The Cheez-It Ring
(Eingestellt am 17. April 2025, 01:56 Uhr von PhoenixAki)
Check out my other puzzles if you haven't yet! Listed in order of estimated difficulty (easiest to hardest):
- [0/5 stars] My snackdoku series, findable here on LMD or via links in solution videos on YouTube (which is linked below).
- [1/5 stars] Hidden Patterns
- [1/5 stars] Swirlies
- [1/5 stars] Easter Egg 2025
- [1/5 stars] Cheesy Adventure
- [2/5 stars] Caged By a Secret Killer
- [2/5 stars] How to Dot Your V's
- [2/5 stars] Escape the Foggy Liar
Rules:
- Normal sudoku rules apply: place 1-9 in each row, column, and 3x3 box.
- Dynamic Fog: Most of the grid is covered with grey fog. Placing correct digits may progressively clear away the fog, at minimum under itself and sometimes in other cells as well.
- White Dots (salt): Digits separated by a white dot must be consecutive.
- Killer Cages: Cells surrounded in dotted-line cages must sum to the number given in the top left corner of that cage.
- German Whispers: Adjacent digits on green lines must differ by at least 5.
- X: Digits separated by an X must sum to 10.
- Arrows: A digit on a white circle is the sum of the digits along that circle's arrow.
Everyone is welcome to solve this on a stream or video, but I would prefer you let me know when such a thing happens so I can check it out (DM me on Discord, same username phoenixaki) :)
Solve on Sudokupad here (without Cheez-It graphics)!
Lösungscode: Row 5 from left to right (9 digits)
Kommentare
am 15. Mai 2025, 10:38 Uhr von RoystonDA
More Cheez-Its are required! Excellent sequel
am 17. April 2025, 22:55 Uhr von VitP
warning to americans: too many cheez-its, & you WILL get diabetes.
virtual ones are fine
am 17. April 2025, 22:41 Uhr von penor
1 Star - nice puzzle with straightforward logic. I was able to solve without one of the dots.
am 17. April 2025, 20:12 Uhr von St9
I was ready to use ring equivalence just from the look of the puzzle. I solved it without using ring equivalence.
Thanks for the great puzzle.
am 17. April 2025, 10:53 Uhr von PhoenixAki
Normally I haven't been adding comments to my posts when I upload the solution video for it, but since there's been some comment activity here on the difficulty of this (which has seemingly now been reflected in the rating showing as 2*) I figured I'd mention I just uploaded solution video for anyone who needs help or wants to see my intended solve path.
am 17. April 2025, 09:45 Uhr von bbutrosghali
I put this as 2* based on how my times are calibrated to the LMD star ratings, but it was close enough to the border that it is probably more properly the high end of 1* rather than the low end of 2*
am 17. April 2025, 09:44 Uhr von TheNineElements
Solve Time: 18:08
I rated this 2/5 difficulty.
Really nice puzzle with a great application of the ring equivalence!
I have to agree with @cfunkmi that this puzzle is definitely harder than 1*. It is still approachable as a fairly experienced solver, but the use of the set equivalence (which is seemingly required for this solve - as far as I could tell) automatically makes it harder than 1* IMO.
I only ever rate a puzzle 1* difficulty if I think that a novice/beginner solver (who is at least familiar with the ruleset) would be able to solve the puzzle unassisted - and I don't think the ring equivalence is "beginner" knowledge by any means. If a beginner came across this puzzle in the "wild" I don't think they would have any chance of solving this on their own (at least not within a reasonable timeframe and following the intended logic).
Even excluding the SET trick, the actual logic for the rest of the puzzle felt on the harder end of 1* (and easier end of 2*) - contributing to my 2* rating. Additionally, my 18 minute solve time (which in all fairness was slower than it should have been due to poor scanning) would be well outside my normal range for 1*s.
The puzzle itself was very nice and the solve went quite smoothly for me. I think the break-in logic was the hardest part of the solve, perhaps followed by the box 5 logic. Both of those steps were a bit tricky, but still definitely fair for an easier puzzle.
I really liked the fog triggers & reveals - and they all seemed well-planned and included several nice ideas. I think the fog placement was perfect for the given reveals, as I was "forced" to find the intended logic/solve path and really utilize the given clues as much as possible (which is, of course, the "goal" for dFoW).
I'm not sure why the rating for the puzzle is 91% (definitely seems underrated), but this does seem to be an unfortunate "trend" for dFoW puzzles on the site. The puzzle itself had no apparent issues (no obvious bypasses for the fog) and the logic itself was very nice & clean throughout. Either way, I found the puzzle very enjoyable. Thanks for sharing!
-------------------------------------
PhoenixAki: SET / ring equivalence strategies are not required and are not the intended approach for this (details omitted to not spoil further, if anyone wants an explanation, DM me on Discord, same username). I edited this a bit ago with details but it looks like it either didn't go through or you edited it back out after, so please keep it here this time.
am 17. April 2025, 09:40 Uhr von PhoenixAki
added link to 2nd version of puzzle that removes the Cheez-It graphics
am 17. April 2025, 08:31 Uhr von Mozart40
Is there a way to have a version without the cookies? The graphics are nice, but I find the Sudoku elements difficult to recognize. To switch off background pictures doesn't help.
@PhoenixAki Thx a lot!
-----------------------------------------------
I can make a version that gets rid of the graphics, yeah. I was debating if I wanted to do that but no one else had suggested it yet so I didn't think it was necessary, but I'll edit in a link to a version like that in a bit.
am 17. April 2025, 04:00 Uhr von cfunkmi
Definitely 2 stars for me. Some tricky logic, but it solves wonderfully.
-----------------------------
PhoenixAki: I was on the fence about whether this might be considered on the low/easy end of 2 stars or on the upper end of 1 star and opted to leave it as 1 star and let the initial LMD ratings decide it
