# Curvy Copter Discussion(New)

#### Kit Clement

Any tips on a process to solve this?
If you aren't sure about the idea of orbits, try tracing where the triangle pieces can go by only 180 degree turns. You should find that it's not possible in your current cubeshape to solve many of your triangle pieces. Next, try to identify moves that can be done (which will need to break cubeshape temporarily) that put triangles in positions that couldn't be obtained by 180 degree turns alone. This will be the key to making sure you can solve all your triangles before solving all of the other piece types you have solved.

#### qwr

##### Member
I solved one on my own today (without jumbling) after having only three corners left for a while.

My basic strategy was to solve the bottom half intuitively, inserting centers and corners into slots. Then at the last layer I try to get all corners oriented correctly (yellow on top).
I came up with two last layer algorithms: One moves around two pairs of centers and flips both edges: (UF UR)3; the other performs a 3-cycle of centers, one on F, one on U, and one on R: (UF FR UR FR)2. These don't affect any corners. These were enough to solve the puzzle just by messing with the top layer and sometimes one side edge. On top layer, first corners are solved intuitively, then edges using (UF UR)3, then 3-cycle of centers.

Tomorrow I'll try it with jumbling.

Last edited:

#### qwr

##### Member
I found this nice diagram of the orbits here https://fan2cube.fr/curvycopter1.php

If enough algs are created, what do you guys think about getting a wiki page going? (You can take credit for algs you add )

#### qwr

##### Member
Ok it's been more than a day because I forgot about it but I solved the puzzle with jumbling!

After scrambling I got it back to cube shape intuitively and solved the first layer by intuitively swapping orbits.
For the last layer, normally I would solve the corners and edges first, but this time I tried fixing all the center orbits.
(Here I use the notation where + means CW to first cut, ++ means CW to second cut, and CCW for - and --.)

I solved the last layer by observing the result of the center swapping move. Performed on the UF edge this is [FL+ UR+ : UF] (setup FL and UR edges, do 180 deg UF rotation, then undo setup). This move flips UF edge piece, swaps U face bottom left center with F face top right center, swaps L face top left center with R face top right center (directly across from each other), and rotates UFL corner CW and UFR corner CCW. The important part is the two centers on L and R sides swap since this changes orbits.

Another useful alg is performing the center swapping move and then its mirror: [FL+ UR+ : UF] [FR- UL- : UF]. This swaps two pairs of centers adjacent to UF just like doing one UF move but leaves the corners and edges unchanged.

The other variation is [FL+ UR-- : UF]. This changes orbits by swapping L face top right corner with U face top right corner. It can be mirrored too.

After solving the centers, I proceeded to solve like in my non-jumbling solution. I didn't have any weird corners or edges parity but I don't know if that is possible.

Last edited:

#### qwr

##### Member
Is this some sort of jumbling "parity"? I was able to intuitively figure out the non jumbling solution to this puzzle, coming up with corner 3 cycles and an alg to orient corners but during a solution where i hand scrambled with jumbling moves i am totally stumped (puzzle was super ugly and bandaged all over the place, i jumbled by turning only 1 side at a time leading to lots of shape shifting). No matter what i do i keep getting back to states that seem unsolvable with 180° turns, all my attempts to switch the triangle/clover pieces seems to just lead me back to some other quirky state i can't handle with "standard" moves.

Is this state solvable without jumbling moves? How can you tell? Any tips on a process to solve this?

View attachment 12808
I will assume that these are the only pieces unsolved. The U face orange center and R face green center are in the wrong orbits. Therefore setup these centers then swap these two centers with a center swapping move I mentioned in the last post.

I think in this case you can do UF UR y which sets up orange center on R face top left green center on U face top left. Then [FR- UL++ : UF] to swap

Last edited:

#### ichcubegerne

##### Member
So, I just started doing some solves again and I feel like there is no good way of intuitively solving CubeShape, when the case has certain depth. Is there any kind of help to this? I feel like an event that you cant learn because there are almost no resources should not be Part of the weekly comp

qwr

#### One Wheel

##### Member
So, I just started doing some solves again and I feel like there is no good way of intuitively solving CubeShape, when the case has certain depth. Is there any kind of help to this? I feel like an event that you cant learn because there are almost no resources should not be Part of the weekly comp
More intuitive solving is good. There's still plenty of room to develop resources, but there's enough out there that anybody can, with a little dedication and intuition, solve the cube. The biggest reason I don't compete in curvy copter more is just that the scrambles are hard to read, so it takes a long time to scramble (and I also need to learn more CO and center algs).

#### ichcubegerne

##### Member
More intuitive solving is good. There's still plenty of room to develop resources, but there's enough out there that anybody can, with a little dedication and intuition, solve the cube. The biggest reason I don't compete in curvy copter more is just that the scrambles are hard to read, so it takes a long time to scramble (and I also need to learn more CO and center algs).
I am not that much into competing because I have a hard time solving some cubeshapes. For a certain depth I just cant solve them at all and there is no help with that.

#### One Wheel

##### Member
I am not that much into competing because I have a hard time solving some cubeshapes. For a certain depth I just cant solve them at all and there is no help with that.
I don't know if this is what you're dealing with, but a little trick that Walker Welch showed me is that when you have an edge that's not aligned, align that edge and misalign two corner-center pairs, then solve from there.

#### ichcubegerne

##### Member
I don't know if this is what you're dealing with, but a little trick that Walker Welch showed me is that when you have an edge that's not aligned, align that edge and misalign two corner-center pairs, then solve from there.
Dont quite know what u mean. I asked Walker for advice once, but he never came back at me and at some point just ignoried or missed my messages

#### One Wheel

##### Member
Dont quite know what u mean. I asked Walker for advice once, but he never came back at me and at some point just ignoried or missed my messages
Don't try to solve from this position:

Solve from this position:

The other thing I got from Walker was when he did something like UF- UR-2 FR UR+2 UF+ and I said "but that's an illegal move" he said "says who?"

#### ichcubegerne

##### Member
I actually know that. I just have problems when there are like 3 of these.
That alg does not work. Not even if you ignore illegal moves.

#### One Wheel

##### Member
I actually know that. I just have problems when there are like 3 of these.
That alg does not work. Not even if you ignore illegal moves.
I had no end of trouble with that, especially with 2 of those for some reason, until I tried thinking about it that way. Now I can usually isolate two corner-center pairs and solve them, and get it without much trouble from there. The step that gets me is moving the last couple of centers from the top to their respective side spaces.

#### Mike Hughey

Staff member
The other thing I got from Walker was when he did something like UF- UR-2 FR UR+2 UF+ and I said "but that's an illegal move" he said "says who?"
Try that algorithm and I think you will discover that "something like" that algorithm must have been something different from that algorithm. I don't think even the loosest imaginable puzzle could execute those moves. That third FR move looks completely impossible.

I'm wondering if instead you were thinking of some kind of move sequence that passes through a shape like the one when you do UF- UR-2 UF+ ? That is a shape that probably should be considered illegal, but is relatively easy to turn into, even with a cube that has as little give as mine does.

#### One Wheel

##### Member
Try that algorithm and I think you will discover that "something like" that algorithm must have been something different from that algorithm. I don't think even the loosest imaginable puzzle could execute those moves. That third FR move looks completely impossible.

I'm wondering if instead you were thinking of some kind of move sequence that passes through a shape like the one when you do UF- UR-2 UF+ ? That is a shape that probably should be considered illegal, but is relatively easy to turn into, even with a cube that has as little give as mine does.
I may be using the notation wrong. I think what Walker showed me, and what I've been doing, is this:

#### Mike Hughey

Staff member
Okay, that looks like UF- UR-2 UF UR+2 UF+. And that makes sense as a "somewhat illegal move". A potentially useful algorithm, but it doesn't help much with getting to cube shape.

#### One Wheel

##### Member
Okay, that looks like UF- UR-2 UF UR+2 UF+. And that makes sense as a "somewhat illegal move". A potentially useful algorithm, but it doesn't help much with getting to cube shape.
Lol. Yep, I was wrong, that's correct. It's not useful for cube shape, mostly for switching centers from U to F faces.

#### qwr

##### Member
I've been playing with my curvy copter again, and the great thing about this puzzle is that it is has a lot of depth, and effectively two modes: easy/non-jumbling and hard/jumbling. Anyone want to take a stab at a "superflip" type pattern? Normally there are 4 orbits with 6 colors each, but you could totally screw with that and put four of the same color in one orbit

#### VIBE_ZT

##### Member
Every weekly competition, I seem to win Curvy Copter with a mid-3:00 average?

Where did all of the fast CC-solvers go? I remember when I started someone had a sub-1:00 single??

.....did the curvy copter hype die?

#### qwr

##### Member
Every weekly competition, I seem to win Curvy Copter with a mid-3:00 average?

Where did all of the fast CC-solvers go? I remember when I started someone had a sub-1:00 single??

.....did the curvy copter hype die?
I'll believe a 1 minute solve when I see one