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 1997Deep Cut85points
- NGC 1998Deep Cut85points
- NGC 2Deep Cut85points
- NGC 20Deep Cut85points
- NGC 200Deep Cut85points
- NGC 2000Deep Cut85points
- NGC 2001Deep Cut85points
- NGC 2002Deep Cut85points
- NGC 2003Deep Cut85points
- NGC 2004Deep Cut85points
- NGC 2005Deep Cut85points
- NGC 2006Deep Cut85points
- NGC 2007Deep Cut85points
- NGC 2008Deep Cut85points
- NGC 2009Deep Cut85points
- NGC 201Deep Cut85points
- NGC 2010Deep Cut85points
- NGC 2011Deep Cut85points
- NGC 2012Deep Cut85points
- NGC 2013Deep Cut85points
- NGC 2014Deep Cut85points
- NGC 2015Deep Cut85points
- NGC 2016Deep Cut85points
- NGC 2017Deep Cut85points
- NGC 2018Deep Cut85points
- NGC 2019Deep Cut85points
- NGC 202Deep Cut85points
- NGC 2020Deep Cut85points
- NGC 2021Deep Cut85points
- NGC 2022Deep Cut85points
- NGC 2023Deep Cut85points
- NGC 2025Deep Cut85points
- NGC 2027Deep Cut85points
- NGC 2028Deep Cut85points
- NGC 2029Deep Cut85points
- NGC 203Deep Cut85points
- NGC 2030Deep Cut85points
- NGC 2031Deep Cut85points
- NGC 2032Deep Cut85points
- NGC 2033Deep Cut85points
- NGC 2034Deep Cut85points
- NGC 2035Deep Cut85points
- NGC 2036Deep Cut85points
- NGC 2037Deep Cut85points
- NGC 2038Deep Cut85points
- NGC 204Deep Cut85points
- NGC 2040Deep Cut85points
- NGC 2041Deep Cut85points
- NGC 2042Deep Cut85points
- NGC 2043Deep 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.