Search results

Wait a minute this could be really really good. EoEdge: Always closer to 6 for me CO+Belt: 9 CP+1 edge: 8 Reduce to L5EP: 7 L5EP: 7 AUFs throughout the solve: 2 Sub-40 moves

I was messing around with a non-matching LEG-1 WaterRoux variant and got this 24 STM solve. I lost the scramble, but since the solution was so short I still remember how it went: "Scramble" generated by Cube Explorer: B2 R' D2 B2 R2 F2 D F2 U B' R' F' R2 B F U2 B' R' U' y M' S U S' // FB (4/4)...

That would be 23+28 = 51 avg movecount. What I am proposing is not ideal if orientation is not already solved.

Another way to go about it would be: 1. Orient everything and solve 3 E-slice edges (15 moves) 2. Separate and permute corners (12 moves) 3. Roux blocks (5 moves) 4. L7EP (16 moves) Total: 48 STM

Okay so here's my idea for implementing L7EP. 1. FB (8 moves) 2. Corners (10 moves) 3. Two redges (7 moves) 4. L7EO (7 moves) 5. L7EP (16 moves) Total: 50 STM Not exactly the most efficient approach... Any other ideas?

Actually might be good cuz intuitive is closer to 18 moves and this only requires two looks as oppose to three.

FML I just wasted an hour generating algs. Just realized L7EP can be solved in 15 moves or so intuitively...

Is there any way we could implement L7EP in speedsolving? I just generated algs that solve FR + L6E in 16.43 moves on average. If there was some way to make this useful, that'd be cool, Also, "only" 53 algs.

Looks great, thanks for the creds :P. I was actually in the process of filming something similar to this until I noticed you posted, so I might as well give up since I have 2 hours of footage and its mostly rambling and terrible explaining. Might keep a couple of speedsolves I recorded using ECE...

Wait... Hexagonal Francisco is good?? Well, not quite, but if we change it up a bit it actually is: 1. Solve a 2x3x1 on DB, sorta like a Roux block but rotated to be on the D layer, plus one corner, ideally the DLF corner (10 moves) 2. Solve three E-slice edges. Super fast, awesome lookahead...

Okay, I see. Thanks a lot for the help, I guess I'll stick to Cube Explorer for the longer algs.

Okay so sorry but I think there may be a bug or something... step epbl movegroup 3 prunedepth 8 searchdepth 8 epmask 0xffffffffffff eomask 0xffffffffffff cpmask 0xffffffff comask 0xffffffff cnmask 0xfff all epbl I type "custom" and as it is loading, the program crashes for no apparent...

Thanks!

Hey sorry if this question is super obvious but I just discovered this (it is AMAZING btw), and I'm wondering what the terms prune depth and search depth mean. Because atm I just enter random numbers when defining a custom method and sometimes it works, other times it does not.

I thought maybe if there weren't too many cases (idk what I was thinking tbh) maybe we could do F2L super fast with algs, then fix F2L while solving PLL or something.

Damn is it really that high? Oh well.

The FR pair doesn't have to go to the FR slot. You can solve any pair to any slot, it doesn't matter. The goal is simply to solve two pairs at once, but I'm thinking that could possibly have a huge number of cases, but if not I may have an idea that revolves around this.

Hey who is good enough at math to figure out how many cases solving F2L pairs two at a time, but into random slots would have?

I just generated all the algs for COLLDS (COLL + FD and BD are swapped). I can share them if there's any interest. Here's an example solve: F R2 F' R2 F' L2 R2 F R2 B U2 L' D' B F' D L' D L2 U x2 U' R' F' L D U L2 // cross with FD and BD swapped U L U' L2 U L // First pair U' R U' R' U' L U L'...

Isn't that just CMLL? Or do you mean something that would preserve orientation but ignore permutation?