@Paul-Winterhalder , could you please respond to @noah 's inquiry?

Thanks for the reply.

I checked the Deployment settings and tested the behavior, but it looks like there is currently no option to prevent Promotions from being overwritten during deployment.

The available “Do Not overwrite product/pricing information” option does not seem to apply to Promotions.

Thanks again for checking this.

Hi @gyutaelee I am bringing this to the dev team for further discussion. thank you for suggesting it.

Thanks @Brad-Hester !

Thank you for your helpful response. I will proceed as you suggested.

It's been resolved. Thank you for your response!

Dear @dbgtdbz2 ,

About your feature request #1, “Please allow specifying items as conditions for purchasing virtual or bundle items."

I have developed a mockup for this feature.

If we add your Prerequisite Items request to the system as shown, will this work for your needs?

Note that in this implementation, the prerequisite requirement applies only to a Virtual Currency transaction. PrereqItemsMockup.png

Please let me know at your convenience,
Regards,
John H
-Design

Hey, thanks for reaching out. To answer your main question directly: yes, brainCloud's lobby and matchmaking system can trigger an Edgegap server deployment automatically. You do not need to build a custom C++ room server to make this work.

https://github.com/getbraincloud/examples-cpp/tree/develop/relaytestapp

The relaytestapp example on the develop branch of examples-cpp is a working client example that does exactly what you are describing. It uses brainCloud lobbies and matchmaking to find a match, and once the lobby is ready to launch, brainCloud handles spinning up the Edgegap server and passes the connection details back to all players through RTT.
The server configuration you see in the screenshot is what ties everything together on the brainCloud side. That entry defines which Edgegap application to deploy, which regions to consider based on the selected beacons, and the credentials needed to make the deployment call. Once that server is linked to a lobby type, the entire launch sequence is handled for you.
The relaytestapp is a solid starting point to see this end to end.
Screenshot 2026-05-07 at 12.13.17 PM.png

@Paul-Winterhalder Hello! Here is my app Id "15675

Q1: The removed player is completely excluded from reward calculation, so if the deletion happens before the job runs, that player is never iterated over and receives no rank or rewards.
Q2: Yes, the modified score will be used. The job always reads live state. Note that whether the score actually gets modified depends on the leaderboard type (e.g., for the LOW_VALUE type, only updates if the new score is less than the existing)
Q3: No backfilling, the next joiner goes to the latest instance, not the freed spot in ^2. No loop over earlier instances (^1, ^2) ever happens. The next joiner goes to ^3 (or ^4 if ^3 is full). The freed spot in ^2 stays empty permanently.

The aggregation that counts new users is not real time, it runs at hourly granularity, so there can be a delay before the stats reflect the actual number of users. At the time of checking again, the numbers had updated as follows
image.png

Hi @noah ,

This support has already been added to the Builder API. The new options can be specified when importing app configuration data OR when deploying an app.

When importing app configuration data, there is a new optional 'preserveDivisionSetConfigsOverride' parameter that can be specified. If not specified, it will default to whatever the value is for 'preserveLeaderboardTournamentConfigs'.

When deploying from one app to another, there is a new optional 'divisionSetConfigOverrides' parameter that can be specified in the 'options.meta.excludes' section. If not specified, it will default to whatever the value is for 'leaderboardsTournaments'.

I will endeavour to get our Builder API docs updated with these new parameters. Let us know if you encounter any issues using them.

Thanks!
Greg

The structure is such that the certificate and template are distributed simultaneously.
What I need is to distribute only the template, excluding the certificate.

@moondory77 - why would you need/want to update a tournament in progress?

We consider the tournament to be a contract between the player and the game dev. You enter this tournament. You have <X> hours to compete. And you can win <Y> in prizes.

Changing the rules half-way through the tournament seems unfair? You are changing the duration? The prizes? These are both things that the player did not agree to.

Anyway - that was the assumption of the system - and it's why once a tournament is started any changes you make to the tournament get queued up for the NEXT tournament cycle, not the current one.

That said - divisions are even more complicated - as even if we wanted to there would be potentially thousands of records to update to make the change.

I need to better understand your use case to consider this request.

Paul.

FYI, you can use the Report service APIs to retrieve this data: https://docs.braincloudservers.com/api/capi/report/

We’re planning some major changes to our push notification system, it’s more than just adding a few titles and content fields to the templates. It's not a near-term, stay tuned!

Symptom
After updating from 5.9.2 to 5.9.3, iOS/iPadOS experiences gradual performance degradation during extended play sessions, eventually leading to app termination
This issue did not occur on 5.9.2
Suspected Code
In BrainCloudComms.cs - HandleResponseBundle, the following line was added in 5.9.3:

jsonData = JsonWriter.Serialize(JsonReader.Deserialize(jsonData));
Concerns
This performs a full deserialize → reserialize on every API response
Immediately after, DeserializeJsonBundle parses the same data again — effectively parsing every response twice
Each response generates a large number of temporary objects (Dictionary, List, boxed values, strings) that are immediately discarded
On iOS with IL2CPP (Boehm GC), could this repeated allocation/deallocation pattern cause managed heap growth over time?
Question
Could this code potentially contribute to memory-related issues on iOS during extended play sessions?