Difference between revisions of "Template talk:Graticule Hopper"
From Geohashing
imported>Relet (New page: How about introducing subdivisions for this achievement. Something along the lines of * 25 graticules = Bronze/... Graticule Hopper * 50 graticules = Silver/... Graticule Hopper * 75 grat...) |
imported>Ekorren (Intermediate stages: Yes please. Which: No good idea...) |
||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
* 100 graticules = THE Graticule Hopper Achievement | * 100 graticules = THE Graticule Hopper Achievement | ||
But I was looking for a geekier, funnier type of scale. Those metals just don't cut it. -- [[User:relet|relet]] 10:41, 24 February 2009 (UTC) | But I was looking for a geekier, funnier type of scale. Those metals just don't cut it. -- [[User:relet|relet]] 10:41, 24 February 2009 (UTC) | ||
| + | |||
| + | :When I sorted the achievements into several categories (as a kind of a ToDo-list) a few days ago, this one went right into the "not interested" category because of being virtually impossible to even come near. So I'd strongly support intermediate stages. About a geeky scale - the only numbers that cross my mind there are 2<sup>n and 42. Still, I think it should have some linear scale (because the average effort gets larger for each additional graticule, so in effort it's still above-linear) and not start too low, so a 2<sup>n</sup> isn't probably that great for this achievement. --[[User:Ekorren|Ekorren]] 11:41, 24 February 2009 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 11:41, 24 February 2009
How about introducing subdivisions for this achievement. Something along the lines of
- 25 graticules = Bronze/... Graticule Hopper
- 50 graticules = Silver/... Graticule Hopper
- 75 graticules = Gold/... Graticule Hopper
- 100 graticules = THE Graticule Hopper Achievement
But I was looking for a geekier, funnier type of scale. Those metals just don't cut it. -- relet 10:41, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
- When I sorted the achievements into several categories (as a kind of a ToDo-list) a few days ago, this one went right into the "not interested" category because of being virtually impossible to even come near. So I'd strongly support intermediate stages. About a geeky scale - the only numbers that cross my mind there are 2n and 42. Still, I think it should have some linear scale (because the average effort gets larger for each additional graticule, so in effort it's still above-linear) and not start too low, so a 2n isn't probably that great for this achievement. --Ekorren 11:41, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
