Sandra here! (Nala is already sleeping). Thank you for the lovely feature! It was quite the surprise for me, but I always love to see Nala’s adventures get featured. Isn’t it lovely how so many digits build pairs and triples when this puzzle is about finding friends :) loved to read this in a comment as well! And loved to see Simon having so much fun with the solve :D
I'm going to post this for the benefit of fellow novices like me: I can't explain why, but I missed the VERY early and VERY obvious 9 in r4c8, and spent a very long time struggling with this puzzle as a result. It's actually absurd how far into the puzzle I was able to get without that digit... but I did eventually get stuck. Once Simon helped me see it, everything else came together super quickly. It's okay to not be awesome at variant sudoku, I hope. The folks who do this in 25 minutes are awesome, but those of us who take more than an hour are also belong here.
Of COURSE you belong here! I do too. 😁 It took me 45 min to solve, but honestly, if I had tried this puzzle 3 months ago I wouldn't have been able to solve it at all. And even if I can't solve a puzzle, this is still my favorite channel on YT. Some of the folks on here are competition level solvers. Some are novice. Most fall someplace in between. But all belong here. 😁❤️
Lol I clocked in at several hours (I do these at work, so time gets away from me a bit) and it also took me a while to notice the 9, and a while after that to finish the puzzle. Most CtC puzzles in not able to finish at all, but the more I try, the better I get, and that's really what matters.
I think many, if not most of us, start out here as novices and end up improving. So welcome aboard the CtC train where it's quite common for people to need a nudge every now and then and where even the sudoku experts miss the sudoku part of the sudoku puzzles 😅
I agree with Zardox2. This is definitely a channel for everybody. Simon is so incredibly brilliant at quickly deducing what can sometimes take me an hour, if I'm able to figure it out at all, yet he never directs his solve to the other geniuses who tag along and are able to match his speed. I learn from Mark as well but I'm totally a Simon fan because of his beautiful explanations of why a bit of logic forces a particular conclusion. Added note: I can't actually claim I solved this puzzle since I missed that initially r6c5 could have been a 3 that could only be eliminated later. (sigh) So many other simple deductions I missed and ended up doing them the hard way. I have much to learn. Sometimes I don't even bother trying, just to straight to popcorn and watch the CtC movie of the day.
I agree that it could be a possibility for that first-found digit to be a 4 if there were fog in r5c5, but usually in FoW puzzles, if a thermo (or another line) crosses a corner, you can see a little bit of it in an adjacent cell.
@@stevieinselby Which is likely how the original solvers consciously or subconsciously eliminated 4 as an option and why it needed to change. If a puzzle is only solvable due to a quirk of the UI the puzzle needs to be adjusted.
I think it's fair to use the fact that solvers can see thermos that are present in corners, but not to use the fact that solvers would be able to see such a thermo, since a solver who's new to fog of war won't know that such a thermo would be visible.
I remember stumbling over the channel when I was looking for something mellow to put on while trying to get my 1 year old to sleep. I never thought I’d actually be able to attempt and even complete some of these. Thanks for the enthusiasm which brought these intriguing puzzles to my attention.
I think it is DEFINITELY helpful to new solvers to be as thorough as possible when it comes to puzzle rules and their implications. It is far better to be a bit wordier-and-redundant but *clear* -- as opposed to being more technically concise but opening up the possibility for 'gotchas' and confusion. As an extra point of relevance to Cracking the Cryptic: on the phone app, Kropki puzzles *almost always* feature a negative constraint, whereas the youtube-featured Kropki puzzles *almost never* feature negative constraint -- meaning that someone used to one format is likely to be blindsided when experiencing the other, unless it's made really clear in the rules. Providing more explanation is also surely a benefit for solvers who don't natively speak English -- just as it's useful for those who don't natively speak Puzzle. As a note, "Not all possible dots are given" is the wrong way to state a lack of negative constraint, since strictly speaking it does still imply information, namely that there *is* in fact at least one dot-less pair which could have had a dot. Whereas something like "Not all possible dots are necessarily given" (or a more plain-English phrase like "Cells without dots between them aren't required to obey one of these relationships, but they might do so regardless"). Wordier, sure, but truer and also more understandable to a greater number of solvers.
Totally agree with your second point. I differ on the main point... "(Not) All possible dots are given" should always be stated. But i think that "Not all dots are necessarily given" (which should have been the case here) should always be omitted. The phone app should follow the same protocol.
"Those who don't natively speak Puzzle" got a good laugh out me. And after reading your comment I find myself imagining a puzzle where the slight distinction between "not all dots are given" and "not all dots are necessarily given" is a necessary part of the solve. Where there's some Deadly Pattern towards the end that only breaks when you realize that one way makes the ENTIRE GRID free of "bonus dots", and one doesn't. I have evil ideas and probably shouldn't be allowed to construct puzzles. I've already done the same thing with Minesweeper. A puzzle that can only be solved logically if you SAY it can be solved logically, and is impossible if you don't.
Here's a suggestion: word it as "If two adjacent digits are consequtive, they are separated by a white dot" "If two adjacent cells are separated by a white dot, they are consequtive digits" "Iff two adjacent cells are separated by a white dot, they are consequtive digits" ("iff" being logic for "if and only if"). This is how a formal logistician would say it. It's shorter than adding a sentence about the negative constraint, and it's completely unambiguous.
@@davidgustavsson4000 That is only completely unambiguous to a those that know formal logic, and that's *exactly* my point: rules should be written so as to make them as accessible as possible, NOT in a practically-obscurantist fashion like that
@@anaphysik Like Simon pointed out, the most common version would then be "If dot, consequtive", which would be intuitively interpreted correctly by beginners and professionals alike. The second most common would be "iff", and I guess one could write out "if and only if", or just teach it like we do "orthogonally adjacent" or other technically necessary jargon. The problem with a lot of imprecise text is that it doesn't necessarily help beginners either. A shorter ruleset is easier to memorize. The current convention makes the most common ruleset the most verbose. Even a beginner, should they realize the possibility of a negative constraint, will be able to fine comb "if a then b" and realize it's not bijective, I'm sure of it.
Simon: "I must prove everything by logical deduction and not use tricks like uniqueness" Also Simon: "Shall I just write 3 into the corner?" 😂 Loved this puzzle and finding Nala's friend 🦔, although I'll admit to fluking the start because I didn't consider the possibility of the thermo going _up_ through c6.
I solved it in 63 minutes and I'm rather proud that I didn't have to stop and watch Simon for any hints. Of course the fog helps by rewarding you for partial solves,so I wasn't rethinking my answers all the time
I follow your channel for months and this is the second puzzle I am able to solve all of my own. It seems like I am learning a few tricks but my greater improvement is that I finally use my guts. I used to stay bloicked at a point becuase I wasn't sure if it was the right number and lost many puzzles but now I simply try and put the numbers in. Love you guys!!! That you corner gaining your religion
Your point at the very end about the thermo in the fog, if the thermo was going through that middle box diagonally, wouldn't you see the edge of it sticking out in the corner of the box on the right? The thermos are quite thick.
Oh, wow! I thoroughly enjoyed that! Would you believe I was thinking just this morning, how I'd love to see another Sandra and Nala puzzle?! Nala must have read my mind .....
The logic at 42:57 doesn't apply because you would be able to see the diagonal line passing through the top left corner in r5c6 (or the bottom right corner of r5c4) but if the software showed really thin lines, yeah maybe it would be obscured enough to work out. Really lovely puzzle, and my fourth solve overall; took me 50:37. Thank you for your work as always. Much love from Spain 💜
I mean in the foggy r5c5 you would've seen the thermo barely pointing out of the corner of the visible boxes since they are so thick (and Simon has used this logic in a previous puzzle) but i guess better safe than sorry
@@snipegrzywa You cannot go vertically throught r5c5 with a 4 in r5c7 between the dots. And I agree that you would have seen the diagonal thermo, but as a negative constraint this is very weak.
27:15. Itchy from the flea. Loved the celebration (3 in the corner) with the hedgehog. Trickiest part was the green thermo and figuring out if was increasing or decreasing.
I just started this puzzle and didn't get anywhere with so I checked back here and noticed that Simons dot clues were the reverse of mine. I play in dark mode and it seems that dark mode makes the white dots black and the black dots white! I'm glad I didn't spend much time before I spotted that.
Wow, 21 minutes and there were many times, when I was Goodliffing the thermos, that I was just "uh? ok, that just happened?". Really lovely puzzle that seemed to fit me well. And I did not use any thermos in corners. Was able to deduce likely thermos in the fog anyway. And I just love the breakin. The first digit was a real shocker to me.
I almost always "Goodliff" the thermometers, so I too like when thermo puzzles are quite restricted. Nice to be rewarded rather than punished with a mess of pencil marks. So many pairs and triples that jumped out of nowhere when filling out thermos
@43:03 for the sake of a carefull start i can understad people needing r5c5 having to be non-fog, but both in r5c4 (bottom-righthand corner) and r5c6 (top-lefthand corner) one would be able to see a smidge of a thermometer line going diagonally across the cell intersections. Loved the puzzle, had to start it up again a few days later being tired and all when i first tried it. So it took me over an hour (just) to solve, but i am happy with my solve. Thank you @Sandra_and_Nala and @Simon for the puzzle and video!
I managed it in 28 min. Very nice puzzle. In these fog of war puzzles, what I like is that there is generally only one path of logic available at each time point, so, while intimidating at first glance, they can be quite approachable.
a really lovely puzzle (just the right amount of struggle and happy surprise for me), thanks @Sandra_and_Nala. and for Nala, it's good to know that hedgehog fleas are host specific--so a happy ending after all.
52:33 was my time today. That was a very enjoyable puzzle with a good level of challenge for me without being overwhelming or requiring any real insane logic. I liked it! 👍👍
Unfortunately I couldn't see the 456 triple in column 9 for about 10 mins of looking. I had a bit of a scowl for that part of my solve. But another really fun puzzle
12:06 I figured out why the centre cell cant contain fog. If the thermo crosses the centre cell, going from the top right to the bottom right, then it's possible for r5c6 to be a 4. If r5c6 has more than one possibility, then we don't get our starting digit.
Such an enjoyable puzzle. Not too hard, but you still had to think to work your way through it. Lots of different logic had to be applied. Thank you so much Sandra and Nala!!
If it's worded like in those rules, I think you can drop the part about there being no negative kropki constraint. If there was one, we would write "all orthogonally adjacent digits in a 1:2 ratio are separated by a black dot". Saying "cells separated by a black dots are in a 1:2 ratio" indeed doesn't say anything about cells that are not separated by a black dot, so there is no need to be redundant about the absence of negative constraint.
This took me 103 minutes to complete. No kidding, that's a lot. BUT.... I did it without coming to the video for tips. This is my first time doing that and I'm wildly excited.
I saw the white dot in Box 4 affected the 3/4 pair but didn't deduce it also affected the 4/5 pair. After watching you explain that, the puzzle solved really quickly.
Blazed through this one. 22:23. I felt like I looked in the right places pretty quickly. Figuring out the 2 in box 4 probably would have taken me a long time in a worse day but today I got it quite quickly.
I love the colorfulness of the puzzle! Your Pencilmarkings are so Brilliant, you help us armchair sudokians just crash through! 32:04 i'm like nice a 356 pair in column 5, time to place a 4 in box 2. [33:56 so you never end up seeing it.] 33:12 it's funny you'd see this different version of it. 34:32 wait doesn't yellow have to have a 7 on the line, the puzzle seems to be on the downward swing with so many of your pencil marking just knocking through. 36:03 well the red line isn't a nine anymore is it, 9 can't be in the middle of a line. 39:55 considering the black dot making a 6:3 pair is coming up, it is in fact going to be a 3.
I got a different picture for the 3 in the corner :D Edit: also I think the puzzle would still be solvable if the middle cell was fog because you can see the corner bits of thermos poking into adjacent cells when they move diagonally. Maybe it's just the case that you wouldn't be able to know for sure if they were supposed to be there...
Very nice puzzle, thanks Sandra! 24:23 for me, felt like a pretty fast solve this time around. Maybe I just looked at the right numbers at the right time...
Maybe you could change it to: Digits separated by a black dot must be in a ratio 1:2 (implies other's may). And if you want to use the negative constraint you can just add *Only* at the start.
after several days of disappointment, finally one I could actually solve! 28:23, although I did accidentally place a correct digit while pencil marking a fog cell 😖
Thanks! Sudoku is a favorite past time for me and it helped me to create my own puzzles named Magic Square Puzzles. Magic Square Puzzles involve both Arithmetic and Logic.
What a lovely puzzle. I particularly liked the way the hedgehog was revealed by clearing the very last foggy cell. Hedgehogs are one of my favourite animals. One of my earliest childhood memories was when my dad got me out of bed to look at a mother hedgehog with three tiny hoglets. The fleas they often carry are not the same as dog fleas, so Nala wouldn't have become infested. If you put out a saucer of dried mealworms, they love them so much they completely ignore your presence. I even had one become so tame it would climb my leg because it could smell the packet I had in my lap. @ 24:36 - "8...7...6...5...4" - Sigh! You're doing your usual thing of focussing on one thing at a time and ignoring everything else. You got the 6 on a white dot, which would have to join with a 5, so the next digit on the thermo was no more than 4, and since 2 and 1 are already in the row, the first two digits in the row must be 34, and the last two on the thermo must be 78. @ 28:02 - Have you lost your mind? You've clearly got the tip of a thermo, and you're trying to make it be the lowest cell on the thermo. I know I've moaned before about you inventing and clinging to possibilities that can clearly be ruled out instantly, but this is a whole new level. There is no problem with a foggy centre cell. If the thermo did take the path you suggested, there would be bits of line visible in the top-left of R5C6 and bottom-right of R5C4. I can only assume that the ones who objected didn't consider this.
That is such a nice childhood memory you have there! I have noticed that those fleas don’t really know what to do with Nala. It’s usually just 1 and it would walk around aimlessly on her head (not the rest of her body) until I pick it up. Kind of funny 😃
@37:34 An alternative move here would be looking at the 39 in r8c3 and seeing the thermo continues. Just an alternative, it doesn't do any more or less.
What a lovely video! The puzzle is also really nice, and one that will be on my "try this one soon" list. Simon, your pleasure is contagious. As to whether "not all dots are necessarily given" should be in the rules - I actually think it helps novice variant sudoku solvers to be primed with the idea that, in some puzzles, there may actually be a negative constraint - but not in this puzzle. I am trying to remember a particular occasion when this came home to me when I was a novice solver - but it is on the edge of memory and I can't quite draw it forth. Nevertheless, in my reading comments on some of the discord channels (and in the comments on videos), complaints about rules being incomplete is not uncommon, so I think, in the case of negative constraints, it's better to be more fulsome.
Listened to the Hamish Hawk song. Clever lyrics but I wouldn't exactly call it a banger or an earworm. Rather reminiscent of Prefab Sprout, Lloyd Cole or even The Smiths, that kind of thing.
Sandra here! (Nala is already sleeping). Thank you for the lovely feature! It was quite the surprise for me, but I always love to see Nala’s adventures get featured. Isn’t it lovely how so many digits build pairs and triples when this puzzle is about finding friends :) loved to read this in a comment as well! And loved to see Simon having so much fun with the solve :D
Your puzzles are my favorites to solve on this channel nowadays ❤
are you now Sandra, Nala & flea?
That's Nala's friend in the corner, proving his devotion.
That was a very enjoyable puzzle.
Very enjoyable puzzle! Nala is adorable - as is the hedgehog in the corner!
I love that sudokus now have a narrative arc. ❤
I'm going to post this for the benefit of fellow novices like me: I can't explain why, but I missed the VERY early and VERY obvious 9 in r4c8, and spent a very long time struggling with this puzzle as a result. It's actually absurd how far into the puzzle I was able to get without that digit... but I did eventually get stuck. Once Simon helped me see it, everything else came together super quickly.
It's okay to not be awesome at variant sudoku, I hope. The folks who do this in 25 minutes are awesome, but those of us who take more than an hour are also belong here.
Of COURSE you belong here!
I do too. 😁
It took me 45 min to solve, but honestly, if I had tried this puzzle 3 months ago I wouldn't have been able to solve it at all.
And even if I can't solve a puzzle, this is still my favorite channel on YT.
Some of the folks on here are competition level solvers.
Some are novice.
Most fall someplace in between.
But all belong here.
😁❤️
Lol I clocked in at several hours (I do these at work, so time gets away from me a bit) and it also took me a while to notice the 9, and a while after that to finish the puzzle. Most CtC puzzles in not able to finish at all, but the more I try, the better I get, and that's really what matters.
I think many, if not most of us, start out here as novices and end up improving. So welcome aboard the CtC train where it's quite common for people to need a nudge every now and then and where even the sudoku experts miss the sudoku part of the sudoku puzzles 😅
I agree with Zardox2. This is definitely a channel for everybody. Simon is so incredibly brilliant at quickly deducing what can sometimes take me an hour, if I'm able to figure it out at all, yet he never directs his solve to the other geniuses who tag along and are able to match his speed.
I learn from Mark as well but I'm totally a Simon fan because of his beautiful explanations of why a bit of logic forces a particular conclusion.
Added note: I can't actually claim I solved this puzzle since I missed that initially r6c5 could have been a 3 that could only be eliminated later. (sigh) So many other simple deductions I missed and ended up doing them the hard way. I have much to learn. Sometimes I don't even bother trying, just to straight to popcorn and watch the CtC movie of the day.
Take all day to solve it if you want, as long as it's fun! Of course you belong :)
Isn’t it funny how something as simple as revealing Nala’s latest thing can put a smile on your face? 😊 Thanks for the puzzle, Sandra!
Happy to hear that it brought you joy! Thank you :)
17:20
Simon wondering if the thermos can overlap when clearly they already have x
That´s a flea in the corner along with the hedgehog. That´s why Nala got that flea.
I like how this puzzle was all about finding friend pairs in the grid. Excellent theming in the solution path
Excellent comment as well! Thank you so much 😊
That's flea in the corner.
I agree that it could be a possibility for that first-found digit to be a 4 if there were fog in r5c5, but usually in FoW puzzles, if a thermo (or another line) crosses a corner, you can see a little bit of it in an adjacent cell.
Agreed, you might have to look carefully to spot it but there is always a tell-tale mark in the corner of the cell.
@@stevieinselby Which is likely how the original solvers consciously or subconsciously eliminated 4 as an option and why it needed to change. If a puzzle is only solvable due to a quirk of the UI the puzzle needs to be adjusted.
I thought the same thing. But it’s easier to see it if it’s there rather than when it’s absent. 🤣
Yeah, I had a feeling it had to do with that blue thermo.
I think it's fair to use the fact that solvers can see thermos that are present in corners, but not to use the fact that solvers would be able to see such a thermo, since a solver who's new to fog of war won't know that such a thermo would be visible.
I absolutely love the combination of adorable light humour with some of the best rulesets, cheers to Sanda&Nala!
Thank you! Happy to hear that you enjoy my (our) puzzles so much!
@@Sandra_and_NalaAnd thank you for setting these, can't wait to find out what Nala's going to be looking for in the fog next :)
I love Sandra's puzzles! Always so playful you can't help but smile.
They feel like little adventures. 🙂
Where can we find more?
@@GeekRedux on Logic Masters Germany under the Name „SandraNala“ ❤ thank you!
I remember stumbling over the channel when I was looking for something mellow to put on while trying to get my 1 year old to sleep. I never thought I’d actually be able to attempt and even complete some of these. Thanks for the enthusiasm which brought these intriguing puzzles to my attention.
Welcome to the channel! Have you tried any of the puzzles, and have you had some success?
I think it is DEFINITELY helpful to new solvers to be as thorough as possible when it comes to puzzle rules and their implications. It is far better to be a bit wordier-and-redundant but *clear* -- as opposed to being more technically concise but opening up the possibility for 'gotchas' and confusion. As an extra point of relevance to Cracking the Cryptic: on the phone app, Kropki puzzles *almost always* feature a negative constraint, whereas the youtube-featured Kropki puzzles *almost never* feature negative constraint -- meaning that someone used to one format is likely to be blindsided when experiencing the other, unless it's made really clear in the rules. Providing more explanation is also surely a benefit for solvers who don't natively speak English -- just as it's useful for those who don't natively speak Puzzle.
As a note, "Not all possible dots are given" is the wrong way to state a lack of negative constraint, since strictly speaking it does still imply information, namely that there *is* in fact at least one dot-less pair which could have had a dot. Whereas something like "Not all possible dots are necessarily given" (or a more plain-English phrase like "Cells without dots between them aren't required to obey one of these relationships, but they might do so regardless"). Wordier, sure, but truer and also more understandable to a greater number of solvers.
Totally agree with your second point.
I differ on the main point... "(Not) All possible dots are given" should always be stated. But i think that "Not all dots are necessarily given" (which should have been the case here) should always be omitted. The phone app should follow the same protocol.
"Those who don't natively speak Puzzle" got a good laugh out me. And after reading your comment I find myself imagining a puzzle where the slight distinction between "not all dots are given" and "not all dots are necessarily given" is a necessary part of the solve. Where there's some Deadly Pattern towards the end that only breaks when you realize that one way makes the ENTIRE GRID free of "bonus dots", and one doesn't.
I have evil ideas and probably shouldn't be allowed to construct puzzles. I've already done the same thing with Minesweeper. A puzzle that can only be solved logically if you SAY it can be solved logically, and is impossible if you don't.
Here's a suggestion: word it as
"If two adjacent digits are consequtive, they are separated by a white dot"
"If two adjacent cells are separated by a white dot, they are consequtive digits"
"Iff two adjacent cells are separated by a white dot, they are consequtive digits" ("iff" being logic for "if and only if").
This is how a formal logistician would say it. It's shorter than adding a sentence about the negative constraint, and it's completely unambiguous.
@@davidgustavsson4000 That is only completely unambiguous to a those that know formal logic, and that's *exactly* my point: rules should be written so as to make them as accessible as possible, NOT in a practically-obscurantist fashion like that
@@anaphysik Like Simon pointed out, the most common version would then be "If dot, consequtive", which would be intuitively interpreted correctly by beginners and professionals alike. The second most common would be "iff", and I guess one could write out "if and only if", or just teach it like we do "orthogonally adjacent" or other technically necessary jargon.
The problem with a lot of imprecise text is that it doesn't necessarily help beginners either. A shorter ruleset is easier to memorize. The current convention makes the most common ruleset the most verbose.
Even a beginner, should they realize the possibility of a negative constraint, will be able to fine comb "if a then b" and realize it's not bijective, I'm sure of it.
Simon: "I must prove everything by logical deduction and not use tricks like uniqueness"
Also Simon: "Shall I just write 3 into the corner?" 😂
Loved this puzzle and finding Nala's friend 🦔, although I'll admit to fluking the start because I didn't consider the possibility of the thermo going _up_ through c6.
I solved it in 63 minutes and I'm rather proud that I didn't have to stop and watch Simon for any hints. Of course the fog helps by rewarding you for partial solves,so I wasn't rethinking my answers all the time
I agree totally with you, Simon. The negative constraint is *so* powerful that no one should hide it in any ruleset.
17:56, confetti when finding a friend.
...
But, oh no, the text after you finish the puzzle!
I follow your channel for months and this is the second puzzle I am able to solve all of my own. It seems like I am learning a few tricks but my greater improvement is that I finally use my guts. I used to stay bloicked at a point becuase I wasn't sure if it was the right number and lost many puzzles but now I simply try and put the numbers in.
Love you guys!!! That you corner gaining your religion
Lots of pairs and tripples when searching for friends nice puzzle
Finisshed in 27:10. I'm really loving these more approachable fog of war puzzles.
I got 27:40, so close
I'd like to propose that we call a white dot with one side on a thermometer a "mercury leak"
That's awesome
It's interesting to watch a different solving in the second half. Thank you for the puzzle and solve.
Your point at the very end about the thermo in the fog, if the thermo was going through that middle box diagonally, wouldn't you see the edge of it sticking out in the corner of the box on the right? The thermos are quite thick.
I don't know what it is about fog puzzles that I enjoy so much... but I really do love to do / watch these!
Oh, wow! I thoroughly enjoyed that!
Would you believe I was thinking just this morning, how I'd love to see another Sandra and Nala puzzle?! Nala must have read my mind .....
The logic at 42:57 doesn't apply because you would be able to see the diagonal line passing through the top left corner in r5c6 (or the bottom right corner of r5c4) but if the software showed really thin lines, yeah maybe it would be obscured enough to work out. Really lovely puzzle, and my fourth solve overall; took me 50:37. Thank you for your work as always.
Much love from Spain 💜
I love these fog sudokus. It really helps me know where to start.
"There's a great big purple thing that's come out of the fog."
When did we go from puzzle solving to a horror film?
I was thinking smut film but that says more about me tbh
Hells, this doggo is one mighty sudoku setter.
That's a flea in the corner, that's a flea on the hedgehog, moving to a kitten. 🎶
Thanks for the analysis explaining the reasoning for the middle NOT being fog. Now I get it. An excellent solve again. 😊
I mean in the foggy r5c5 you would've seen the thermo barely pointing out of the corner of the visible boxes since they are so thick (and Simon has used this logic in a previous puzzle) but i guess better safe than sorry
*Edit* Disregard - In that case the r5c6 would be 2 regardless, so actually, ya, your point stands.
@@snipegrzywa You cannot go vertically throught r5c5 with a 4 in r5c7 between the dots. And I agree that you would have seen the diagonal thermo, but as a negative constraint this is very weak.
Much better to not use partially visible thermos like that. Especially as this was a rather complicated first deduction anyway.
thanks for the song rec. very good
21 for me, much faster than a usual time for me. Delighted. Spiny Norman is a delightful surprise.
I finished in 31:02, the fog of war puzzles of Sandra & Nala are always a treat ;)
A small struggle near the beginning, but 31 minutes and a wonderful puzzle, along with a wonderful friend!
Approachable but very fun to solve. Loved it.
27:15. Itchy from the flea. Loved the celebration (3 in the corner) with the hedgehog. Trickiest part was the green thermo and figuring out if was increasing or decreasing.
Yes!! this was my first solo solve!! what a lovely puzzle!
I just started this puzzle and didn't get anywhere with so I checked back here and noticed that Simons dot clues were the reverse of mine. I play in dark mode and it seems that dark mode makes the white dots black and the black dots white! I'm glad I didn't spend much time before I spotted that.
Wow, 21 minutes and there were many times, when I was Goodliffing the thermos, that I was just "uh? ok, that just happened?". Really lovely puzzle that seemed to fit me well. And I did not use any thermos in corners. Was able to deduce likely thermos in the fog anyway. And I just love the breakin.
The first digit was a real shocker to me.
I almost always "Goodliff" the thermometers, so I too like when thermo puzzles are quite restricted. Nice to be rewarded rather than punished with a mess of pencil marks. So many pairs and triples that jumped out of nowhere when filling out thermos
Very cook puzzle! Can't wait to see where the flea ends up in the next puzzle from Sandra!
This one was a lot of fun--would love to see more.
@43:03 for the sake of a carefull start i can understad people needing r5c5 having to be non-fog, but both in r5c4 (bottom-righthand corner) and r5c6 (top-lefthand corner) one would be able to see a smidge of a thermometer line going diagonally across the cell intersections.
Loved the puzzle, had to start it up again a few days later being tired and all when i first tried it. So it took me over an hour (just) to solve, but i am happy with my solve.
Thank you @Sandra_and_Nala and @Simon for the puzzle and video!
I managed it in 28 min. Very nice puzzle. In these fog of war puzzles, what I like is that there is generally only one path of logic available at each time point, so, while intimidating at first glance, they can be quite approachable.
❤ the puzzle, ❤Nala, ❤ the hedgehog in the corner, ❤️Simon’s enthusiastic solve!
I agree with every ❤
@@emilywilliams3237 ❤️!
That moment at 28:00 when Simon started treating the tip of a thermo as a bulb really cracked me up lol
Me too! Came to see if anyone else noticed😂
That Hamish Hawk song indeed is a banger! I'll have to check out more of his stuff!
a really lovely puzzle (just the right amount of struggle and happy surprise for me), thanks @Sandra_and_Nala. and for Nala, it's good to know that hedgehog fleas are host specific--so a happy ending after all.
Aww poor Nala, that was a nice funny ending. Good solve Simon.
My time was 01:00:02
My first fog puzzle. Very enjoyable.
Funny that Simon assumed the friend was some kind of giant 3 in the corner.
52:33 was my time today. That was a very enjoyable puzzle with a good level of challenge for me without being overwhelming or requiring any real insane logic. I liked it! 👍👍
Had a smile on my face all the way through - love the Sandra-Nala puzzles!
Unfortunately I couldn't see the 456 triple in column 9 for about 10 mins of looking. I had a bit of a scowl for that part of my solve. But another really fun puzzle
12:06 I figured out why the centre cell cant contain fog.
If the thermo crosses the centre cell, going from the top right to the bottom right, then it's possible for r5c6 to be a 4. If r5c6 has more than one possibility, then we don't get our starting digit.
After an accidental reset early on I managed this puzzle in about 16 minutes. Truly delightful and I enjoyed meeting Nala 's friend!
I needed help from Simon twice, but I really enjoyed this puzzle!
Really loved this puzzle! Completed it in 34:01 and am quite proud of my time considering I solved before watching :)
77 minutes and I'm very proud indeed. Very nice puzzle!
Very lovely and funny puzzle. And what a surprise discovering Nala's new little friend in a ......😂
Such an enjoyable puzzle. Not too hard, but you still had to think to work your way through it. Lots of different logic had to be applied. Thank you so much Sandra and Nala!!
This one took me a while, but I got through it! Tell Nala I love her!
Thank goodness it wasn't too difficult for me to play, and I was able to complete it in a reasonable amount of time. I enjoyed that.
Awesome! Thanks for a great puzzle!
If it's worded like in those rules, I think you can drop the part about there being no negative kropki constraint. If there was one, we would write "all orthogonally adjacent digits in a 1:2 ratio are separated by a black dot". Saying "cells separated by a black dots are in a 1:2 ratio" indeed doesn't say anything about cells that are not separated by a black dot, so there is no need to be redundant about the absence of negative constraint.
This took me 103 minutes to complete. No kidding, that's a lot. BUT.... I did it without coming to the video for tips. This is my first time doing that and I'm wildly excited.
A hedgehog - nice! Took me 90 minutes. At least, I solved it. This was a nice puzzle. Thank you Sandra and Nala!
One of my favourite! loved it!
What a fun puzzle! It's nice to do something that doesn't break my mind once in a while, lol.
I saw the white dot in Box 4 affected the 3/4 pair but didn't deduce it also affected the 4/5 pair. After watching you explain that, the puzzle solved really quickly.
Blazed through this one. 22:23. I felt like I looked in the right places pretty quickly. Figuring out the 2 in box 4 probably would have taken me a long time in a worse day but today I got it quite quickly.
I love the colorfulness of the puzzle! Your Pencilmarkings are so Brilliant, you help us armchair sudokians just crash through!
32:04 i'm like nice a 356 pair in column 5, time to place a 4 in box 2. [33:56 so you never end up seeing it.]
33:12 it's funny you'd see this different version of it.
34:32 wait doesn't yellow have to have a 7 on the line, the puzzle seems to be on the downward swing with so many of your pencil marking just knocking through.
36:03 well the red line isn't a nine anymore is it, 9 can't be in the middle of a line.
39:55 considering the black dot making a 6:3 pair is coming up, it is in fact going to be a 3.
I got a different picture for the 3 in the corner :D
Edit: also I think the puzzle would still be solvable if the middle cell was fog because you can see the corner bits of thermos poking into adjacent cells when they move diagonally. Maybe it's just the case that you wouldn't be able to know for sure if they were supposed to be there...
My time was 23:17, thank you for the puzzle ❤
24:29 for me. Flowed really nicely!
30min for me, it’s been a while since I beat Simon’s time, really enjoyed the puzzle!
16:43 ... I found great joy in solving this (and loved the ending)
Nice puzzle!
The whole Hampshire hawk album with that song on is wonderful
A rare occasion where I was faster than Simon. I'm glad I tried this one, very fun and quite approachable.
This was a very fun 30:57 for me. Very nice balance of sudoku and other rules through the puzzle!
absolutely love these puzzles from Sandra & Nala, 23:19 for me
Very nice puzzle, thanks Sandra! 24:23 for me, felt like a pretty fast solve this time around. Maybe I just looked at the right numbers at the right time...
Maybe you could change it to: Digits separated by a black dot must be in a ratio 1:2 (implies other's may). And if you want to use the negative constraint you can just add *Only* at the start.
after several days of disappointment, finally one I could actually solve!
28:23, although I did accidentally place a correct digit while pencil marking a fog cell 😖
Thanks! Sudoku is a favorite past time for me and it helped me to create my own puzzles named Magic Square Puzzles. Magic Square Puzzles involve both Arithmetic and Logic.
Thanks so much!
27:25 for me. I love fog of war so much! And I love the stories behind the fog
77 minutes and change, because I'm bad at these, but it's my first solve yet of a non-GAS puzzle without resorting to watching any of the video. :D
Simon's reaction to finding the Hedgehog is cracking me up!
That is the cutest little hedgehog there! Thank you @Sandra_and_Nala
What a lovely puzzle. I particularly liked the way the hedgehog was revealed by clearing the very last foggy cell. Hedgehogs are one of my favourite animals. One of my earliest childhood memories was when my dad got me out of bed to look at a mother hedgehog with three tiny hoglets. The fleas they often carry are not the same as dog fleas, so Nala wouldn't have become infested. If you put out a saucer of dried mealworms, they love them so much they completely ignore your presence. I even had one become so tame it would climb my leg because it could smell the packet I had in my lap.
@ 24:36 - "8...7...6...5...4" - Sigh! You're doing your usual thing of focussing on one thing at a time and ignoring everything else. You got the 6 on a white dot, which would have to join with a 5, so the next digit on the thermo was no more than 4, and since 2 and 1 are already in the row, the first two digits in the row must be 34, and the last two on the thermo must be 78.
@ 28:02 - Have you lost your mind? You've clearly got the tip of a thermo, and you're trying to make it be the lowest cell on the thermo. I know I've moaned before about you inventing and clinging to possibilities that can clearly be ruled out instantly, but this is a whole new level.
There is no problem with a foggy centre cell. If the thermo did take the path you suggested, there would be bits of line visible in the top-left of R5C6 and bottom-right of R5C4. I can only assume that the ones who objected didn't consider this.
That is such a nice childhood memory you have there! I have noticed that those fleas don’t really know what to do with Nala. It’s usually just 1 and it would walk around aimlessly on her head (not the rest of her body) until I pick it up. Kind of funny 😃
Very nice puzzle. I love the fog variant 🙂
@37:34 An alternative move here would be looking at the 39 in r8c3 and seeing the thermo continues. Just an alternative, it doesn't do any more or less.
What a lovely video! The puzzle is also really nice, and one that will be on my "try this one soon" list. Simon, your pleasure is contagious. As to whether "not all dots are necessarily given" should be in the rules - I actually think it helps novice variant sudoku solvers to be primed with the idea that, in some puzzles, there may actually be a negative constraint - but not in this puzzle. I am trying to remember a particular occasion when this came home to me when I was a novice solver - but it is on the edge of memory and I can't quite draw it forth. Nevertheless, in my reading comments on some of the discord channels (and in the comments on videos), complaints about rules being incomplete is not uncommon, so I think, in the case of negative constraints, it's better to be more fulsome.
28:13, thank you - excellent puzzle!
Delightful! Really enjoyed this!
Good, thanks. Not too difficult but just enought grit in the oyster.
Hedgehog recovering from explosive 3 trauma.
also - 28 mins. Excellent puzzle!
37:07 for me. Nala is facetious once again 😊🎉
Great fog of war 🙃
Listened to the Hamish Hawk song. Clever lyrics but I wouldn't exactly call it a banger or an earworm. Rather reminiscent of Prefab Sprout, Lloyd Cole or even The Smiths, that kind of thing.
28:46 The way the the purple thermo is considered to hang upside down may explain the amount of bad weather in the UK... :-D