How my opponent could know the answer ?

[Falveryn]

The game I talk about : https://boardgamearena.com/gamereview?table=453737742
My question is simple, how to find the blue number without checking the C verifier ?

-Blue can't be odd as there would be no way to determine blue with just C and E.
-Blue can't be 4 as that would make E redundant.
-The only possibility for C is zero 4's.
-So B can only be 2.

I'm new to this game so I'm sure I've misssed something, but how does the opponent know that violet is odd? From the replay it seems that the opponent did not use B verifier.

Using the statements above (B=2) and continuing:
-P can't be even, because there is no 4, so this makes verifier D useless.
-P has to be odd.
For the first game: https://boardgamearena.com/archive/repl ... =453737742

I redo my solver to be sure. But no, the end of my post is right, yours is wrong.
235 makes verifiier B useless.

Yes, I agree my last post was wrong and there are 2 possible answers and Y = P is an option.. This one should(?) be correct.
Consider the attempt as this whole post. You can read the deductions above in this post.
For this, you need to follow all the statements above. We'll continue from P = odd.
-If Y=5 then there is no code. So Y can't be 5 and Y can't be >3.
-Right now, B=2, Y=1/2/3 and P=1/3/5.
-If Y=2, then Y>P leads to 2 codes while Y<P leads to 221. However with 221, verifier B is redundant.
-Verifier E sum must be even since B=2 and Y+P is odd + odd = even.
-P can't be 5. If Y = 1 and Y<P then there are 2 codes 213, 215. If Y = 3 and Y<P then verifier B is redundant (we know it can't be 4).
-Right now, B=2, Y=1/3 , P=1/3.
-If Y=P, on 233, we have verifier B redundant. However, 211 works.
-If Y<P on 213, shown 3 lines above, it shares solution with 215, so it can't be.
-If Y>P on 231, it works.

So the post is proof that it can be done in 1 question. You only need to know if Y=1 or Y=3,

[GMT1]

I wonder the same with this game : https://boardgamearena.com/gamereview?table=457065005
And some other games I played...

If players don't solve the game by themselves, I don't see the point of playing.

So instantly from B&C, you know that p<yb else B would be useless.
Then you don't have much information about purple, so that mean there is a blue or a yellow which equal 2 or 3 or 4 and purple below it (and maybe the parity of D) will fix the value of purple. But that doesn't look to help much.
So if b=y, then D tell the parity of both of them, and A tell the value which isn't 3. So 221 look like a valid solution, and the only one if b=y.
If b>y, then we got b>y>p. If b=3, then D is useless. If b=4, then it's either 432, 431, or 421, D would make 432 and 421 not be differenciated, so 431 is left.
If b<y, then we got y>b>p. If b=4, then y=5, and we got 452 as only valid solution (451 & 453 can't be differenciated). If b=3 then only solution is 342. If b=2 then only solution is 241.

So we got 221/431/452/342/241.
Let me look at my solver. Apparently 241 & 452 are only solutions. At least I got them.
221 makes verificator D useless.
431 has 5 others solutions like 521
and 342 makes verificator B useless.

But that's not too hard.
Note that if you play in 'easy 4' with very high elo players, you can expect them to be way better than me who have around 275 elo, and I reduced the possibilities to five pretty easily.


Note that it's doable in 1 question, and they used 2 for safety because you used 3 questions instantly.

Thank you for your reply, that makes sense.

[GMT1]

With 0 guesses https://boardgamearena.com/gamereview?table=457388358.
I must be dumb.

[Jacer]

With 0 guesses https://boardgamearena.com/gamereview?table=457388358.
I must be dumb.

Look at this. https://boardgamearena.com/11/turingmac ... playFrom=5
My oponent knew answer with only 1 test about number of fours. And that was exacly like with your game "212". Is bugged or what? It is impossible to solve it like this.

Same codes, same verificators. They knew it. This is cheating.



biwebof (your opponent) play Turing Machine only 2 days. Now he have 3th place in Ranking.
Look his other games. He know the answers of every games:
https://boardgamearena.com/archive/repl ... s=89629084;
https://boardgamearena.com/gamereview?table=457392476

I reported bug https://boardgamearena.com/bug?id=109355

[Romain672]

With 0 guesses https://boardgamearena.com/gamereview?table=457388358.
I must be dumb.

Look at this. https://boardgamearena.com/11/turingmac ... playFrom=5
My oponent knew answer with only 1 test about number of fours. And that was exacly like with your game "212". Is bugged or what? It is impossible to solve it like this.

212 only solution. Yeah it's hard to believe.

b=p since you got no information on them.
If there is two 4s then D is useless.
b and p are even else you can't differenciate 1 from 3 from 5. So b=p=2.
if y=3 then B is useless.
if y=4 or y=5 then B is useless since C give the value of yellow.
and finally 222 gives 6 others solutions like 122.
so only solution 212

[Romain672]

https://boardgamearena.com/archive/repl ... s=89629084;

4 solutions: 125-135-521-531
He find it in 2 questions. That's the optimal way.


So yeah, I would be tempted to said just 'get good'...
Maybe he is cheating, but that seem totally doable,


His last defeat was on this game:
https://boardgamearena.com/archive/repl ... s=84207926;
Solutions were 154-252-314-324-342-412-514. So 7. He asked 3 questions which should be enough to win, but it is really hard to first find those possibilities (without mistakes) and then find the verificators to ask and the code to enter.


And please stop open bugs for that
Talk about using a solver if you want in the forum, but don't open bugs for saying someone cheats.

Arena shouldn't be on 'easy 4' anyway imo.

[Jacer]

@romain: if you want report someone for cheating you have to give a reason. If you choose "player used a bug" you have to give link of bug. Is no other way to report cheating

[Romain672]

@romain: if you want report someone for cheating you have to give a reason. If you choose "player used a bug" you have to give link of bug. Is no other way to report cheating

I think cheating is different than using a solver.
I never did it, but I suppose it is done that way to discourage you to report that kind of cheating, especally while it's totally possible he doesn't cheat.

It's hard to differenciate someone who use a solver compared to someone who don't and is just really good.

[biwebof]

Looks like people are accusing me of cheating.
I often type my thought process in chat, but it's time to start documenting them here.

I just played this game: https://boardgamearena.com/1/turingmach ... =457642083

(I will cover the above games after. Doing this one while I still remember since it was hard and I used all 8 minutes to do it.)

Got it after 3 clues! Impossible?

B. One 1.
D. Not 1 even. Therefore, 0 or 2 even.
Therefore, E must be no order (otherwise, 124 / 135 makes other solvers redundant.)
C. B=Y is impossible (makes E redundant.) Therefore, B<Y
Then I convinced myself that 2 even was impossible (I think I just tried all possibilities of 221/241/441 and they all didn't work.)

I will be honest, at this point, I felt like I had enough information to get the answer (it seems very restricted), but time was running out and I didn't figure out it yet, so I clicked yes, and used the extra 2 minutes to get 133. I'm still not sure it's the only answer, but I got it in the time and found that it works, and one answer that works is as good as any other.

[biwebof]

With 0 guesses https://boardgamearena.com/gamereview?table=457388358.
I must be dumb.

Okay, first observation is that purple and blue are indistinguishable, therefore must be same. Also, as 1/3/5 is indistingushable, so either both 2, or both 4.
If both 4, then even > odd is redundant. Therefore, both 2.
AB here is well known combination, yellow cannot be 3.
That leaves only four combinations and only one works.

I think all of these observations are quite easy to make. There are very difficult sets where a clue has to go this way because every other way fails for a different reason, and these are hard. But this one is really not that hard.