I used to be absolutely horrible at these puzzles. Then I got a puzzle booklet with a few of them and figured out how to solve them. The main reason for that I think is that I changed the notation for these puzzles by colouring the inside of the loop.
This puzzle has a tricky opening, so it might take a bit to get started.
I've solved twice with the same contradiction… Probably I'm making some bad deduction, but considering nobody has commented with success yet, perhaps there's a small chance there's an error?
ReplyDeleteI've been having a lot of fun with your puzzles, by the way. Thanks!
Cheers
Rob
Hi
ReplyDeleteI've doublechecked the solution with the puzzle and it seems to be correct. You can email me at bram.d.laat [at] gmail [dot] com (note the missing e) and show me where and how it goes wrong. I hopefully be able to help you out.
Bram
Agree with Bram - this is logically solvable
ReplyDeleteGreat, thanks! I'll give it another try soon.
ReplyDeleteCheers
Rob
Success, yay! Not quite sure where I went off track.
ReplyDeleteCheers
Rob
I don't like the form of this puzzle. If all number is painted than it isnt extra information that this square is counted.
ReplyDeleteFor instance in Seethrough puzzle (see Puzzle Picnic) the number isnt counted.
Unfortunately this is the usual form of this type.
I have never been a fan of the "including the cell itself" rule myself either. But that's probably because I was more used to four winds and seethrough puzzles when I started. It just felt more natural to think an 8 sees 4 horizontal, so it sees 4 vertical istead of seeing 5 vertical. That was also a reason I regularly messed up in these puzzles.
ReplyDeleteBut I decided to just stick to the convention for this puzzle type here.
This is a great puzzle. I do these as I fly across the country (airline pilot). Keeps the mind alert.
ReplyDeleteThanks. And keep them coming.