Ideas for Hardware revolutions

[Wish Lin]

That's true. Reading the regulations, it is unclear whether the concave pieces count as "elevated pieces" that "significantly distinguish" the types of pieces.


Yeah, I don't think anyone would use it at a competition, except for maybe Wish Lin.

If the cube is officially proven competition legal, I WILL put my tengyun aside and do a WCA competition with it. Sure is going to be fun.

 

[One Wheel]

There’s room for improvement on big cubes, but honestly I think about all that’s left for 3x3 is customizable stickerless color schemes.

 

[brododragon]

I think something that could be improved on 3x3 is "edge cutting". Almost the same as corner cutting, except with slice turns. Most cubes can only do half a cubie. You can really notice the lack of "edge cutting" in H perms. They are louder than most perms because of the force required to cut edges.

 

[brododragon]

To figure out edge cutting, I guess you need to first figure out corner cutting. I don't know a lot about why corner cutting is so good, but some one else know why?

 

[Nmile7300]

If you think about it, an "Edge Cut" is just a forward corner cut and a reverse corner cut happening at the same time.

 

[WarriorCatCuber]

Ideally a cube would have 45/45 cornercutting.

 

[brododragon]

If you think about it, an "Edge Cut" is just a forward corner cut and a reverse corner cut happening at the same time.

Ideally a cube would have 45/45 cornercutting.

True, it's just a reverse and regular cut. The problem is we've yet to see a cube with 45 degree reverse.

 

[xyzzy]

True, it's just a reverse and regular cut. The problem is we've yet to see a cube with 45 degree reverse.

Wasn't @Sion working on something like that?

You can't truly get 45 degrees both forward and reverse (there must be some dead zone where the cube will just lock up), and forward cutting is "easier" to design for (reverse cutting requires a piece to push others out of its way, which is not a problem with forward cutting), which is why cubes usually have much better forward cutting than reverse. If there's a reasonable mech that can somehow do forward and reverse roughly equally well (e.g. 40 degrees both ways), it would be very interesting to see if slice-heavy methods (Roux, CF variants, 3-style) have a clear advantage over CFOP on that cube.

 

[Nmile7300]

it would be very interesting to see if slice-heavy methods (Roux, CF variants, 3-style) have a clear advantage over CFOP on that cube.

If this could happen on a smaller level to big cubes (30/30 cutting would be amazing on 5-7), then it could also mean that slices become a more reasonable thing in big cube solving.

 

[ProStar]

If this could happen on a smaller level to big cubes (30/30 cutting would be amazing on 5-7), then it could also mean that slices become a more reasonable thing in big cube solving.

The reason slice moves on big cubes aren't done is because they're almost impossible. Turning 5 layers at once without making mistakes is almost impossible

 

[brododragon]

The reason slice moves on big cubes aren't done is because they're almost impossible. Turning 5 layers at once without making mistakes is almost impossible

Use multiple fingers.

 

[Sion]

I think it could be possible, but the cube would likely sacrifice in other areas if it has 45 degrees worth of reverse.

That said. We need more products that could be stable without magnets or with very little use of them. Designers are relying on them too much now it feels like.

 

[ketchupcuber]

maybe

 

[chocool6]

Also another idea would be swappable magnets and easy tensioning systems in non 3x3s.

 

[brododragon]

Also another idea would be swappable magnets and easy tensioning systems in non 3x3s.

I don't think it would be that hard to make a set of magnetic caps for a 4x4 (though it would take a lot of them), or use the Gan magnet system. I think the main problem is there would be so many magnets to change.

 

[chocool6]

I don't think it would be that hard to make a set of magnetic caps for a 4x4 (though it would take a lot of them), or use the Gan magnet system. I think the main problem is there would be so many magnets to change.

The Gan XS system is very fast to change, and the Gan X system I'm pretty sure takes under a minute to change, so for 4x4 with double the magnets it will still only take 2 minutes. I don't think time would be that much of any issue. The main problem is cost, the 4x4 would probably be around $80-$100

 

[Cuberstache]

If the cube is officially proven competition legal, I WILL put my tengyun aside and do a WCA competition with it. Sure is going to be fun.

Pillowed cubes are legal (3h1) so I don't see why concave wouldn't be. Ask the delegate at your next competition.