Otherwise fun!
1 2 1 2 2 3 1 1 2 2
3 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
2 1 2 2 3 2 1 1 3 1
2 1 3 3 1 3 3 1 3 1
3 3 1 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
2 3 2 2 2 2 1 2 2 3
3 3 3 3 1 3 3 1 3 2
1 3 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
2 1 3 3 2 2 2 2 1 F
Unless I made a mistake, the simplest solution is not easy to find. Obviously I was thinking about an algorithm to create harder "Jumping Julia" puzzles. Definitely doable, but for now I'll leave it at that!https://jumpingjuliamaze.onrender.com/?width=7&height=3
and ended up with a 3 wide 7 high table... but with a projected Goal square at 7 wide 3 high?
| 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| 1 | 3 | 3 | 3 |
| 1 | 3 | 2 | 2 |
| 1 | 3 | 2 | G |
Or | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 |
| 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 |
| 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 |
| 2 | 1 | 2 | G |
This seems to be able to be understood as a reachability graph problem of some sort perhaps.Edit: formatting
n=1 is trivial, and n=2 it small enough to enumerate with 3^4 = 81 solutions, but many of them being degenerate (no solutions), but already n=3 is pretty bad with ~20.000 possible puzzles. I do not see an obvious path to compose solutions either and make use of some kind of structural induction.
| 2 | 3 | 3 | 3 |
| 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 |
| 3 | 3 | 3 | 1 |
| 3 | 3 | 3 | G |
I'm fairly sure the only solution here is 2 down to 3 right to 1 to goal. You can of course then use this to generate a couple of more by changing all the numbers that are impossible to reach.