GB2454537A

GB2454537A - Puzzle game with multiple solutions

Info

Publication number: GB2454537A
Application number: GB0722197A
Authority: GB
Inventors: Nigel Robert Wood
Original assignee: Individual
Current assignee: Individual
Priority date: 2007-11-12
Filing date: 2007-11-12
Publication date: 2009-05-13
Also published as: GB0722197D0

Abstract

A puzzle game consisting of two or more homogeneous single or multi-facet puzzle pieces, each facet having three or more edges and each edge ascribed with one or more indicia. The indicia can be an alphanumeric character, a solid or broken colour, a pattern consisting of two or more colours, raised dots, one or more shapes/symbols or combinations of the aforementioned. The indicia are allocated, ensuring that at least one of the indicia is utilised in two or more targets, such that when all, or a sub-set, of the puzzle pieces are placed in an unique relative two or three-dimensional positional and rotational configuration, so that indicia of two or more adjacent puzzle piece(s) match in either two or three-dimensions, two (or more) two-dimensional or three-dimensional configuration 'targets' or solutions are obtained. A set of puzzle pieces may be used to form a number of targets or solutions. For example, 13 pieces could be used to form one 4 piece target and one 9 piece target. The puzzle pieces may have attachments allowing them to be joined. The pieces may also have passive or electronic identification to allow the location of the pieces within the completed puzzle to be determined. The puzzle may be implemented electronically via a computer program or the like.

Description

1 2454537

A PUZZLE GAME WITH MULTIPLE TARGETS

This invention relates to a puzzle game consisting of homogeneous puzzle pieces with one or more facets, each facet having three or more edges, each edge having a single or multiple ascribed indicia, that form two or more target configurations simultaneously or non-simultaneously.

Many people, young and old, enjoy the mental stimulation and achievement satisfaction solving a puzzle game brings, whether this be a traditional puzzle game such as Towers of Hanoi', Solitaire or a Jigsaw puzzle; or one of the newer puzzle games such as Rubik's Cube or Sudoku. All of these puzzle games have one common factor that a single player (or puzzler) traditionally plays them.

As means of introducing the key aspects covered by this invention consider Microsoft Corporation's computer-based puzzle game Tetravex and the mathematical work of Jorge Rezende, University of Lisbon, Portugal.

The computer-based puzzle game Tetravex, devised by Scott Ferguson of Microsoft Corporation, was distributed as part of the Entertainment Pack' for the company's Windows95 Operating System. Various clones have been produced since for other Operating Systems, for example Linux. The puzzle game involves the visual representation of an N x M grid of single-facet square tiles, with numerical indicia located adjacent to each of the four edges (of each tile). From notes on the game, and that of its clones, allocation of the paired indicia of adjacent (touching) edges of different tiles relies solely on a random process (allocation), with edges of tiles forming the outer boundaries of the grid also being allocated random indicia. At the beginning of the game the solution' is shown until the player starts the game -the position of the tiles is then randomly shuffled. The objective of the game is to restore the position of the tiles to reproduce the starting configuration (the solution') by the game player (puzzler) selecting and swapping tiles. The game is restrictive in that only the position of the tiles can be varied -no rotation is possible. Although a solution is implicitly guaranteed, through the allocation of the indicia, there are no checks made to remove the possibility of multiple solutions or that the allocation of indicia is unique (it is possible for multiple tiles to have the same indicia set). In summary the game although challenging is significantly less demanding than if the game included rotation of the puzzle pieces and guaranteed an unique solution.

The mathematical work of Jorge Rezende has been published in the papers entitled "On the Puzzles with Polyhedra and Numbers" and "Puzzles with Polyhedra and Permutation Groups", available via the web site of the Mathematical Group of the University of Lisbon (http://gfm.cii. fc.ul.ptlMembersflR.ptPT.htnil). The publications cover the mathematical methods behind using polygonal plates (tiles), with numerical indicia ascribed to each edge, to form the surface of regular polyhedron. Although the analysis is very detailed and covers a method (effectively a search based routine) that determines how many solutions a particular indicia set can produce, i.e. how many different ways the tiles can be arranged to form the surface of the polyhedron by matching adjacent indicia of different tiles, there is no discussion on limiting the allocation of the indicia to ensure a unique solution.

The key features of the two-highlighted puzzle games are: (1) both utilise puzzle pieces with a single indicia ascribed per edge -matching indicia, of adjacent puzzle pieces, it is required, at most, to match one puzzle piece to one other; (2) the puzzler has to solve a single puzzle configuration (or target').

The set of puzzle games outlined by this patent addresses the problems raised by the two highlighted examples to produce a range of challenging puzzles in which: (I) the allocation of the indicia, controlled by an Indicia Allocation algorithm (IAA) that determines the indicia ascribed to each edge of each facet, is such that there is a guarantee that the puzzle pieces can only be positioned in a specific unique relative position/orientation configuration to achieve a specific puzzle configuration (or target'); (2) either single or multiple indicia are ascribed per edge. If the number of indicia per edge were increased to two, for example, a maximum of three puzzle pieces would be involved in the matching. It follows that the maximum number of puzzle pieces that can be matched for a given number of indicia per edge is 1 + the number of lndicia -although geometric restrictions will limit actual puzzle configurations; (3) two or more puzzle targets' can be achieved from the same set of puzzle pieces.

The key to these puzzle features is the Indicia Allocation Algorithm (IAA) that determines the set of indicia that guarantees that the puzzle pieces can only be positioned in a specific relative position/orientation configuration to achieve a specific set of puzzle configurations (or targets'). Note that varying the limits (or constraints) to the IAA could produce different puzzle difficulty levels. The constraints utilised limit the number of occurrences an indicia is (a) used in the whole puzzle (IMAXPUZZLE), (b) used on a single puzzle piece (Itt&x_PmcE) considering all facets and edges and (c) used on a puzzle piece's facet (I.x FACET). For puzzle pieces with only one facet (F=l) constraints (b) and (c) are equal.

The IAA, specifically, has to cater for multiple puzzle targets that can be classified as follows: * Class A -all the available puzzle pieces are utilised in all of the puzzle targets'; * Class B -one (or more) puzzle pieces are not utilised in any of the targets'; * Class C -one (or more) spare puzzle pieces are utilised only in at least one of the puzzle targets'.

The classifications can bç further categorised by the number and type of multiple targets the same set of puzzle pieces form, as follows: * [Type I -a solo target (normal puzzle type) -included for completeness only]; * Type II -multiple solo' (dissimilar) targets (simultaneously or non-simultaneously); * Type III -multiple solo' (similar) targets (simultaneously only); * Type IV -either a solo' target a group' of similar targets; * Type V -either a solo' target g a group' of dissimilar targets; * Type VI -either a group' of similar targets a group' of similar targets; * Type VII -either a group' of similar targets p a group' of dissimilar targets; * Type VIII-either a group' of dissimilar targets a group' of dissimilar targets.

Note that solo' defines a puzzle in which there is a single puzzle target, where as group' defines a puzzle that has two (or more) targets that can be achieved simultaneously. Also, note the classifications only concern dual-target puzzles -additional sub-classifications would be required to capture of the possibilities if considering triple, quad, etc. targets.

For example if triple-target puzzles were considered then one possibility is a solo' target a solo' (dissimilar) target a group of dissimilar targets.

It is stated that in all the following discussions it is implied that this patent addresses puzzles with multiple-targets.

Combining the classifications and types, defined above, provides a convenient method of describing the features a particular puzzle has. For example a puzzle of category C-VT' is a multi-target puzzle in which the puzzle pieces can form two (or more) different groups (each group having similar targets) and a puzzle piece is only utilised in the one of the groups (unused in all others).

In summary, the family of puzzle games described by this patent is concerned with puzzles in which there are two or more puzzle configurations (or targets') that the puzzler must solve.

For each target' the indicia allocation is such there is an unique relative placement' of the puzzle pieces that achieves the required target' configuration. In addition this patent covers puzzle gaines with one or more indicia ascribed per edge and with similar puzzle pieces, utilising: * single-facet puzzle pieces (single-facet tiles) to form two (or more) similar or dissimilar two-dimensional puzzle game configurations, e.g. N x M grids, regular and irregular polygons; * dual-facet puzzle pieces (dual-facet tiles) to form two (or more) similar or dissimilar dual-sided puzzle games, e.g. dual-sided N x M grids, regular and irregular polygons; * multi-facet puzzle pieces to form multiple puzzles where each puzzle piece facet contributes to a specific multi-target two-dimensional puzzle, e.g. the use of 8 six-sided hexahedron (cube) based puzzle pieces to form six different multi-target two-dimensional puzzles, where a centrally positioned indicia is used to differentiate which facet contributes to which multi-target puzzle game. A multi-sided dice could be used to randomly select which of the puzzles (six in this example) the puzzler is to solve. Note that the different multi-target puzzle games could be of the same format (same set of target configurations) differing in difficulty level only, or be of different formats (different target configurations) or be a combination of difficulty and format; * multi-facet puzzle pieces to form two or more similar or dissimilar multi-facet regular or irregular polyhedra based puzzles e.g. three dimensional grids, regular and irregular polyhedra; Embodiments of the invention will now be described, by way of example only, with reference to the accompanying diagrams, in which: Figure la shows a standard' solo target puzzle, of category A-I', comprising of 4 single-facet square shaped puzzle pieces (tiles), forming an N x M (N=M=2) grid, each puzzle piece has a single indicia ascribed per edge. The allocation of the indicia (to each tile) is such an unique solution (target') exists for the relative position and rotation of the 4 tiles, whilst minimising the number of different indicia used.

Figure lb shows the 2 x 2 grid based puzzle of figure Ia after an mdicia interchange (l-4, 2-'3, 3-*l & 4-.2) has been applied, demonstrating how different puzzle configurations (targets') can be produced by the interchange of indicia.

Figure 2 shows a dual-target puzzle, of category A-Ill', comprising of 8 single-facet square shaped tiles forming two N x M (N=M=2) grids (simultaneously), each tile has a single indicia ascribed per edge. The allocation of the indicia (to each tile) is such that an unique solution exists for the relative position & placement of the 4 tiles in each grid target'. The indicia set for the second (right-hand) N x M grid has been produced by adding an indicia offset of 4 to the respective indicia in the first (left-hand) 2 x 2 grid. The figure demonstrates a method (veiy crude) of producing multiple targets -in this case from non-overlapping indicia (indicia are only utilised in the same target'). Note that multi-target puzzles generated in this manner are not the subject of this patent.

Figure 3 shows a dual-target puzzle, of category A-Ill', comprising 8 single-facet square shaped tiles, forming two N x M (N=M=2) grids. Unlike the dual-target grid puzzle shown in figure 2 the allocation of the indicia for the second (right-hand) grid target' is such that at least one indicia is also utilised in the first (left-hand) grid -demonstrating the use of overlapping indicia (the same indicia is used in two or more targets).

Figure 4a shows (pictorially) 9 single-facet square shaped puzzle pieces (tiles) forming two puzzle targets, of category A-H', non-simultaneously -an N x M grid NM=3) a triangular shaped puzzle (height=3). This outlines a dual-target puzzle configuration in which the same set of puzzle pieces form two dissimilar puzzle targets non-simultaneously. The allocation of the indicia, to each edge of each tile, is such that both targets can be formed, from the same set of puzzle pieces.

Importantly, the indicia are allocated such that an unique solution exists for the relative position & rotation of the 9 tiles (whilst minimising the number of different indicia used) when considering the requirement to achieve both targets'.

Figure 4b shows 9 single-facet square based puzzle pieces (tiles) forming the first puzzle target of figure 4a -an N x M grid (N=M=3).

Figure 4c shows the same set of tiles, as shown in figure 4b, forming the second puzzle target, a triangular shaped puzzle (height=3).

Figure 5a shows (pictorially) 13 single-facet square shaped puzzle pieces (tiles) forming two puzzle targets, of category A-Il', simultaneously -an N x M grid (N'M2) an N x M grid (N=M=3). This outlines a dual-target puzzle configuration in which the same set of puzzle pieces form two dissimilar puzzle targets simultaneously.

Figure 5b shows the indicia set of the 13 single-facet square based puzzle pieces (tiles) forming the two N x M grids simultaneously. The allocation of the indicia, to each edge of each tile, is such that both targets can be formed, from the same set of puzzle pieces. Importantly, the indicia are allocated such that an unique solution exists for the relative position & rotation of the 13 tiles (whilst minimising the number of different indicia used) when considering the requirement to achieve both targets'.

Figure 6a shows (pictorially) the same set of 8 single-facet square shaped puzzle pieces (tiles) forming either a solo puzzle target (a hexagonal shaped puzzle) a group' of similar targets (two N x M grids, where N=M=2) non-simultaneously -this puzzle is of category A-IV'.

Figure 6b shows the indicia set for the first puzzle target, of figure 6a, in which the 8 single-facet square shaped puzzle pieces (tiles) form a solo' puzzle target -a hexagonal shaped puzzle.

Figure 6c shows the same set of puzzle pieces as shown in figure 6b forming the second target of figure 6a, a group' of similar targets (simultaneously) -in this case two N x M grid based puzzles, where N=M=2.

Figure 7a shows (pictorially) the same set of 8 single-facet square shaped tiles forming two group' targets -in this case either a group' of similar targets (two N x M grid based puzzles, where N=M=2) or a second group' of similar puzzle targets (two linear puzzles, length=4) -this puzzle is of category A-VI'.

Figure 7b shows the mdicia set for the first group' puzzle target, of figure 7a, in which the 8 single-facet square shaped tiles form two similar N x M grids (N=M=2) simultaneously.

Figure 7c shows the same set of puzzle pieces, as per figure Th, forming a second target group' -in this case two similar linear based puzzles, length=4, simultaneously.

Figure 8a shows (pictorially) the same set of 13 dual-facet square shaped puzzle pieces forming two targets simultaneously -in this case a dual-facet N x M grid based puzzle (N=M=2) and a dual-facet N x M grid based puzzle (NM3) -this puzzle is of category A-fl'. Note that to form the puzzle configurations (both dual-facet N x M grids) the indicia ascribed on the edges of both the front and rear facets of adjacent puzzle pieces must be matched (i.e., front-to-front and rear-to-rear).

Figure 8b shows the indicia set for the first puzzle target, of figure 8a, in which 4 (out of 13) dual-facet square based puzzle pieces form a dual-facet N x M grid (N=M=2).

Figure 8c shows the indicia set for the second puzzle target, of figure 8a, in which the remaining 9 (out of 13) dual-facet square based puzzle pieces form a dual-facet NxMgrid(N=M=3).

Figure 9a shows (pictorially) the same set of 9 single-facet, dual-indicia ascribed per edge brick' shaped puzzle pieces (tiles) forming either a solo' puzzle target (a diamond shaped puzzle, using all 9 puzzle pieces) or a group' of puzzle targets (two smaller diamond shaped puzzle, using 4 puzzle pieces each) -this puzzle type is of category C-IV'. Note that the second group' target also includes a spare puzzle piece, which is utilised only in the solo' puzzle target.

Figure 9b shows the indicia set for the solo' puzzle target, of figure 9a, in which the 9 single-facet, dual-indicia ascribed per edge, brick' shaped puzzle pieces form a diamond shaped puzzle.

Figure 9c shows the same set of puzzle pieces as per figure 9b, forming two similar targets (two smaller diamond shaped puzzles, with 4 puzzle pieces each) and an unused (spare) puzzle piece.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION

In figure la, four single-facet square based puzzle pieces (tiles) form a 2 x 2 (N=M=2) grid based puzzle. On each edge of each tile (110, 120, 130 and 140) a numerical indicia (11 1... 114, 121... 124, 131... 134 and 141... 144) has been allocated, by an IAA, such that there is a unique relative placement (considering Jj possible positional and rotational permutations) of the puzzle pieces to form the target' configuration (a 2x2 grid). In addition the IAA has minimised the number of different indicia used, maximising the puzzle's difficulty. The numerical indicia 1' (112, 113, 122, 124 and 131) is used 5 times, 2' (111, 123, 132, 141 and 144) is also used 5 times, 3' (114, 121, 133 and 134) is used 4 times and finally 4' (142 and 143) is used 2 times. The encircled indicia highlight the indicia required to be matched (total of 8) to form the target' configuration. Of particular interest is that the matching of the indicia, on the edges of adjacent puzzle pieces, only involves two puzzle pieces or is piece-to-piece.

With reference to figure la, allocate A' to the top left-hand corner position, B' to the top right-hand corner position, C' to the lower left-hand corner position and D' to the lower right-hand corner position. When the puzzler commences to solve the puzzle the puzzler has 4 possible puzzle pieces that could be positioned in position A', and that each piece could be in any of four rotational positions (equal to the number of edges). If P is the number of puzzle pieces, E the number of edges each puzzle piece has (and hence the number of indicia) and F the number of facets (of each puzzle piece, as F=1 in this case it is ignored) the number of possible permutations for position A is given by P E. If piece 110 was positioned in position A' (in any rotational state) the puzzler would have to find a piece that would fit in position B' which has the same indicia on its left-hand edge (matching the indicia on the right- hand edge of piece A'). Ignoring pieces that do not have indicia that match, the number of permutations is now given by ( -1). E. If the puzzler continues to find pieces that match for positions C' and D' the puzzler (again ignoring pieces which the indicia do not match) would eventually have to consider (P.(P-1).(P-2).(P-3)).(E.E.E.E) or P!EpositionaI and rotational permutations to find the target' solution. With P=4, E4 (F= 1) the total number of positional and rotational permutations that the puzzler may have to consider would be 4!4 = 6144. It should be noted that as the N x M (N=M) grid has 4 symmetrical rotational states Out of the 6144 possible permutations 4 permutations would yield a solution.

The permutation equation, defined above, only provides a relative indication of a particular puzzle configuration's difficulty, as the actual number of test scenarios (position and rotation of the puzzle pieces), that the puzzler may have to consider, is dependent upon the actual indicia set utilised. To calculate the number of actual test cases a search-based algorithm For the puzzle in figure la the search algorithm (or puzzler) would have to find the solution as follows: for position A' there are 16 scenarios (P. E), i.e. each puzzle piece in each rotational state. For each of the position A' scenarios determine the unique puzzle piece in position B' that would match (right-hand edge indicia of piece in position A' matching the left-hand edge indicia of piece in position B') -there are a total of 44 cases. For each of these 44 cases find the unique puzzle piece that fits in position C' matching the piece (it's indicia) in position A'-this results in 63 valid cases. Finally find the unique puzzle piece for position D' that matches both of the pieces (their indicia) in positions B' and C'. Out of the 63 cases only 4 will result in a valid position D' match, these 4 being the 4 rotational solutions to the puzzle.

As shown in figure Ia, the IAA does produce possible' clues to the solution (especially if numerical indicia are utilised) as the puzzler could guess (or at least start with) that the indicia 1' is likely to be used in the top left-hand corner. Applying an interchange (for example 1-�4, 2-3, 3-.1 & 4-*2), as shown in figure ib, of indicia would remove this dependency -although in practice the number of puzzle pieces has to be higher than 4 to produce useable results.

The IAA utilised is flexible in that by using a combination of constraints and indicia interchanges it is possible to produce different puzzle configurations with differing degrees of difficulty. The constraints limit the number of occurrences an indicia is (a) used in the whole puzzle (Irx_PuzzLE), (b) used on a single puzzle piece (Ix PiecE) considering all facets and edges and (c) used on a puzzle piece's facet (I x_FAc). For puzzle pieces with only one facet (F=1) constraints (b) and (c) are equal. It should be noted that by just applying an indicia interchange to an indicia set, consisting of I' different indicia, I' factorial (I!) different puzzle targets' could be derived -for the puzzle in figure Ia, with 4 different Indicia, this could be 24 (4!).

If the indicia where non-alpha numerical characters the target' solution would be better hidden, as it removes any link to numerical sequences. For this reason it is considered that an actual puzzle implementation would use colours, shapes, shading patterns or combination of these three. The key is to have sufficient different patterns to enable unambiguous discrimination between different indicia and to avoid any possibility of the indicia providing any clue to the correct orientation of the puzzle piece in the target'. It should also be noted that raised dots could be utilised to aid blind or partially sighted puzzlers.

Figure 2 shows a dual-target puzzle requiring the puzzler to form two similar N x M grid based puzzles (N=M=2) from 8 single-facet (210... 280) square shaped puzzle pieces (tiles).

The indicia, ascribed per edge, have been determined (considering all possible positional and rotational configurations of the puzzle pieces) so that by matching like indicia the puzzle pieces fit together to form the two 2x2 grids. The first (left-hand) 2x2 grid can only be formed by combining puzzle pieces 210... 240, with the second (right-hand) 2x2 grid being formed only by combining puzzle pieces 250... 280. The indicia, though, for the second grid have been determined using a very crude/simplistic method -by applying an indicia offset, of 4, to the corresponding indicia of the first grid. Multi-target puzzles created in this manner, where the indicia of each target are non-overlapping (are only utilised within the same target) are not of interest to this patent and, therefore, are not discussed further.

It is, though, stated that multi-target puzzles created from non-overlapping indicia are possible but are strictly multiple versions of a single target puzzle and not true multi-target puzzles.

Figure 3 shows a dual-target puzzle similar to that shown in figure 2. Unlike figure 2, though, the indicia set (for both targets, an N x M grid, with N=M=2) has been determined for each target using overlapping indicia (at least one indicia has been utilised in both targets -in this case the numerical indicia 3', 4' and 5'). As per figure 2, the indicia set utilised has been determined (for both targets) considering all possible positional and rotational configurations of the puzzle pieces, ensuring that only puzzle pieces 310... 340 form the first (left-hand) 2x2 grid and only puzzle pieces 350... 380 form the second (right-hand) 2x2 grid, by matching like indicia in two-dimensions.

It is the use of overlapping indicia sets (in a multi-target puzzle) that is the key feature of the puzzles covered by this patent. The following figures provide detailed discussions on the different classes/types of multi-target puzzles that can be produced by using single-facet or multi-facet puzzle pieces, with three or more edges and each edge ascribed with either a single or multi-indicia. In all of the figures the indicia that match have been encircled (dashed line) to aid understanding.

Figures 4a, 4b and 4c show an embodiment in which 9 single-facet (410... 490) square shaped puzzle pieces (tiles), with a single-indicia ascribed per edge, can be arranged to form either an N x M (N=M=3) grid based puzzle (figure 4b) or a triangular shaped puzzle (figure 4c). Formally this dual-target puzzle is of category A-il' -multiple dissimilar targets, non-simultaneously. Note the position of the 9 tiles in each of the targets and how the unmatched indicia of the puzzle pieces at the edge of the N x M grid (for example piece 410, figure 4b) are matched in the triangular shaped puzzle (piece 410, figure 4c).

Also, it should be noted that although this embodiment shows two targets (a 3x3 grid and a triangular) it is possible to have additional (two or more) targets from the same set of puzzle pieces.

Figures 5a and 5b show an embodiment in which 13 single-facet (510, 515... 565 and 570) square shaped puzzle pieces (tiles), with a single-indicia ascribed per edge, can be arranged to form an N x M grid (N=M=2) and a second N x M grid (N=M=3) simultaneously -see figure 5b. Formally this dual-target puzzle is of category A-Il' -multiple dissimilar targets (simultaneously).

It should be noted that puzzles with different sized N x M grids possess a significant difficulty level and have to be solved in a particular order. That is, if the puzzler commences by trying to find the 4 puzzle pieces (tiles) that from the (smaller) 2 x 2 grid target' they will find that there are several false' solutions due to the 3 x 3 grid puzzle inherently possessing multiple 2 x 2 grid solutions -i.e., the remaining 9 pieces will not form the 3x3 grid target.

For example (see figure Sb) pieces 530, 535, 545 and 550 form a 2 x 2 grid, pieces 535, 540, 550 and 555 also form a 2 x 2 grid, etc. for a total of 4 false' 2 x 2 grids. Therefore, to solve puzzles of this type, the puzzler should find the correct 9 pieces (out of 13) that form the (larger) 3 x 3 grid target' first, leaving 4 pieces -which when arranged correctly will form the 2 x 2 grid target. The N x M grid is just one of many puzzle target' configurations that contain multiple versions of smaller targets' -all have to be solved in the manner described, i.e., larger' (contains more puzzle pieces) puzzle first, followed by the smaller'.

Figures 6a, 6b and 6c show an embodiment introducing the concept of group' targets. That is two or more targets that can be formed simultaneously from the available puzzle pieces. In this case 8 (610... 680) single-facet square shaped puzzle pieces (tiles) can be arranged to form either a solo' target (hexagonal shaped puzzle, figure 6b) a group' of two similar shaped puzzles (two N x M grids, with N=M=2, figure 6c). Formally this dual-target puzzle is of category A-IV' -a solo' target a group' of similar targets.

Note, in figures 6b and 6c, the position of the 8 tiles in each of the targets and how the indicia of the puzzle pieces are matched differently to form the two different targets. As with the multi-target puzzle shown in figures 5a and 5b it could be possible for the 8 puzzle pieces to be arranged to form additional targets, either solo' or group' -adding additional variety to the puzzler's puzzle solving experience.

Figures 7a, 7b and 7c show a further embodiment introducing the concept of multiple group' targets, i.e. the puzzle pieces can be arranged to form two or more group targets. In this case 8 (710... 780) single-facet square shaped puzzle pieces (tiles) can be arranged to form either a group' consisting of two similar grid based puzzles (N=M=2) a group' consisting of two similar linear (length-4) based puzzles. Formally, this dual-target puzzle is of category A-V1' -a group' of similar targets or a group' of similar targets.

It should be noted that puzzles with multi-group targets could have either: * a group' of similar targets or a group' of similar targets -category A-VI'; * a group' of similar targets or a group' of dissimilar targets -category A-WI'; * a group' of dissimilar targets or a group' of dissimilar targets -category A-Vu!'.

Figures 8a, 8b and 8c show an embodiment of a category A-I!!' (multiple dissimilar targets) multi-target puzzle. In this case the puzzle targets are formed from 13 (810, 815... 865 and 870) dual-facetted square shaped puzzle pieces with a single-indicia ascribed per edge on both the front and rear facets. The two targets (a dual-facet 2 x 2 grid, figure 8b) and a dual-facet 3 x 3 grid, figure 8c) are formed simultaneously by selecting the required sub-set of the available puzzle pieces and by matching like indicia on both facets (front-to-front and rear-to-rear) of adjacent puzzle pieces.

As with the multi-target puzzle shown in figures 5a and 5b the puzzler has to take care in which order they tackle the two puzzle targets -as the dual-facet 3 x 3 grid inherently includes multiple dual-facet 2 x 2 grid false' solutions. For example dual-facet 2 x 2 grids can by formed from pieces 830, 835, 845 and 850 and pieces 835, 840, 850 and 855, etc. -4 false' dual-facet 2 x 2 grids in total.

Figures 9a, 9b and 9c show an embodiment of a category C-IV (solo' target a group' of similar targets, including a spare puzzle piece only utilised in one of the targets -in this case the solo' target) multi-target puzzle. The embodiment shows 9 single-facet dual-indicia ascribed per edge brick' shaped puzzle pieces forming the multiple targets. Note how the indicia are matched via the use of piece-to-multi-piece matching (e.g., piece 910 matches with pieces 920 and 930) as opposed to the piece-to-piece indicia matching if single indicia ascribed per edge puzzle pieces are utilised.

Claims

A puzzle game consisting of two or more moveable single-facetted puzzle pieces, each piece having three or more edges and each edge ascribed with one or more indicia, such that when all or a sub-set of said puzzle pieces are placed in an unique relative positional and rotational configuration, so that adjacent indicia of two or more different puzzle pieces match, a required set of two or more two-dimensional configurations/patterns (targets') are achieved, where the targets can be either a group consisting of two or more similar or dissimilar targets, a solo target who's pieces can be rearranged to form one or more similar or dissimilar solo targets, a solo target who's pieces can be rearranged to form a group of two or more similar or dissimilar targets, or a group of two or more similar or dissimilar targets who's pieces can be rearranged to form another group or multiple groups of two or more similar or dissimilar targets.
2. A puzzle game consisting of two or more moveable dual-facetted puzzle pieces, each facet having three or more edges and each edge ascribed with one or more indicia, such that when all or a sub-set of said puzzle pieces are placed in an unique relative positional and rotational configuration, so that adjacent indicia of two or more different puzzle pieces match on the piece's front and rear facets, a required set of two or more two-dimensional configurations/patterns (targets') are achieved, where the targets can be either a group consisting of two or more similar or dissimilar targets, a solo target who's pieces can be rearranged to form one or more similar or dissimilar solo targets, a solo target who's pieces can be rearranged to form a group of two or more similar or dissimilar targets, or a group of two or more similar or dissimilar targets who's pieces can be rearranged to form another group or multiple groups of two or more similar or dissimilar targets.
3. A puzzle game consisting of two or more moveable multi-facetted puzzle pieces, each facet ascribed with a centrally located indicia, and each facet having three or more edge, each edge ascribed with a one or more indicia, such that when said puzzle pieces are placed, using only the facets of puzzle piece's with a matching centrally located indicia, in an unique relative positional and rotational configuration, so that adjacent indicia of two or more different puzzle pieces match, a required set of two or more two-dimensional configurations/patterns (targets') are achieved, the selection of which targets' are required is chosen by means of a random process and the targets can be either a group consisting of two or more similar or dissimilar targets, a solo target who's pieces can be rearranged to form one or more similar or dissimilar solo targets, a solo target who's pieces can be rearranged to form a group of two or more similar or dissimilar targets, or a group of two or more similar or dissimilar targets who's pieces can be rearranged to form another group or multiple groups of two or more similar or dissimilar targets.
4. A puzzle game consisting of two or more moveable three or more facetted puzzle pieces, each facet having three or more edges and each edge ascribed with one or more indicia, such that when all or a sub-set of said puzzle pieces are placed in an unique relative positional and rotational configuration, so that adjacent indicia of two or more different puzzle pieces match in three-dimensions, a required set of two or more three-dimensional configurations/patterns (targets') are achieved, where the targets can be either a group consisting of two or more similar or dissimilar targets, a solo target who's pieces can be rearranged to form one or more sirmiar or dissimilar solo targets, a solo target who's pieces can be rearranged to form a group of two or more similar or dissimilar targets, or a group of two or more similar or dissimilar targets who's pieces can be rearranged to form another group or multiple groups of two or more similar or dissimilar targets.
5. A puzzle game as outlined in claim 2 in that there is a means of support or inter-connection of the puzzle pieces allowing said puzzle pieces to be positioned vertically, aiding the viewing of the viewable front and rear facets of each puzzle piece.
6. A puzzle game as outlined in claims 1 to 4 in which the indicia ascribed on each puzzle piece's edge and any indicia ascribed in a centrally located position on a puzzle piece's facet are implemented as an alphanumeric character, a solid or broken colour, a pattern consisting of two or more colours, a pattern of raised dots suitable for blind or partially sighted puzzlers, a pattern consisting of one or more shapes or symbols or combinations of the aforementioned.
7. A puzzle game as outlined in claims 1 to 4 in which the indicia set required to form each of the targets contains at least one indicia that is utilised in two or more targets.
8. A puzzle game as outlined in claims I to 4 in which the total number of puzzle pieces matches or exceeds the number of puzzle pieces required in solving the puzzle (targets').
9. A puzzle game as outlined in claims I to 4 in which one or more of the puzzle pieces have a fixed position and orientation.
10. A puzzle game as outlined in claims I to 4 in which one or more moveable puzzle pieces, identified with a centrally ascribed indicia on one or more facets, has to be positioned in a specified position and/or orientation.
11. A puzzle game, as outlined in the preceding claims, in which by the addition of a passive or electronic means, to each of the puzzle piece facets, allows the unique identification of a particular puzzle piece, it's position in the puzzle and it's orientation so that feedback to the puzzler can be provided, indicating that the puzzle has been solved or to supply continuous or upon request hints to the puzzler.
12. A puzzle game, as outlined in the preceding claims, in which the puzzle game is implemented in software and/or fixed or programmable logic so that the puzzle game can be played either on a personnel computer, a games console, a hand-held dedicated gaming device or a mobile communications device.