Sudokross 2
(Published on 26. October 2025, 11:20 by Lyouke)
My second puzzle. I'm really happy I could make a nonogram without any given numbers. I might try and update this to remove the Kropki in the main grid, but I'm otherwise extremely happy with how this turned out. Check out the original if you want a brief warmup.
If anyone knows how to make it so you can put digits in the outer grid without SudokuPad giving conflicts (while still properly doing conflicts for the 9x9 grid), I'm all ears.
Link to the puzzleNormal sudoku rules apply inside the 9x9 grid.
Nonogram rules apply (see below for explanation).
Digits along an orange Dutch whisper line have a difference of at least 4. If the nonogram clue (numbers outside the 9x9 grid) contains a Dutch whisper, then adjacent shaded cells in that clue's row/column must also have a difference of at least 4. Unshaded cells in the clue's row/column must have a difference less than 4 with their adjacent cells (shaded and unshaded).
Digits along a green German whisper line have a difference of at least 5. If the nonogram clue (numbers outside the 9x9 grid) contains a German whisper, then adjacent shaded cells in that clue's row/column must also have a difference of at least 5. Unshaded cells in the clue's row/column must have a difference less than 5 with their adjacent cells (shaded and unshaded).
Black Kropki separates cells where one digit is double the other (not all possible dots are given). If the nonogram clue (numbers outside the 9x9 grid) contains a black Kropki, then adjacent shaded cells in that clue's row/column must also be in a 1:2 ratio. Unshaded cells in the clue's row/column must NOT be in a 1:2 ratio with adjacent cells (shaded and unshaded).
White Kropki separates cells with consecutive digits (not all possible dots are given). If the nonogram clue (numbers outside the 9x9 grid) contains a white Kropki, then adjacent shaded cells in that clue's row/column must also be consecutive. Unshaded cells in the clue's row/column and their adjacent cells (shaded and unshaded) must NOT be consecutive.
The red diamond is even or odd. Shaded cells in the red diamond's column must have the same parity (even or odd) as the nonogram clue, unshaded cells in the clue's row/column must have a different parity.
Contiguous sets of shaded cells in a row/column with a caged nonogram clue have the same sum as the digit(s) in the cage.
Nonogram clues with a constraint have no digits outside their constraint, e.g., row 1's nonogram clue is exactly 2 digits long, column 7's nonogram clue is exactly 3 digits long, etc.
Nonogram clues without constraints are to be determined by the solver.
If a cell has no constraint in the nonogram clue for its row AND column, it is always unshaded.
Nonogram: The numbers on the outside the 9x9 grid represent nonogram clues. Each number represents the length of a contiguous region of filled-in squares in that number's row or column. If there are multiple clues in the same row/column, there must be at least one space that isn't filled between them. The regions appear in the same order as their clues.
Solution code: Row 6 of the sudoku (Sudoku Pad may have this labelled as 8) including the nonogram clue
Comments
on 31. January 2026, 04:52 by Lyouke
Hopefully made rules clearer
on 13. November 2025, 08:50 by apothycus
I had a few problems with this puzzle:
-the solution code is confusing: it's ambiguous, because four cells in columns 2&8 are indetermined whether or not they are shaded; and also, the wanted row is labeled row 8 and doesn't have a nonogram clue
-one needs to assume that all nonogram clues are given by the special constraints (eg column 2 only has 1 group of shaded cells) in order to use the "cells with no clues are unshaded" rule and break in to the puzzle (but then this assumption is contradicted by the wording of the solution code)
-for me the puzzle was basically a matter of case testing/bifurcation in order to narrow down the placement/contents of the shaded cells. There were some interesting interactions around the negative constraints (and in particular with column 9) which helped eliminate cases quickly, but I couldn't see any satisfactorily logical way to go about it.
-------------------
Thanks for the feedback, I've been meaning to revisit this puzzle sometime to make a version that flows nicer (with rules that are much better worded). I think that it could really benefit from fog to minimise case testing, and crucially, so I can explore more constraints in the nonogram clues without making it trivial.
Didn't realise the solution code was that troublesome, I wanted it to be a row without clues so the solver had one last (albeit simple) step to top off the puzzle.
