Author |
Message |
|
Very well constructed! You are a star.
Not hard really, but I like the logical path here.
|
|
|
Strange puzzle with 4 to 5 extraneous clues. The '1' in the right-most col (and possibly the '4' in the bottom row to aid the starting logic) was sufficient to solve this.
|
|
|
I am glad that you are sure. I will ignore such cells, completely.
|
|
|
The rules have been amended due to me. Click read more for full text.
|
|
|
In all probability, this looks like an experimental puzzle that was not revoked and slipped into the wrong queue.
|
|
|
Number: Puzzle #6539
Genre: Slant
Author: jama
Appeared at: January 12, 2021
This one has a very nice logical path. R12C78 resolves with uniqueness arguments, but who am I to complain when it is such a fun solve overall with ample use of the slant constraint.
|
|
|
Bifurcation is much a thing of speculation. There are in fact 7 or 8 instances in this puzzle where there are two options to choose from, but they are very short deductions and never go deep enough to feel like a bifurcation.
|
|
|
I agree with xevs. This really felt like a 2-3*. Top 3 rows fill in completely first, then the 1st col, bottom-half of the second col, followed by the rightmost 2 cols. Very clean solve.
|
|
|
Yes, essentially the clues in this version indicate number of available edges-triangles. We are used to counting triangles. The difference really is about convenience. Logic remains more or less the same.
|
|
|
The rules are different from those of ShakaShaka. I think the reference to ShakaShaka in more info is probably mistaken.
|
|
|
Number: Puzzle #6346
Genre: Tents and Trees
Author: jama
Appeared at: July 10, 2020
Nice logic in the top rows.
|
|
|
Thanks.
|
|
|
Number: Puzzle #6167
Genre: LITS
Author: wernie_de
Appeared at: July 28, 2019
One of the most enjoyable LITS I got my hands on.
|
|
|
Number: Puzzle #6196
Genre: Walls
Author: wernie_de
Appeared at: July 29, 2019
This has easy steps, mostly throughout. Difficulty is Slightly overrated.
|
|
|
Two stars is absolutely fine. One or two minutes is not 1* time anyway.
|
|
|