| Comments
(turn spoilers off) |
 |
| 11884 |
Crosshairs (expert version) |
gary (1998) |
Sat 14 Mar 2009 01:36 |
SPOILER |
| |
Added speedrun: 139 moves (old: 146). |
| |
| 2493 |
Crosshairs (expert version) |
bpotetz (144) |
Tue 10 May 2005 21:34 |
SPOILER |
| |
Added speedrun: 146 moves (old: 218). |
| |
| 2368 |
Crosshairs (expert version) |
bpotetz (144) |
Sat 07 May 2005 02:06 |
SPOILER |
| |
Added speedrun: 218 moves (old: 336). |
| |
| 855 |
Crosshairs (expert version) |
Max (61) |
Wed 30 Mar 2005 09:41 |
SPOILER |
| |
Added speedrun: 336 moves (old: 999999).
|
| |
| 733 |
Crosshairs (expert version) |
Max (61) |
Thu 24 Mar 2005 20:41 |
SPOILER |
| |
Yeah, cockstump, the solution to the Potetz version is the slightly trickier of two possible solutions to this one, as I recall. I think Potetz's version is the best since it whittles it down to one possible solution and neatly completes the symmetrical design. |
| |
| 731 |
Crosshairs (expert version) |
cockstump (383) |
Thu 24 Mar 2005 20:33 |
SPOILER |
| |
Cook: not sure if i really "cooked" this one... but the solution i found to it is exactly the same as the solution i found to the potetz version. my assumption here is that i inadvertently stumbled upon the more trickier solution that brian potetz intended for his version. did anyone else solve these two in exactly the same way? |
| |
| 141 |
Crosshairs (expert version) |
Max (61) |
Fri 03 Dec 2004 12:01 |
|
| |
Don't force me to make a "Crosshairs (novice version)" just for you, Tom! ;) |
| |
| 137 |
Crosshairs (expert version) |
Tom 7 (1) |
Fri 03 Dec 2004 10:28 |
|
| |
At least I didn't solve the other one yet, so I can just solve this guy twice. ;) |
| |
| 136 |
Crosshairs (expert version) |
Max (61) |
Thu 02 Dec 2004 17:38 |
|
| |
This level forces you to perform the harder of the two main possible solutions to "Crosshairs". |
| |
