New Pyraminx Method?

[WhatDoIPutHere]

I've been thinking about developing a new method for pyraminx, it would go like this:
1. Solve all corners and centers
2. Execute one algorithm to solve all the edges

All the algorithims I have made so far are 7 or 8 moves (LINK)
Would this be more effective than current methods?

EDIT: If so, why has no one made this yet?
Is it simply because the amount of algorithims to make is too high to be practical, and no one would memorize them all (I'm thinking it will be either 32, 48, 64, or 96 algs)?

 

[TipsterTrickster]

so L6E? not sure the exact algorithm count, but I think it's in the ballpark of 1920 (23040/12, aka total number of l6e permutations/number of puzzle orientations) that number might be off, but considering L5E has a bit less than 200 algs, L6E is gonna big significantly higher than 96. also solving centers blindly is usually pretty bad, most of the time you can get at least an L5E, and L5E algs are gonna be better than L6E algs, so L6E is worthless in a significant number of solves. L5E has a bunch of algs generated, and some top pyra solvers know some of them, but the method isn't widely used because top pyra solvers can find within a couple moves of optimal with L4E anyway through 1 looking a bunch of solutions and cancellations. I know some L6E has been used in extremely specific cases, for example R U' B R U' B R U' B + variations is occasionally useful, and there is this video (sorta a joke)

with some discussion in the comments about L6E that you can read, but other than that not really useful.

If you are interested in pyra algs there are a lot here: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/12FH8MswpdBJxLJ_Eu_gopoxTCySPk9H_o7_yjN8_ECw/edit?usp=sharing
These are pretty much all the algs you'll ever need

 

[WhatDoIPutHere]

Wow! That's a lot more than I thought it would be, I'm glad I asked before I kept going through literal pain.