>>1073733 >You should be able to solve this. 15?

>>1073733 Is this effortposting I spy? Well, I better take this up. In classic Layton bullshit semantics, the phrasing is designed to trip you up into thinking fractionally (since a normal person would try to move two horses simultaneously and assume the horses are moving at the same time; one horse would have to double back for the straggler in real life) when for the most part whole numbers are fine. So with pairs, you optimize by taking the fastest horses first, 1+2. >2 hours going forward >1 hour going back Then the slowest, 3+6. >6 hours going forward At that point, the 2 hour horse is still in reserve. Replicate the first move again, and 2+1+6+2+2=13 hours. I wonder if Level-5 purposefully picked combinatorics since those problems are often used when selecting software developers. Me next, you should be able to solve this. I was going to post a certain Steamed Hams parody but I'm too lazy to do it right now, I want to encode it full-resolution and then at DS-accurate resolution.

>>1073746 >minimum number of places to touch I don't like how this is worded I don't even like how this question uses a poor visual aid Technically, I'd say the minimum places to touch is 1 in numerous ways: <1 touch on the minute hand which you would just dial back until it reaches midnight or <1 touch on the 'winding key' part of a clock which lets you set the time, just wind it until the clock shows midnight but presumably, what the question actually wants is 0 times, you just need to wait 8.5 hours until it becomes midnight You want a bullshit question? Try this one. You should be able to solve this.

>>1073733 14 hours, you always ride the fastest horse

>>1073750 Wrong, you can shave off an hour more by taking a certain combination of horses. Try one more time and think it through.

>>1073749 13?

>>1073749 This one is probably easier for EU anons to solve given two-party systems aren't as prevalent. I initially thought 14, using 40/3=13.3, but the question's asking for a supermajority of the electorate. 40-14-1=25 so a candidate could win with that amount. So instead 40-3=37, 37/2=18.5, which rounds up to 19, 19+1=20. Let's go for something more pictorial. You should be able to solve this.

>>1073753 Lower-left is the odd one out. Each shape is made up of a number: 3, 5, 7, 6, and 4. And each shape has their respective number show up in the shape the same amount of times as the number they represent, EXCEPT for 6's shape, which only has five of its number appear.

>>1073752 Incorrect >>1073753 I thought I saw something in those shapes for a moment...

>>1073790 Lemme guess, it's 2 because people can vote or non-candidates

>>1073755 Dang, much faster than I had envisioned the solution. How about this one? You should be able to solve this.

>>1073871 My mind wasn't thinking in terms of multiplication. 200?

>>1073876 That was a softball, all things considered. Alright, time for some bullcrap. You should be able to solve this.

The second game went really crazy on these 3D visualization ones This reminded me of the apple visualization test. Do you reckon only people with a "1-type" mind would be able to complete these puzzles accurately without relying on creating a physical model to test it out with? Is there a mathematical way of representing this?

>>1073877 I'm thinking either B or D, but leaning towards B because, in addition to the weight being lighter, the pad used on the scale would also be lighter and effected by the change the gravity. >>1073878 I was really overthinking the second one.

>>1073733 I hate puzzles but whatever going to do this cause bored. Acustic Alert >>1073733 Easy, just put make the fast horse carry all the other ones, it would only take 1 hour. >>1073746 Just wait 8:30 hours or go back in time 3:30 hours, so 0 touches. >>1073749 Just kill the other two candidates, then you will only need 1 vote (Yours). Checkmate Democrats. >>1073753 >One of them isn't quite rigth. Anon... thats racist , cannot asnwer that quesition or i will lose my social credit points. I will chose top-rigth cause it gives me toc. >>1073871 >Feet No thanks, I aint a podophile. >>1073877 The moon landing wasnt real anon, also without an atmosphere (your) "grams" would disperse or evaporate away, so 0. >>1073878 These puzzles are ableist, they asume you have eyes and a brain, so thats speciesist bro. I have no idea kek, hate this math puzzle Also for the cardboard one, just cut the two pieces in the middle and tada! you have a hollow rectangle.

>>1073882 Correct on the second one, but the dice one is slightly wrong. Flip the man upside down so his head is being pointed at by the sharp end of the triangle

>>1073892 The heart is upside down too. Really the hardest part of the puzzle is figuring out that clubs is upright. And finding the controls for rotating tiles ingame

>>1073878 >Do you reckon only people with a "1-type" mind would be able to complete these puzzles accurately without relying on creating a physical model Not really because all the information required to determine the faces can be described a series of logical predicates just by interpreting the 3 images, and then based on the starting point of where you fill in, you can work out how the squares are meant to fold to build a cube in a logical way without visualizing it (eg: To the right of the spade pointing north, you see two squares connected by folds, there is only one valid way that they can fold in on themselves such that it forms a cube), so on and so forth. It's certainly harder, I think, but it's the only way I managed to do it, because I can't just close my eyes and "vibe" my way into imagining how the cube would look like based on those two images.

>>1073878 >Is there a mathematical way of representing this? Yes, a graph

I'm so mad at myself for missing out on this series when I was younger, it's so good. But then again, I'm retarded so I probably couldn't have made it past the first few puzzles as a kid. I'm currently playing the original trilogy, are the games on the 3ds easier in difficulty?

Two more good ones I just did in-game >>1074979 I agree entirely, when I was a kid, all I played were Pokemon mainline and spinoff games. I specifically remember seeing a commercial or some kind of ad for the first Professor Layton game, and considered buying it, but I decided against it. I can't remember why I thought not to buy it (ask for it on Christmas or for my Birthday). Maybe I thought it was too 'advanced' for someone my age at the time. >>1074263 Personally, I stared at the image of the 'unfolded' cube and was able to picture how it looks in a 3-Dimensional way. From there, I answered the question.

>>1074996 Easy. The odd numbers and $14.

>>1077767 I am extremely tempted to remaster this at some ludicrous resolution like 8K with the PC port.

You should be able to solve this.

>>1078101 This is just basic math, not much of a puzzle. It should be 50 feet. The girl reaches 20 feet walked in 20 total seconds, the father would catch up in 10 seconds at 2 ft/sec, the dog would have ran 50 feet.

>>1078133 Like most Professor Layton puzzles, it's easy to get caught up on certain uses of language

>>1078101 As somebody with severe dyscalculia, these puzzles are the bane of my existence.

>>1073753 That's a pretty unreasonable question. While >>1073755 is one answer, you could just as easily say top right doesn't fit because it's irregular and not rotationally symmetric (this was actually my initial answer on seeing the question), or bottom right because it's the only one with multiple enclosed areas bordering each other by an edge (or because it's the only one with an even instead of odd structure), or top left because it's the only one with no junctions, being a single line forming the boundary of a simply-connected region, or top middle because it's the only one with both straight lines and curves. None of those answers would be wrong. You could pick any of those five as the odd one out and be correct. >>1078160 Six. Only the 3/4 face pair works for both junctions of the middle die, and the bottom's 1 is accounted for so it must be 2+3. That leaves 4+1 on the upper junction, so 6 upwards.

>>1078173 Kadyrov shouldn't had shown his dissatisfaction publicly, because that shit makes it worse.

I just completed Diabolical Box and am playing through Unwound Future now You should be able to solve this.

>>1079285 >folding in half doesn't match >turning 90° counterclock wise could read "min"?? probably nothing uuuh 121413!

>>1079402 I saw that at first too but I think it's actually 121-113= meaning the answer is 8. Which is a lot less plausible as a door code than 121413, but whatever.

>>1079454 I'VE HAD ENOUGH

Here's another one >>1079454 Correct!! >>1079455 That one fucked me up as well

>>1079470 Now construct the trisection geometrically

>>1079513 now try pouring that shit at this awkward angle without killing Dr. Schrader

>>1079542 Your turn.

>>1079573 >>1079470 >>1079513 >>1079542 This is how you should be thinking of dividing it up. Just split the bottle into fifths in a way that would be visibly evident if you were actively removing liquid from it

Bump so we don't lose the puzzles to the void just yet!

Man, I fucking love Professor Layton. I wish there were more games of its style.

>>1073878 the dice puzzle is retarded. the answer changes depending on the direction in which you flip the sides. the only way it makes sense to me is if the icons are also drawn on the underside (i.e. the side that's 'below' the unfolded dice) and you flip the sides towards the viewer, but you still end up with the dude upside down... >check solution wtf you can rotate the shapes? that where the fuck does it say you can rotate them?

You should be able to solve this.