Page 1 of 1
Today's Maniac
Posted: Tue Jul 31, 2007 1:39 pm
by HowardBrazee
I ran today's Maniac, set it to show naked pairs, and mindlessly solved - until it was finished. That is the first time that happened.
I like the tool for the Daily Light, for a quick daily practice - but today was too easy, with no thinking involved.
Posted: Mon Sep 03, 2007 2:04 pm
by HowardBrazee
Yesterday and today the same thing happened.
I love the interface in the Daily Lite puzzles, and wish it was available for the tougher SudoCue puzzles. Maybe allow us to cut and paste the tougher puzzles in it.
Posted: Tue Sep 04, 2007 8:21 pm
by Ruud
HowardBrazee wrote:I love the interface in the Daily Lite puzzles, and wish it was available for the tougher SudoCue puzzles.
It's on my TODO list.
About the difficulty:
I'm constantly refining my rating system, but most of these puzzles have been rated and uploaded a long time ago. With the current rating system, they would receive a lower rating.
Ruud
Posted: Tue Sep 04, 2007 8:36 pm
by HowardBrazee
That makes sense.
It is a great interface.
Posted: Wed Sep 05, 2007 10:43 am
by Mike
Today's maniac also very very easy..... not even an xwing (perhaps one i don't remember). Only naked pairs ans hidden triples.
Your interface is greaaaaaat.
But when you push the check button, does it highlight the false numbers by comparing them to the final solution, or by checking internal coherence ?
because that's too easy if it compares to final solution...
Cheers
Mike
Posted: Wed Sep 05, 2007 11:48 am
by HowardBrazee
I notice the check button apparently doesn't look at candidates. If you mistakenly delete the correct candidate, it doesn't show.
As I have read about some strategies, I find that some named strategies such as "pointing pairs" are obvious elementary strategies that hardly require names.
Posted: Wed Sep 05, 2007 12:03 pm
by Mike
HowardBrazee wrote:I notice the check button apparently doesn't look at candidates. If you mistakenly delete the correct candidate, it doesn't show.
i noticed that too... i'll make a test to see if it detects internal incoherences or if it compares to final solution.
HowardBrazee wrote: I find that some named strategies such as "pointing pairs" are obvious elementary strategies that hardly require names.
i just began to read theory about sudoku, and as i read i noticed many things i was doing alone whithout even giving them a name... things such as looking for hidden triples and naked pairs.
but ... did i ask anything about a strategy name (which would eventually correspond to 'pointing pairs' ) ? (no ofense here, i'm just asking myself why you say that as an answer for me
Cheers
Mike