Off-by-one on range boundaries
Wrong move: Loop endpoints miss first/last candidate.
Usually fails on: Fails on minimal arrays and exact-boundary answers.
Fix: Re-derive loops from inclusive/exclusive ranges before coding.
Move from brute-force thinking to an efficient approach using array strategy.
You are given an integer array enemyEnergies denoting the energy values of various enemies.
You are also given an integer currentEnergy denoting the amount of energy you have initially.
You start with 0 points, and all the enemies are unmarked initially.
You can perform either of the following operations zero or multiple times to gain points:
i, such that currentEnergy >= enemyEnergies[i]. By choosing this option:
currentEnergy = currentEnergy - enemyEnergies[i].i. By choosing this option:
currentEnergy = currentEnergy + enemyEnergies[i].i is marked.Return an integer denoting the maximum points you can get in the end by optimally performing operations.
Example 1:
Input: enemyEnergies = [3,2,2], currentEnergy = 2
Output: 3
Explanation:
The following operations can be performed to get 3 points, which is the maximum:
points increases by 1, and currentEnergy decreases by 2. So, points = 1, and currentEnergy = 0.currentEnergy increases by 3, and enemy 0 is marked. So, points = 1, currentEnergy = 3, and marked enemies = [0].points increases by 1, and currentEnergy decreases by 2. So, points = 2, currentEnergy = 1, and marked enemies = [0].currentEnergy increases by 2, and enemy 2 is marked. So, points = 2, currentEnergy = 3, and marked enemies = [0, 2].points increases by 1, and currentEnergy decreases by 2. So, points = 3, currentEnergy = 1, and marked enemies = [0, 2].Example 2:
Input: enemyEnergies = [2], currentEnergy = 10
Output: 5
Explanation:
Performing the first operation 5 times on enemy 0 results in the maximum number of points.
Constraints:
1 <= enemyEnergies.length <= 1051 <= enemyEnergies[i] <= 1090 <= currentEnergy <= 109Problem summary: You are given an integer array enemyEnergies denoting the energy values of various enemies. You are also given an integer currentEnergy denoting the amount of energy you have initially. You start with 0 points, and all the enemies are unmarked initially. You can perform either of the following operations zero or multiple times to gain points: Choose an unmarked enemy, i, such that currentEnergy >= enemyEnergies[i]. By choosing this option: You gain 1 point. Your energy is reduced by the enemy's energy, i.e. currentEnergy = currentEnergy - enemyEnergies[i]. If you have at least 1 point, you can choose an unmarked enemy, i. By choosing this option: Your energy increases by the enemy's energy, i.e. currentEnergy = currentEnergy + enemyEnergies[i]. The enemy i is marked. Return an integer denoting the maximum points you can get in the end by optimally performing operations.
Start with the most direct exhaustive search. That gives a correctness anchor before optimizing.
Pattern signal: Array · Greedy
[3,2,2] 2
[2] 10
Source-backed implementations are provided below for direct study and interview prep.
// Accepted solution for LeetCode #3207: Maximum Points After Enemy Battles
class Solution {
public long maximumPoints(int[] enemyEnergies, int currentEnergy) {
Arrays.sort(enemyEnergies);
if (currentEnergy < enemyEnergies[0]) {
return 0;
}
long ans = 0;
for (int i = enemyEnergies.length - 1; i >= 0; --i) {
ans += currentEnergy / enemyEnergies[0];
currentEnergy %= enemyEnergies[0];
currentEnergy += enemyEnergies[i];
}
return ans;
}
};
// Accepted solution for LeetCode #3207: Maximum Points After Enemy Battles
func maximumPoints(enemyEnergies []int, currentEnergy int) (ans int64) {
sort.Ints(enemyEnergies)
if currentEnergy < enemyEnergies[0] {
return 0
}
for i := len(enemyEnergies) - 1; i >= 0; i-- {
ans += int64(currentEnergy / enemyEnergies[0])
currentEnergy %= enemyEnergies[0]
currentEnergy += enemyEnergies[i]
}
return
}
# Accepted solution for LeetCode #3207: Maximum Points After Enemy Battles
class Solution:
def maximumPoints(self, enemyEnergies: List[int], currentEnergy: int) -> int:
enemyEnergies.sort()
if currentEnergy < enemyEnergies[0]:
return 0
ans = 0
for i in range(len(enemyEnergies) - 1, -1, -1):
ans += currentEnergy // enemyEnergies[0]
currentEnergy %= enemyEnergies[0]
currentEnergy += enemyEnergies[i]
return ans
// Accepted solution for LeetCode #3207: Maximum Points After Enemy Battles
// Rust example auto-generated from java reference.
// Replace the signature and local types with the exact LeetCode harness for this problem.
impl Solution {
pub fn rust_example() {
// Port the logic from the reference block below.
}
}
// Reference (java):
// // Accepted solution for LeetCode #3207: Maximum Points After Enemy Battles
// class Solution {
// public long maximumPoints(int[] enemyEnergies, int currentEnergy) {
// Arrays.sort(enemyEnergies);
// if (currentEnergy < enemyEnergies[0]) {
// return 0;
// }
// long ans = 0;
// for (int i = enemyEnergies.length - 1; i >= 0; --i) {
// ans += currentEnergy / enemyEnergies[0];
// currentEnergy %= enemyEnergies[0];
// currentEnergy += enemyEnergies[i];
// }
// return ans;
// }
// };
// Accepted solution for LeetCode #3207: Maximum Points After Enemy Battles
function maximumPoints(enemyEnergies: number[], currentEnergy: number): number {
enemyEnergies.sort((a, b) => a - b);
if (currentEnergy < enemyEnergies[0]) {
return 0;
}
let ans = 0;
for (let i = enemyEnergies.length - 1; ~i; --i) {
ans += Math.floor(currentEnergy / enemyEnergies[0]);
currentEnergy %= enemyEnergies[0];
currentEnergy += enemyEnergies[i];
}
return ans;
}
Use this to step through a reusable interview workflow for this problem.
Try every possible combination of choices. With n items each having two states (include/exclude), the search space is 2ⁿ. Evaluating each combination takes O(n), giving O(n × 2ⁿ). The recursion stack or subset storage uses O(n) space.
Greedy algorithms typically sort the input (O(n log n)) then make a single pass (O(n)). The sort dominates. If the input is already sorted or the greedy choice can be computed without sorting, time drops to O(n). Proving greedy correctness (exchange argument) is harder than the implementation.
Review these before coding to avoid predictable interview regressions.
Wrong move: Loop endpoints miss first/last candidate.
Usually fails on: Fails on minimal arrays and exact-boundary answers.
Fix: Re-derive loops from inclusive/exclusive ranges before coding.
Wrong move: Locally optimal choices may fail globally.
Usually fails on: Counterexamples appear on crafted input orderings.
Fix: Verify with exchange argument or monotonic objective before committing.