>>46829903>>46831885Fuck it, why not:
Every square with an X shouldn't even be bothered with because you know it's not a 2 or 3. Any row/column that adds up to five is an example (4+1 or 2+3). You know row 1 doesn't have a 2 or 3 because there's only room for a 1 left since there's a 3 opened (3+1=4, 3 voltorbs). Same with row 5 because there's only one voltorb (3+1+1+1=6, 1 voltorb)
I'm not denying that it's bullshit guesswork after that but come on, 25% chance is better than randomly picking squares
