Do you do logic game questions in order?

rebelwithoutaclause

Despite having gone through the core curriculum and JY's explanation videos multiple times, where he frequently skips around to local questions with premises before tackling global ones, I still approach logic games questions in order unless I'm really stuck. I've found in the past that LG questions often build on inferences from previous questions, something you might miss if you skip around.

Anyone have a particularly firm opinion on either approach? Would love to hear your thoughts!

MissChanandler

I typically go in order unless there's a question that's giving me a little trouble. I think that the idea behind doing local questions makes complete sense, but I also think that you should do what works for you. I typically get between -3 and -0 for logic games sections, so I don't feel the need to change my strategy. If you feel like you're not performing to your fullest, definitely don't feel like you can't try changing it up a bit

RealLaw612

I skip around. I do the first question, than the locals before finishing the remaining globals. As mentioned, the information gained from answering all the local questions first cuts a lot of time on the Games in my experience.

Pride Only Hurts

If I skip a logic game, it’s almost always the third game.

Habeas Porpoise

It depends on the game for me. I'm with you and @MissChanandler, I usually go in order. But if there's a game that's challenging from the get-go (few inferences, not many boards/open-ended), I'll skip around, leaving some tougher global questions until I have more gameboards.

gabes900-1

Hi @rebelwithoutaclause , I am fool proofing LGs right now. I have noticed that I skip around on first attempts for most games. I do this because after I have the setup down and answer the acceptable situation question, if there is one, I will scan for local/additional premise questions and answer them first.

On first go, I find this better for my approach to the section as it is my weakest section, in terms of time and accuracy. I also skip general questions if I can't answer them immediately. This saves me time since I can: (1) answer the additional premises questions first, (2) gain a keen sense of the inferences that may be tested in the general questions----after I have answered the additional premise questions----and (3) essentially fly around the game quicker than I would have if I had been doing them in order. However, I do sometimes do games in order on first go if the game is a 1-2 star difficulty sequencing game. These games tend to just click with me now after fool-proofing them to death. As a result, I can do them very quick without skipping around because I can anticipate the inferences the questions will test me on clearly and efficiently without wasting precious time.

Another reason I like to skip around is because when I encounter a weirder game, on first go and under timed conditions, I tend to sometimes get stuck if I do them in order. This results in, of course, time wasting and inactivity---in a physical sense with the logic game. Skipping around, in these situations, keeps me engaged and in the game that I may have some difficulty with in terms of smoothness.

But this is all just my 2 cents. Best of luck studying and finding your groove with this section. Sorry for the lengthy post. I am obsessed with logic games now after fool-proofing them for some time. It is somewhat ironic due to the section being my weakest initially. I personally think it is my favorite section now due to my love for video games lol.

Guillaume

Games are not my strongest section. Even after fool proofing and practicing for months I still get -2 to -4 but I've found what works for me is:

1. Doing the first question as I write out the rules
2. Split if possible/write out any inferences that become obvious
3. Do local questions to fish out any additional inferences and make modifications to my master game board accordingly
4. Global questions

rebelwithoutaclause

Thanks, everyone, for the great feedback! Going to try skipping around a bit more as I've mainly taken a linear approach thus far, and see where it gets me.

My biggest struggle at the moment is definitely experiencing paralysis when encountering unfamiliar game types, of which there have been quite a few in the more recent PTs (late 70s-early 80s). Trying to get more comfortable with being uncomfortable at this point, and also save myself some time in earlier games to have a contingency in place for these "unusual" game types.

xenonhexafluoro

I usually do the questions in order unless one looks really hard (e.g. rule substitution). But after game 2 I always glance at games 3/4 to see which one has more questions and tackle that one first.

TexAgAaron

I typically go in order and skip when necessary, though I'm intrigued by doing the global questions last strategy. Might have to try this haha

jmarmaduke96

If I can split my game boards to solve for most possibilities then I will go through the questions in order. However, if I have to use my rules on a question by question basis then I will generally try to do questions with an additional premise first and leave the naked MBT/MBF questions for the end when I can generally eliminate at least one or two answer choices simply by looking at game boards that I used for the questions with additional premises.