MGWCC #752 - “Costume Change”

[ky-mike]

Brilliant!

Have it done. Waiting until Monday to submit.

[runart]

At the point where I fear I'm not solving this one without a nudge if anyone is so willing. So MANY rabbit holes......

Thanks in advance.

[StunGun]

Got a nudge. Thanks!

[Joe Ross]

Beamed up at #36. Not sure I would have ever solved it with a nudge, though.

Boy, the nudges are that bad that they prevent you from solving?

This is extremely difficult to nudge subtly. To preserve your AHA!, approach a solver with as long a laundry list of rabbit holes, thoughts, dreams, WAGs, and expectations as possible, in order to give the solver something with which to work. Think you have enough? Add fourteen more things.

Why is this a difficult puzzle AND one difficult to nudge? BECAUSE IT'S PURE FREAKY GENIUS! @MattGaffney has outdone himself. This is simply stunning.

I expect there to be negative comments & I expect every accomplished meta creator to come to Matt's defense. Me? I'm a hack who enjoys this particular corner of the world these puzzles afford. However, I've been around long enough to appreciate beauty, elegance, and scary intelligence used to create some puzzles. This is a singularly great meta, IMO.

Those who cracked this and solved alone have every bit of respect I can give. @Toby? WOW!

[woozy]

Beamed up at #36. Not sure I would have ever solved it with a nudge, though.

Boy, the nudges are that bad that they prevent you from solving?

This is extremely difficult to nudge subtly. ....

Maybe, I wasn't clear that I was making a joke about Cinny (presumably) omit the "out" in (presumably) "Not sure I would have ever solved it with(out) a nudge, though".

... unless Cinny was trying to say the puzzle was so intricate that a nudge really would have prevented her from solving.

(I can say that so far I haven't been able to solve it with a nudge so far...)

[HoldThatThought]

I admire the puzzle and its creativity, but I honestly can't see how the original title (or any other aspect of the presentation) was expected to clue the solution.

There are puzzles that are incredibly clever in their design, and absolutely stunning in the "I can't believe how much work must have gone into making such an amazing construction work", but that doesn't mean they are enjoyable to solve, and ultimately, this is supposed to be both a showcase of constructor talent AND a fun and rewarding pastime.

I know exactly why this puzzle is frustrating so many people - there are quite a few seemingly worthwhile rabbit holes (many suggested by the seeming theme), but exactly none of them will prove relevant. I'm not giving anything away to say that the correct meta-chanism has nothing to do with the puzzle theme.

This same question comes up from time to time, and I already know that my OPINION will be unpopular with those who subscribe to a perfectly legitimate school of thought that celebrates technical achievement above all else. I will be told that any shade is reflective only of my own obvious shortcomings as a solver. I agree, this is an amazing puzzle, and there is genius in its construction. There is pain in its solve.

[Joe Ross]

Point taken, @woozy. Thank you for clarifying.

Oh, trust me, @HoldThatThought, I was frustrated, too. I agree with your respected & considered thoughts. However, sometimes the body of work needs to be stretched. Enjoyable, or not, there's nothing wrong with expanding what can be done, to establish what's possible, and - frankly - allow creators to show off.

No pain, no gain? Maybe. Perhaps we can allow it, occasionally.

[ky-mike]

I admire the puzzle and its creativity, but I honestly can't see how the original title (or any other aspect of the presentation) was expected to clue the solution.

After the contest closes on Tuesday (is it still noon Tuesday since the puzzle came out and hour and a half late?), we should have a puzzle naming contest to see who can come up with a more clever title without giving away the meta mechanism. Alternately, commenters could suggest clues / answers that might hint towards the mechanism. No disrespect to the great Matt Gaffney, just maybe a fun way to respond to the frustrations that this puzzle brought to many.

There are puzzles that are incredibly clever in their design, and absolutely stunning in the "I can't believe how much work must have gone into making such an amazing construction work", but that doesn't mean they are enjoyable to solve, and ultimately, this is supposed to be both a showcase of constructor talent AND a fun and rewarding pastime.

I agree to an extent. I have been enjoying the meta puzzles since the WSJ started and Matt's for a couple of years. I will guess that for the "experts" out there, they want to be challenged. Challenging the experts and catering to the relative new solvers like me, is a difficult task. There will always be some level of frustration for the less experienced in order to keep the "experts" challenged.

[HoldThatThought]

Yes, to be clear, I do celebrate aesthetic beauty, and this is gorgeous.

It's also going to demand hours of utterly fruitless effort, which, hopefully, will be fully assuaged by the eventual appreciation of the stunning construction.

[runart]

"Hours of utterly fruitless effort" perfectly describes my weekend with this thing. I even raked leaves for four hours in the hopes that inspiration would find me in that drudgery. No breakthroughs running this morning either. It's weird to have absolutely no toe hold on it even after so much work.

[woozy]

I'm going to go with the dislike crowd. It was brilliant constructed but the cluing to let the solver in was entirely lacking. It could be done if you simply do every possible thing ever but there's nothing to say do that thing rather than the other thing. And that's not "difficult". That's serendipity.

(The way I see it, the only thing that could clue you in, also directly implies you certainly need to avoid what must be done.)

[Jade]

Would also love a nudge if anyone's able to provide one!

[Cinny]

Beamed up at #36. Not sure I would have ever solved it with a nudge, though.

Boy, the nudges are that bad that they prevent you from solving?

Thanks for catching that! I think my head was still spinning from trying to solve. I definitely would not have solved if I had not had the nudge. I think I got it right that time!

[MountainManZach]

Edit: About to beam up thanks to a nudge from @AaronT! Thanks Aaron

I’d love one of them nudges, even if it’s a narrowing of what to focus on. I’m pretty much at sea here (a phrase I never used before doing crosswords)

[rjy]

Got it with a nudge. Incredible idea, masterfully constructed and obviously difficult to solve. An appropriately difficult Week 4 - ok, maybe better saved for a month with 5 weeks - but I remain amazed by the way this crazy art form continues to be stretched. Kudos, Matt, and also those who solved nudgelessly.

[DrTom]

Completely beyond me even with multiple nudges. I'll wait for the reveal and just be amazed. I have reached my limit of time and patience in trying things. I'm a slightly better than average solver at best and this week I needed to be in the elite group.

Tom

[BobDylan]

I'd much appreciated a nudge, if anyone is willing. I've got nothing here.

EDIT: Got it with a nudge. What a tough one.

[MikeyG]

I remain amazed by the way this crazy art form continues to be stretched. Kudos, Matt, and also those who solved nudgelessly.

+1 on the stretching of the art form. Don't know how he does it!

[raceyamatt]

Would happily take a nudge...have traveled down so many rabbit holes that they're beginning to connect to one another in a web of conspiracy. But alas, nothing. Thank you friends!

[DrTom]

As a neophyte constructor (and just HOW much of a neophyte was illustrated with this puzzle) I stand in awe. How you that saw it, saw it I will never know. I would love some insight on that after the reveal. I mean HOW in the world....

I cannot say I LIKE the puzzle, but I do admire it.

Tom