Three Out of Four Ain't Bad
(Published on 12. July 2020, 22:00 by Big Tiger)
Standard Sudoku Rules apply to the final numerical layout.
Small numbers in circles indicate the sum of the three largest digits in the immediate four-cell cubicle, and no digit may repeat in any such cubicle.
*****
Setter's Diary :: July 12, 2020 :: I have heard the cries of those who find some of my puzzles "way too complicated" and decided I'd try out something very simple. One basic rule! And I suffered miserably making sure that it was solvable and unique, so I look forward to hearing from the experts on what they think. I'm guessing four stars of difficulty.
I discovered that no matter how I arrange the digits, the very logic and rules of this idea force me to place one digit in the grid every time. As much as that irritates me, I will accept defeat and publish it anyway, ha ha.
Solution code: Row 5 then Column 5
Comments
on 9. May 2023, 02:39 by dennischen
Woah, setting that puzzle must've completely ended your sanity. Such intricate use of the clues --- especially when earlier clues which saw just a little use circle back later, whether to reveal more logic or to clean up some "deadly" pairs. I love this, this is good stuff.
BT: Thanks for hunting down an Oldie! It was indeed a pain for me, in large part because I'm not a numbers and logic whiz. Testing it on myself took hours, ha ha.
on 8. May 2023, 10:26 by bbutrosghali
https://f-puzzles.com/?id=2ev9kgh7
on 2. October 2020, 21:39 by DiMono
Pro tip: enter the solution in the right order. It helps you not feel like a big dumb.
This is a very good puzzle set in a really nice puzzle type, and I'd like to see more of it. I may need to make one of my own at some point.
on 18. July 2020, 21:56 by karen_birgitta
I don't have wifi where I am right now, so I have just screenshoted puzzles, solved them and noted what ratings I would give them, and waited to put in my solutions so I wouldn't spend all my data on this website. However, today I couldn't wait anymore so I put in my solutions for a lot of puzzles, including this one. I had noted 3☆, so seeing the 5 here really suprised me... However- lovely puzzle, definitely one of the best I have solved during the last weeks!
*** I only gave it four stars as a preliminary, it's the users who seem to have found it pretty hard for the most part! :-D
on 18. July 2020, 11:15 by Ours brun
Easier than expected; although lengthy, I think this puzzle does not come close to most other 5-star ones. Excellent construction though!
on 16. July 2020, 00:35 by japoorva
My goodness! This was a very convoluted puzzle... but so so satisfying to solve at the same time! The constraint of having the lowest number not being part of the sum was amazing... but it was also messing with my head a lot wrt to calculations! Nevertheless, enjoyed it thoroughly
*** When I first said to myself, "I don't want to do all four because that would just be a killer sudoku again. What about three out of four?" ... I had no idea how much it would mess with MY head, too! I'm happy to see that one little whim is proving to be an enjoyable challenge for a growing number.
on 14. July 2020, 23:58 by henrypijames
@Big Tiger: For what is worth, this puzzle was at least as difficult as the Battlefield one you've having a hard time with. So if you can create this, you should be able to solve that. I just left you an explaination there (as you requested) as a hidden comment - but now I realize you might not be able to see it.
*** I did see it. :-) But it only took me as far as I had gotten anyway. Whatever the strategy is over on that other one, my brain is simply not spotting it. I may even have to give myself a facepalm once someone reveals it to me, but it is a fact of nature today that I am not discovering it on my own recognizance.
on 14. July 2020, 11:28 by henrypijames
OMG! After gotten stuck for an eternity, I came back to reread the rules and realized that I've totally missed the word "largest" (three digits). Suggestion: Maybe emphasize the word in bold?
Update: Phew! That was quite an excerise. Even after discovering the extra constraint I'd missed, I still made several wrong assumptions and had to back up multiple times.
*** It was quite mind-bending for me as I tried to prove it before publishing it. It's easy enough to figure out basic possibilities for a 3-digit sum, but then to remember that there MUST be a lower one had me double- and triple-checking assumptions everywhere.
on 13. July 2020, 20:54 by Big Tiger
Wow - 5 stars. I will be very surprised if it stays that high, but that's a cool feeling for now! :-D
on 13. July 2020, 18:19 by Big Tiger
The Solve Counter is going up fast. Is it easier than I imagined? Or just a more inviting rule set? I'm looking forward to having the aggregate ratings revealed. :-)
on 13. July 2020, 17:11 by Jesper
Great puzzle! It shows that you put a lot of time and effort into optimizing this.
on 13. July 2020, 14:01 by Statistica
@geronimo92: This rule is valid only for the cubicles WITH circles.
