8500 sounds pretty low to me. I'll check something using overall placings from yesterday to see how it would scale with levels. BBIAF

It doesn't look like it's marking the Epic complete...Wes and Salami passed the mark but still have incompletes...

Yesterday stats
2nd number is player level
4th number is the 6 total


1 171 6 8605
2 167 6 9335
3 165 6 8173
4 163 6 8272
5 162 6 8193
6 161 6 7905
7 161 6 8188
8 158 6 8928
9 157 6 8663
10 156 6 8045
11 155 6 9329
12 155 6 8382
13 154 6 8250
14 153 6 9730
15 152 6 8750
16 152 6 8450
17 152 6 7602
18 151 6 7687
19 150 6 7912
20 150 6 7873
21 150 6 9395
22 149 6 9249
23 148 6 8780
24 147 6 8039
25 147 6 9151
26 147 6 8770
27 146 6 8221
28 146 6 8256
29 140 6 9574
30 140 6 7271
31 139 6 8631
32 139 6 5514
33 139 6 7054
34 136 6 9018
35 136 6 8666
36 136 6 6495
37 136 6 7393
38 135 6 5573
39 135 6 6813
40 134 6 8705
41 134 6 7319
42 133 6 8283
43 132 6 8055
44 132 6 8550
45 132 6 8618
46 132 6 7485
47 130 6 7657
48 130 6 7389
49 128 6 8394
50 128 6 9388
51 128 6 7126
52 127 6 7837
53 127 6 8007
54 126 6 9853
55 126 6 7613
56 126 6 7087
57 126 6 7402
58 126 6 7967
59 122 6 8444
60 122 6 5613
61 121 6 8017
62 121 6 7987
63 121 6 7823
64 121 6 6681
65 120 6 7503
66 120 6 8834
67 120 6 7380
68 120 6 4916
69 119 6 7975
70 117 6 8133
71 116 6 7484
72 116 6 5877
73 116 6 8854
74 115 6 8108
75 115 6 8580
76 115 6 7128
77 114 6 7455
78 114 6 8415
79 113 6 7694
80 113 6 6958
81 112 6 4468
82 112 6 7690
83 112 6 7261
84 112 6 5535
85 110 6 7294
86 109 6 7363
87 109 6 7940
88 108 6 6888
89 108 6 3521
90 107 6 8122
91 107 6 3084
92 106 6 6405
93 105 6 6791
94 105 6 7827
95 104 6 7194
96 104 6 9001
97 103 6 6159
98 102 6 7814
99 102 6 3078
100 102 6 2787
101 102 6 8407
102 102 6 5610
103 101 6 6987
104 101 6 8282
105 100 6 6087
106 99 6 7973
107 98 6 7519
108 96 6 7488
109 95 6 8189
110 95 6 7370
111 95 6 6036
112 94 6 4032
113 94 6 7036
114 93 6 6933
115 92 6 7165
116 91 6 6523
117 91 6 6857
118 91 6 7092
119 88 6 4933
120 85 6 8003
121 84 6 8387
122 84 6 3312
123 84 6 7665
124 81 6 7882
125 81 6 6305
126 81 6 8082
127 80 6 7971
128 79 6 4218
129 77 6 6663
130 72 6 6329
131 70 6 7047
132 67 6 7249
133 62 6 6442
134 61 6 7324
135 58 6 6654
136 57 6 7499
137 38 6 4174
138 34 6 6620

yeah, the completion check isn't in yet since im fiddling with nums

Hold up. Since when was kad's lower than mine? :-P Mine looks doable, in fact, downright easy after that other one.

( I think Wesley lives in a fantasy world where he thinks everyone scores 100% on everything like him )

Mine says: "You must collect (dum di dum) points in each of the following (dum di dum)" and nothing is underlined apart from mode - and the mode shown is the hardest one.

And if that's 15% I hate to think what 100% was, my calculator doesn't go that high.

Flopsy, you can score 1000 points for a 10 Q quiz in game mode.

Have my goals always been higher than yours before?

If so, it's because of level range modifications.

Your numbers confim my analysis I did a different way.

If I take about 75th percentile in your list (25% are better), by level groups, I get a decent approach with

150+ : 9000
140s: 8800
130s: 8600
120s: 8400
110s: 8200
100s: 8000
90s: 7800
80s: 7600
and so on.

You're right, Terry, Wes is incredibly good... He managed 9500, which is pretty high for most players. I did better than average today, and only manage 8522. I think between 8500 and 9,000 is a good number. Like mentioned before, we don't want it to be impossible.

Speaking of which, I got 8522, my goal is 8511, and it says incomplete.

Okay, but do we really want a 75% failure rate?

I think a 50/50 would be more in line.

Remember that the stats are skewed because only players who played those games appeared on the list. A lot of players will get that challenge and play unfamiliar games. It's a mini-badge. We don't want to be too evil.

You sure? :-P

That's a good method, Wes. 9,000 isn't too terrible. :P

But perhaps simply viewing levels isn't the best. I have no skill in some of the games, so average scores could be looked at as it does for the other challenges, and add it up based on our average score, plus a few hundred for added difficulty. That way, players like you would get 9500, and players like me would get about 8500. :P


Some people don't do well in the games, just have tons of points and get levels that way. It looks like a good point system you have there, but perhaps it's not the greatest in that respect.

Is it possible to have the number automatically created based on each individual player's averages of the games?

Hmmm... for 50%, we'd actually want 5400 + lev * 20, in that case 8500 at 155 is of course correct. I interpreted "difficult but not impossible" closer to a 75% effort.

It's a confusion caused by the wording. You can score 1000/1000 but you'll still only get 150 points - I interpreted it to mean FT points, and I'm pretty sure I wouldn't be the only one!

So, an example for what I attempted to suggest...

Player A: Averages total of 950 in A, 450 in B, etc, total average of 6250, add a few hundred for added difficulty, that particular player gets 6450 as their goal.

That might be a level 140 player. A level 80 player that is really good at games (a few come to mind) might get 8500 as their goal. Just depends on each person.


If that's possible. :P

I think the current values would trip up a good deal of players who dont play the games regularly.

I doubt I'd pass my requirement, lol

Salami, the problem is that many players will not have meaningful averages for all six games.

1,000 points in game mode is near impossible. You have to click the answer as it is appearing, and the timer starts before the fourth option is even visible at times. I find 99 per question to be about right for a very simple quiz that you can answer quickly, with an occasional 100 points... Very unlikely. Near impossible to score 1,000.


Not that it matters; just saying.

I, myself, only play two of the games listed on a regular basis.

You're right, Wes, that's true.


Hmmm, your method perhaps works best. Or whatever that 5400 and level * 20 thing was, too complicated for me, but it seemed to work out. :P

Yes, like me. I've not touched Pot of Gold before....But Salami has a point, not all level 60ers are created equal. :-P I'm pretty sure that some people my level will do tons better than me.

Still, even taking 10 seconds to answer each question, that's 900 points, which is still a bunch.

So what are everyone's thoughts on the orange one before I move on... too much stuff?

Too many categories? Too many points required?

Or does it look fair?

I guess it looks fair. Fair enough to me, anyhow, although I'm still not sure about categorizing people by level.

For my goals, it seems quite doable. The points required are easy enough to get for each category, but perhaps the number of categories could be lowered by a couple. Many of them I don't play on a regular basis because I know nothing about the subjects and have to Google...

I was also speaking from experience.... I'm level 154, but my scores are VERY low in comparison to most other level 150+ers... That's why player based seemed good. Some players have 20,000,000 points and reach level 150, others have 120 badges that gave them those levels... I stink at PoG, others excel. If a player is a quiz-author and point-earner, they could have 60 in points, 10 in quiz-writing, plus 5 or so with point earning only... That's level 75. Throw in a few hourly badges and other assorted badges, it's not too difficult to reach level 120 or so without being too terribly good at the games.


That's the only reason I figure that basing it on levels isn't that great, but there really is not much of a choice; otherwise it's too difficult to come up with numbers.


Of course, I will love whatever is chosen, and will do my darndest to win it regardless, so it doesn't really matter.

Well you DID win it with 8511 Salami :P