Searching history, like the first ones were maps and the shapes of contents with others being tangrams.
Not seeing how they got the standard square shape with 4 sides. A hexagon shape for example would be just as efficient as square.
Had a very small handful of puzzles that weren’t your standard square, so not saying they don’t exist. Some were cut in shapes matching the puzzle pic, eg. shape of a spider. Those seem very far and few in-between tho. Much harder tho.
In: Other
When you say “just as efficient”, are you talking about from the consumer standpoint or manufacturing?
Less sides/corners is likely to be more efficient from the manufacturer’s perspective.
Latest Answers