ffa points not adding up ? whats up with that ?

[sterile harness]

my rank points not adding up ?

[coral glen]

Yeah, they could add them up right away, then sync it with the server later.

Or at least tell you your points are coming in a few minutes. (And how many)

[cedar swift]

Its delayed because a lot of calculations need to happen in the correct order. Not only your own score, but all the other players score before your game needs to be completely updated before it can show.

Just have to live with it being up to several hours before your rank points update currently.

[coral glen]

The devs could easily make store some ints locally as during the match to calculate it right away for the players, then confirm it with the server and update it as need be to check for cheating. No reason to really do it in the manner they have done it. Not that I care. It doesn't really bother me.

[cedar swift]

Its about priorities, Theres other stuff we would love to see improved that .

[coral glen]

I think yall need to hire a more fluent programmer. (Though as I said, I personally don't see an issue with how it is now since I don't care) Implementing that should not take more than 10 minutes if the whole game has been coded by 1 person. If multiple people working on different sections where they need some kind of communication to change or access other scripts it should not take longer than 30 minutes to implement. All you need to do is store their ranked points in on the client for this. Not saying they should not also be stored on the server. Attach the ranked points to each player object as a network variable so that all other clients can see and access that information at the start of the match. The ranked points stored on the client would not be authoritative and would never be sent to the server in this manner though as it would create an exploit. All you would use it for would be to instantaneously show the client how many points they got at the end of the match. The server would still do what it does already and it would update the ranked points accordingly then send the information back to each client just as it does now to prevent hacking. Sure someone COULD change their ranked points locally but they can already do that. Only thing they could use would be a screenshot to show off their "hack". Server would still be secure though.

[cedar swift]

Sounds really easy.

[pure wave]

it's a legacy codebase, like RIsk has been a thing for what, 8 years now? since 2018? (correct me if I'm wrong) during which time I'm sure many hands have touched the code.

I mean, I totally 100% agree that there needs to be more transparent rank accounting but I don't think it's an issue of underqualified developers. I imagine it's a pretty complex codebase

[coral glen]

Eh. Unless they have gone thru several coders I don't see why that would matter which could be the case seeing how slow they work. If they have to keep getting a new coder then may God have mercy on their soul. lol

[coarse zephyr]

RISK was released initially in 2015 (not sure if public release was 2015 or 2016, but around that time)

[coral glen]

But how many coders have they gone thru. I can go back to any one of my games and know every aspect of it within 48 hours. But all my games have the same organization style so If I know one, I know them all. And Risk would be the smallest game I ever made, and that would be true for most coders I think except maybe for practice projects as they learn the language. But don't get me wrong, taking over another project after they have been fired for being slow and unorganized would take much longer to take over. But even at that risk is still a game that can be remade in a few weeks from scratch, so if learning the former code took longer than that, then a complete redo could easily be done.

[coarse zephyr]

Couldn't say but game industry tends to have fairly high turnover compared to SAAS etc - it'd be interesting to hear how many lines of code RISK's codebase is (might give better context?)

Also when you may have 5-10 people working on different areas at any given time, at best you will be seeing ⅕ of the code because you're only working on specific areas, you'll obviously have devs more fluent over time in specific areas, but I think you maybe don't appreciate just how large a project something like RISK would be.

As time goes by, that ⅕ you know will be shifted if you work on another project (others continue developing it), or as people come and go (you'll have new devs looking at ⅕ later that no-one else will have worked on) - add a decade to that and you'll have specific areas you're extremely well versed in (you know every aspect of) and massive chunks that also work as they did before you worked on it (and haven't had any reason to be updated, until it's no longer working as intended, or something new clashes because some older code wasn't designed with that new feature/style of use in mind)