The New Method / Substep / Concept Idea Thread

[Shiv3r]

Speaking of 3x3 stats, I'll be running some major tests on what I believe are the best ZZ variants that are under 200 algs to see what tends to come up the most often, what is the most efficient, and what can give you the "luckiest" solves and averages. I'll be using ZZ-CT, ZZ-B (ZZLL), CLS, ZZ-WV, ZZ-VH (COLL+EPLL), and ZZ-Tripod. I'll probably use 50 random scrambles and try all of them out using Cube Explorer and HARCS to ensure all solves and methods are on an equal playing field in terms of efficiency up to the LS/LL variant. Any other ZZ variants that should be tested? Maybe someone can help me out for methods other than ZZ?

If you are looking to see how fast these methods can get, then use x2 y neutrality. I believe x2 y neutrality is possible with ZZ(example: iirc Chris Tran is x2 y). Also look and see how much of each solve is 2-gen, because that will give you a rough Idea of how good that variant id for OH.

and for ZZ methods to try, also look at ZZ-4c, and also maybe one of the better ZZ-D methods.
Also, I heard a variant of ZZ where you only solve DB during EOline, which means you can use that empty DF slot to build more efficiently(Matt Dipalma and @Teoidus I believe were talking about this on the discord).

 

[AlphaSheep]

Let me explain: as far as I know, no one has learned all 3668 1lll cases or algs so why do you then ask for a 1llsll which is 817344, that cannot be reduced further than 20000 algs from mirrors and inverse and auf so the only way of achieving anything with any relation to 1llsll is complex setup so even if it could be done it is not a viable speedsolving method I do not believe that recognition could ever be sub1 second also algs would be long and the execution would be hard so it is not viable for speedsolving as it either requires complex setup or a rediculous amount of very long algs

I agree with everything you've said except for the long algs part and the execution part. The average move count would probably be around 15 moves, and the algs for the most part would be similar in ergonomics to typical LL and LS sets that currently exist.

 

[Neuro]

If you are looking to see how fast these methods can get, then use x2 y neutrality. I believe x2 y neutrality is possible with ZZ(example: iirc Chris Tran is x2 y). Also look and see how much of each solve is 2-gen, because that will give you a rough Idea of how good that variant id for OH.

and for ZZ methods to try, also look at ZZ-4c, and also maybe one of the better ZZ-D methods.
Also, I heard a variant of ZZ where you only solve DB during EOline, which means you can use that empty DF slot to build more efficiently(Matt Dipalma and @Teoidus I believe were talking about this on the discord).

Alright I'll be sure to look at those ZZ variants. I'll probably do all the solves with x2 and y axis neutrality but still use the same EO linefor every solve (per scramble of course) so there's no direct advantage. Would you like to tackle the Roux variants? I think that TCMLL, EOLR, Pinkie Pie, MO centers, and (maybe) UFUB would be good places to start. Maybe some blockbuilding variants also (i.e. opp centers, free blockbuilding, etc)

 

[Shiv3r]

Alright I'll be sure to look at those ZZ variants. I'll probably do all the solves with x2 and y axis neutrality but still use the same EO linefor every solve (per scramble of course) so there's no direct advantage. Would you like to tackle the Roux variants? I think that TCMLL, EOLR, Pinkie Pie, MO centers, and (maybe) UFUB would be good places to start. Maybe some blockbuilding variants also (i.e. opp centers, free blockbuilding, etc)

I cannot, I don't know how to operate HARCs

 

[Neuro]

Alright well testing out all the LSE variants is still pretty easy.

Basic HARCS coding for Roux

>apply (insert scramble) # (yes there does need to be a space in between the # / scramble and apply / scramble)
>roux (loads FB SB FS LSE CMLL)
>style (UF UB etc) (sets solving orienation)
>fb
>x (1 2 3 etc) (fb gives many solutions so select the optimal one)

And continue from here. The HARCS thread has a tutorial video I think

 

[Shiv3r]

Alright well testing out all the LSE variants is still pretty easy.

Basic HARCS coding for Roux

>apply (insert scramble) # (yes there does need to be a space in between the # / scramble and apply / scramble)
>roux (loads FB SB FS LSE CMLL)
>style (UF UB etc) (sets solving orienation)
>fb
>x (1 2 3 etc) (fb gives many solutions so select the optimal one)

And continue from here. The HARCS thread has a tutorial video I think

okay. I'm assuming this runs on PC, if it is then I can't actually achieve anything for a while, I'm on a laptop

 

[Neuro]

I can run it on my laptop at home, runs Windows. Not sure about Mac OS though

 

[Hazel]

Some skewb method ideas I came up with:

1) An advanced Skewb method where you first solve a half layer + an adjacent center (so it would look like a Petrus block), then solved the remaining 4 centers and 6 corners with one alg.
2) An addition to Sarah's methods where you can have the first layer corners permuted incorrectly (as in a diagonal swap).
3) A method where you solve 2 diagonal corners relative to a center, solved the opposite side/layer, then solved the rest with one alg.
4) Solve 2 Roux-style blocks (center + 2 adjacent corners) on left and right, then corners, then Last 4 Centers

Also, has anyone thought of a 2x2 method where you solve a 1x1x2 block, then use one alg to solve the rest?

Or what about a 4x4 method like this:
1) solve Roux-style 1x3x4 block on left, then on right (or right then left), as well as the D center
2) DF and DB dedges
3) Last 3 centers
4) OLL
5) PLL (this would probably have to be done corners -> edges, instead of all at once)
This method could also be adapted to other big cubes

Are any of these viable and/or worth pursuing?

 

[Thermex]

I have posted several times about methods for 4x4+, however no one else suggests any further developments. Also I think that 2x2 is actually somewhat unexplored, due to the mindset that "EG is love, EG is Life, EG is the only way to survive"(poetry intended). Also, seeing some intersting Square-1 methods or Skewb methods would be nice as well.

so guys, with all the 3x3 talk, there is still room for lolmethods on 3x3.
here's one I came up with a while ago, K3(basically a corners-first method based off K4)
1.solve D layer
2.CLL(can be done after step 3 if you want)
3.F2L with K4 F3L algs
4.ELL

Yeah you're one of the only ones coming up with non-3×3 ideas which is cool, but I know barely anything about big cubes so I cant really respond to any if your posts but I think I might start getting into big cubes. For a while now I have been interested in pyra, skewb and mega and think they could definitely use some huge advancements. Here's a couple of ideas:

Pyra: This has probably been explored before but what if you started a solve the same as 1-flip but then did the flipping+centers and L3E steps in one look? (If that didn't make sense basically you just solve a 1-flip top and solve the rest with one algorithm). It would only be like 100 algs.

Mega: I've been looking into last slot+last layer methods for a while, my best idea is actually taking LLS (Leighton's last slot, the method Crafto22 came up with) and transposing to megaminx like this:
1) Orient ALL the corners (otherwise recognition sucks for the next step)
2) Solve the pair into slot while doing corner permutation
3) ELL (are there any webpages with MM ELL algs? Do they suck?)

Skewb: Maybe TEG on skewb? How many algs would this be?

@Aerma now that I think about it, your recomendation might be better than skewb TEG. I actually am really interested in the first idea you came up with, it could be a rediculous # of algs (imo anything above 450 isn't worth pursuing) but solving the block is really easy and you could use ARFs to drastically lower the number of algs required for the last step. I think it's the best idea you've come up with so far. Some of the other methods you came up with were kinda meh (3 and 4) and I've heard that 2 has already been made before. Also the big cube method you came up with was basically just the Lewis Method but you included OLL and PLL at the end which doesn't work because the DF and DB edges are still unsolved.

 

[Hazel]

After a bit of experimenting, I think a pretty good way of reducing the cases for the skewb thing would be to solve DBR corner because it takes 3 moves max I'm pretty sure, which would reduce the case number, and you could potentially solve the U center (which would add just 1 more move 50% of the time and 0 more moves 25% of the time), which would bring down the case number even more.

 

[Thermex]

@Aerma the variant you just mentioned is slightly less efficient and ergonomic but still a good replacement to the original if it's too many algs. I think I'll spend the next 30 mins or so trying to figure out how many algs there would be. I'll get back to you when I'm done.

 

[Neuro]

For your megaminx variation you'd be far better off if you did EO before so you get EPLL. MM EPLL is already 15 algs so full ELL would have horrible recog and would have tons of cases (zero rotational symmetry and pure flips) Otherwise it actually looks pretty good!

 

[Shiv3r]

Some skewb method ideas I came up with:

1) An advanced Skewb method where you first solve a half layer + an adjacent center (so it would look like a Petrus block), then solved the remaining 4 centers and 6 corners with one alg.
2) An addition to Sarah's methods where you can have the first layer corners permuted incorrectly (as in a diagonal swap).
3) A method where you solve 2 diagonal corners relative to a center, solved the opposite side/layer, then solved the rest with one alg.
4) Solve 2 Roux-style blocks (center + 2 adjacent corners) on left and right, then corners, then Last 4 Centers

here are the methods you just described:
1)Rhanza's Skewb method
2) I dont think anyone has done this.
3)...
4)Scrouxb

Also, the 4x4 method is called Kenneth's big cube method, but it's also kind of the Lewis method. you may want to look into the Lewis method, K4, and kenneth's though.

 

[TDM]

2) I dont think anyone has done this.

Its close enough to Kir-Meep, although I guess it's slightly more advanced than Kir-Meep since it solves the opposite centre (which Kir-Meep doesn't do).

 

[Thermex]

here are the methods you just described:
1)Rhanza's Skewb method
2) I dont think anyone has done this.
3)...
4)

Also, the 4x4 method is called Kenneth's big cube method, but it's also kind of the Lewis method. you may want to look into the Lewis method, K4, and kenneth's though.

The skewb method Aerma proposed is similar to Rhanza's method but the last three steps are done in one look. According to @shadowslice e several 2×2 methods have been tried on skewb including the one Aerma reccomended.

@Aerma so about the skewb method, at this point I've determined it would be pretty much impossible to do the step you described without >500 algs, so i think the best idea now is to do what you did and start thinking of mini sub-steps we could put before it to reduce the number of cases. I'll think about it.

 

[xyzzy]

Mega: I've been looking into last slot+last layer methods for a while, my best idea is actually taking LLS (Leighton's last slot, the method Crafto22 came up with) and transposing to megaminx like this:
1) Orient ALL the corners (otherwise recognition sucks for the next step)
2) Solve the pair into slot while doing corner permutation
3) ELL (are there any webpages with MM ELL algs? Do they suck?)

Some megaminx ELL algs: https://sites.google.com/site/permuteramera/home/3ell

They don't seem to be very nice, but I don't know how bad other megaminx algs are anyway. Compared to the 333, it's a lot more awkward to use commutators to solve edges because megaminxes can't slice.

Also, step 2 would have loads of cases. (180-ish? Too lazy to count the exact number.)

 

[Shiv3r]

so about the HD method(formerly EG VOP) we were talking about earlier, we have released the "first step" (LOLS, for Lewis Orient Last Slot). Here are the algs. If you want to start learning the algs, start with those.

Note:


these are only the orientation algorithms. The permutation algorithms are still being speed-optimized. One thing to notice is sometimes it can be better to mirror the - alg for a + case and vice versa because the v gives you a cancellation into that alg.

If you are working on learning HD, I suggest doing this until the NLL algs are released(and while you are learning them):
0.Make the "V"(3/4 ortega face)
1. LOLS(predict in inspection)
2.use R2 U R2 and R2 U' R2 to separate the layers
3.PBL
This is the method I used to practice the V and predicting LOLS. it can be used as a kind of learner's method, kind of like using 4 look Last layer on 3x3.

 

[ShyGuy1265]

Speaking of 3x3 stats, I'll be running some major tests on what I believe are the best ZZ variants that are under 200 algs to see what tends to come up the most often, what is the most efficient, and what can give you the "luckiest" solves and averages. I'll be using ZZ-CT, ZZ-B (ZZLL), CLS, ZZ-WV, ZZ-VH (COLL+EPLL), and ZZ-Tripod.

ZZ-b has more than 200 algs if you use the full 58 phasing algs.

 

[Hazel]

How good would a Pyraminx advanced method be where you solved the centers (5 moves max I think), then L6E?

What about a 2x2 method where you:
1) solve 3/4 of a face (just a few turns)
2) insert the last corner while permuting that face and orienting LL corners
3) PLL

 

[Sue Doenim]

How good would a Pyraminx advanced method be where you solved the centers (5 moves max I think), then L6E?

What about a 2x2 method where you:
1) solve 3/4 of a face (just a few turns)
2) insert the last corner while permuting that face and orienting LL corners
3) PLL

Pyraminx L6E has way too many cases. I personally think the Petrus/backbone method for pyraminx deserves more attention. For the 2x2 method, the second step has 624 algs. I would either change steps 2/3 to insert last corner and solve D-layer/CLL, insert any corner and orient everything/permute everything (HD method), insert last corner and orient all other corners/PBD (104 algs + PBL), or something, but all of those are pretty bad, besides HD. I might try looking into my first suggestion more; it's only 32 algs, I think.
I think that either of my 2 previously mentioned square 1 methods could be good. This could be considered the next step:
SQ-CT
1) Parity cubeshape (the parity solution is essential this time)
2) First block
3) Second block and fix equator
4) Insert DB edge (can be combined with previous step often, algorithmically might be worth it)
5) Finish everything else in one algorithm (93 cases, same as TTLL)