Forums

Number: Puzzle #2368
Genre: LITS
Author: mathgrant
Appeared at: December 11, 2010

Very easy to be considered a 3*. It's large, but there's nothing tricky.

Welcome! This site really is great, isn't it.

fl0rrat wrote:

I have a question: Is the catwalk-genre just a special case of the anglers-genre, or am I missing something? In a catwalk puzzle, if you change all the cats to question marks, all the bowls to fishes and all the black squares to plants, you get an angler puzzle.

In Anglers puzzles, a path must go through every single square. In Catwalk, the number of squares in a row/column a path must go through is specified, and if no clue is given, any number of squares may be used.

You *could* create a puzzle that is simultaneously an Anglers and Catwalk puzzle, but it would have to be pretty trivial. (Catwalk with all clues equal to row/column length, Anglers with all question marks.)

I really like this one. I think it should be a 2* even though it's 5x5, I found it to be pretty tricky...

Number: Puzzle #2193
Genre: Easy as ABC
Author: Bram
Appeared at: November 16, 2010

I really liked the solving theme of this one

It is actually possible to solve this without any guessing or trial and error. You can, without too much trouble, prove that (spoiler) the sum of the numbers outside of the 32 block must be at least 97, i.e. the sum of the numbers in the 32 block must be at most (1+2+3+4+5+6)*6 - 97 = 31, and therefore the operation cannot be addition and must be multiplication. But I suppose if you had it in mind to even prove such a thing, you'd just try it out...

I wasn't sure how to rate this one, but I thought that the simplest path to the solution might be missed by some people because it is a little different. Or perhaps you figured it out another way that I didn't anticipate.

Number: Puzzle #999
Genre: Diamonds
Author: Johan
Appeared at: August 14, 2008

Cool design

Nice puzzle. I resorted to uniqueness to solve a number of areas (corners mostly), however. Does that make me a bad person?

What happened to this puzzle?

Number: Puzzle #2086
Genre: Sum Thing
Author: Eranus
Appeared at: October 1, 2010

Cool design! Appears intimidating but the constraints are actually very tight. Nicely done.

Thanks.

Very nice puzzle! Makes you think, it's a bit hard to find where to start, and still tricky after that, but can be solved without any guesswork.

Well, couldn't you incorporate that subtraction/division rule for >two-cell regions without causing any confusion? As it is, there won't be any puzzles with subtraction or division in >two-cell regions, so there's no conflict. You wouldn't need to allow Snyder variants to expand just that one rule, that would be a separate question. Maybe I'm missing something, though...

In the news, the link to the Calcudoku genre is:
http://puzzlepicnic.com/genre/calcudoku

but it should be:
http://puzzlepicnic.com/genre?calcudoku

Strongly seconded! Considering the markup options some of the other applets have, it would be quite nice to have the feature to color a square on Spiral Galaxies.