• Welcome to the Speedsolving.com, home of the web's largest puzzle community!
    You are currently viewing our forum as a guest which gives you limited access to join discussions and access our other features.

    Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community of 35,000+ people from around the world today!

    If you are already a member, simply login to hide this message and begin participating in the community!

SALOW Notation for Curvy Copter.

Would you support Curvy Copter as an event?

  • Yes

    Votes: 30 76.9%
  • No

    Votes: 9 23.1%

  • Total voters
    39
Joined
Oct 17, 2017
Messages
194
Location
Here
WCA
2018OLSE04
"clockwise" is a relative term. The letterings are only clockwise if you look at the cube from the bottom. Also something tells me the algorithm you have is not right since I is not adjacent to either of the other two letters used.

That being said, this is essentially the best notation possible if all twelve edges have to be used.
 

Sion

Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2015
Messages
835
Location
New York
"clockwise" is a relative term. The letterings are only clockwise if you look at the cube from the bottom. Also something tells me the algorithm you have is not right since I is not adjacent to either of the other two letters used.

That being said, this is essentially the best notation possible if all twelve edges have to be used.

Thanks for the feedback; I feel honored. Care to make some changes to the alg?
 

Mike Hughey

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Jun 7, 2007
Messages
10,150
Location
Indianapolis
WCA
2007HUGH01
YouTube
Visit Channel
My only comment to this is that we used to have a megaminx scrambling notation with a bunch of letters, and it was completely impractical. I wonder if it would actually be better to just use the two letter designations directly, so instead of I F+ B F+, why not simply DL FR+ UF FR+? It's longer, but probably a lot easier, especially for someone who's not too familiar with scrambling.
 

Sion

Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2015
Messages
835
Location
New York
My only comment to this is that we used to have a megaminx scrambling notation with a bunch of letters, and it was completely impractical. I wonder if it would actually be better to just use the two letter designations directly, so instead of I F+ B F+, why not simply DL FR+ UF FR+? It's longer, but probably a lot easier, especially for someone who's not too familiar with scrambling.

My idea was that it would be less intimidating to get involved if everything was on a one letter basis. It would also account for the fact that curvy copter is a completely new puzzle compared to anything else.

Also, I also thought of the complications of how the letters would go in order, for example being RU or UR? I'm sure this would more than confuse people who are new to cubing.
 

superphluous

Member
Joined
Mar 15, 2019
Messages
16
My idea was that it would be less intimidating to get involved if everything was on a one letter basis. It would also account for the fact that curvy copter is a completely new puzzle compared to anything else.
I feel like it's a more intimidating to have to learn the piece that each letter refers to than just having more letters in a move.

Also, I also thought of the complications of how the letters would go in order, for example being RU or UR? I'm sure this would more than confuse people who are new to cubing.
The order of the letters wouldn't matter, because RU and UR refer to the same piece, and therefore the same turn.
 

OreKehStrah

Member
Joined
May 24, 2019
Messages
225
I think using the + and - for the partial turns is actually a really good and simple solution. I do think using something a notation of the Side and then top,bottom, and side would be better. So like FU LD RU FR LU FR y2 ... to do the initial scramble, then use those kinds of pairs with jumbling +\- to do scrambles like squan
 

Sion

Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2015
Messages
835
Location
New York
Update: I'm going to buy a curvy copter tomorrow, so I will be able to describe the notation (Traditional Positionative and A-L Sion notation variants) in better detail.
 

OreKehStrah

Member
Joined
May 24, 2019
Messages
225
Update: I'm going to buy a curvy copter tomorrow, so I will be able to describe the notation (Traditional Positionative and A-L Sion notation variants) in better detail.
Nice! I’d get the lan lan. The cubicle also makes stickers for it btw
 

Aerma

Premium Member
Joined
Apr 1, 2017
Messages
1,369
Location
Galar Region
WCA
2015MANN01
YouTube
Visit Channel
I agree with the people above - just using things like "FR" is much more clear than "F" and is easier for most people to figure out. As for the orders of the letters (FR vs. RF), we would just need a standard. For example, F/B is the most important, followed by U/D, followed by L/R. For example, FL would never be LF, and UR would never RU.
What about partial turns below 180 degrees? I'm not too familiar with the curvy copter, but would two partial clockwise turns on FR be "FR++", or would it always end up being a 180 degree turn?
Everything else is great though!
 
Last edited:
Joined
Oct 17, 2017
Messages
194
Location
Here
WCA
2018OLSE04
Two partial turns would, using R/L, U/D, F/B Order, would be, in your case: RF. However, in reconstruction, where someone would do two F+ moves, it would be RF+ RF+.
I think it would be much easier if turns between 90 and 180 degrees were denoted with F++ or RF++ instead of writing double moves.
So to be clear, does doing two partial turns always end up in the same place as doing a 180?
No, this puzzle is too interesting for that.
 

Sion

Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2015
Messages
835
Location
New York
I think it would be much easier if turns between 90 and 180 degrees were denoted with F++ or RF++ instead of writing double moves.

No, this puzzle is too interesting for that.
yeah, that's a good idea, but wouldn't that technically cancel out to an RF-?

I'll technically find out tomorrow, lol.
 

OreKehStrah

Member
Joined
May 24, 2019
Messages
225
Would you be able to make any jumbling moves from the position of RF++?
Yes, UF should be able to jumble. There you have to perform six partial turns to return to the original state on an edge btw.
 

Sion

Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2015
Messages
835
Location
New York
From solved, RF++ would take the puzzle to the same shape as RF-, some of the pieces would just be in different places. So yes, you would be able to continue jumbling
So RF++ is the opposite of RF-, and RF-- is the opposite of RF+? So would it be possible to call RF++ RF-' and RF-- RF+'?
 

OreKehStrah

Member
Joined
May 24, 2019
Messages
225
So RF++ is the opposite of RF-, and RF-- is the opposite of RF+? So would it be possible to call RF++ RF-' and RF-- RF+'?
It would be turned the same way but the center petals would be in different spots. So algs that would solve those later or swap them would have to be very specific.
 

Want to hide this ad and support the community?
Top