region where the collision is open. Instead, it would be smoother to automatically use the tprk or tpr commands to the currently voted player.

TACCOO

[Interstate Nomad]

48 minutes ago, TACCOO said:

Sounds good but,

However, in such a system, it will be more inaccessible to open a region where the collision is open. Instead, it would be smoother to automatically use the tprk or tpr commands to the currently voted player.

TACCOO

 

That seems to be a more effective way to deal with a player who blocks traffic.

[Zak'S]

51 minutes ago, TACCOO said:

Sounds good but,

However, in such a system, it will be more inaccessible to open a region where the collision is open. Instead, it would be smoother to automatically use the tprk or tpr commands to the currently voted player.

TACCOO

Can you explain the function of the commands you mentioned, because I don't know.

[Zak'S]

56 minutes ago, _Enes said:

In fact, not every obstruction is intentional. Players can block the path for many reasons. To be realistic, there will be many people and teams who will abuse this system. After all, the criterion during the voting will not be 50 players, logically it will be lower. The solution is actually simple. The question must be asked: Why is there so much traffic on the road between Duisburg and Calais, where are all the game managers? When you ask the admins, instead of saying nonsense like we have a life or we do it voluntarily, people who can do this job should come. Because if you got this title, you won't have such excuses. This is my opinion, have a nice day.

I didn't say it on purpose to fix the voting amount with real experiences, so it's hard to make such an inference in the first place. Apart from that, I haven't come across very large convoys on the D-C road, so I don't think mini-teams will confuse this system. Also, a player can block the road intentionally or unintentionally, but this creates a lot of traffic behind. Players should pass this user when they want to. If the player cannot get out of the blocking situation until a simple majority is reached, I think the decision taken for him will be justified. Also, there can be no abuse here, there is no punishment system here. As for the admin issue, the only thing I would say is that it would be nice if the number of them were increased, but I'm sure it won't be enough again. We should be open to such projects and innovations.

[_Enes]

41 minutes ago, Rfh* said:

Oy miktarını gerçek deneyimlerle sabitlemek için bunu bilerek söylemedim, dolayısıyla ilk etapta böyle bir çıkarım yapmak zor. Onun dışında DC yolunda çok büyük konvoylara rastlamadım dolayısıyla mini ekiplerin bu sistemi karıştıracağını düşünmüyorum. Ayrıca bir oyuncu kasıtlı veya kasıtsız olarak yolu kapatabilir ancak bu, arkada çok fazla trafik oluşmasına neden olur. Oyuncular istedikleri zaman bu kullanıcıyı geçmelidirler. Eğer oyuncu basit çoğunluk sağlanıncaya kadar blokaj durumundan çıkamazsa kendisi adına alınan kararın haklı çıkacağını düşünüyorum. Ayrıca burada istismar olamaz, burada ceza sistemi yoktur. Admin konusuna gelince diyeceğim tek şey sayıları arttırılırsa güzel olur ama yine yeterli olmayacağına eminim. Bu tür proje ve yeniliklere açık olmalıyız.

This is what I've been talking about. Do you think that when such a system comes, people will use it with good intentions? Let's not deceive ourselves, even someone who is not a team will become a team just to throw. Their aim is to do just that. If there is someone blocking, the TruckersMP algorithm should understand it and kick it off the server. It may be like a lamp system, but if you come now and say, give this opportunity to the player. They will use it for malicious purposes. If the system does the job of removing this from the server, the question arises as to why there is an admin. Also, the problem that would be solved is not the number of admins, but the admins that are useful and the admins that do their job. It's like the players are playing on a big map. There is only one road, and accidents happen at certain points anyway. It would be solved if the 4 worst D-C roads were taken care of and they worked in shifts. In short, this system should not be left in the hands of the player.

[Zak'S]

18 minutes ago, _Enes said:

This is what I've been talking about. Do you think that when such a system comes, people will use it with good intentions? Let's not deceive ourselves, even someone who is not a team will become a team just to throw. Their aim is to do just that. If there is someone blocking, the TruckersMP algorithm should understand it and kick it off the server. It may be like a lamp system, but if you come now and say, give this opportunity to the player. They will use it for malicious purposes. If the system does the job of removing this from the server, the question arises as to why there is an admin. Also, the problem that would be solved is not the number of admins, but the admins that are useful and the admins that do their job. It's like the players are playing on a big map. There is only one road, and accidents happen at certain points anyway. It would be solved if the 4 worst D-C roads were taken care of and they worked in shifts. In short, this system should not be left in the hands of the player.

As I have said again and again, this system is not a punishment system. Its abuse will not hurt anyone. Also, it would be really hard to collect a certain amount of votes in a certain period of time in the absence of injustice. Assuming it is collected, again, this is not a penalty system. It doesn't harm anyone.

Is this the only solution? No, definitely not. As for the connection point of this situation with the admins. If we want to increase the number of admins or merit (I don't want to get into the discussion of this situation, or I'm not making accusations. I'm talking about the allegation), the admin will already punish when he sees such a thing. We are talking about the possibility of not having an admin. As you said, when the admins can intervene instantly in every incident, even if this system exists, the admin will do what is necessary before the players can use it.

What we are doing here is just hypothetical conversations, I think these things should be added as demos and tested. Then we can see the benefit and the harm of these systems. Sim2 style servers might be ideal for testing this.

[TACCOO]

2 hours ago, Rfh* said:

Can you explain the function of the commands you mentioned, because I don't know.

Thats some admin commands.
These are so useable commands for admins.
tpr:teleport player to f7
tprk:teleport player f7 and kick

2 hours ago, blabberbeak said:

That seems to be a more effective way to deal with a player who blocks traffic.

Thanks sir 

[Zak'S]

4 minutes ago, TACCOO said:

Thats some admin commands.
These are so useable commands for admins.
tpr:teleport player to f7
tprk:teleport player f7 and kick

Thanks sir 

Ah yes, I remembered. What you say is possible and logical, but the first comment that comes under this kind of suggestion is abuse. In such a system, the "abuse" debate will start again. For this reason, I found ghost mode more appropriate for the person being voted for. Even if the person is voted unfairly, there is no problem that can be affected.

[Niuro]

On 1/15/2024 at 6:06 PM, Rfh* said:

Suggestion Name: Solution for blocking.

 

Suggestion Description: From time to time we encounter blocking in the game. We see this especially on the Calais-Duisburg road. On such a crowded road, when a player blocks the road, there is incredible traffic and players have to wait for that person. Most of the time, those who try to bypass the blockage somehow make the traffic even worse. I thought of something like this: Other players should be able to vote for the blocking player. When the required number of votes is reached within a certain period of time, the system should open the no-collision zone for the blocking player. This way I think we can avoid this problem.

 

Any example images: Nope

 

Why should it be added?: We have to admit that admin interventions in the game are insufficient, players suffer from blocking issues. Such a method creates an instant solution in the game. Moreover, players can do it themselves.

 

Or... TMP could simply enforce the speed limit for trucks in the different sections of the course...

[Zak'S]

1 minute ago, Niuro said:

Or... TMP could simply enforce the speed limit for trucks in the different sections of the course...

What do you mean by speed limit?

[TACCOO]

9 hours ago, Rfh* said:

Ah yes, I remembered. What you say is possible and logical, but the first comment that comes under this kind of suggestion is abuse. In such a system, the "abuse" debate will start again. For this reason, I found ghost mode more appropriate for the person being voted for. Even if the person is voted unfairly, there is no problem that can be affected.

I saw 25 people writing that they should vote. I think 25 people voting shouldn’t be abused. I don't think so many people will abuse it.

Just now, TACCOO said:

saw 25 people writing that they should vote. I think 25 people voting shouldn’t be abused. I don't think so many people will abuse it.

I'm sorry i didn't see you wrote it for 25 people, but I saw it as 25 people in the comments, so I gave an example from 25 people

[Zak'S]

12 minutes ago, TACCOO said:

I saw 25 people writing that they should vote. I think 25 people voting shouldn’t be abused. I don't think so many people will abuse it.

No, I'm not talking about numbers, I'm in favor of trial and error testing. I think players should use a voting system to block the blocking player. The result could be as you say or as I say. Since I anticipate that there will be those who will stubbornly say "abuse", I came up with the idea of ghost mode as a measure to appease them, so that even if the system is abused (which I don't think it will be if a good amount of votes are set for it), no one's enjoyment of the game will be ruined. The solution may change, but there should be something like voting on the way to the solution. Players don't have to have this problem.