Scrolling homecoming equips

Another Pro-Tip, the most efficiante board set up to my knowledge, is a Right Triangle. That uses up 12 pieces in total, and i beleive no other set up can beat it.

By a right triangle i mean

11111
10010
10100
11000
10000

(1s being places to put food, 0s being places to not put food)

The least efficient board setup is having them all intersect in the same spot, which uses 13.
11111
00011
00101
01001
10001

00011
11111
00110
01010
10010
etc.
So you're choosing between 12 or 13... nbd.

The least efficient board setup is having them all intersect in the same spot, which uses 13.

I'm pretty sure the least efficient board setup is not having them intersect at all, using 15 pieces.

You used to be able to trade in 2 of the same food for a random piece of food with Cassandra but I can't seem to find that option anymore. Anyone wanna confirm it was removed or am I just not seeing it?

You used to be able to trade in 2 of the same food for a random piece of food with Cassandra but I can't seem to find that option anymore. Anyone wanna confirm it was removed or am I just not seeing it?

I never saw this option...

I can guarantee it existed. It was after you pressed "talk to Cassandra" which I'm guessing isn't used by most people. Right not all that's there is "tell me about current events". But it did exist before.

I can guarantee it existed. It was after you pressed "talk to Cassandra" which I'm guessing isn't used by most people. Right not all that's there is "tell me about current events". But it did exist before.

I can confirm this. I actually traded two of the same items to gain a new item a few times. I could not find it today either

I'm pretty sure the least efficient board setup is not having them intersect at all, using 15 pieces.

You can't have 5 in a row, 5 in a column, and 5 in a diagonal without them overlapping in 3 spots - where the row & diagonal meet, where the row & column meet, and where the column & diagonal meet. If you make the 3 overlaps in different places, it's 3 pieces for 6 parts of the solution (and thus cuts 15 to 12) - if you make the 3 overlaps in the same place, it's 1 piece for 3 parts of the solution (and thus cuts 15 to 13).

Just by putting 5 into a row, you've completed 1 of any possible column and either diagonal.

00000
11111
00000
00000
00000

There's no column on this board that doesn't overlap, you need 4 pieces to complete any column.

You can't have 5 in a row, 5 in a column, and 5 in a diagonal without them overlapping in 3 spots - where the row & diagonal meet, where the row & column meet, and where the column & diagonal meet. If you make the 3 overlaps in different places, it's 3 pieces for 6 parts of the solution (and thus cuts 15 to 12) - if you make the 3 overlaps in the same place, it's 1 piece for 3 parts of the solution (and thus cuts 15 to 13).

Just by putting 5 into a row, you've completed 1 of any possible column and either diagonal.

00000
11111
00000
00000
00000

There's no column on this board that doesn't overlap, you need 4 pieces to complete any column.

Is there a rule that says you can't have 3 horizontal rows?

You can't have 5 in a row, 5 in a column, and 5 in a diagonal without them overlapping in 3 spots - where the row & diagonal meet, where the row & column meet, and where the column & diagonal meet. If you make the 3 overlaps in different places, it's 3 pieces for 6 parts of the solution (and thus cuts 15 to 12) - if you make the 3 overlaps in the same place, it's 1 piece for 3 parts of the solution (and thus cuts 15 to 13).

I meant they'd be parallel so they wouldn't intersect at all. That'd be 15 pieces.

Oh, can you complete it that way? The quest worded it so I thought it was always 1 of each to get the rewards, and since I'm training at LHC I don't really complete the quests much anymore.

Hmm, I'm not entirely sure, I've always made sure to use as few pieces as possible, but, I think I've completed one with 2 columns and a diagonal.

You don't need one of each angle to complete it. Maximum efficiency as described upthread isn't always doable, depending on piece availability; sometimes, with what you have, it's faster to include a pair of parallels.