Diagram inferences

[NicoleD642]

When I tested each answer choice out, none of the answer choices seemed to fill the diagram completely. They all left open possibilities for me so I was wondering what the correct inferences to be made should be for the original diagram setup. I figured that I had to be with either F/H under S then after that I became stuck.

[ohthatpatrick]

A lot of Open Grouping games don't have much in the form of up front inferences. And ... when it's that loose a game, you'll feel while you're working questions like, "So? That doesn't tell me anything. Now what?"

The reality is these games are just about pumping out could be true's and capitalizing on previous work when possible.

============

There are three cities (M, S, T),
and they each need to have 2 managers assigned.

M: __ __
S: __ __
T: __ __

(I do these as one horizontal row ... MPrep does them as three vertical columns ... here, I'm doing it as three rows, just because it's easier in this typing environment)

So, we have six spots to fill.
We have four people (F, G, H, I)

Since we're underbooked, some of those people will go more than once. What is the legal language about the min/max they can go?

"At least one" in the setup, would allow for
1 1 2 2, (two people go once, two people go twice)
1 1 1 3 (three people go once, one person is in all three)

Once we see rule 1, we know it can only be
I H G F
2 (2, 1, 1)

FH are enemies. Either of them could still be the other '2', though.
G can't be in S. But G could still be the other '2'.
if G is in M, H goes to T. This doesn't seem that interesting on its own.

Are there any two or three way splits to the logic of this game that would lend themselves to framing?

Ibanez visits 2 cities:
it could be MS, MT, or ST. Would assigning those two I's trigger anything?
Doesn't seem like it.

G is in two rules. He is either just M, just T, or M and T.
Would assigning those G's trigger anything?
Yes, I guess. In two out of those three options, we are triggering the conditional rule (If G goes to M -> H goes to T)

So it would probably be worth framing G's three options:

OPTION 1 (G is only in M, which triggers H in T)
Man: G __ (F, H, I)
Syd: __ __ (F, H, I)
Tok: H __ (F, I)

since F and H can never be together, we know in the 2nd group that it has to be I and one of F/H. We know in the 3rd group it has to be I. And since I only gets to go twice, we know that we can't use I again in M.

OPTION 1 (G is only in M)
Man: G, F/H
Syd: I, F/H
Tok: H, I

OPTION 2 (G is only in T)
Man: __ __ (F, H, I)
Syd: __ __ (F, H, I)
Tok: G __ (F, H, I)

For the 1st and 2nd row, we have to use I and F/H. That will use up our two I's, so we can't use I in the 3rd row.

OPTION 2 (G is only in T)
Man: I, F/H
Syd: I, F/H
Tok: G, F/H

OPTION 3 (G is in both M and T, triggering H in T)
Man: G __ (F, H, I)
Syd: __ __ (F, H, I)
Tok: G, H

Since I has to go two times, we can assign the two I's.

OPTION 3 (G is in both M and T, triggering H in T)
Man: G, I
Syd: I, F/H
Tok: G, H



As it turns out, this game has three pretty filled out frames, so framing actually would be a prudent decision. But frames are never necessary. If you don't have a lot figured out up front, just force yourself to write some complete scenarios, even if that means arbitrarily filling things in (always following rules, of course). Once you get some legal hypotheticals on your page, you'll have ammunition for eliminations/answers, AND you'll often accidentally start uncovering some of the limitations/deductions to the game.

[AidenF813]

This is super helpful, but option two is invalid because G cannot visit Sydney.

[Misti Duvall]

This is super helpful, but option two is invalid because G cannot visit Sydney.

Yep, you're right, looks like a typo in the original post (G should be in T, not S). I've fixed it. Thanks for catching!