Comments | projectyl: Hunt '09 Recap, Part 2: The First Half of Outer Zyzzlvaria

projectyl

Hunt '09 Recap, Part 2: The First Half of Outer Zyzzlvaria

Jan 29, 2009 23:38

(Note: From here on out, I'm grouping things by round. This order differs wildly from actual chronological order of solving.)

( I am recapping the a-re-a of beautiful Zyzzlva-ri-a... )

Comments 15

dalryaug January 30 2009, 04:57:29 UTC

Actually, Geek Drama had definitely fallen earlier because I asked ertchin to resolve it when we realized the nature of the round. I believe you mean Fantasy Magnoball League there. That was the fifth set of answers we got from that round.

projectyl January 30 2009, 05:02:25 UTC

I knew that sounded wrong as I was writing it. Edited.

jedusor January 30 2009, 04:59:15 UTC

half-jokingly suggested ORLANDO'S BELOVEDS for the last part ("Of course! Mickey Mouse and Donald Duck!")

NO. Johnny Depp and Viggo Mortensen. You have known me long enough to know this.

devjoe January 30 2009, 11:44:17 UTC

Also suggested was Dawn (the female singers who performed with Tony Orlando in the 70s).

ertchin January 30 2009, 05:17:26 UTC

"Ha ha! The plural of 'beloved'! What crazy wrong thing will we put into these blanks next?"

*shakes head*

tinhorn2 January 30 2009, 05:24:15 UTC

Wasn't me on the Harvoid meta, so possibly Dart.

(Great recap, by the way!)

(The comment has been removed)

projectyl January 30 2009, 06:24:45 UTC

In Evil Midnight's case, if I'm remembering the story correctly, the problem wasn't a transcription error; they didn't have the physical dice until after it was far too late to change anything, and they'd designed the meta under the assumption (which turned out to be wrong for some dice) that opposite sides would always add up to the same number. They made the new reward images to reflect the actual dice, but somehow the old ones were uploaded instead.

foggyb January 30 2009, 11:20:40 UTC

That's not quite accurate...at some point, I may tell the full story, but there was a lot of misconception going on about the dice in question, which ultimately did have sides adding up to the same number.

cananian January 30 2009, 17:36:14 UTC

I think the problem relates to 0-based vs 1-based dice? If you use 6-sided dice, the 1 and the 6 are opposite, so all the opposite sides add up to 7. For 10-sided dice, you might think that 1 and 10 would be opposite, and all the sides would sum to 11. But in fact our dice started at 0, so all the sides summed to *9* instead, and 0 and *9* are opposite instead of 1 and 10. Then, we have the issue that the 0 is to be treated as a 10 and word numbering still starts at 1 -- but I don't think the "starting at 1" was ever an issue for the constructors, just for the solvers. I could be wrong, though.