If it's a legacy challenge, it probably has the attribute because HQ's automated identification of challenges just didn't have the nuance and misidentified it. Not sure why it shouldn't be allowed. You could in theory do a "modern" one, by just not associating the checker with the GCcode. As for counting as a challenge... technically, you're checking the attby bmuzzin - Miscellaneous
I'm trying to develop calendar challenges for the highest/lowest/most favorited for each day of the year... the problem is that, the methods for getting those caches don't provide much ability to do filtering, and will only return 1000 results. So, if all the days of the year are not represented within the first 1000 results, then it's difficult to figure out what the "most exby bmuzzin - Miscellaneous
Yes, if you just don't included "needed" at all in the tag, it does the generally requested thing... eg. requires every day of the year, except leap day.by bmuzzin - ARCHIVE Checker requests (completed)
GCBH460 already published and has a checker... perhaps there is some misunderstanding here?by bmuzzin - ARCHIVE Checker requests (completed)
Hi there - You can use: https://project-gc.com/Challenges/GCBY243/119403 Test it out and let us know.by bmuzzin - ARCHIVE Checker requests (completed)
Hi there - You can use: https://project-gc.com/Challenges/GCBY23P/119402 Test it out and let us know.by bmuzzin - ARCHIVE Checker requests (completed)
Updated the script to support this, and the tag... should now have have # of passes per row. (You can also now add the number of passes per column).They match your examples.by bmuzzin - ARCHIVE Checker requests (completed)
Hi there - You can use: https://project-gc.com/Challenges/GCBY227/119400 Test it out and let us know.by bmuzzin - ARCHIVE Checker requests (completed)
Looks to be an issue in the recent privacy changes. You have an owner of a cache you've found set their privacy settings on full. You should message the script owner and let them know of the issue. ... however, this checker doesn't actually do the proper check anyhow, because the CO says you can't "use them" to fulfill the requirements, and the script doesn't exclby bmuzzin - ARCHIVE Checker requests (impossible)
Full disclosure - I didn't write this function. It does seem like there's a bug, but I think I would like to explicitly give a parameter to limit the number of caches including in the sum, rather than implicitly using numFinds. Because, there's a situation, where you'd want both a sum of the total FPs, and a minimum number of them found. Eg. The total sum must be 1000, butby bmuzzin - ARCHIVE Checker requests (completed)
Updated tag (just needed to add "minFavoritePoints":5).by bmuzzin - ARCHIVE Checker requests (completed)
Yes, but this is what I was saying above, in that checker, there's no "consecutive" requirements, which is what really makes it much more difficult. I'd you just wanted a similar thing, where they've found X number of each of Y types on different days (instead of grid squares), that's already implemented.by bmuzzin - ARCHIVE Checker requests (impossible)
My script already does this for the "unique group" func... And a bunch of other tricks. But, it's still an extremely large search space, that could easily get "stuck" in a large branch that has to continually backtrack. A* might work better, but it would need a lot of tuning I think. I guess I'm not sure if the effort is really worth it - the challenge could simpby bmuzzin - ARCHIVE Checker requests (impossible)
Chiming in here - regardless of whether the challenge is acceptable or not.... Implementing the checker is a different story. This is a problem of choosing a member from a group, to satisfy conditions. In this case, it's a full calendar, so there's 365 groups (with each type you found that day). The choices are also interdependent, so your choice of one might need to be reconsidered ifby bmuzzin - ARCHIVE Checker requests (impossible)
I can confirm that's the longest streaking challenge in the world. I coincidentally have 1445 day streak.... Take my advice: bring a ?@$%! ladder and save yourself a world of pain.by bmuzzin - Miscellaneous
Hi there - You've been waiting a while... here's my attempt: https://project-gc.com/Challenges/GC2W6WE/117600 The first part seems to be working - I am unsure about the owner's part... I don't think I have any coyote or roadrunner owner finds, and it says you don't either. Not sure if that's true or not, if you know of somebody with that name, it would be goodby bmuzzin - ARCHIVE Checker requests (completed)
Alrighty... had to modify the script a bit... but I think it's all good now. - False positive fixed - if you don't have any available cache (eg. if like me you don't have MN finds), it gives you -125 points, so you automatically fail. - Distances in the cache outputs are printed in miles now. Note this doesn't check the #3 rule (have the checker give a fail for a user wby bmuzzin - ARCHIVE Checker requests (completed)
I'd like to fix the false positive first... I find once someone posted that they used a PGC checker (even if it's not associated directly with the cache), then others will pick up on that, and if the checker gives false positives then it's up to the CO to delete those. False negatives are less of a problem. Anyhow - I'll see if I can fix that later tonight.by bmuzzin - ARCHIVE Checker requests (completed)
Alright, well... some improvement was made, not quite there yet. The "points" are now in miles, but the distances listed are in meters still... and it doesn't appear there's enough size in the tag left to do much, so that's going to take some thinking. It also lists the confluence point above both the points in the table and the output cache. It also now doesn't uby bmuzzin - ARCHIVE Checker requests (completed)
Hi there - You can use: https://project-gc.com/Challenges/GCBV2ZF/117485 Test it out and let us know.by bmuzzin - ARCHIVE Checker requests (completed)
Hi there - You can use: https://project-gc.com/Challenges/GCBV2WW/117484 Test it out and let us know.by bmuzzin - ARCHIVE Checker requests (completed)
Hi there - You can use: https://project-gc.com/Challenges/GCBV2XC/117483 Test it out and let us know.by bmuzzin - ARCHIVE Checker requests (completed)
Hi there - You can use: https://project-gc.com/Challenges/GCBV2WW/117482 Note: 5280ft converted to 1609m.by bmuzzin - ARCHIVE Checker requests (completed)
https://project-gc.com/Challenges//117477 It's close... it should show you now your find that is closest to the each confluence point, and the distance (in meters) from that, including the sum. I won't associate it with the cache, because it doesn't quite meet the challenge requirements, but it should be helpful to figure out what needs to be done to complete it. NOTE: Distanby bmuzzin - ARCHIVE Checker requests (completed)
Pretty sure I can do this without a new script........ let me take a look.by bmuzzin - ARCHIVE Checker requests (completed)
So... I've started to look at this, and I think the changes I made are fine... here's a new tag: https://project-gc.com/Challenges/GC8CW6X/117429 You put in the end-date gccode as the end_date. If you're logging a find on this (and not just logging a write note), it means that you have qualified at whatever date you're running the checker. If the following month, you fiby bmuzzin - ARCHIVE Checker requests (completed)
I think it would be possible, the data is all there. We know what date they found the particular cache, and which date all of their finds occurred on, and that doesn't change (unless they edit their found dates... But that's unlikely). I could modify my script to support that easily enough. I'm away until tomorrow, but I will see when I return. This would require a new checker tagby bmuzzin - ARCHIVE Checker requests (completed)
Should be good now... in the log output, it now says which consecutive months you achieved the challenge, and only lists the ones between those dates.by bmuzzin - ARCHIVE Checker requests (completed)
Shouldn't be that hard. I'll take a look and see if I can patch it tomorrow.by bmuzzin - ARCHIVE Checker requests (completed)
PGC.print(dump(finds)) is slow no matter what.by bmuzzin - ARCHIVE Checker requests (completed)
