[sdkgames]

Thank you! While Euclidea and my game explore the same theme, the approaches are different. It seems Euclidea uses some kind of automated theorem prover to verify a solution. I use numerical verifiers. There are pros and cons for both approaches. The tools are different. I think some choices in Euclidea are too restrictive (e.g. collapsible compass, inability to draw arcs). Their monetization model affects the gameplay (grinding, solution hiding).

[JadeNB]

> I think some choices in Euclidea are too restrictive (e.g. collapsible compass, inability to draw arcs).

Collapsible compass is not a choice of Euclidea, but a choice of Euclid. (Although, of course, one of the first things Euclid proves is that you can simulate a rigid compass with a collapsible compass: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compass_equivalence_theorem.)

[amenghra]

Euclidea’s solutions are a YouTube search away.

I personally prefer the satisfaction of finding the solutions myself, even if it sometimes takes me months to solve a given puzzle (I usually end up putting it on hold for weeks and then revisiting with a fresh perspective).

Over the years, I amassed 430/535 stars, not bad but still quite some stars to go.

I always wondered how they came up with the minimal constructions and if they ever got them wrong?

[alanbernstein]

Whenever I play a puzzle game, I wonder about the construction of the puzzles and solutions. Who is responsible for it? Do they have a systematic method? Or does a solo indie game author just become so familiar with the mechanics of their game that most of the solutions become obvious?

I definitely had these questions about euclidea.

I like their other games as well, Pythagorea and x section.

[gilleain]

At least one person simply asks on Math Stack Exchange ...

https://math.stackexchange.com/users/11955/ed-pegg

but yes, I suspect that when you get very familiar with the mechanics of the game, solutions become obvious. Or they construct 'backwards' from the solution to a problem, maybe.

[gilleain]

Interesting to me is how complex some of the 'traditional' or, perhaps, formal construction methods can be.

I've been trying to draw Islamic designs, and the strict methods are very involved. For example this shows a very simple design, with construction lines then the final pattern:

https://ibb.co/RN8vJKN

[hcs]

Speaking of geometric designs and puzzle games, this reminded me of Engare: https://store.steampowered.com/app/415170/Engare/

[ComplexSystems]

How can you be sure that your numerical algorithm gives the right answer? There are pairs of constructible numbers that are arbitrarily close to one another.