Agent Plissken

Are endgames like this possible to solve through logic that you know of? Or do you just have to get lucky?

edit* POST YOUR BEST EXPERT TIMES!

__________________
Dyin' ain't much of a living, boy

Agent Plissken

I just got an expert time of 229

Butch

Ya had a 50/50 shot . . . no logic, since it could have been the other two squares that had the bombs, and it still would have fit the information available.

I used to kick ass at minesweeper . . . I forget my best expert time, but I believe it was under 100 . . . possibly under 60, I forget.

I had the beginner set down to like 2 or 3 seconds, as well.

It was rather addictive. Since I moved onto laptops, I haven't found it as entertaining, since I'm typically using the little nub or trackpad, and you simply can't go as quickly as you can with a mouse.

__________________
I used to be into sadism, necrophilia and beastiality, but then I realized I was just beating a dead horse

GraingerGuy

was to the point I got 2 seconds on beginner, 29 or so on intermediate and 74 on expert. Cheesy actually beat me on the intermediate with a 27. Never could beat that.

__________________
potato gun + marshmallow gun = FLAMING MARSHMALLOWS OF DOOM!!!!!
-Welfareloser
4/13/05

Time to switch to AMD now I guess... (just kidding... )
-Darkfury
5/23/05

I don't think this'll stop anything though - the better you idiot-proof a system, the more impressive the idiot becomes.
-ShawnLee
5/30/08

ArkiStan

you guys are frightening....

Grimm

How could you miss that?!?

Look at the 3 two spaces above the blown mine.
That 3 tells you the space under can not be a mine, which in turn tells you that the last space you selected has to be a mine, because the number to the right of the blown mine is a two.

InfiniteNothing

How does the 3 tell you there's no mine under it?

Mike_N_Ike

A lot of times, you'll end up with a 2x2 block where you know that two of the diagonals are mines, but you really have no way of knowing which two. Unless I'm missing something, there really is no way to tell at that point.

I haven't played in a year or so - but I think my bests were 3, 27, and 76.

__________________
-Mike

Butch

It doesn't . . . he's being evil . . . if you were to put the bombs in the 2 empty spaces instead of the positions they were in, they still would have fit the information given by the numbers around the 4 unblown squares.

attgig

yeah, back in hs, i was beast at minesweeper. i got under 100, but not quite 74. and i think i was in low 30's in intermediate. don't remember the beginner, but i do remember trying to get it as fast as i could (redoing it 100's of times over and over instead of studying) lol.

__________________

Agent Plissken

Huh? Can you explain that one more time?

Grimm

Oh, sure you go and spoil my fun by using logic...

DaFunkyUnit

nm...

how in the world can you beat beginner in 2 seconds??? my best at beginner is 12 seconds.

__________________

Agent Plissken

On beginner, if you do it over and over eventually you will get one that clears itself out...

Mike_N_Ike

I've heard of two different methods for playing "speed minesweeper." The first, which I've always done, involves flagging certain squares as mines and "double clicking" the others to clear them out. With the second method, you don't flag the mines at all; you just click on the squares that you know not to be mines.

I would think that the second method would be more condusive to a quicker time, since it should require fewer mouse clicks. The problem is, I'm so used right-clicking the mine squares, that I have a tough time only clicking the non-mines.

Anyways, the only reason I brought that up is because I think that in beginner, it's a little bit easier to use the second method. You don't have a ton of logic to overcome in that game -- so you can usually just click the safe squares and get a quicker time that way.