Battlefield Sudoku - Use The Force
(Published on 13. July 2020, 05:29 by DiMono)
This puzzle went through a couple revisions. I've found that Battlefield Sudokus that don't have 18 clues tend to wind up with unresolvable columns of pairs, so you need to choose your clues carefully to avoid that. For this puzzle, though, I had a column that could work as either a gap or an overlap, and any number I chose could work for either, which was obviously a problem.
I wanted to make sure there were no given digits in this grid, so I tried adding restrictions around gaps and overlaps, but my test solvers ended up focusing on whether clues were gaps or overlaps rather than the actual solution path. It took about six revisions to get this puzzle to the point that there was a clear logical path to a single unique solution, and I'm really quite happy with it. I hope you enjoy solving it.
Normal Sudoku rules apply. Additionally, Battlefield rules apply:
Consider the first X cells and the last Y cells of a row or column where X is the number in the first cell and Y is the number in the last cell. A clue outside the grid gives the sum of the digits where these groups overlap, or the sum of the digits in the gap between the groups if they don't overlap.
Solution code: Column 3, Column 7
Comments
on 20. January 2022, 18:02 by Jesper
Very nice! Not sure how I managed to overlook this puzzle for so long. Given the difficulty rating, I expected this to be quite tricky, but actually it went surprisingly smooth.
on 10. November 2021, 15:57 by glum_hippo
I did not find the puzzle unfair; in fact it's very much to my taste & unduly maligned by the capricious "rating" system.
on 19. October 2021, 21:07 by PixelPlucker
Tricky but very rewarding! A nice showcase of Battlefield logic. The rows being fully clued was used to great effect.
@PixelPlucker: Thank you for the kind feedback. I think this is a better puzzle than Ring Theory, but apparently the solvers here do not agree :D
on 30. June 2021, 20:26 by Vebby
Excellent puzzle!
on 15. July 2020, 00:25 by Big Tiger
Since this is a Battlefield, I'd like to include it in my upcoming blog collection, but I'd like to know the "logical path" first. If anyone would like to take the time to type out a full "logical path" for me and send it to bigtigerproductions@outlook.com that would be awesome. No rush, no obligation, just a general request.
@BigTiger I have emailed you my solve documents for both my 9x9 battlefields.
on 14. July 2020, 00:35 by henrypijames
It doesn't have to be either-or. In this case, I'd say you need two out of the following three: skill, patience, and luck. Or just one of them in exceeding amount.
on 13. July 2020, 23:11 by Big Tiger
It's not a matter of patience, it's a matter of skill. Three months ago, before discovering CTC, I wouldn't have been able to solve my OWN Battlefield puzzles. I'm learning new ways to look at logic and the grid regularly, but I am flat-out stumped here.
on 13. July 2020, 22:20 by henrypijames
@Big Tiger: The author has pre-announced (in another puzzle) that the entry of this puzzle would be complex - and it is. Have patience and keep pencil-marking diligently, until suddenly, with one key piece of logic, everything opens up. (By everything I mean a decent number of things, because there is still a bunch of hard work left to do after that.)
on 13. July 2020, 22:08 by marcmees
enjoyed it.
on 13. July 2020, 18:16 by henrypijames
The entry was very nice - and not as hard as feared (given your recent announcement). The middle phase, however, was a bit tedious.
@henrypijames If it was tedious, then you missed the solution path.
@DiMono: That goes without saying - I always assume I've missed the solution path when I resort to try and error. In this case, I was okay with it because after having broken in fairly smoothly (which I'm very proud of), I estimated that the effort of T&R would be comparable to keep looking for the logical path. In the end, I might even have found the path - but only after T&R (as in: darn, if only I had tried this first, it would've led to a somewhat immediate contraction).
What I meant by my original comment was that despite of the beauty and complexity of the entry, it turned out that the next step was actually a lot harder, at least for me.
@henrypijames No worries. I'm glad you did find it, even if it was apparently a little bit late :P
