Well, it seems like a "move" is decreasing a block of adjacent dice by the same number and checkmate is either 11111 or 11121. This is really random though ... sure I'm missing something.
Posts: 643 | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Oh wow, that's wierd. 11222 gives 2 moves, not 1, even though I could reduce the middle die by 1 to get to the position Tom points out.
Posts: 643 | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think a lot of us have figured out this algorithm from the source code--myself included. But the point is that we see no relation to Checkmate, and it seems, as you said, like an arbitrary algorithm, and so we're trying to find a different rationale for getting right answers, that has the "elegance" that . . . . . SPOILER . . . . taking the largest die, discarding its neighbors, summing the values and subtracting three . . . . . END SPOILER . . . lacks. Hence the suggestion, above, that the source found a deliberately inelegant way to get the right answer to obfuscate the better solution. The author (?) himself suggests as much when he or she repeatedly states, in the commnents, that it's not some random algorithm, and that the name is relevant.
I figured out the Petals Around the Rose thing, which I had not seen before, in about twenty minutes. I don't know if this is good or bad. I have easily spent longer on this one and not figured out the solution, and apparently Hatrack's combined brainpower is stumped as well.
Wouldn't it suck if the whole thing were just a hoax?
quote:Well, it seems like a "move" is decreasing a block of adjacent dice by the same number and checkmate is either 11111 or 11121. This is really random though ... sure I'm missing something.
quote:[Editor's Note: It appears I've upset a few users in one particular forum. One of them says they might sue me or might try to get my page removed :-( But I will definitely talk to my lawyer about it tomorrow (just kidding, I'm not old enough to have a lawyer)! Oh, rika means business, s/he put an angry face at me, I hope they don't get too mad]
A bit immature, if you ask me.
Also, saying
quote: Apparently this link was posted in quite a few forums.
is rather disingenuous when you post the link yourself.
Posts: 1658 | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
edit: in fact, I grant him a license to reproduce any of my posts, provided they are reproduced in their entirety and with clear attribution, and that if he reproduces any I feel lack sufficient context I may require he put up additional commentary by me (likely merely another post or two I made on the subject), but he may always take down the post he has up instead of putting up my additional content.
posted
Dice Game Person: All you had to do was ask; most of us would have said yes. We're not just names and comments, we're real people .
Posts: 8473 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
Although, given the nature of the comments-about-the-comments on the comments page (say THAT five times fast), I might not have.
They are fairly mean-spirited. Which makes me wonder more and more whether this whole thing is a hoax/joke.
Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well yes, but I think that were the person treating us as real people, he or she would not be making such comments at our expense.
Posts: 8473 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
You know, I'm trying to get into the head of the author, here. The actual process used is fairly simple, but I can't for the life of me figure out what this has to do with any meaning or permutation of the word "checkmate."
And I figured out "Petals Around the Rose" quite literally on the second roll. It took me under a minute.
But this one makes no sense whatsoever.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm with Tom on this one. It's very simple to do in your head, but a connection to "Checkmate!"? No idea.
SPOILERS... (as if I need the warning anymore at this point in the thread)
Maybe something to do with not being able to move next to high numbers? But why subtract three at the end? Seems pretty arbitrary.
Posts: 1810 | Registered: Jan 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
I didn't figure out Petals Around The Rose very quickly. It probably took me a good 1/2 hour or more. This one took me longer than that and I did need to analyze the source code (as the -3 seems very arbitrary). I really can't think of any association this has to Checkmate.
SPOILER
The checkmate condition seems to be getting the dice down to 3 ones (so the -3 will make the total 0).
Posts: 1336 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
BIGGER SPOILERS | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | The dice seem to affect the adjacent ones. A bigger number will "kill" the adjacent dice (set them to 0). You start with the highest number die (if there are more than one of the same value, you give precedence to the one on the left). For example: 41235 - the 5 sets the 3 to 0, then the 4 sets the 1 to 0, the 2 then has a 0 on either side and affects nothing. You then add the non-0 values up and subtract 3 to get 8 as the answer.
In the case of 11111 the first 1 kills the second 1, the third 1 kills the fourth 1 and you are left with 10101. Add them up and subtract 3 to get an answer of 0.
This algorithm works but I don't know what it has to do with Checkmate!
[ March 23, 2005, 02:59 PM: Message edited by: solo ]
Posts: 1336 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Sometimes you are left with only two non-zero values: 1 6 1 6 1 yields 9, which leaves a 1 and a 2 in place of the sixes.
I got this visually, and had to arbitrarily put in values to confirm the minus 3. Having read the source code, I can't know for sure if the visual impression (kind of like islands of "power" emanating out from the highest dice) was totally correct, because it's been adjusted by my knowledge of the source code.
I still can't find a "physical" explanation, related to checkmate! or not. I think it's possible he screwed up the source code.
quote:This algorithm works but I don't know what it has to do with Checkmate!
That's actually the one thing I do get. My assumption from the outset was that the "mate" probably referred to adjacent dice. I'd thought "check" meant "to consult," but based on solo's post, I suppose it means "to stop."
I don't know where subtracting three would enter into it, though...
(Petals on the Rose was much more straightforward. Got that one in about three minutes.)
Posts: 884 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
Is it me, or have we a sudden influx of Jewish newbies? (mostly on the other side . . .) I'm very curious as to why that might be, if so.
Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
In my case, you can blame/credit Chris Bridges for my joining here. He's referred to various threads here for some time in our conversations, and I eventually started lurking... and, you know, one thing led to another, and here I am. Thanks for the welcome!
posted
I don't understand the described solution. 46444 yields 7 moves. How does the "delete neighbors of largest cube, add and subtract 3" give the answer?
Posts: 643 | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged |
Shmuel is my writing buddy, met online some years back. We've chatted and e-mailed for quite a while, met once in New York City when I went there for the express purpose of meeting several URL friends from around the country, and we manage to find something to IM and giggle about every day.
Last year he started taking column-writing courses in college and ended up with a deadline similar to my work deadline, so we started bouncing ideas and drafts off each other. I offer him direction and dumbass ideas, he offers impeccable copyediting abilities and the wisdom to tell me when my columns drift off into the kingdoms of Unfunny and Lame.
Most Monday nights we can be found sending lengthy IMs to each other until the wee hours, explaining why the other has to delete the part he really likes.
Posts: 7790 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
Saying "SPOILER" is probably pointless now, but here it is again: SPOILER!
quote:I don't understand the described solution. 46444 yields 7 moves. How does the "delete neighbors of largest cube, add and subtract 3" give the answer?
You missed the step where the largest remaining cube has the same effect after the first deletion goes through. So 46444 begets 06044, then 06004, or possibly 06040. Either way, add 'em up and you get 10. Subtract 3, and you get 7. Voila!
Posts: 884 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:So 46444 begets 06044, then 06004, or possibly 06040.
06044 definitely becomes 06040. The checking of mates goes left to right (see, for example, 56666 versus 66665). As for the interpretation of the puzzle title, I think it's lame. Posts: 1810 | Registered: Jan 1999
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
.
![[Dont Know]](graemlins/dontknow.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
