The one I get (quite a lot!) says I have to be in the top five. So with yours that's two Triathlon challenges at least.

May I point out that first, the "table somewhere" was a list of players who had completed the most Daily Challenges. Sort of like Cumulative Mind Melt points. Second, no one said anything about putting Daily Challenges in the player's profile. Neither of these would have any affect on how many Daily Challenges are completed. In fact, seeing each other's progress would be via the Daily Challenges page. And third, I'm not quite getting your point, either.

means there is indeed something in the icebox (not a place to store bananas by the way). Is one to understand that there is another side to what is being stated whenever something is said? That truth is really just lies sometimes?

And as far as no one saying putting the numbers on the profile page, please read the thread...


Also, the point is not how many challenges are finished or completed but how many one sided challenges might get issued. Luck of the draw is not the same as a seeding sheet with vacancies.

Mariamir reiterated what I thought was meant by numbers on the profile; I don't get all the extra stuff you're throwing into it, as I've already said.




What?


I'm out on this one-- I just don't get it anymore (it's extremely confusing going back-and-forth, and I can only imagine how confusing it is for others who're looking here for answers).




As I already said, I'm not explaining this-- it's way too much of an aside and I think you're looking too deep into something that only needs to be read at surface level.

You read it as a dangling modifier. It is "the players who are on his/her profile" not "seeing the progress on the profile".

One sided challenges have nothing to do with this, besides, you still get the credits without a partner.

Okay most Daily challenges are set up to see if we can outdo ourselves. Then someone got interplayer challenges added to the mix (which is fine by me). Now some want player performance posted as if it were interplayer challenges as the point to the whole effort. I'm saying keep daily challenges as they are, with status and performance history on just the challenge page itself, not on profiles or in tables somewhere. It's that aspect of making the thing another competition between members that I do not want to see happen.

That's like saying that the Bus Ride is an interplayer game because we list who's completed the most quizzes. For some it may be; for others it isn't.

It's only a competition if you want it to be. This is the same argument as 'you don't need to play the challenges, even if you open the page'. It won't hurt anyone and it's certainly not a lose-lose.

I'm still confused about brains in this mix and 'being added to the challenges' and all that other stuff brought up before, but I'd rather not hear the reason for it. XD

Argument table

Kyleisalive...1
Kaddarsgirl..1
Mariamir.....1
mehaul.......0
--end of argu, er, report--

I'm not sure why this is being seen as an argument.

This forum is meant for feedback, and I understand why you don't want to post the challenge tallies on profile pages. Unfortunately, there are many who seem to want the opposite, not necessarily for competition's sake, but for their own achievements. People like to show their achieved goals-- it's part of the reason badges are so popular. Just because certain 'games' and activities on the site post numbers in charts or on profiles doesn't mean they're competitive in any sense. When was the last time you heard someone saying 'Haha, I'm beating you in the Monster Quiz!'?

The problem I'm noting here is that your posts have been confusing; I still don't know what certain elements (eg. brains, being added to challenges against one's will, etc.) have anything to do with your query, one posted in a thread about ideas for new challenges being added to the pool. When posts like these show up in the Feedback and Quiz Authoring forums, occasionally with information which is either misleading or incorrect, it only serves to make the truth more difficult to understand for not only those looking for answers to their questions in the moment, but everyone else looking at the threads for answers in later months or years. This is especially prevalent with answers from non-editors about the workings of the quiz queues in the Q&A forum.

Again, none of this is meant to be an argument. It is, however, frustrating trying to hash out what's being asked between elements which seem to have no connection, posts which seem to be jokes/plays-on-words/etc., and occasionally misleading follow-ups, sometimes from unreliable sources. Some of the people following up in here do have a great deal of experience working with the challenges-- most of the testers played *every* challenge including most of the epics, for instance. While it's perfectly constructive to have feedback back and forth about new topics in here, we need to be clear and we need to know that answers we're giving are not only true, but from people who can attest that it is true, otherwise people could be walking away with the complete wrong impression.

How about a challenge (if not already there but I haven't had it yet) of playing a certain amount of crosswords, the difficulty depending on the number of crosswords required? An alternative would be to play crosswords in a certain number of categories. Easy mode could be used for easy challenges, regular mode could be for medium or difficult challenges.

There is one for playing a (random picked) crossword. Difficult is no easy mode, I think simply "complete" is Medium. I've gotten it twice. And...never mind.

Thanks Mariamir. I'll look forward to getting that challenge

What Mariamir wants to say, but won't, is that there is also an Epic that has something to do with Crosswords as well, so you should be on the lookout for that too!

There's also an Easy level crossword challenge that pulls crosswords from the "Easier" rated puzzles, whereas the medium and difficult challenges, in addition to what Mariamir said about play requirements, are harder crosswords.

Quite true. I wasn't quite sure about spoiling the Epic surprise...

It's something to look forward to I was just putting an idea out there as I hadn't had a crossword challenge yet and no one had mentioned it to my recollection.

It is a good idea. Probably why it was added in the first place. Still, maybe something more can be done with the crosswords. Maybe play a crossword that's in one of the starred global categories or something.

I have the complete today as my medium, and I've had the hard one before (which I didn't do, as it was the most obscurist crossword probably on the site!) I was able to do the one today.

Considering that on the "Recently Complete Epic Daily Challenges" page, the purple flag is labelled as "Epic: Crossword", I don't think it spoils anything.

I also got an easy challenge to play any crossword in Television (in any mode). While Mariamar's idea sounds interesting, I think we've probably got enough crossword challenges.

Would you consider letting us trade challenges with each other?

It'd be limited to so many times per week, or only among team members, or have a purchasing cost or other limitations.

I honestly don't like the idea. We already have the ability to swap a challenge each week. And everything is random. I like the randomly unknown.

I thought the point of Daily Challenges was to be a personal challenge that varies from day to day. Trading defeats the object of that I feel. It also disadvantages those who do not know a lot of people.

Apologies if these are existing challenges that I have yet to meet!


-- Score a cumulative X points on the insta quizzes* today. (At 2 points per question, this could be Difficult, Medium or Easy depending on the amount of points required. Scores in their hundreds would be perfectly attainable even if they would take some dedication to the cause.)

-- Play X amount of insta quizzes today, scoring at least X points per quiz. (Easy)

-- Score a "perfect score" (20 points) (10/10) on the insta quiz*. (Or score 3/10/20 etc "perfect scores" in a day). Easy/Medium or Difficult rating depends on amount required.

-- Score X/10 on each of four quizzes in the International Hourly game in the same hour. Easy/Medium rating depends on amount required. A Difficult version might ask for the feat to repeated X times.



*I know you said, Terry, that you were getting rid of the insta quiz but I like it and you might have changed your mind.

Of those you mentioned there is the exact thing of the last one, the International games. You'll get it at some point. No instant quiz challenges, though.

The Instaquizzes have a problem - they're old, creaky, and Terry is probably going to remove them at some point. (I hope it's the point where we have another game where we can get an odd number of tiny points to do the precision badges, or the Twin challenge, or the Three Keys badge, etc. And despite what Wesley says about an alternate method, I have not yet found a better way to do it.)

I did the International quiz challenge this morning... had to get x/10 in all four country games in the same hour. I hate to say it but that game is creaky too.

A teammate of mine rather fancies winning the Daily Buccaneer badge by having all three levels of challenge on 199 and then cracking 200 for all three levels on the same day. He has different amount of challenges in easy, med and difficult at present so he's come up with an idea. A challenge at present costs 9 credits to buy. He'd like to see the ability to nominate which level of challenge you buy, with an increasing cost to buy the medium or difficult challenges. I don't mind the idea myself, but I'll tell him that he could always stop playing the easies and mediums until the difficult challenges catch up with them.

I'd suggest that you could choose the difficulty of the challenge (apart from epic) but for an increased cost. So, you can still choose to buy a challenge for 9 credits (or whatever the cost for buying the next challenge is), but you can buy a challenge and choose from easy, medium or difficult for about, say, 15 credits. No matter what difficulty you choose, the cost is the same.

The specially bought challenges would cost 3 more each time, but would also increase the cost of the normally bought challenges by 3. So, you could buy a challenge normally for 9 credits and then buy a challenge and choose that it's medium for 18 credits.

It would help people going for the 10 in a day - they could pick easy ones and have much to try much less (then again, maybe that's not a good thing), although they would have to save up for longer.

However, it would complicate things further (and I think that the challenges are already complicated enough, hearing what others have said) and I'm not sure that it would add much to the game. It might even make it worse - part of the fun is not knowing what you're going to get next. Sure, there's still 20 or so possibilities within a single difficulty level, but it does take some of the surprise element out of it.

And, there's another problem. I've heard it implied (possibly by Wes) that you can't get the same challenge twice in one day. I think Terry also said that not only that, but you can't receive 2 of the same type of challenges (e.g. score 5 in any international game [easy] and score 7/10 in all for international games [medium]) in one day either. With being able to choose the difficulty, it's not completely impossible for a player to buy all the easy (or whatever difficulty) challenges there are in one day. They come back to buy the next easy, and what happens? They've already played them all before, so they can't receive any of them. Does it just take their credits and do nothing? Does it refuse to let them buy another?

I think it's probably not worth bothering. Your friend can put a little bit of effort in to do what you mentioned anyway, if he/she is willing to purposefully fail a couple of challenges (like you said).

I don't think it should give the ability to choose which difficulty. During testing, we determined that the randomness was appealing... Winning ten in a day becomes less impressive when you win ten easy challenges and knowing you not get and midnight ending ones.

If this player wants to have199 for all three, might I suggest purposely NOT winning certain ones when te numbers are getting close?

I agree. I don't think there should be an option to choose the difficulty levels for bought challenges. The randomness makes it more interesting I think.

That's what I've already suggested to him if he's really keen on this idea. For the record, he already has the 10/day under his belt so he wouldn't use it for that. I thought I'd mention the idea here though. It might not be used in this particular format but it might be the germ of an idea that gets twisted into something else.

Quick, man! Get it out of there! It will turn brown!