Nmile7300
Member
That would basically be the equivalent of level one.Ok, my bad I was solving with any color adjacent to any other color if that makes sense. Honestly just assumed you could do that but that would be a totally different event.
That would basically be the equivalent of level one.Ok, my bad I was solving with any color adjacent to any other color if that makes sense. Honestly just assumed you could do that but that would be a totally different event.
Aha, so I do have WB on level 1 still, I thinkOk, my bad I was solving with any color adjacent to any other color if that makes sense. Honestly just assumed you could do that but that would be a totally different event.
Facepalm, should have read the whole post...
Yes, almost. The middle layer pieces could be swapped around.That would basically be the equivalent of level one.
I am a little confused what the solved state is for level 2.
View attachment 12601View attachment 12602
Is this solved for level 2?
I definitely think there needs to be a few calculations done to determine how many moves a puzzle must require to be solved. If it does not meet this requirement, rescramble. But I can believe this might not be possible this early into developement.
View attachment 12599
This is called a Tuttminx and it has the same soccer ball shape that the Rotoball has. The hexagonal faces would be the only moving parts and the pentagonal faces would be the axes of rotation. I don't think it would be possible to mod a Tuttminx into a Rotoball but if you want something as a sort of reference. Some faces would have to rotate over others but I'm 100% sure that a physical Rotoball would be something that is possible to engineer.
The dark colors are correct, but the middle layer needs to be alternating pink and green(with the green part of the checkerboard being closer to the dark green). Check the OP
I agree, that way it doesn't take one move to solve. Without a limit, it will make best times pure luck and no skill
I still think there should be a 1 or two move limit, at least when playing by yourself.With tournaments where people play against each other, each player would get the same scramble, so there would be no need to worry about how many moves it takes. I was thinking about implementing a dual scoring strategy -- Shorter time wins, wherever there is a tie, whoever made fewer moves is the winner. If both time and the number of moves are the same, there would be a rematch... What do you think?
I am a little confused what the solved state is for level 2.
View attachment 12601View attachment 12602
Is this solved for level 2?
With tournaments where people play against each other, each player would get the same scramble, so there would be no need to worry about how many moves it takes. I was thinking about implementing a dual scoring strategy -- Shorter time wins, wherever there is a tie, whoever made fewer moves is the winner. If both time and the number of moves are the same, there would be a rematch... What do you think?
I still think there should be a 1 or two move limit, at least when playing by yourself.
No problem, it's just a suggestion. Maybe someone on this forum who has coded Rubik's cube solvers before could help you.My programming skills may not be good enough for this... It might take me a lot of time to figure this out. The way I set up the initial state is to pick 5 random faces (from 20) make it one color, pick another 5 random faces (from remaining 15) for the other color. this leaves 10 white faces left. This is basically level 1. With level 2 I pick an additional 5 of the remaining 10 so you have 5 of each 4 colors randomly spaced on the sphere. The ads that there would be almost completed puzzles are very low in this scenario. For tournaments, the software would send the same random numbers to participants.
I'd recommend it being structured like a traditional Rubik's cube competition: each competitor gets 5 solves(same 5 scrambles for each competitor), then they drop the best and worst solves and average the middle three. Take times to the hundredths place(xx.xx), so there will be ties almost never. Focusing on movecount will sacrifice speed and make it into a FMC Duel type event, although that could be fun
I like this puzzle! although, I wish you could make it into a physical puzzle cuz physical control over the puzzle is just better in my opinion.
From what we know, Pawel is a mobile game developer and also has an interest in puzzles, so he doesn't have experience or the means to make this into a physical puzzle. However, due to the many suggestions of making into a physical puzzle, he has decided to at least look into making a physical version
10.50 on level 2 I got a green "center" skip and then 2 moves on adjacent faces for the green "midges" and only 1 pink "midge" needed to be inserted
Edit: Whoops double post, I feel the content was different enough though
I like this puzzle! although, I wish you could make it into a physical puzzle cuz physical control over the puzzle is just better in my opinion.
I still think there should be a 1 or two move limit, at least when playing by yourself.