L
lucarubik
Guest
just watched a 7 min video called how to floating buffers (advanced) and orientation and even number of pieces cycles are still a problem, as it has always been to me to even consider this. now i wouldnt normally say that a method being hard makes a method bad, but i don't think you can get used to the ambiguities of using two buffers, never as good as using one, not in a lifte time. having to focus on weather if the cycles have a closed orientation or not, etc, mainly etc, so im gonna go ahead and say im not a fan, since there are no actual game changers. of course if i see a U perm, or an H or a Z perm ill do them, i think everyone does that, and when i do it its barely better. while it might be "good" to really work on it its definitely not "worth it", same for 5 cycles, i'd call a step forward a way to learn all 5 cycles easily or a way to use floating buffers consistantly, even when one of the two problems appear. this reminds me of swapping pieces during memo when parity; a dirty, overated solution. I give value to having to worry about less things. i could almost meassure it in time.
if someone has actually worked on it and calculated when its worht it to go for it and by how much, and by how much is better to be willing to go for it and these things im not so sure about i'd love to read about it ofc
if someone has actually worked on it and calculated when its worht it to go for it and by how much, and by how much is better to be willing to go for it and these things im not so sure about i'd love to read about it ofc