The problen here is the L5C the movecounts for speed optimised algs will be far higher than the pure comms so the movecount will be closer to 15 than 10 I'm pretty sureOkay, my responses to each one of you:
3×3 method (Waterman VH)
Okay, so I'm really going to have to revise this method if L5C won't work, but could TEG work with this method? Would it be less moves than solving a hexagon? I really hope it is, because then this method definitely could be under 40 moves. Now I understand you guys are skeptical about that figure, but here's the original thought I had in my head:
1. Hexagon ~9 moves
2. L5C ~10 moves
So at this point we have two steps that can easily be done in under 20 moves, as long as the last half of the solve (solving the last 9 edges) can be done in under 20 moves, this would be sub 40.
There would be.Okay, for TEUL, there would probably be lots of cases and I would need help with lots of it, but i seriously doubt it would anywhere around the ~2500 figure Teoidus provided. I thought TEUL could be divided into 4 different subsets:
1. All three edges on u-layer (only 60 algs)
2. Two edges on u-layer (I'm pretty sure there would be ~60 algorithms to solve the two edges alone, then if the E-layer edge can be in two different orientation when you move it to RF, and it can go in two different spots, I get the number 240 for this set, but I doubt that's exact)
3. One edge on u-layer (no idea how to calculate the number of cases here, but it would probably be inbetween the number for sets 1 and 2.)
4. No edges on u-layer (probably only like 100 cases or so)
Which means total I estimate is there's about 550 cases, altought this figure may be way off.
4!*2^3/4=48 cases for the first set,
(4!/2)*5*2^3= 480 cases for the second set,
4*5!/3!*2^3=640 cases for the third set and
5!/2*2^3=960 cases for the fourth set giving a naive total of 2128 though this would probably be reduced to something like 1500 cases so less but still quite lot.
Just so you know L5C has about 5!*3^4/4/2=~1000 cases.
Unless you do L6E LSE style, it will have 6!*2^5/4/2/2=1440 cases hence why roux solvers do not learn as most would if it was "only" 90 algs.This would definitely be the most alg heavy step of the method, as the last step is only about 90 cases.
It was talked about for a bit a while back but was abandoned because other method were found to be better for one looking and stuff even if they were slightly less efficient. By all mean pursue it if you want thoughPyraminx method (L5E)
Who's working on this? I've never heard anything about it
Basically all 2x2 methods have had people try to apply them so skewb with varying levels of success like skewb EG and stuff.Skewb method (TCLL)-
Again, who's working on this? I've never heard anyone mention it before.
Btw, TCLL stands for Twisty Corner Last Layer not Twisty Complete Last Layer
I calculated the alg count for the COLL and that number of algs is why the best people learn EOLL/OCLL/PLL rather than EOLL/COLL/EPLL.Megaminx methods-
Are you sure about those numbers? 1944 cases seems like WAY too many cases just to permute 6 pre-oriented edges.
Incidentally, there would be 6!/5=144 cases for EPLS.