Author here, happy to answer questions about any part of this. The scoring weights are hand-tuned from playtesting, not learned from data. Would love to hear from anyone with psychometrics or spatial cognition experience.
You are definitely correct, and that is how I am solving all the puzzles as well. However, I've encountered many people that couldn't wrap their head around even the mirror across the fold line logic. For such people, the techniques I described help to come up with puzzles that feel "hard" for them. Thanks for giving it a try.
I think I have your new build(s) as I can play from the archive, but the contrast is still too low for me. Note that displays are different, so it's likely that things are more indistinct for me than for you. I've just played through the archive, and all my mistakes came from off-by-one errors because the grid lines were indistinct and I misplaced the holes.
Hmm I think you made the grid lines thicker? I prefer it, but the thickness looks inconsistent (several divisions of the paper do not seem have thicker grid lines on my display)
you are right, and that has been bugging me from the start and never got to fixing it. I tweaked it a bit to make it hopefully make much more sense now. Also I didn't know enclose.horse, and loved playing it, so thanks for pointing it out and for the nice feedback.
23 comments
https://icfpc2016.blogspot.com/2016/08/pdf-for-task-descript...
In reverse order of the folds, just mirror all holes across the fold line.
Advice. Make the scoring more like http://enclose.horse/
Score should be correct out of incorrect but medals for perfect, almost perfect, and some cutoff above.
I missed one fold on the hard one (but 3 points due to this), and only 1 star feels a little harsh to me.
These puzzles are great! Simple and effective.
I wonder if the engine could be adapted for origami. :)