Talk:Challenge difficulty - Revision history

2943411: /* Texas example error */ layout fix

2021-06-27T14:16:29Z

Texas example error: layout fix

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:16, 27 June 2021
Line 16:		Line 16:

	The formula states:		The formula states:
	3$worldPercent + 5$countryPercent + 10*$regionPercent		:3$worldPercent + 5$countryPercent + 10*$regionPercent
	In the Texas example; it's...		In the Texas example; it's...
	3$regionPercent + 5$countryPercent + 10*$worldPercent		:3$regionPercent + 5$countryPercent + 10*$worldPercent

	Also note that when any of these percentages increases; the Challenge difficulty also increases when decrease would be expected.		Also note that when any of these percentages increases; the Challenge difficulty also increases when decrease would be expected.

2943411: /* Texas example error */ new section

2021-06-27T02:27:37Z

Texas example error: new section

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:27, 27 June 2021
Line 12:		Line 12:
	:::[[User:3305483\|3305483]] ([[User talk:3305483\|talk]]) 19:49, 24 June 2021 (CEST)		:::[[User:3305483\|3305483]] ([[User talk:3305483\|talk]]) 19:49, 24 June 2021 (CEST)
	Sounds great. Have a great time.		Sounds great. Have a great time.

			== Texas example error ==

			The formula states:
			3$worldPercent + 5$countryPercent + 10*$regionPercent
			In the Texas example; it's...
			3$regionPercent + 5$countryPercent + 10*$worldPercent

			Also note that when any of these percentages increases; the Challenge difficulty also increases when decrease would be expected.

2566135: Well wishes

2021-06-25T14:38:55Z

Well wishes

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:38, 25 June 2021
Line 11:		Line 11:
	:::Yes, the code is correct. I posted the code so that the error in the Wiki article could be detected and corrected. I won't have time to look at it myself until next week. On a five days long gc-trip/mini vacation.		:::Yes, the code is correct. I posted the code so that the error in the Wiki article could be detected and corrected. I won't have time to look at it myself until next week. On a five days long gc-trip/mini vacation.
	:::[[User:3305483\|3305483]] ([[User talk:3305483\|talk]]) 19:49, 24 June 2021 (CEST)		:::[[User:3305483\|3305483]] ([[User talk:3305483\|talk]]) 19:49, 24 June 2021 (CEST)
			Sounds great. Have a great time.

3305483: Add sig

2021-06-24T17:49:48Z

Add sig

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:49, 24 June 2021
Line 10:		Line 10:

	:::Yes, the code is correct. I posted the code so that the error in the Wiki article could be detected and corrected. I won't have time to look at it myself until next week. On a five days long gc-trip/mini vacation.		:::Yes, the code is correct. I posted the code so that the error in the Wiki article could be detected and corrected. I won't have time to look at it myself until next week. On a five days long gc-trip/mini vacation.
			:::[[User:3305483\|3305483]] ([[User talk:3305483\|talk]]) 19:49, 24 June 2021 (CEST)

3305483: Reply

2021-06-24T17:49:12Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:49, 24 June 2021
Line 8:		Line 8:

	::The confusion appears to be with how the percents are calculated and that is not in the code.		::The confusion appears to be with how the percents are calculated and that is not in the code.

			:::Yes, the code is correct. I posted the code so that the error in the Wiki article could be detected and corrected. I won't have time to look at it myself until next week. On a five days long gc-trip/mini vacation.

2566135: comment on code

2021-06-24T17:45:47Z

comment on code

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:45, 24 June 2021
Line 6:		Line 6:
	:https://pastebin.com/tWMZFKHe		:https://pastebin.com/tWMZFKHe
	:[[User:3305483\|3305483]] ([[User talk:3305483\|talk]]) 18:10, 24 June 2021 (CEST)		:[[User:3305483\|3305483]] ([[User talk:3305483\|talk]]) 18:10, 24 June 2021 (CEST)

			::The confusion appears to be with how the percents are calculated and that is not in the code.

3305483: Formatting

2021-06-24T17:14:25Z

Formatting

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:14, 24 June 2021
Line 3:		Line 3:
	Consider the case where 100% of cachers in the region, 100% in the country and 100% in the world all qualify. This would be an easy challenge. But by the example on the page, this would have a high score.		Consider the case where 100% of cachers in the region, 100% in the country and 100% in the world all qualify. This would be an easy challenge. But by the example on the page, this would have a high score.

	:You are correct, something is wrong but I haven't had the time to check it, not available this week.		:You are correct, something is wrong but I haven't had the time to check it, not available this week. Here is the code a bit simplified, I already had it available.
			:https://pastebin.com/tWMZFKHe
	Here is the code a bit simplified, I already had it available.		:[[User:3305483\|3305483]] ([[User talk:3305483\|talk]]) 18:10, 24 June 2021 (CEST)

	https://pastebin.com/tWMZFKHe

	[[User:3305483\|3305483]] ([[User talk:3305483\|talk]]) 18:10, 24 June 2021 (CEST)

3305483: Real code

2021-06-24T16:10:21Z

Real code

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:10, 24 June 2021
Line 2:		Line 2:

	Consider the case where 100% of cachers in the region, 100% in the country and 100% in the world all qualify. This would be an easy challenge. But by the example on the page, this would have a high score.		Consider the case where 100% of cachers in the region, 100% in the country and 100% in the world all qualify. This would be an easy challenge. But by the example on the page, this would have a high score.

			:You are correct, something is wrong but I haven't had the time to check it, not available this week.

			Here is the code a bit simplified, I already had it available.

			https://pastebin.com/tWMZFKHe

			[[User:3305483\|3305483]] ([[User talk:3305483\|talk]]) 18:10, 24 June 2021 (CEST)

2566135: Added clarifying example

2021-06-24T16:04:00Z

Added clarifying example

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:04, 24 June 2021
Line 1:		Line 1:
	The percentage description do not seem to make sense. The more people who can find a cache the lower the difficulty should go. The formula shown here has it increasing. I suspect it is people who do not qualify.		The percentage description do not seem to make sense. The more people who can find a cache the lower the difficulty should go. The formula shown here has it increasing. I suspect it is people who do not qualify.

			Consider the case where 100% of cachers in the region, 100% in the country and 100% in the world all qualify. This would be an easy challenge. But by the example on the page, this would have a high score.

2566135: Created page with "The percentage description do not seem to make sense. The more people who can find a cache the lower the difficulty should go. The formula shown here has it increasing. I s..."

2021-06-24T13:17:43Z

Created page with "The percentage description do not seem to make sense. The more people who can find a cache the lower the difficulty should go. The formula shown here has it increasing. I s..."

New page

The percentage description do not seem to make sense. The more people who can find a cache the lower the difficulty should go. The formula shown here has it increasing. I suspect it is people who do not qualify.