Returning Players After a Ban

[KDD[HUN]]

Suggestion Name: Returning Players After a Ban

Suggestion Description: I've noticed that a recurring issue is that many players have three or more active bans, and once their ban expires, they continue driving on the C-D road without changing their behavior at all. My idea is that when a player's ban expires, they should only be allowed to connect to the Arcade server for a certain period, depending on the number of active bans they have. For example, after a 1-month ban, the player would only be able to connect to the Arcade server for an additional 1 month. If they choose not to play during this period, that’s fine, but at least they won’t be driving on the Simulation 1 server, reducing the chances of receiving another ban. I am well aware that my idea won't be popular with a small percentage of players, especially those whom this rule would directly affect. However, on the Arcade server, players can still drive together with friends and company members, while ensuring that they can't cause harm to others.

Any example images: N/A

Why should it be added?: With this idea, I believe the Arcade server's traffic would increase significantly, as players would still get the same gameplay experience as on the Simulation 1 server, but without the ability to cause harm to other players.

[Sunstrider]

I would prefer them to prove they can complete Driving Academy.

 

The problem with this suggestion, they don't learn. And the higher active bans proves it. There's also an age difference and not caring about the rules of the road.

You can give them every tutorial, and teach them every possible method to make them good. The problem is, they just won't learn or bother to change and then complain when their next ban comes in.

[chaotic-control]

You could also not constantly drive up and down the c-d...?
There's so much more map to explore, and very much more enjoyable to drive.
Trolls and noobs will always find trouble on the c-d, the more people that avoid the area and explore more of the map, the better it is for everyone!

[(Furry)NoahTheGamer]

i like this idea it seems a ban means nothing and they still continue to ruin i am with you on this idea

[quln]

I really liked your idea but I would like to improve it.

I think it would be better if there was a limit for the Simulation 1 server. For example, if a player has less than X active bans the player will not be able to join Simulation 1 and ProMods for Y month(s) but will be able to join Simulation 2. However, if a player has more than X active bans the player will not be able to join Simulation 1, Simulation 2 and ProMods servers for Z month(s).

What do you think?

 

[Arf.]

A system that completely bans players for serious offenses such as intentional trolling, racism, severe insults, and deliberate crashes is the best approach, and I do not agree with considering any alternative system for these cases.

However, for players who receive bans due to accidental collisions, traffic violations, etc., an Arcade server would be a better solution. Additionally, a Rehabilitation server could be introduced.

Instead of focusing purely on punishment, this server could provide educational content, helping players learn all the rules and details of multiplayer gameplay. Guides and mentors could assist players in understanding proper driving etiquette, improving their behavior before rejoining the main servers.

[Niuro]

On 2/1/2025 at 6:05 PM, KDD[HUN] said:

Suggestion Name: Returning Players After a Ban

Suggestion Description: I've noticed that a recurring issue is that many players have three or more active bans, and once their ban expires, they continue driving on the C-D road without changing their behavior at all. My idea is that when a player's ban expires, they should only be allowed to connect to the Arcade server for a certain period, depending on the number of active bans they have. For example, after a 1-month ban, the player would only be able to connect to the Arcade server for an additional 1 month. If they choose not to play during this period, that’s fine, but at least they won’t be driving on the Simulation 1 server, reducing the chances of receiving another ban. I am well aware that my idea won't be popular with a small percentage of players, especially those whom this rule would directly affect. However, on the Arcade server, players can still drive together with friends and company members, while ensuring that they can't cause harm to others.

Any example images: N/A

Why should it be added?: With this idea, I believe the Arcade server's traffic would increase significantly, as players would still get the same gameplay experience as on the Simulation 1 server, but without the ability to cause harm to other players.

The only way to learn is to not be able to play/drive on it or any of the vanilla map locations. Instead require from them to buy the DLC maps. When cash is involved, people tend to obey the rules.

[Guest Martin_v8]

I do agree there is a huge number of players that honestly couldn’t care if they get banned and they go online get banned then return to just get banned again. I’ve previously made suggestions regarding this, limiting the access to Eva arcade or simulation two but again suggestions like this have been rejected with the response  “They have served the length of the original ban but restricting their access to punish them further is not something we are looking to implement” 

 

They’ve also been many other suggestions about having a rear realistic simulation serger or Car free server, but again everything gets rejected.

 

It is actually sad that TMP seems to care more about car users and people who continuously get banned over realistic truck drivers. I do feel like they need to seriously we think their strategy otherwise they are going to lose a lot of people to SCS convoy Mode

[GennySavastano]

On 2/3/2025 at 10:42 AM, Arf. said:

[arcarde servers could help] players who receive bans due to accidental collisions

 

If a player lightly bumps someone else's vehicle by accident and gets banned, there really isn't anything to learn, except that maybe the game (truckersMP) isn't worth their time in the first place. There's a reason why ban-evading is such a problem, and I'll give you 3 guesses why.

 

The fact that players are banned from all servers (and on a different game) for breaking rules specific to one server is simply lazy, at best. 

[Guest Martin_v8]

On 2/2/2025 at 2:23 PM, quln said:

I really liked your idea but I would like to improve it.

I think it would be better if there was a limit for the Simulation 1 server. For example, if a player has less than X active bans the player will not be able to join Simulation 1 and ProMods for Y month(s) but will be able to join Simulation 2. However, if a player has more than X active bans the player will not be able to join Simulation 1, Simulation 2 and ProMods servers for Z month(s).

What do you think?

 

The problem with this is they will just join simulation 2 where there are less moderators

[GennySavastano]

On 4/14/2025 at 11:21 AM, Martin_v8 said:

The problem with this is they will just join simulation 2 where there are less moderators

 

That's the point. You break the rules, you end up in the place with less of them.

And honestly, I think most people try to follow them regardless. Almost everyone I've come into contact with has been extremely nice, besides those who scream "BAN" but I just assume that's because they don't know any english or they're admins? No way of knowing.

Granted I'm pretty certain this isn't possible, or they would have done it a long time ago.

[FayezTMP]

Greetings everyone ,

 

The way bans are structured in TruckersMP right now is pretty straightforward - If you've been banned, you’ve been banned from the whole network,

meaning you can’t access into any servers until your ban has been lifted/expired. If we’ve been thinking about adding restrictions where you'd be locked out of specific servers based on your ban history it’s likely it’d just complicate things more and cause more confusion.

 

The whole point of the ban system has always been to keep it clear and consistent. If rules start limiting access to certain servers because of past bans/history, it might feel a bit too restrictive. I think it's better to keep it simple and stick with the idea that if you're banned, you're banned from the whole network until your ban is over. That way, there’s no grey area.

[GennySavastano]

That makes sense for 'cheating'. For virtually everything else, it doesn't.

 

1. You join a server. 2. You break a rule on that server, 3. you get banned from that server. 

 

What exactly about that is complicated? Part 1, 2 or 3? I mean...you have to be kidding me, right?

 

You know what doesn't make sense? Banning someone for breaking a rule on a completely different game on a completely different server. With the way bans are handled here, in my opinion that's just flat out stupid.

 

But that would assume it's possible in the first place, and the way things are set up here, it probably isn't. But at least that would be a valid argument. 

 

 

[FayezTMP]

3 hours ago, GennySavastano said:

That makes sense for 'cheating'. For virtually everything else, it doesn't.

 

1. You join a server. 2. You break a rule on that server, 3. you get banned from that server. 

 

What exactly about that is complicated? Part 1, 2 or 3? I mean...you have to be kidding me, right?

 

You know what doesn't make sense? Banning someone for breaking a rule on a completely different game on a completely different server. With the way bans are handled here, in my opinion that's just flat out stupid.

 

But that would assume it's possible in the first place, and the way things are set up here, it probably isn't. But at least that would be a valid argument. 

 

TruckersMP has always been one community with one set of rules that apply across the board. That’s not been done to overcomplicate things, however, it’s been done to make sure everyone’s treated fairly.

 

Take §1.1 for example, that’s part of §1 – Service-wide rules, and it’s been there to make it absolutely clear, players are responsible for their accounts and all of their in-game behaviour, regardless of which server they’ve been on. Whether someone’s been reckless/trolling on Sim 1 or been causing offensive behavior on ProMods, it’s all treated the same because it all affects the same community.

 

All TruckersMP servers have been part of the same multiplayer platform, they’ve not been separate games, just different environments. And so the rules have been put in place to cover the full thing not just bits of it. If bans were only enforced on a server-by-server basis, it would’ve created more confusion than it solved. People would’ve just been hopping between servers to avoid consequences, and that would’ve ended up weakening the whole moderation system. It’s important to keep things joined up so everyone knows where they stand. The way the system’s been set up helps prevent that it’s been about keeping things clear, as well as fair.

 

Here are a few examples to illustrate why consistent enforcement across all servers makes sense:

• A player uses hate speech on the ProMods server. Should their punishment only apply to that server? The harm they caused is not bound to one location it's a community wide issue and violates §1.5 Inappropriate use of language, which applies everywhere.

• A player repeatedly causes traffic jams in Calais on Simulation 1 by blocking intersections and refusing to move. They are banned. Should they really be allowed to move to ProMods and/or Simulation 2 and continue the same behavior possibly in a different city or zone?

• A player tailgates and intentionally overtakes unsafely in convoys on Simulation 2, putting other players at risk. If they’re banned only on that server, they could go to another convoy event server and do the exact same thing.

[GennySavastano]

 

 

 

 

 

4 hours ago, FayezTMP said:

TruckersMP servers have been part of the same multiplayer platform, they’ve not been separate games, just different environments. 

 

American truck simulator and Euro truck simulator are not the same game. Arcade servers and Simulation servers do not share the same rules and restrictions (besides the obvious)

 

4 hours ago, FayezTMP said:

• hate speech

 

yeah pretty sure this isn't what we're talking about

 

4 hours ago, FayezTMP said:

• A player repeatedly causes traffic jams in Calais on Simulation 1 by blocking intersections and refusing to move. They are banned. Should they really be allowed to move to [another server] and continue the same behavior

 

If it's the arcade server, they literally can't cause traffic jams, right? So, sure. 

 

4 hours ago, FayezTMP said:

• A player tailgates and intentionally overtakes unsafely in convoys on Simulation 2, putting other players at risk. If they’re banned only on that server, they could go to another convoy event server and do the exact same thing.

 

Again, if they're limited to an arcade server, sure. 

Even if they do get banned on sim 1 and go to sim 2, there's a fraction of the players there. And if they continue, (which is what you have to assume for your argument to matter) then it's just as simple as relegating them to Arcade servers. I don't really think that's complicated or controversial. 

[FayezTMP]

2 hours ago, GennySavastano said:

American truck simulator and Euro truck simulator are not the same game. Arcade servers and Simulation servers do not share the same rules and restrictions (besides the obvious)

 

Technically speaking, ETS2 and ATS are two separate games, however, when it comes to TruckersMP, they’re both part of the same mod, the same community, and run under one account with one set of rules across the board. Players don't have separate TMP profiles/accounts or punishment histories across games. You can’t for example, abuse chat in ETS2 and expect not to be held accountable if you jump into ATS the next day, both games are run together under the TruckersMP community.

 

The Terms of Service 1.1 are clear on this:

 

“We create and manage a gaming platform… to let you interact with other members in a massively multiplayer online (MMO) fashion.”

 

So whether someone is playing ETS2 or ATS, Simulation 1 or Arcade, it’s all part of the same MMO community and rules are enforced service-wide, not game-specific. That’s how consistency and fairness are maintained.

 

3 hours ago, GennySavastano said:

yeah pretty sure this isn't what we're talking about

 

You said “hate speech isn’t what we’re talking about” but it is absolutely relevant. Behavior that breaks the rules, whether through driving, communication, or other has platform-wide impact. Just because a server doesn’t have collisions doesn’t mean it's a lawless environment. That’s why rule §1 covers service-wide behavior, not just driving conduct. For example, imagine letting someone back onto Arcade who’s been causing trouble by harassing others in chat, you wouldn’t just let them stroll back onto Arcade like nothing happened - Collisions or not, it’s about how they behave, not just how they drive.

 

You’ve mentioned that moving repeat offenders to Arcade “isn’t complicated or controversial,” but I’d say it’s not been nearly as simple as that. Trying to make that work fairly would’ve been a right mess. You’d have to start tracking what rules have been broken on which server, decide who’s been banned from where. Permissions would have been changing all the time and that’s just been asking for confusion - not just for the players, but for the staff trying to keep it all straight, as well as fair.

 

Everyone’s been held to the same expectations, no matter what server they’ve been on - and that’s been key in keeping the community safe and enjoyable for all.

[GennySavastano]

13 hours ago, FayezTMP said:

 

....abuse chat in ETS2 and expect not to be held accountable...

...Behavior that breaks the rules, [through communication]...

...causing trouble by harassing others in chat...

 

...it isnt what we're talking about in that these sorts of offences would obviously be community wide, just like 'cheating' or other standard zero-tolerance policies. 

 

13 hours ago, FayezTMP said:

You’ve mentioned that moving repeat offenders to Arcade...

 

i never said "repeat offenders." You mentioned someone blocking traffic in a sim server. Assuming they're relegated to Arcade servers after a ban on the Sim server, they are no longer able to physically block traffic, therefore it is impossible for it to be repeated. However I recognize you may be referring to the originally suggested idea, in which case, you have a point. 

 

13 hours ago, FayezTMP said:

Trying to make that work fairly would’ve been a right mess. You’d have to start tracking what rules have been broken on which server, decide who’s been banned from where. Permissions would have been changing all the time and that’s just been asking for confusion - not just for the players, but for the staff trying to keep it all straight, as well as fair.

 

Everyone’s been held to the same expectations, no matter what server they’ve been on - and that’s been key in keeping the community safe and enjoyable for all.

 

If players received warnings and kicks for first time infractions instead of week long bans, i'd be much more inclined to agree with your last statement. But that clearly doesn't happen - at least not consistently. So I'm much more favorable to the players via this suggestion; that is, a relegation to non-sim servers for sim server-specific rule infractions. 

 

This is pretty standard stuff. If you get a "cooldown" (temporary ban) for example in 'competitive' (ie: simulation) counter-strike games - you're relegated to 'casual' (ie: Arcade) servers where things like friendly fire and player collisions are off. This is exactly the same concept. If it isn't technically possible, fine. But to say it's confusing is a little disingenuous (in my opinion) when you expect players to follow a 2,500 word document containing the rules.

 

[FayezTMP]

4 hours ago, GennySavastano said:

This is pretty standard stuff. If you get a "cooldown" (temporary ban) for example in 'competitive' (ie: simulation) counter-strike games - you're relegated to 'casual' (ie: Arcade) servers where things like friendly fire and player collisions are off. This is exactly the same concept. If it isn't technically possible, fine.

 

Games like Counter Strike 2 have been known to split things between casual and competitive modes, however, it’s never really been a like-for-like comparison. In CS2, most cooldowns have been handled automatically or have been tied directly to specific mechanics, like abandoning matches or excessive team damage. TruckersMP, on the other hand, has always been a community-run project, where bans have been enforced manually and each case has been reviewed on its own merits. Trying to bring in server-specific punishments would mean bans have to be tracked per server, and the whole ban system would need to be reworked.

 

What you’re proposing is a structural change to the backbone of the moderation system, and one that, frankly, opens the door to people gaming the system by bouncing between enforcement zones, which undermines the very consistency the rules are built to uphold. That alone makes implementing server-specific enforcement a much bigger structural change than it may seem.

 

4 hours ago, GennySavastano said:

If players received warnings and kicks for first time infractions instead of week long bans, i'd be much more inclined to agree with your last statement. But that clearly doesn't happen - at least not consistently. So I'm much more favorable to the players via this suggestion; that is, a relegation to non-sim servers for sim server-specific rule infractions. 

 

This isn’t quite accurate. Warnings and kicks are absolutely part of the moderation process but they’re used at the staff’s discretion based on the severity and context of the rule break. If someone’s just making a minor mistake, they often do get warned or kicked instead of banned. But if someone causes a major crash, drives recklessly through busy areas, or clearly shows intent to disrupt others especially in well-known problem zones like Calais-Duisburg, moderators may not issue a soft warning first. That’s not about being harsh, however, it’s about protecting the community and responding proportionally to the behavior.

 

Moderation’s never been about favoring players - it’s always been about keeping the community safe and fair for everyone. There’ve been players who’ve been given chance after chance, but when someone’s been breaking the rules repeatedly, it can’t just be brushed aside. TruckersMP’s never been the sort of place to let that slide. That’s why the ban system’s been designed to scale based on a player’s history (§2.8) - not where they’ve been playing from.

 

5 hours ago, GennySavastano said:

i never said "repeat offenders"

 

My point’s really been about how this sort of system would’ve likely been playing out in practice. Even if it’s been set up to handle with one-off rule breaches at first, it’s hard to imagine it not gradually being shifted more towards targeting repeat behaviour.

 

Say a player’s been causing a serious issue and ends up being moved straight onto Arcade or maybe it’s been happening a few times already. Either way, the mod team’s still got to judge the intent behind it, how often it’s been happening, and what kind of impact it’s actually been having. So yeah, the point’s still been the same all along: once punishments have been tied to specific servers, things end up being far more complicated both for the staff who’ve been managing it, and for the players trying to make sense of it.

 

4 hours ago, GennySavastano said:

But to say it's confusing is a little disingenuous (in my opinion) when you expect players to follow a 2,500 word document containing the rules.

 

And lastly, saying that proper rule enforcement’s somehow ‘disingenuous’ just because the rules have been a bit long to read doesn’t quite sit right. Players need to know what’s expected of them. It’s not about overregulating, however, it’s about creating a fair and predictable environment. At the end of the day, players have been choosing to use the mod, and with that comes the responsibility to follow the rules. These rules haven’t been written as suggestions, they’ve been set in place to keep things fair.

 

TruckersMP isn’t just a collection of servers. It’s one community. Rules only work when they apply to everyone the same way, regardless of where they’re standing at the time.

[GennySavastano]

It's like talking to a brick wall. I don't know if it's a translation error or something but there's clearly no point point in me responding. You either get what what I'm saying or you don't, I'm not going to endlessly try to explain it for you.

[FayezTMP]

3 hours ago, GennySavastano said:

It's like talking to a brick wall. I don't know if it's a translation error or something but there's clearly no point point in me responding. You either get what what I'm saying or you don't, I'm not going to endlessly try to explain it for you.

 

Alright but just to be clear, Saying "like talking to a brick wall" doesn't exactly help your point. I’ve been responding in good faith, explaining my reasoning and backing it up. Just because we haven’t been agreeing doesn’t mean I haven’t been listening, it’s just that we’ve been seeing things differently and that’s alright.

 

That being said, comparing TruckersMP to something like Counter Strike 2 just doesn’t really work. CS2 has built-in systems for things like cooldowns and match-based punishments, and most of it is handled automatically within the game’s own specific mechanics. TruckersMP, on the other hand, has always been a community-run project layered on top of two different simulators ETS2 and ATS. Everything from moderation to bans is done manually by real people reviewing context. So it’s not just a case of "competitive vs casual" it’s two completely different ecosystems.

 

If you’ve been feeling like this chat’s run its course, fair enough, but there’s not been any need to throw shade just because I’ve not been agreeing with you.

[xosho]

On 2/3/2025 at 3:42 PM, Arf. said:

A system that completely bans players for serious offenses such as intentional trolling, racism, severe insults, and deliberate crashes is the best approach, and I do not agree with considering any alternative system for these cases.

However, for players who receive bans due to accidental collisions, traffic violations, etc., an Arcade server would be a better solution. Additionally, a Rehabilitation server could be introduced.

Instead of focusing purely on punishment, this server could provide educational content, helping players learn all the rules and details of multiplayer gameplay. Guides and mentors could assist players in understanding proper driving etiquette, improving their behavior before rejoining the main servers.

 

I mean... I believe most people who play this game already have their driver's license in real life. They know the rules of the road and how they should drive in a simulation scenario... I think they just don't care and drive however they want

[Lz_TMP [UK]]

I agree, especially for the 1 month, and 3 month bans.

not everyone with a history, or a lot of bans are a bad driver, it just depends on the situation at the time, and as we all know... there are some admins out there who loveeee to just ban for everything, ignore appals, and dont take time to understand someone. I am with you here!

[slimeboi2121]

I approve of this!!

[Guest average_player_f]

As for the suggestion made by @KDD[HUN], 

They've already served the length of the original ban, so restricting their access further feels like additional punishment. I think the current ban system is already effective, many bans are for long durations like 1 month then 3 months on further offenses, which is already a significant amount of time. If someone continues to cause problems after returning, they'll just get another long ban anyway.
 

Also, I would support allowing currently banned users to access the Arcade servers. Since reckless driving and collisions don’t lead to bans there, it makes sense. especially considering most bans are issued for those reasons. Allowing banned players on Arcade would be a great step.

 

[GennySavastano]

1 hour ago, average_player_f said:

Also, I would support allowing currently banned users to access the Arcade servers. Since reckless driving and collisions don’t lead to bans there, it makes sense. especially considering most bans are issued for those reasons. Allowing banned players on Arcade would be a great step.

 

Apparently that would be "too confusing"