Krillion Recorded answers
30,029 recorded answers
How to approach it
Work from the smallest scale outward rather than trying to recall a single famous object. List the categories that can satisfy the size test — planets, natural satellites, stars, nebulae, clusters, galaxies — and then ask which members of each you can actually name with confidence. Anything with a catalogue number or a Bayer-style letter counts, so you are not restricted to household names; star catalogues alone supply thousands of valid answers. Weigh your options by how distinctive they are, not by how impressive they sound: a well-known giant is safe but widely shared, while an obscure survey object is harder to verify but far less crowded. Before committing, sanity-check the diameter against the lunar baseline so you do not lose the point on a technicality.
Get a hint
Begin at the scale you can picture without effort and then widen the frame, because the answer does not have to be something famous, only something real and large enough to be measured.
A little more
Then think in terms of catalogues, since most qualifying objects are not famous at all: they carry numbers, Greek letters or survey codes instead of memorable names.
One step further
Finally stretch the scale to its extremes, because the biggest candidates can be whole galaxies or gas clouds spanning many times the width of any planet, and those uncommon answers tend to be worth more.
Reveal answers 30,029
- NGC 1751Deep Cut85points
- NGC 1752Deep Cut85points
- NGC 1753Deep Cut85points
- NGC 1755Deep Cut85points
- NGC 1756Deep Cut85points
- NGC 1758Deep Cut85points
- NGC 1759Deep Cut85points
- NGC 176Deep Cut85points
- NGC 1760Deep Cut85points
- NGC 1761Deep Cut85points
- NGC 1762Deep Cut85points
- NGC 1763Deep Cut85points
- NGC 1764Deep Cut85points
- NGC 1765Deep Cut85points
- NGC 1766Deep Cut85points
- NGC 1767Deep Cut85points
- NGC 1768Deep Cut85points
- NGC 1769Deep Cut85points
- NGC 177Deep Cut85points
- NGC 1770Deep Cut85points
- NGC 1771Deep Cut85points
- NGC 1772Deep Cut85points
- NGC 1773Deep Cut85points
- NGC 1774Deep Cut85points
- NGC 1775Deep Cut85points
- NGC 1776Deep Cut85points
- NGC 1777Deep Cut85points
- NGC 1778Deep Cut85points
- NGC 1779Deep Cut85points
- NGC 178Deep Cut85points
- NGC 1780Deep Cut85points
- NGC 1781Deep Cut85points
- NGC 1782Deep Cut85points
- NGC 1783Deep Cut85points
- NGC 1784Deep Cut85points
- NGC 1785Deep Cut85points
- NGC 1786Deep Cut85points
- NGC 1787Deep Cut85points
- NGC 1788Deep Cut85points
- NGC 1789Deep Cut85points
- NGC 179Deep Cut85points
- NGC 1791Deep Cut85points
- NGC 1792Deep Cut85points
- NGC 1793Deep Cut85points
- NGC 1795Deep Cut85points
- NGC 1796Deep Cut85points
- NGC 1796ADeep Cut85points
- NGC 1796BDeep Cut85points
- NGC 1797Deep Cut85points
- NGC 1798Deep Cut85points
Why these answers count
The reveal held 30,029 recorded answers, and the distribution is unusually lopsided: a single entry at 100 points, 29,941 sitting at 85, and 72 scraping 60. That shape tells you most solvers converged on the same safe territory. The 85-point band is dominated by numbered stellar designations such as 1 Aquarii or 10 Andromedae — individually correct, trivially generated, and therefore shared by thousands of players, which caps their value. Bare catalogue codes behave the same way: 0313-192 and 037-B327 are perfectly valid picks, yet they still landed at 85, because hundreds of players reached for the same lists. The lone 100-point answer, Hanny's Voorwerp, is a different animal — a genuinely distinctive, almost quirky object that few would name unprompted, and the scoring rewarded that originality. Answers that fell to 60 were presumably vaguer or even more heavily repeated. The lesson: correctness gets you into the 85-point band, but only a memorable, unexpected object breaks past it.