Diagram

[aidanmenzul]

this is a tough game... not even sure how to approach.

[cyruswhittaker]

This was game was really tough when I studied it a few weeks ago, and even after doing a lot of games, it's still tough.

But for me the difficulty lies in keeping track of the setup and more crucially, the impact and restrictions formed by the rules.

So for the setup, I put the factories vertically and the years horizontally. I realize that this is contrary to the solution given in the book, but I found this easier to conceptualize because I normally diagram progression in time from left to right. But I also played around with the horizontal setup, and it didn't make too big of a difference. Five models are being made each year by five factories, but we only have 4 models to choose from. Since each model must be represented each year at least once, it means that ONE model will appear twice. From this, it would make sense to see the rules revolve around restrictions on which models can repeat.

For rule two, in any particular factory, X cannot be followed in the next year by V or W. This is the same way as saying that V or W can't be assembled in any factory in which X was assembled the previous year.

At this point it helps to conceptualize what we're doing: we are looking at restriction within a factory and in regards to consectuive years.

Combined with rule 1, we know that X can also not another X in the same factory in consecutive years. But that means that ONLY Z can follow X, in the same factory, in consecutive years.

But then rule 4 tells us that Z can only occur once in a year. Remember, X MUST occur during a year, and it MUST be followed by Z only, so that means that for years 1 and 2, XZ form a block, and there can only be one X in years 1 and 2. The reason we can't say this about year 3 is because nothing follows year 3 (it's the end of our time period).

Rule 3 is slightly different in that it says that neither V nor X can follow Z in any factory for consecutive years. And of course, due to rule 1, Z can't follow Z. So, what this says is that any model that follows Z MUST be W. But W COULD follow a variable besides Z if it occurs more than once in a year.

This game is a good example of when implications of the rules become very important. These implications weren't clear to me when I first did the game, and it was extremely brutal and time-consuming.

By getting these rules down, you can annihilate the questions:

20: Apply the rules and eliminate the choices that don't conform.

21: Rules 1 and 4 eliminate A, D, and E. Our discussion of rule 3 eliminates C (remember, Z can only occur once and it must be preceded by X). So B remains.

22: B is quickly evident from discussion of rule 3. If X was assembled more than once, then since Z follows X, it would create more than one Z in year 3, which violates rule 4.

23: Again, the discussion of rule 3 makes E quickly evident.

24: Use the rules and quickly eliminate B-E.

[aidanmenzul]

that helps thank you...

[s0630506]

can anyone attach a diagram for the setup for this game?
Thanks

[ManhattanPrepLSAT1]

Sure, check out this setup and let me know what you think.



This is a classic closed assignment game from the past. In this game you cannot find quick and elegant solutions and never do you find that you’ve got a completed solution. Don’t try to force the game to feel more complete than you need to find the correct answers. Remember that Z is only produced in one factory each year - it’s critical to making some of the final eliminations for several of the questions.

This is a tough game, and requires less plug and check then you might think. This one is more about finding which answer choices don't work, and then choosing whatever is left. Success means that you've remembered to check each of the constraints against the incorrect answers and figured out where they go wrong.

Good luck!

[s0630506]

Thanks. The game was pretty simple after having the setup.

[cdjmarmon]

Is this one of those games LSAC hasnt put on a test in like 11 years?

My Princeston review teacher kinda told us about them. I started this test as a timed practice test and as soon as I got to this game I just quit lol. I couldnt believe I found a game I could not finish in time.

[ManhattanPrepLSAT1]

This game does function very much in a way that hasn't appeared recently. That last occurrence of a game with such a mechanism was back in December 2002 (PT39, S1, G2 Three Day Conference).

That said, you should be ready for it! The LSAT has a habit of diving into the past and using them for inspiration for new ones.

[cdjmarmon]

I wish I could think of the names of the games my Princeston review teacher showed us.

They were games you could not derive any inferences from without more info from the question.

They would essentially tell you some rules then every question would be an "If......" and you just had to keep working possible configuartions.

One I remember involved like different colored chemicals in beakers like orange, violet, green, red, something like that and you had a set of rules that limited the way you could order them in slots 1-5.

Does that strick anyone as familiar?

[ManhattanPrepLSAT1]

That's a fun game! And that game has more in common with another set of game than this game.

For games of that sort, you go back to 1991-1995. Here are a few:

PT12, S2, G4 Four Flasks
PT11, S1, G4 Four Apprentices
PT18, S1, G4 Law Firm

And take at the questions in there... you're instructor might have oversimplified what you expect to find in such a game.