all clues were useful. No clue could be ignored to read to crack the full board.
Posted 30th Apr 2019 at 10:10
JoergWausW Daily subscriber Has not played this puzzle yet
Sorry, but I have to disagree. I didn't use 288x and I didn't use 18+. If those numbers weren't there - still solvable. (Again - I don't use the big boxes if I don't have to). As Elisabeth mentioned before: To make a puzzle with only needed clues and one way to solve is almost impossible.
Posted 30th Apr 2019 at 15:04
Elisabeth Daily subscriber Has not played this puzzle yet
I didn't use 18+ but I had to use 288. How, otherwise, JoergWausW, do you solve the top 2 rows? Do you not have to conclude that 5 cannot be in 288? (No other use of 288 however)
Posted 30th Apr 2019 at 15:33
tishtosh Has not played this puzzle yet
I agree - you have to conclude that 5 cannot be in 288
Posted 1st May 2019 at 08:55
JoergWausW Daily subscriber Has not played this puzzle yet
You are right about that 288 argument. Now looking at it, I guess I made a mistake with the 2- box and used it wrong so the 5 came from here. I'm sorry for that.
But still you don't necessarily have to conclude that 5 cannot be in 288 - you can figure out you need the 6 twice. If you only had one 6 in the right column, it leads to 6*2*3=36, this is not enough to get to 288 with only one remaining factor in a 6x6 puzzle - no matter if this factor is 4 or 5.
So I'm corrected: 288x box is indeed necessary. Thank you.
But now I have another argument that you might want to check, because I might have made a mistake again.
Hypothesis: You don't need 18+, 7+ and 2- to solve this puzzle. I didn't need these to solve the bottom 4 rows. After using the 288x clue you can just use missing numbers logic and don't necessarily need the calculations (but they might be faster to compute).
And maybe someone wants to check wether you in fact need either of the two 1- clues at all. I don't think so.
Plus: If you use the 18+ clue you might not need some other clues that were used so far. But I'm done for today.
Posted 1st May 2019 at 10:30
Elisabeth Daily subscriber Has not played this puzzle yet
I think the answer, JoergWausW, is that there are many ways of solving this puzzle and each shows some clues can be ignored!!!! But I am not sure you can solve without using the fact that 5 cannot be in the 288??
Posted 1st May 2019 at 11:30
JoergWausW Daily subscriber Has not played this puzzle yet
Yes, that's what I agreed with you already: There is almost always more than one way, and it's very hard to create a puzzle with a unique way to solve it and without redundant clues.
As I tried to explain: I used the 288x box, but not to exclude the 5. I used it to conclude that this box needs a 6 twice or else the product would be too low. Same clue, but different approach.
Posted 1st May 2019 at 15:04
Elisabeth Daily subscriber Has not played this puzzle yet
I was just confirming what we had already agreed and I see what you mean about the two 6s for 288. So perhaps I should say the puzzle can't be solved witout using 288 in some form!! Over and out:)
Sorry: You must log in (create a free user) in order to be able to post comments on this puzzle.
You can however view other players' statistics and comments in the tables above.
Post comment
Key
A yellow/light blue highlight in the time distribution charts highlights your time, where relevant.
Rating scores out of 10.0 show the average difficulty rating chosen by users, where 1.0 is "Easy" and 10.0 is "Hard".
If a puzzle is opened more than once, including by loading from a saved position, then this is potentially a significant aid so it is listed as being completed with 'multiple sessions' for the purpose of the best time/average rating displays above.
Minor aid is defined as no more than one use of 'Check solution' when incomplete and/or no more than one use of 'Check solution' when wrong; and/or using highlighting aids (show repeated digits, show broken inequalities and show valid/invalid placements [slitherlink] only). Major aid is any and all other use of the solving aids except for 'show wrong'.
I didn't use 288x and I didn't use 18+. If those numbers weren't there - still solvable. (Again - I don't use the big boxes if I don't have to).
As Elisabeth mentioned before: To make a puzzle with only needed clues and one way to solve is almost impossible.
I'm sorry for that.
But still you don't necessarily have to conclude that 5 cannot be in 288 - you can figure out you need the 6 twice. If you only had one 6 in the right column, it leads to 6*2*3=36, this is not enough to get to 288 with only one remaining factor in a 6x6 puzzle - no matter if this factor is 4 or 5.
So I'm corrected: 288x box is indeed necessary. Thank you.
But now I have another argument that you might want to check, because I might have made a mistake again.
Hypothesis: You don't need 18+, 7+ and 2- to solve this puzzle. I didn't need these to solve the bottom 4 rows. After using the 288x clue you can just use missing numbers logic and don't necessarily need the calculations (but they might be faster to compute).
And maybe someone wants to check wether you in fact need either of the two 1- clues at all. I don't think so.
Plus: If you use the 18+ clue you might not need some other clues that were used so far. But I'm done for today.
As I tried to explain: I used the 288x box, but not to exclude the 5. I used it to conclude that this box needs a 6 twice or else the product would be too low. Same clue, but different approach.
You can however view other players' statistics and comments in the tables above.