Queens combines three exact counts with a local spacing rule. Place one queen in each row, column and colored region; queens must not touch, including diagonally. Unlike chess queens, pieces are not excluded merely because they share a long diagonal. The examples below are constructed teaching fragments, not a current LinkedIn board or a claim of a complete solution.
Track candidates, not attractive-looking squares
A candidate is a square that has not yet been ruled out. It is not a promise that the final queen belongs there. Start by looking for a small region or a row with few candidates. For each confirmed placement, cross out its row, column, region and immediate neighbors. Then revisit every affected unit: a new single candidate can appear far from the placed queen.
Keep the three inventories separate. A row can still contain several candidates while a region crossing that row has only one. Finishing the row count alone does not prove the region count.
A region confined to one row reserves that row
C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 Row 2 · A A · · A = remaining candidate for region A
If these are region A's only candidates anywhere on the board, its queen must occupy row 2. You cannot yet choose C2 or C3, but you can exclude every other cell in row 2. The key word is “only”: if another A candidate remains in row 4, this deduction is not valid.
Apply the same reasoning to a region confined to one column. This is often more useful than guessing a square, because it removes candidates without committing to an unproved position.
Use exclusions shared by both possibilities
In the sketch above, a queen at R2C2 would touch R3C1, R3C2 and R3C3. A queen at R2C3 would touch R3C2, R3C3 and R3C4. Consequently R3C2 and R3C3 are excluded whichever candidate wins. R3C1 and R3C4 are not both excluded by this argument. Take the intersection of the two exclusion sets, not their union.
This distinction prevents a common mistake: crossing out every square threatened by any possible queen. Only a confirmed queen removes its full neighborhood. An unresolved choice removes squares that every remaining choice would invalidate.
Two rows can reserve two columns
Suppose rows 1 and 4 each have candidates only in columns 2 and 5. Each row needs a queen and each column allows one, so those two rows must consume columns 2 and 5 in some order. Other rows cannot use either column. This does not determine which of the two placements belongs in row 1, and the region and touching constraints still apply.
Before using this deduction, check that you have not accidentally omitted a candidate. A pair that exists only because of an earlier mistaken cross-out spreads that error to the rest of the board.
When the board stops making sense
- A row with no candidate: revisit the last exclusion affecting that row.
- A region with no candidate: check whether a queen was assumed rather than proved.
- Two queens in one column: the row constraints were satisfied independently but not together.
- A rejected long diagonal: remove the chess assumption; immediate diagonal touching is the relevant restriction.
If you try a tentative placement, keep it distinct from confirmed deductions. A contradiction disproves that branch only if each step in the branch followed a valid rule. Do not erase the whole board before identifying the earliest unsupported step.
Check the finished board
Count one queen per row, then per column, then per colored region. Finally inspect each queen's neighboring squares. A visually balanced board is not sufficient evidence. During practice, write the reason for one placement per puzzle; over time this reveals whether your bottleneck is scanning, region logic, or candidate bookkeeping.
Rule reference: official LinkedIn Queens game. These deductions are our instructional explanations of the constraints, not official daily hints.
Queens answer center · Learn a different constraint system: Tango · All guides