@ 2011-09-09 5:37 PM (#5599 - in reply to #5455) (#5599) TopPosts: 148
Country : France
Ours brun posted @ 2011-09-09 5:37 PM
Sorry for the delay, I have big difficulties to get a connection these days.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts. Stefano, I don't know to what "somewhere" you are referring, but I was careful to say "rather easy" in the Instruction Booklet, since I knew that no two people agree on the definition of "easy".
One precision first : the idea was not to have puzzles that beginners may find easy. It was to have puzzles which would be easy enough so that beginners may be able to solve them, which is not exactly the same thing. However your point is still valid ; not all the puzzles were solvable in a reasonable time by beginners, and some were simply too tough for such a test. It is always hard to determine this, in particular for types such as Fortress or Galaxies that never appear in competitions. That is why we were attached to the fact of having some feedbacks : they will certainly be useful to the organizers of future such tests.
Very interesting remark. My idea was that, with many puzzle types, a beginner would always find some puzzles to his likes. The weakness of this choice is obvious indeed : adapting to these 15 types in a very short time is out of reach of a beginner. Certainly something to keep in mind. One idea that comes to my mind is a series of tests each dedicated to a theme : loop puzzles, latin squares, etc. In each test, 5 puzzle types, 3 puzzles per type. Maybe there is an idea to dig, here.
Here is a file with all solutions : Link
forcolin
Apart from this, the puzzle set was good (I like particularly the FORTRESS), but in my opinion the puzzles were not exactly "EASY" as defined somewhere (I had a debate with Deb on a different forum). Easier than usual, OK; the contest was solvable in the 75 minutes time, OK, (although my target seemed to me unrealistic, other players of similar level have achieved it), but if the target was to attract new players I believe only a few 5 or 10 points diagrams were simple enough for beginners.
Apart from this, the puzzle set was good (I like particularly the FORTRESS), but in my opinion the puzzles were not exactly "EASY" as defined somewhere (I had a debate with Deb on a different forum). Easier than usual, OK; the contest was solvable in the 75 minutes time, OK, (although my target seemed to me unrealistic, other players of similar level have achieved it), but if the target was to attract new players I believe only a few 5 or 10 points diagrams were simple enough for beginners.
Quela
I agree with Forcolin too, about this test was not so "easy" for newbie. The time is not sufficient for who of us that have tried periodically some puzzle on magazines, considering that many of them never appeared on magazines, and the difficult is absolutely not easy for other of new puzzler that have never tried this kind of game, or done it too few time.
I agree with Forcolin too, about this test was not so "easy" for newbie. The time is not sufficient for who of us that have tried periodically some puzzle on magazines, considering that many of them never appeared on magazines, and the difficult is absolutely not easy for other of new puzzler that have never tried this kind of game, or done it too few time.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts. Stefano, I don't know to what "somewhere" you are referring, but I was careful to say "rather easy" in the Instruction Booklet, since I knew that no two people agree on the definition of "easy".
One precision first : the idea was not to have puzzles that beginners may find easy. It was to have puzzles which would be easy enough so that beginners may be able to solve them, which is not exactly the same thing. However your point is still valid ; not all the puzzles were solvable in a reasonable time by beginners, and some were simply too tough for such a test. It is always hard to determine this, in particular for types such as Fortress or Galaxies that never appear in competitions. That is why we were attached to the fact of having some feedbacks : they will certainly be useful to the organizers of future such tests.
Fred76
I think that the main thing for me is that there was to many different puzzles if you consider that the goal is to introduce new players to puzzles.
I think that the main thing for me is that there was to many different puzzles if you consider that the goal is to introduce new players to puzzles.
Very interesting remark. My idea was that, with many puzzle types, a beginner would always find some puzzles to his likes. The weakness of this choice is obvious indeed : adapting to these 15 types in a very short time is out of reach of a beginner. Certainly something to keep in mind. One idea that comes to my mind is a series of tests each dedicated to a theme : loop puzzles, latin squares, etc. In each test, 5 puzzle types, 3 puzzles per type. Maybe there is an idea to dig, here.
Here is a file with all solutions : Link