Destructive Counting
(Eingestellt am 21. November 2025, 13:12 Uhr von eap314)
Sudoku / Latin Square: Digits do not repeat in rows or columns.
Destruction (NXTMaster): All GIVEN regions contain at least one repeat digit. Locate 7 orthogonally connected HIDDEN regions that contain the digits 1-7.
A circle counts how many (orthogonally and diagonally) adjacent cells including itself (up to 9) are in both its given and hidden region.
A square counts how many TOTAL cells overlap between its given and hidden region.
Counting (IcyFruit): A digit in a CIRCLE indicates the TOTAL number of circles and squares that contain that digit. Digits in squares do not necessarily go in circles.
(2 could go in 1 square and 1 circle. 3 could go in 5 squares if it goes in 0 circles)
Click on the image to play
Note for setters: CC is complex; it requires understanding how the regions will play out. If you're a beginner, it might be useful to work backwards from a solution, but this isn't necessarily the best method.
Lösungscode: Row 6 left to right. Use a hyphen (-) to designate hidden region boundaries.
Kommentare
am 2. Dezember 2025, 18:21 Uhr von eap314
Updated setter's note, removed extra given
am 1. Dezember 2025, 14:41 Uhr von The Book Wyrm
Brilliant puzzle!
The adjustments to the Chaos Deconstruction ruleset worked really well - the smaller regions are great as it means the forced repeat rule becomes much more relevant, and the square clues are a pretty interesting clue type that adds interesting new deductions.
Both types of destruction clues worked really well with the counting rules as well, which was very nice.
The puzzle was very smooth with a lot of well of interesting and well-telegraphed logic making very good use of all the rules together.
I have some experience with destruction so it was closer to 3*.
(Also didn't need the extra given)
- - -
eap314:
Thank you! Although it doesn't look like it, I'm not a very experienced setter. I needed the extra given for the solve so I included it. I've been thinking about all of these rules individually for a while, so I'm glad that this puzzle came together so well.
I also agree with your difficulty estimate, but it's still a fairly new ruleset.
------------
"Although it doesn't look like it" - bit presumtive, lol. Not that hard to guess you're a newer setter by looking at your LMD page.
Also - the fact that you needed an extra given to solve the puzzle and then removed it from the main link when posting is kinda a red flag to me, even though I liked the puzzle. You shouldn't post puzzles that you can't solve yourself, and you shouldn't end up with a puzzle that you can't solve yourself during setting.
Also not sure I fully agree with your notes on 'how to set chaos construction' - the setting process will vary a lot depending on the ruleset and variants and such you're using. They do require finding a solution partway through setting more often then other puzzle types, but I don't agree with just stating that that's the best way to do it. I didn't do that for most of my chaos constructions.
Also I'd argue that the more important part is to find a solution for the regions specifically, not a solution to the puzzle as a whole. That way you still have some options, but have the solver to guarantee the irregular doesn't break.
Also trying to give out advice to setters as facts while you're still a novice yourself seems inadvisable.
- - -
Agreed on the advice portion, I should probably not do that. On the note of the given, it was well established that it was unnecessary by NXTMaster during testing, I just didn't re-solve it. I should be better about that as well.
Looks like I have another setter to follow to get better at cc!
