Hey, Debabrata here. Apparently I picked the worst time to step away from RU-vid. The first pronunciation of my name is close enough (that's the one that you continue to use later as well). Surprisingly I didn't have to use a computer to create this. I just put in 3 or 4 digits and kept going till I hit an ambiguity, then I'd make a choice and proceed from there. Once I had the first grid I just went back and kept the minimum number of hints I could find that made the grid solvable. It was a very nice experience construction this. I am working on more more puzzle that will hopefully be a little more difficult to solve (but it's a little more difficult to construct as well, so might need to do some programming). In any case I hope this wasn't too easy. I am glad a lot of you guys liked this. I'll keep at it. This gives me a tremendous amount of encouragement. It was great reading all the comments. Thanks a lot, Mark, for solving this puzzle! Edit: I should also mention the first 3 or 4 digits I started placing really determined the way the puzzle would flow, so I did have to do a lot of trail and error around the placements. I kept getting nearly full grids that would suddenly break due to some inconsistency and I'd have to go back and figure out how to change the initial set of digits so I could fix things. So a lot of trail and error but fun none the less.
18:08, took me about 5 minutes trying to see how to start before rereading the rules and being reminded that the digits have to be 3 apart, not just 2! The digits in the center of boxes are surprisingly powerful with that rule.
13:38 Man, this is a surprisingly strong ruleset. Places that look like they couldn't possibly be the next place to go just _crumbled_ when you took a closer look. That was pretty dang fun :D
I love how you aknowlage that still no-one should say that all has been discovered on sudoku variants! Finished in 32 minutes, found a pattern, but couldn't start proving it to myself, so i just plodded through. thanks for puzzle and video!
@@Paolo_De_Leva Interesting. I'm curious if this ruleset has legs to create lots of puzzles. Does what you are saying mean that there would only limited grids that could support this ruleset, they would all have to have lots of roping, and would all solve similarly?
Took me 41 minutes as I kept missing obvious things, but I enjoyed it. Clever setting. Funny thing, I didn't notice the roping until I watched the video and Mark pointed it out.
@@Ramhams1337 I like this sort of puzzle. I tend to find pencil marking satisfying, enjoy puzzles that can be brute-forced, this is right up my alley. Definitely approachable
The passion and enjoyment you show is really infectious. I have been watching you on and off for years and always am happy to watch you solve a puzzle.
Totally fun and quasi-miraculous. It is easy to forget how stunning this kind of puzzle is when we see so many with consecutive constraints in operation. Think of what this would be like if it were the first one we had seen - we would be gobsmacked. Thanks, Mark, for yet another fun puzzle with a clever ruleset that was not all that hard. I loved the puzzle and the video. Congratulations to Debabrata on the debut on the channel, as well!
Solve time is a robust 12:13 for me. It can PROBABLY be a sub-10 puzzle for those who don't need many markings to keep track of digits, as this is definitely an approachable puzzle. Quick, relatively easy and fun... the type of sudoku I can finish off my night on a very positive note while relaxing my mind.
14:32 I noticed the central axes were roped and that some of my pencil marks on the outer squares looked like they _could_ rope, and so I took a gamble that they were...though I still have to look at it more closely to understand _why_ they are actually roped.
@@tmountjr well, if you look box 2 at that time stamp, it is fully specified, and there are a couple of other cells where the candidates can be reduced. as to WHY the roping is fully forced, i suspect that is the primary point of this puzzle, and the SETTER realized it.
Finished in 11:18. Pretty straightforward and approachable sudoku, if you just list out the possibilities of what each digit can be next to. Fun puzzle!
I finished in 17:58 minutes. It's wild how restrictive this ruleset is to solve. It felt exactly like when I first solved the Miracle Sudoku back when. Really fun and surprisingly intuitive. Great Puzzle!
I noticed the roping in both directions fairly quickly, but wasn't sure that could be relied upon to speed up the fill. I assume there's some mathematical proof that this "diff by at least 3" rule leads to the roping?
Slow start for me, but it started moving faster as I filled more of the grid in, loved the full roping going on! Finished in 15:37 (conflict checker off), could have been a bit faster, but oh well! Many thanks to Debabrata for an amazing puzzle!
19:23 for me, I had all of rows 4 5 and 6 filled in and bits of boxes 2 and 8 and had center marked the entire rest of the grid stuck. Wasn't until I applied the ruleset a bit more cleverly to reduce some center marks that I found a few things that cracked the rest of it open smoothly
Rules: 01:26 Let's Get Cracking: 04:57 What about this video's Top Tier Simarkisms?! Three In the Corner: 2x (18:51) And how about this video's Simarkisms?! By Sudoku: 4x (12:33, 13:38, 13:48, 18:07) Pencil Mark/mark: 4x (05:54, 06:15, 09:55, 17:03) Fascinating: 3x (04:19, 08:07, 08:37) In Fact: 3x (02:38, 06:59, 08:23) Missing Something: 2x (10:14, 15:33) Surely: 2x (12:43, 17:35) Obviously: 2x (06:39, 11:01) Weird: 2x (04:37, 09:07) Sorry: 1x (04:22) Clever: 1x (16:45) Lovely: 1x (16:43) Beautiful: 1x (18:59) First Digit: 1x (05:58) Astonishing: 1x (04:01) Approachable: 1x (09:39) Hang On: 1x (10:47) Box Thingy: 1x (08:26) Intriguing: 1x (19:01) Ah: 1x (16:01) Unique: 1x (13:20) Most popular number(>9) and digit this video: Thirteen, Fourteen, Forty Nine, Eighty Four (2 mentions) Three (48 mentions) Antithesis Battles: Low (2) - High (0) Odd (2) - Even (1) Row (5) - Column (3) FAQ: Q1: You missed something! A1: That could very well be the case! Human speech can be hard to understand for computers like me! Point out the ones that I missed and maybe I'll learn! Q2: Can you do this for another channel? A2: I've been thinking about that and wrote some code to make that possible. Let me know which channel you think would be a good fit!
27:40@#8349. Put a few pencil marks in, then eliminate ones that can't go together, and you have a relatively simple solve. The obvious roping didn't hurt either.
Slightly kicking myself that I didn't think to fully pencilmark boxes 2, 4 and 6 at the start, what with the central digits ruling four digits out of four orthogonal cell. Instead I concentrated solely on row 5 and found a 689 triple in the cells that neighboured either of the given 3s. Asking where 6 went in box 3, after getting the 7,8 (around 13:35), was my way forward from there.
38:05 for me. Kind of dismal, but even though I had figured out that roping would be happening, I just couldn't figure out how to prove it, so I had to brute force my way through it.
It was very intuitive for me, did it in 10:26! Super fun and fast to solve. Before I started to watch this channel the only sudoku that I did was the normal paper one. And there we had just a few rules that aren't standard. But now I see many lines and I already know the rule and many times how to approach the sudoku. But I still can't understand how they create such amazing sudokus!! 🤔
At 13:22, I'm jealous at how quick you found this triple, I spent at least 15minutes waffling around the grid, before finally looking into column 7 and seeing this, although I was very glad to find it when i did because the entire puzzle solved right after.
You don't actually need to find that triple to progress, I know because I didn't find it. If you look at the row 3, you either have 7-1-4 or 6-9-3 in box 2. 7-1-4 option breaks the odd cell since it can only be 1 or 7. It flows easy afterwards.
I was a bit slow at this puzzle, 32:45, I think because I got lost in a boondoggle in the wrong part of the puzzle. When I looked at the right part of the puzzle it folded like a paper cup.
thing is, get the very first solve chain "fork" wrong and it'll be an hour because damn, I started with the position of a 1 in the right-middle box - (starting with 1 in c7r4 ...) ... took me an HOUR of constant back and forth (thank god for ctrl+z, also I always spend two minutes filling in pencil marks lol) then in the end it was another 25minutes (after a restart lol because I'd exhausted all solving chains with 1 in c7r4) .
Interesting & fun! I'm going to suggest that such constraints (where orthogonally-connected cells be at least K apart) be called "Cold-Shoulder Constraints" (of order K). Question: for which K do sudokus exist which satisfy cold-shoulder constraints of order K? I'm going to conjecture that K can only be 1, 2, 3 and maybe 4. Another question: do there exist CSC-order 3 sudokus that don't involve roping?
My solve ended with a 3 in the corner. Is the solve path tight enough that everyone will finish with the confetti finish? Seems like it was just a happy coincidence but can setters force something like this?
I can’t believe I’m watching Mark not follow thru with logic. He says the 3 in box 5 eliminates the possible 5 next to it but doesn’t do the same with the 3 in box 4 which would give him the 5 in that box. It’s very un-Mark of him 😂
