General inquiry about the forum

[ThomasJohnsen]

I have been following the postings of sudoku puzzles the recent couple of weeks on this site, and I have a couple of questions:

I have come to expect, from earlier experience, very high quality hand-crafted puzzles usually of an average to extremely high difficulty rating. Like the puzzles from phistomefel, stephane.bura, DiMono and many others; puzzles that no machine can generate. It is evident in those puzzles, that the author has spent a considerable amount of time creating the puzzle to try and make something that unfolds in a logical and beautiful way.

This past week I have also been seeing many many puzzles, usually of an easy to average difficulty rating, that most certainly could be machine generated. Very simple puzzles, that most of us could make in an editor within an hour. People seem to like these - they typically get a rating of some 80+% and sometimes 40+ solves within an hour or two of posting. Most of these are so simple, that they can be brute force solved by an algorithm in a matter of seconds.

It is difficult for me to watch a puzzle, I have spent a lot of time creating, only just getting enough solves to earn a grade, while puzzles, I could be churning out at a rate of two to three an hour, get loads of solves and fairly high grades. I fear that constructors like me, who spent a long time to create their puzzles, might be inclined to either a) chose another place to post their puzzles or b) make simpler and easier puzzles that have a broader appeal.

Now I am pretty new here and a fairly inexperienced creator thus my opinions should be taken with a pinch of salt.

I do however feel, that it is ok for me to make a post about my concerns, without offending anyone.

Thus:
* Could/should the puzzle-section of this site have two (or even multiple) sections? One for hand-crafted beauty (or possibly posterity, when rating is high - I would love an 'OLD 100% PUZZLES' thread) and one for more linear puzzles. Is it even possible to determine which is which - there would probably be a need for moderation? Or am I just being an elitist?

Tom

[pin7guin]

Hello Tom,

do you think about a discussion about the forum or about the Rätselportal?
There is a big discussion about the Rätselportal in the following thread (some parts in German, some parts in English):

http://forum.logic-masters.de/showthread.php?tid=1843

Claudia

[ThomasJohnsen]

I translated the first post, and it seems to be about the site preference over sudoku as opposed to other types of puzzles. It doesn't seem to me to relate to my initial post.

My post is about the puzzle portal mainly - not the site itself. About whether it should possibly contain two separate sections - one for hand-crafted puzzles (be it sudoku or other variants) and one for the more simple and linear puzzles. Now hand-crafted may not be the best term here since a hand-crafted puzzle can be both linear, simple and easy. With hand-crafted, I mean those kinds of puzzles that obviously take several hours to make - puzzles that require logic to be completed; not just filling in blanks.
If there were two or more sections of the portal, hand-crafted puzzles would have a longer 'lifetime' before they vanish into oblivion (page 2+).

Btw - I cannot read German very well, so I may be posting something that has already been discussed. Or I may be alone in my views.

Tom

[Dandelo]

The discussion ran exactly in the way you asked for: Should we split the portal or not?

The result was: We leave it as it is, but we add additional start pages for "no Sudoku" and "only Sudoku".

I think, there could be more pages like these, but no split into sections.

You should have come here some years ago. For many years the portal was exactly as you want it.

[ildiko]

... About whether it should possibly contain two separate sections - one for hand-crafted puzzles (be it sudoku or other variants) and one for the more simple and linear puzzles. Now hand-crafted may not be the best term here since a hand-crafted puzzle can be both linear, simple and easy. With hand-crafted, I mean those kinds of puzzles that obviously take several hours to make - puzzles that require logic to be completed; not just filling in blanks.

How do you want to verify it? I would not want to judge it. The authors had to be sincere. They could already use the icons „created with the help of a computer“ or „generated with computer“.

[Hausigel]

A few abstract thoughts:

* Easy puzzles are typically solved by more people than hard ones. That is in the nature of things; authors must certainly be aware of this when they design harder puzzles. I also take it that less time is needed (on average) to create an easy puzzle than to create a hard one.
* So far I have had no reason to suspect that hard puzzles are generally more likely to be hand-crafted than easy ones. Are there any statistics or other kinds of evidence to support this claim? I don't understand what the term "linear" is supposed to mean in this context; according to my understanding, both easy and hard puzzles can have a linear or a non-linear solving path.
* I can think of many reasons why puzzle authors invest more or less time in a specific creation. The assumption that there is a straightforward link between the time spent designing a puzzle and the presence of a nice, clean, logical solving path is wrong in my opinion - not to mention the fact that different solvers may enjoy different kinds of solving logic.
* Finally: I do not think there is a simple relation between the difficulty and the quality of puzzles. It appears to me that both easy puzzles and hard puzzles have their supporters. As far as I am concerned, they both have their rightful place in the puzzle community and in particular the Portal. Which kind one prefers is mostly a matter of personal taste.
* It may be true that some distinguished authors can be found to produce the one kind more often than the other, but just as with the Sudoku-vs-Non-Sudoku debate, I find it (mildly) presumptuous to argue that the one kind is more "valuable" than the other, or that the majority of puzzles from one group is just "noise".


That said, I do not think it is a good idea to split the portal into two sections as suggested.

[ThomasJohnsen]

A few abstract thoughts:

* Easy puzzles are typically solved by more people than hard ones. That is in the nature of things; authors must certainly be aware of this when they design harder puzzles. I also take it that less time is needed (on average) to create an easy puzzle than to create a hard one.
* So far I have had no reason to suspect that hard puzzles are generally more likely to be hand-crafted than easy ones. Are there any statistics or other kinds of evidence to support this claim? I don't understand what the term "linear" is supposed to mean in this context; according to my understanding, both easy and hard puzzles can have a linear or a non-linear solving path.
* I can think of many reasons why puzzle authors invest more or less time in a specific creation. The assumption that there is a straightforward link between the time spent designing a puzzle and the presence of a nice, clean, logical solving path is wrong in my opinion - not to mention the fact that different solvers may enjoy different kinds of solving logic.
* Finally: I do not think there is a simple relation between the difficulty and the quality of puzzles. It appears to me that both easy puzzles and hard puzzles have their supporters. As far as I am concerned, they both have their rightful place in the puzzle community and in particular the Portal. Which kind one prefers is mostly a matter of personal taste.
* It may be true that some distinguished authors can be found to produce the one kind more often than the other, but just as with the Sudoku-vs-Non-Sudoku debate, I find it (mildly) presumptuous to argue that the one kind is more "valuable" than the other, or that the majority of puzzles from one group is just "noise".


That said, I do not think it is a good idea to split the portal into two sections as suggested.

I was not suggesting that difficult is better than easy. Or that simple is generically bad. If it is a Monday evening and I have say 15-20 minutes to spare, I enjoy an easily accessible sudoku like a simple sandwich or killer, where I am familiar with the rules and can get straight to solving. But if it is say a Sunday morning, and I have a couple of free hours and a cup of coffee, I might prefer a real challenge. The problem with having easy and simple along with complex and tricky, is that the latter category tend to drop down the pages possibly without ever getting the attention, that the audience might warrant.
If this site had a number of moderators, who could spot puzzles of exceptional difficulty, a particular beautiful logical path, a new set of interesting rules or similar, and could copy them to a separate thread (or threads), I would know exactly where to look on a given Sunday. As it is now, I will have to save/remember or flick through several pages and possible miss something, I would have loved to try out.
I have seen some great puzzles never really get above 5 or 6 solves, simply because they have a huge block of rules. The rules may be very interesting and make for a sweet puzzle, but when you only have a half an hour, you flick past those, and they end up never really getting any attention. Imo it would be easier and more user-friendly to have a place to find those kinds of puzzles instead of having to remember/save them.

All that being said - I'm new here and don't solve many puzzles at all. I prefer making them significantly more. So maybe I'm not the one who should be making suggestions. I just notice, that there are a number of puzzles of a decent to high quality, that never get any attention at all, which I find a bit sad. And that is my 5 cents.

[CHalb]

Thomas, do you know the possibilities of the advanced search in the portal? You find it here: https://logic-masters.de/Raetselportal/S...eitert.php

You can search e.g. for the nicest very easy puzzles you haven't solved yet. I'm aware that this is applicable only to puzzles already having a visible rating and not to the mentioned with 5 or 6 solves. But I'm sure you get good hints by using the advanced search.

[ThomasJohnsen]

Thomas, do you know the possibilities of the advanced search in the portal? You find it here: https://logic-masters.de/Raetselportal/S...eitert.php

You can search e.g. for the nicest very easy puzzles you haven't solved yet. I'm aware that this is applicable only to puzzles already having a visible rating and not to the mentioned with 5 or 6 solves. But I'm sure you get good hints by using the advanced search.

I did not know that page existed. I must be blind - it's right there on the main page. I have always just clicked Sudoku without thinking. Thanks for the headsup.

[Dandelo]

And don't forget:
The statistics tells us about the registered solvers. We don't know anything about the unregistered. They could be the majority.