Method idea

[jms_gears1]

Except COLL algs suck, and I'm guessing the step6 algs will suck.

COLL algs dont suck actually most of them are really nice.
although CMLL algs are sooo much better.

 

[jms_gears1]

As for step 6, you can do it intuitivley pretty fast.
And considering all you REALLY need for that step is <MUD> moves, the PEBL shouldnt be that bad.

EDIT: meant <MUD>

 

[ErikJ]

what you should do is keep your method secret like I did until you learn it yourself and are good at it. Then you can show people that it a valid way of solving rather than just an idea.

 

[jms_gears1]

Example solve -
Scramble - L' R2 F2 R D' U' B L' B D B2 D U' L' F' R' L2 D' L' D' U F' R2 D F2

Spoiler

x2 y'
F' R' F2
U' R' U R U L' U' L
y R U L' R' U2 L' y U R U' R' y'
D R U R' D'
U' R U R' U2 F' U F
U F R U R' U' F'
M2 D M' U2 M U2 M2 D'
U' M' U2 M' U' M2 U'

im really bad at F2L and i think my LSE type step could be improved with algs but you get the idea.

 

[Joël]

My opinion;

And ending with 8 edges U/D layers (separated) is not a bad idea. There will probably be a lot of good algs for it. It will be slightly more difficult to recognise and adjust U or D layers before executing the alg, though...

The way to get to such an ending however seems a bit of a waste of time. Starting a solve by placing edges incorrectly just doesn't sound like a good idea to me. When nothing is solved, the first step should place some pieces correctly right away, because the start is THE best time in the solve where placing pieces correctly right away doesn't take many moves, and any good method should take advantage of that. That's just my humble opinion of course...

 

[CubeDust]

i got a parity alg idea:

M2 U2 M2

 

[Diniz]

i got a parity alg idea:

M2 U2 M2

Thats take out the point of the method.

And about the PBLE its easy to recognize the case because you know the edge cross permutation on the inspect time.

And nlCuber, that alg is not enough to do full edge control.


The "advantage" of this method is that it saves like 2.8 moves on the cross, we will only know if it will really save move count if the algs on the last step are good enough..

 

[jms_gears1]

i got a parity alg idea:

M2 U2 M2

Thats take out the point of the method.

And about the PBLE its easy to recognize the case because you know the edge cross permutation on the inspect time.

And nlCuber, that alg is not enough to do full edge control.


The "advantage" of this method is that it saves like 2.8 moves on the cross, we will only know if it will really save move count if the algs on the last step are good enough..

umm parity? if you use <MUD> theres no parity?

 

[Diniz]

umm parity? if you use <MUD> theres no parity?

I think he (Cubedust) meant like a impossible permutation case on U or D (separately), like a parity case on 4x4... if you use that alg (M2 U2 M2) you will make both U and D permutation solvable (separately again). But the idea of the method is solve both permutation together so doesn't exists the idea of parity.

edit: its really hard for me to explain things in english hahaha

 

[jms_gears1]

umm parity? if you use <MUD> theres no parity?

I think he meant like a impossible permutation case on U or D (separately), like a parity case on 4x4... if you use that alg you will make both U and D permutation solvable (separately again). But the idea of the method is solve both permutation together so doesn't exists the idea of parity.

edit: its really hard for me to explain things in english hahaha

i didnt mean just MUD its not parity, its an odd cube and centers are fixed, therefore no parity.

However i understand what you mean. Just saying i think the most effecient move group for PEBL is <MUD>

 

[miniGOINGS]

How about just F2L, CMSLL, LEE (last eight edges)? What a minute, that's columns first...