6
$\begingroup$

enter image description here

I’ve been looking at this board for a little while, and can’t seem to find any places to go where I don’t have to guess. Is guessing the only thing I can do here, or are there strategies that I’m missing?

Am I able to use the “1”s on the borders to help me?

$\endgroup$
1
  • 5
    $\begingroup$ The left flag on row six does not mark a bomb, otherwise the 2's above it would be 3's. $\endgroup$
    – M Oehm
    Nov 7, 2021 at 19:07

3 Answers 3

27
$\begingroup$

Don't trust the (formerly) accepted answer. :-)

(It depends, in part, on a mistake you've made earlier: there's a third flag next to a couple of 2s along the left side. I added a green square to mark the bogus flag in the picture below.)

Despite that, you have several break-ins left to use:

  • the flag that's next to the mistaken flag has a 1 next to it.
  • the 1-3-1 corner is guaranteed to have the 1s' bombs in squares next to the 3, and a bomb in the square that's only next to the 3.
  • an 1-2-1 along a straight edge always has a safe square under the 2
  • at the top, there's a 1-1-1 (looks like 1-1-2, but the 2 already has a bomb) neighbouring only three squares, that can only work with a single bomb in the middle.
  • At the bottom right, the 2 will have both its bombs next to the 4. Combining this with the logic propagating from the other break-ins, you can mark one more bomb next to the 4.

Here's a picture of the possible deductions.

enter image description here

$\endgroup$
4
$\begingroup$

You have a couple of 1s that are already adjacent to bombs that you can clear out, as well as a 2 at left adjacent to 2 bombs.

One strategy which is available to you is on the bottom: you see a 1-2-1 in a row? The center square, directly under the 2, cannot be a bomb. If it were, neither the square to its left or right could be a bomb, which would leave the 2 adjacent to just 1 bomb. Hence it is the left and right squares that are bombs.

$\endgroup$
2
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ "You have a couple of 1s that are already adjacent to bombs that you can clear out" where? $\endgroup$ Nov 9, 2021 at 10:57
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @infinitezero Row 7, column 7, at the least. The important point was to elucidate the "1-2-1" strategy, which is a way to use the 1's on the border, per the OP's request. $\endgroup$ Nov 9, 2021 at 12:46
3
$\begingroup$

Here are a some things I see:

enter image description here

I'll reference my red circled numbers with parenthesis like (1) and the numbers on the board with single quotes like '1'.

  1. The '2' already has one bomb, so one of the two squares below '1' must have the other bomb. Because of this, the '1' above the two cannot have a bomb in position (1) and it can be cleared.
  2. The '2' above (2) already has both bombs flagged so you can clear all three of the other squares it is touching.
  3. When you see a '3' in a corner like this with two ones by it, the corner position must contain a bomb. For the '3' to have 3 bombs, the two squares above the red (2) can only have one bomb because of the '1' above the '3', and likewise the two squares right of the red (3) can only have one bomb due to the other '1', so the third bomb must be in (3) so you can flag it.
  4. Similarly, when you see '1','2','1' along a horizontal or vertical line, the two bombs must be at the edges and the middle spot can be cleared. If the two bombs were both on the left or right here then the '1's would have too many bombs. So you can clear (4)
  5. The '3' to the top-right of square (5) can only have one more bomb, and the '4' above it needs three more. Since they share two squares in common, the two squares above the '4' must contain bombs and only one of the other squares contains a bomb. This means the last bomb for the '3' must be in one of those two squares and you can clear (5)
$\endgroup$
2
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ Boom. You died. (Point 2 stepped into OP's meta-mine, one of those flags you see is false.) $\endgroup$
    – Bass
    Nov 8, 2021 at 19:37
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Doh! :) I originally just mentioned the one itself then revising changed it to include all three $\endgroup$ Nov 8, 2021 at 19:48

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.