So what exactly is this "often overlooked technique"? Making assumptions based on patterns? Cause let me just say, that does NOT make a puzzle "logical". I shouldn't have to make any assumptions when solving a true hanjie puzzle. This is not fully logical, and therefor it is not a hanjie.
Yep, the cells in the pattern are large ambiguous spots with 3 possible solutions. And there's another dual ambiguous part in the corner. All of those together give this puzzle 3*3*3*3*2 = 72 different logical solutions. The correct formations are easy to guess in the end though.
Logical except last 2 dots. Surprisingly satisfying pattern to solve. The large "ambiguous" dots are not ambiguous. They are easily solved with temporaries. If you put there L-shaped dot formations, you are not having enough dots there! They are logical!
The correct formations are easy to guess in the end though.
The large "ambiguous" dots are not ambiguous. They are easily solved with temporaries. If you put there L-shaped dot formations, you are not having enough dots there! They are logical!