[New script required] New checker required - Matrix Wherigo and Letterbox

Hi,

Is it possible to create a challenge chekcer for the following:

81 matrix completed with only Letterboxes and Wherigos
With: minimum required 10 Wherigo D-T's and minimum 10 Letterboxes D'-T's

Do you have a GCcode for us

Oops, sorry

Gccode is GC84J9E

Here is the link https://project-gc.com/Challenges/GC84J9E/70046

Please test and reply

Works great, but is it possible to set to at least 25 Letterbox and at least 25 wherigo?

Good afternoon,

Is it possible to change the checker "https://project-gc.com/Challenges/GC84J9E/70046";

from 10 Letterboxes and 10 wherigo's to 30 LB and 30WIG

And of course still full 81 matrix with Letterboxes and Wherigo only

Thanks in advance

Config adjusted and please test

Dear Scripters,

The link above works, but not exactly as I had in mind...

The challenge should be complete 81 matrix filled with Letterbox/Wherigo,
with 30 UNIQUE DT for Letterbox and 30 other UNIQUE DT for Wherigo

Is this possible?

I can not find a solution and disabled my checker.

This probably requires a new script or extension

I have modified my fizzy mixed-bag checker, such that you can specify and/or/not operations for the criteria, and added a flag, so that a criteria is not allowed to be satisfied by finds in other DTs. I've tagged it for this challenge, so that you need 30 LBs, 30 WIGs, and 21 LBs or WIGs (which don't overlap). Here's the checker:

https://project-gc.com/Challenges/GC84J9E/74117

I feel like the output is a little janky... but not really sure how to make it more intuitive. Let us know.

Hi,

This seems only partially working.
The part for 30 Unique WIG and 30 Unique LB works.

But cachers who do not complete the 81 matrix in Total now qualify for the challenge, which is not according to the idea of the challenge.

Challenge idea is:
81 matrix complete with WIG and LB only
At least 30 Unique DT WIG
At least 30 Unique DT LB

So many bugs, so little time... :) There was a type-o in the script, causing the AND/OR sub-conditions to always evaluate to true, when they shouldn't have. I think you'll find it works now... try again and let us know.

Hi

Thanks a lot for your effort. It seems improved, no more false passes,
but when a player doesn't fulfill there's an error message now:

"[string ""]:489: Script error. We could not find a suitable cache for this criteria, but the initial test indicated there was one."

Could you give me the name of the person you're testing? I tried a few users who don't pass (eg. somebody with zero finds, and somebody with a few LBs + WIGs), and they seem to work (ie. no error).

i tried

Yvn-Geeert
B&M Jonker
DeOOpies

stilol getting the error with these names



*Edit: with a user with 0 WIG and LB founds, I get no error



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/06/2023 05:02PM by OmeErik. (view changes)

I think I see the problem now, although it's not immediately clear to me how to fix it (easily). I'll have a think on it and get back to you.

Thanks for all your effort!

Okay, I think I finally found the applicable bug in the script. I've retagged the challenge, so you need 30 DTs of LBs, 30 DTs of Wherigos, and 21 spaces of either LBs or Wherigos (making a total of 81, so you require a full fizzy of LBs+WIGs). I had originally tagged it using multiple fizzy tests, but it looks like there still might be a bug there, as this script hasn't ever been used for multiple mixed bag fizzies before.

I tested the three profiles you mentioned with the fix and the tag. They don't get script errors anymore, and correctly say that they don't pass (because they all have 30 LBs + 30 WIGs, but not the full fizzy of LBs + WIGs). I've also tested a few people that pass (you + me), and also some who completely fail all, and that seems to work as well.

https://project-gc.com/Challenges/GC84J9E/74313

Test it out, and let us know!

This thread has not received any further feedback and will therefor be moved to ARCHIVE Checker requests (completed). Should the requester have any queries he can raise his question on this thread in the archived section