(Q - Wiclaye: you have repeatedly said that there is no mega trick, that there are no systematic tricks for solving puzzles, you have used
expression there is no martingale If I summarize my hunt to a single track for all the puzzles, that is to say from B to the super solution to a single track, am I right or?
is my formulation necessarily wrong because it overlaps with what you have already said, that is to say that there is no transversal tip to everything?)<
br />
MB: what do you mean by a single track, what should I understand by a single track?
(Q - Wiclaye: my idea is this and it allows you to understand and summarize all the solutions from B to the super solution...)
MB: you start from point A and after a certain number of steps you arrive at point B, is that what they wanted to tell me?
(Q - Wiclaye: I took the example I follow the trail of the smurfs and from B to the super solution it allows you to understand all the puzzles, all the solutions would be the smurfs would be something which constantly returns in a transversal way...)
MB: the difference between the smurfs and Max Valentin is that the language of the smurfs is relatively basic, that of Max Valentin is a little less, much less to be honest, and so yes in theory there is an avenue to follow which is relatively, one could say linear, it's a way of speaking but which responds to a relatively, can I say simple or at least coherent logic.
And on the other hand, there are in the way of evoking things, of saying things, there are possibilities, these are what I called traps, unlike false leads, there are has the possibility of going astray, because we misunderstand a word, because we interpret it, because we give it a meaning that it does not have, one or more words I don't think a word in particular, I think in a general way but in principle yes, we could perfectly imagine that we follow its route to the zone and that we arrive there, as I mentioned once and without any game of words none on the bicycle, I said we change gear, that means we change logic, we are on another problem and there we find the cache.
It can be completely understood like that and your question is a bit cryptic, I have to say the history of the track I understand what a track means, afterward I don't really know how you define it in relation to the game itself -even, there are still...there are stages, there are things to find, there are things to follow logically together, there is an order to give to the puzzles, there all this still needs to be taken into account, but the journey itself can be translated as you have just done.
I like this idea of ??a course, I think it's very simple, everyone, you have to understand it like that.
(Q - Tina: would you consider that a common thread?)
MB: so a common thread the last time I heard of a common thread was in Guy Lux's shows, and yes I'm not very young, it was the test which began at the beginning of the game of Intervilles and which ended at the end, we called it the red thread. What does the red thread mean in the Tina hunt?
(Q - Tian: well, I interpreted what Wiclaye said as being a common thread, which you validated.)
(Q: Wiclaye: yes, it's a good relationship the idea of ??the red thread yes yes that's it, that's how it appeared in the madits already through one or two questions and I like your reformulation, it corresponds to what I wanted to say...)
MB: the common thread in my mind, I wouldn't want there to be any confusion between us, there have already been some, so I'm cautious, the red thread is not a breadcrumb trail , it's not this thing, it's not the Ariadne's thread, it's not what allows you to get out of the labyrinth, it's not the thing we're going to follow like that, which starts and then on which we fall back from time to time, it is not the median strip on the road which allows you not to leave your lane etc, it is not something like that, I understand the common thread, isn't that what you mean?
(Q - Wiclaye: if that's actually a little bit what I wanted to say in any case in the sense of my question, but that's good, your answer is more precise...)
MB: yes there is no parallel to be drawn between these successive decryptions, the way in which we string them together and then a little thing this little red thread which would unwind next to it like that and which would allow us to say well yes, yes I follow this white stripe that we have in the middle of the road there and which allows you to say well yes I'm on the right side, I'm not encroaching on the opposite lane etc, so I'm in my place, it's not there's not that, it's all based on the order of the puzzles and their sequence and the logic that we bring to it.
(Q - ??: so in the absence of a red thread we can say that there are perhaps several red threads?)
MB: well, tell me that?
(Q - ??: for example if I follow several lines which point me towards a single point we can say that all these threads help to orient me in relation to that point?)< /i>
MB: you mean that there is some cross-checking to be done so, can we use that term?
(Q - ??: yes that's it...)
MB: there are a number of cross-references to be made, yes, both in the puzzles and in the solutions indeed...
Oh dear, did I drop something? I dropped a bomb there, do I realize it?
(Q - ??: no, no, not at all, it roughly corresponds to the idea I have of hunting and, so to speak, a great solution...)
MB: yeah
(Q - Wiclaye: my idea is this and it allows you to understand and summarize all the solutions from B to the super solution...)
MB: you start from point A and after a certain number of steps you arrive at point B, is that what they wanted to tell me?
(Q - Wiclaye: I took the example I follow the trail of the smurfs and from B to the super solution it allows you to understand all the puzzles, all the solutions would be the smurfs would be something which constantly returns in a transversal way...)
MB: the difference between the smurfs and Max Valentin is that the language of the smurfs is relatively basic, that of Max Valentin is a little less, much less to be honest, and so yes in theory there is an avenue to follow which is relatively, one could say linear, it's a way of speaking but which responds to a relatively, can I say simple or at least coherent logic.
And on the other hand, there are in the way of evoking things, of saying things, there are possibilities, these are what I called traps, unlike false leads, there are has the possibility of going astray, because we misunderstand a word, because we interpret it, because we give it a meaning that it does not have, one or more words I don't think a word in particular, I think in a general way but in principle yes, we could perfectly imagine that we follow its route to the zone and that we arrive there, as I mentioned once and without any game of words none on the bicycle, I said we change gear, that means we change logic, we are on another problem and there we find the cache.
It can be completely understood like that and your question is a bit cryptic, I have to say the history of the track I understand what a track means, afterward I don't really know how you define it in relation to the game itself -even, there are still...there are stages, there are things to find, there are things to follow logically together, there is an order to give to the puzzles, there all this still needs to be taken into account, but the journey itself can be translated as you have just done.
I like this idea of ??a course, I think it's very simple, everyone, you have to understand it like that.
(Q - Tina: would you consider that a common thread?)
MB: so a common thread the last time I heard of a common thread was in Guy Lux's shows, and yes I'm not very young, it was the test which began at the beginning of the game of Intervilles and which ended at the end, we called it the red thread. What does the red thread mean in the Tina hunt?
(Q - Tian: well, I interpreted what Wiclaye said as being a common thread, which you validated.)
(Q: Wiclaye: yes, it's a good relationship the idea of ??the red thread yes yes that's it, that's how it appeared in the madits already through one or two questions and I like your reformulation, it corresponds to what I wanted to say...)
MB: the common thread in my mind, I wouldn't want there to be any confusion between us, there have already been some, so I'm cautious, the red thread is not a breadcrumb trail , it's not this thing, it's not the Ariadne's thread, it's not what allows you to get out of the labyrinth, it's not the thing we're going to follow like that, which starts and then on which we fall back from time to time, it is not the median strip on the road which allows you not to leave your lane etc, it is not something like that, I understand the common thread, isn't that what you mean?
(Q - Wiclaye: if that's actually a little bit what I wanted to say in any case in the sense of my question, but that's good, your answer is more precise...)
MB: yes there is no parallel to be drawn between these successive decryptions, the way in which we string them together and then a little thing this little red thread which would unwind next to it like that and which would allow us to say well yes, yes I follow this white stripe that we have in the middle of the road there and which allows you to say well yes I'm on the right side, I'm not encroaching on the opposite lane etc, so I'm in my place, it's not there's not that, it's all based on the order of the puzzles and their sequence and the logic that we bring to it.
(Q - ??: so in the absence of a red thread we can say that there are perhaps several red threads?)
MB: well, tell me that?
(Q - ??: for example if I follow several lines which point me towards a single point we can say that all these threads help to orient me in relation to that point?)< /i>
MB: you mean that there is some cross-checking to be done so, can we use that term?
(Q - ??: yes that's it...)
MB: there are a number of cross-references to be made, yes, both in the puzzles and in the solutions indeed...
Oh dear, did I drop something? I dropped a bomb there, do I realize it?
(Q - ??: no, no, not at all, it roughly corresponds to the idea I have of hunting and, so to speak, a great solution...)
MB: yeah