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 1893Deep Cut85points
- NGC 1894Deep Cut85points
- NGC 1895Deep Cut85points
- NGC 1896Deep Cut85points
- NGC 1897Deep Cut85points
- NGC 1898Deep Cut85points
- NGC 1899Deep Cut85points
- NGC 19Deep Cut85points
- NGC 190Deep Cut85points
- NGC 1900Deep Cut85points
- NGC 1901Deep Cut85points
- NGC 1902Deep Cut85points
- NGC 1903Deep Cut85points
- NGC 1905Deep Cut85points
- NGC 1906Deep Cut85points
- NGC 1907Deep Cut85points
- NGC 191Deep Cut85points
- NGC 1910Deep Cut85points
- NGC 1911Deep Cut85points
- NGC 1913Deep Cut85points
- NGC 1914Deep Cut85points
- NGC 1915Deep Cut85points
- NGC 1916Deep Cut85points
- NGC 1917Deep Cut85points
- NGC 1918Deep Cut85points
- NGC 1919Deep Cut85points
- NGC 191ADeep Cut85points
- NGC 192Deep Cut85points
- NGC 1920Deep Cut85points
- NGC 1921Deep Cut85points
- NGC 1922Deep Cut85points
- NGC 1923Deep Cut85points
- NGC 1924Deep Cut85points
- NGC 1925Deep Cut85points
- NGC 1926Deep Cut85points
- NGC 1928Deep Cut85points
- NGC 1929Deep Cut85points
- NGC 193Deep Cut85points
- NGC 1930Deep Cut85points
- NGC 1933Deep Cut85points
- NGC 1934Deep Cut85points
- NGC 1935Deep Cut85points
- NGC 1936Deep Cut85points
- NGC 1937Deep Cut85points
- NGC 1938Deep Cut85points
- NGC 1939Deep Cut85points
- NGC 194Deep Cut85points
- NGC 1940Deep Cut85points
- NGC 1941Deep Cut85points
- NGC 1942Deep 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.