Weekly Challenges

Solve the challenge, share your solution and summit the ranks of our Community!

Also available in | Français | Português | Español | 日本語
IDEAS WANTED

Want to get involved? We're always looking for ideas and content for Weekly Challenges.

SUBMIT YOUR IDEA

Challenge #440: Unmask the Saboteur

cdwaraga
7 - Meteor

Cool challenge. Here is my solution

 
Spoiler
Screenshot 2024-09-10 194420.png
krishnakumare
8 - Asteroid

I have attached my solution

nSpire
9 - Comet
Spoiler
440.png

tammybrown_tds
9 - Comet

I found the element of the time of day to be irrelevant in finding the answer.

 

Spoiler
Screenshot 2024-09-11 135608.png
a640687
8 - Asteroid
Spoiler
Capture.PNG
Gem
9 - Comet

Really enjoyed this one! More murder mystery challenges, please! 

alisonpitt
11 - Bolide

Fun challenge! More murder mysteries, please!

Spoiler
Challenge 440 AP.png
arizzio
7 - Meteor
Spoiler
Screenshot 2024-09-12 165724.png
Yogesh1795
8 - Asteroid

I found the 3 possible culprits, including answer, but don't know how the macro is deciding who is the murderer.

Wish this challenge would have one more hint like after reversing " first 4 letters of saboteur name look the same when you read it backward"

 

AlexvanOs
8 - Asteroid

Fun challenge, but there's an error in the macro and some unneccesary hints. 

 

Spoiler
I had 12 suspects, but the macro also provides the correct answer with <12 suspects. There is no way the "Do you have enough suspects? We are expecting twelve" line will be the result because of the <= part in the bold part of the formula tool (8) of the macro below.

IF [Count] > 12
THEN "Too many suspects!!!"
ELSEIF [Count] <= 12
THEN "Elle Banna shakes and screams in pain!"
ElSE "Do you have enough suspects? We are expecting twelve"
ENDIF

Also, no need to parse the time when all incidents happen at night. Just filter the incidents beforehand and the only times that will pop up are night times. So I ignored that hint. 

Since I don't like to limit my flows to only work with the current data, I decided not to filter on incident count = 7, but instead I counted the total amount of incidents and the amount of incidents per employee and matched who was present for all incidents that way.

440 solution.png