Official Scoreboard and Points (May the 4th be with you!)

[bilsi]

The problem wasn't with adding points retroactively back to April 1st, the problem was with an inherent error with the way points were calculated between April 1 and May 4th. An error that caused huge discrepancies.

For example: I'm going to use real numbers, but not the real username:

Player 'Moonbeam' (name changed) played a whooping 148 games between April 1 and May 4. (True stat)

Their score at the time was fixed at 1225, a cadet.

So when they lost, they lost only 15 points (because of their low rank)
But when they won, they won 200 - 400 points per game, (for the same reason - it was calculated using only 1225 points)

The problem was that their score never adjusted after each win/loss.

So when they should have risen in score after each game: from 1225 to 2000 to 3000 to 4000 to ultimately 7000+ points, they just stayed a cadet with only 1225 points.

Meaning that they only lost 15 points after each game (as opposed to losing up to 100 per game)
And they won up to 200-400 points after each game (as opposed to winning a just fraction of that)

As you can see, there is an inherent error in the way points are calculated when your score does not adjust after each game.

That error might have been overlooked or even ignored if only 2 or 3 games were played per player. But the compounded effect of 148 games just blew the error way out of proportion.

It would be impossible to go back and take the points for each player, in each game, recalculate their scores after the game ended, and then transfer every player's ending score to the start of the next game, and do it all over again for every player in every game. The points in each game are fixed and cannot be manipulated. That ability simply does not exist.

Bottom line is we're just counting scores from games that ended after May the 4th. Sorry to break the news.

But the reassuring part is that 'Moonbeam' actually wrote to me last week after figuring out why their points were inflated so high, and they are perfectly fine with working their way up the scoreboard again. So I'm just happy they were okay with that.

I know who 'Moonbeam' is...

 

[LordBeardmore]

The problem wasn't with adding points retroactively back to April 1st, the problem was with an inherent error with the way points were calculated between April 1 and May 4th. An error that caused huge discrepancies.

For example: I'm going to use real numbers, but not the real username:

Player 'Moonbeam' (name changed) played a whooping 148 games between April 1 and May 4. (True stat)

Their score at the time was fixed at 1225, a cadet.

So when they lost, they lost only 15 points (because of their low rank)
But when they won, they won 200 - 400 points per game, (for the same reason - it was calculated using only 1225 points)

The problem was that their score never adjusted after each win/loss.

So when they should have risen in score after each game: from 1225 to 2000 to 3000 to 4000 to ultimately 7000+ points, they just stayed a cadet with only 1225 points.

Meaning that they only lost 15 points after each game (as opposed to losing up to 100 per game)
And they won up to 200-400 points after each game (as opposed to winning a just fraction of that)

As you can see, there is an inherent error in the way points are calculated when your score does not adjust after each game.

That error might have been overlooked or even ignored if only 2 or 3 games were played per player. But the compounded effect of 148 games just blew the error way out of proportion.

It would be impossible to go back and take the points for each player, in each game, recalculate their scores after the game ended, and then transfer every player's ending score to the start of the next game, and do it all over again for every player in every game. The points in each game are fixed and cannot be manipulated. That ability simply does not exist.

Bottom line is we're just counting scores from games that ended after May the 4th. Sorry to break the news.

But the reassuring part is that 'Moonbeam' actually wrote to me last week after figuring out why their points were inflated so high, and they are perfectly fine with working their way up the scoreboard again. So I'm just happy they were okay with that.

maybe a dumb question but have you considered using AI to fix the calculations for you? might be a little bit of grunt work but doesnt seem unreasonable.

 

[riskyone]

I updated the first post​

UPDATE : We tried to include games that ended between April 1 and May 4, but it caused huge discrepancies with some of the player's scores. As some of you noticed, there were players on the scoreboard with unrealistically high points. This was due to the large number of games that some players played between April 1 and May 4. We tried to think of a way to fix the issue, but in the end determined it would be much easier to only count the games that ended after May the 4th.

So, instead of the April fool's day points rollout we planned, we are going with a May the 4th be with you points rollout instead.

Bottom line. Points now work, so just have fun!

Oh, and ranks do not update yet, but they will be fixed soon.

Sheriff, I wanted to know if our opponents defeated are being counted as of April1, or May 4, or a latter date. Also the UDO's for maps
I appreciate all the work getting put into the site. It's a thing of beauty

 

[SgtPatton]

I know you have the longest todo list ever.....but when you get a chance, can you put the archive list in reverse chronological order in when they ended? I believe that is how it was before. That way when the game just ended, I can see who actually won and the points gained or lost. That game should be at the top of the archived list. Thanks!

agreed

 

[NewSheriffInTown]

Okay, now that we have Points working again, I had a talk with Ian about the next stage. He said to me:

We have two main bottlenecks that make things a little bit tedious:

• A PHP service that still holds some crucial code
• 2 Separate databases making it difficult to pass data around as needed.

Overall, PHP is the bottleneck (and MYSQL by extension). The engine is elegant in terms of handling failures, and when we need to scale in future it'd be very straightforward. We just need to clean things up a bit. Not to mention the previous dev team introduced a bottleneck by having multiple code versions (which took a lot of time in figuring out what was the right version of code). Nevertheless, we'd hopefully get there, but we do need to dedicate sometime after getting Points finished to clean things up and make it more organized, the goal is to be able to make faster rollouts without having the above issues taking center stage each time we want to work on something.

So his suggestion is to invest some time now to organize and clean up the PHP and the two databases so that we can be more productive later. And after witnessing the struggle it was to roll out the points feature, I would agree with him.

Having said that though, I'm positive there can still be some simple QoL features that we can roll out during this cleanup process, like reversing the chronological order of ended games for example. It's anything more significant that will have to wait for now.

Anyway, I'm just bringing you all up to date.

P.S. "Current" Scoreboard has been updated to display only players who have gained/lost points in the last 12 months

 

[riskyone]

I'm not sure how the points work.
22/05/24 07:56:43

riskyone
lost 41 points.
22/05/24 07:56:43

sannheten
lost 100 points.
22/05/24 07:56:43

badkarma
lost 27 points.
22/05/24 07:56:43

-lionheart-
lost 37 points.
22/05/24 07:56:43

ironduke
is Victorious! You have been awarded an outstanding 100 points. Well done!
I would have thought that ironduke would have won 205 points. The total of the four losing players.
Please help

 

[NewSheriffInTown]

I'm not sure how the points work.
riskyone lost 41 points.
sannheten lost 100 points.
badkarma lost 27 points.
-lionheart- lost 37 points.
irondukeis Victorious! You have been awarded an outstanding 100 points. Well done!
I would have thought that ironduke would have won 205 points. The total of the four losing players.
Please help

Can you give me a link to the game?

 

[-LionHeart-]

Play Risk Free - Major Command Risk Online Strategy Game

www.majorcommand.com

The same thing happened in this game,
It should have awarded me almost 400 points for eliminating 8 opponents in a game of assassin mode, and it only tells me that it awards me 100 points

 

[-LionHeart-]

Can you give me a link to the game?

Play Risk Free - Major Command Risk Online Strategy Game

www.majorcommand.com

This is the game that riskyone comments on,
that also happened

 

[Biliam82]

Is there a limit to points? I think I should have gotten more than 100pts, but got 100.

Play Risk Free - Major Command Risk Online Strategy Game

www.majorcommand.com

 

[periwinkle]

There was a limit of 100 that you can lose....but there shouldn't be a limit on how much you can win. Unless it's a 1v1 game. Time to check the code to make sure the limits are done correctly?

 

[NewSheriffInTown]

There was a limit of 100 that you can lose....but there shouldn't be a limit on how much you can win. Unless it's a 1v1 game. Time to check the code to make sure the limits are done correctly?

That's exactly right.

We implemented the 100 point max rule last week, but it seems like it was accidently implemented per game, not per player. I already informed Ian and he said he would roll out a fix asap.

I think we will need to keep track of players and games that may have been "short changed" in a new thread. I'll do that when I get back home tomorrow. I'm away at the moment.

Currently we do not have a way to manually add points, but we will create a way, and then adjust any missing points at that time.

 

[riskyone]

Play Risk Free - Major Command Risk Online Strategy Game

www.majorcommand.com

This is the game that riskyone comments on,
that also happened

Thanks LionHeart, For posting this. Glad to see I'm not crazy. Well not totally. Just 50% crazy

 

[riskyone]

Thanks LionHeart, For posting this. Glad to see I'm not crazy. Well not totally. Just 50% crazy

I checked a few games and noticed this. I will look more later.
It said I won 134 points on the screen, but look
18/05/24 20:55:01

firestorm
lost 22 points.
18/05/24 20:55:01

calume
lost 24 points.
18/05/24 20:55:01

elricsbiscuit
lost 23 points.
18/05/24 20:55:01

tankeater
lost 17 points.
18/05/24 20:55:01

braveheart1
lost 12 points.
18/05/24 20:55:01

sabdal83
lost 12 points.
18/05/24 20:55:01

tonymans
lost 12 points.
18/05/24 20:55:01

zadock
lost 12 points.
18/05/24 20:55:01

riskyone
is Victorious! You have been awarded an outstanding 100 points. Well done!
GAME ENDED

62562 9 player Australia Escalate Unlimited Path Singles

 

[periwinkle]

Currently we do not have a way to manually add points, but we will create a way, and then adjust any missing points at that time.

Oh good. By then the nukes tourney will be completed in time to manually adjust points

 

[gipper624]

Can you also check game 62610? I won but didn't see any change to my score, though it also said I won the game in '0-2138313 seconds'. I see you may not be able to manually add points but I'm curious to see if there was a glitch

 

[edsdad]

Just finished a game that pushed my score to 1864 and the score for Sergeant is 1800, my rank stayed the same. Is there a delay before the rank changes ?

Just won another big game. Points are now 2035, still no change in rank.

 

[NewSheriffInTown]

UPDATE:

Ian has implemented a fix, so now you should be able to win more than 100 points in a game.

However, a single player still cannot lose more than 100 points to another player at any given time.

In terms of all the games affected between May 4th and May 23rd, we will do a database query to look at them all, but meanwhile, please post your missing points requests (and tournament point requests) in our new POINTS REQUEST THREAD.

Thanks!

 

[MNatt]

I had a look at the scoreboard just now and I wonder if there's some sort of glitch with it. It is showing a cadet in the all-time top few, and 2 or 3 other cadets also in the top 20 or 30. Which seems odd. If it's correct, fair play to them - though I wonder how they find time to eat!. But thought I'd draw it to your attention in case there's some sort of number-crunching-weirdness going on.

 

[NewSheriffInTown]

I had a look at the scoreboard just now and I wonder if there's some sort of glitch with it. It is showing a cadet in the all-time top few, and 2 or 3 other cadets also in the top 20 or 30. Which seems odd. If it's correct, fair play to them - though I wonder how they find time to eat!. But thought I'd draw it to your attention in case there's some sort of number-crunching-weirdness going on.

Yeah, that was the main reason we were not able to count points in April like I originally promised. It was because we had some players playing between 100-150 games a month. I don't know what to say, but at least I hope they are having fun!

And the only glitch we have that I know of, is that the ranks are not changing with the points. Well, not a glitch per se, but rather something we still need to implement.