The New Method / Substep / Concept Idea Thread

[supercavitation]

1. Build a 1x2x3 block.
2. Build another block in the other side like in Roux.
3. Insert a white edge ( if you aren't colour neutral) between the blocks, if you haven't done it during blockbuilding
4.orient and permits corners
5. Algs to orient and permute last 2/4(plus oriented edge on last layer of it is not permitted) edges ( Not sure how many algs))
6.Solved
Thoughts?

Less efficient Roux, basically. Also, you're looking for L5E.

 

[Renox]

Random method

Me again ;P
anyway I have a new method:
1. EOline
2. Expand to a 2x2x3(essentially build a 1x2x3 next to the EOline)
3.Solve remaining f2l,but use MGLS on last slot
4. PLL
5. Solved
I just thought this was a similar way to Petrus instead of 2x2x2 -> 2x2x3 -> fix "bad edges" you oriented the edges and built the 2x2x3 block in two moves instead of three. Plus I like MGLS. Thoughts? I'm not familiar with Petrus and EOline so I might be wrong on some things.

 

[shadowslice e]

Me again ;P
anyway I have a new method:
1. EOline
2. Expand to a 2x2x3(essentially build a 1x2x3 next to the EOline)
3.Solve remaining f2l,but use MGLS on last slot
4. PLL
5. Solved
I just thought this was a similar way to Petrus instead of 2x2x2 -> 2x2x3 -> fix "bad edges" you oriented the edges and built the 2x2x3 block in two moves instead of three. Plus I like MGLS. Thoughts? I'm not familiar with Petrus and EOline so I might be wrong on some things.

That is literally MGLS-Z but slightly more restricted with what blocks you build.

 

[Renox]

That is literally MGLS-Z but slightly more restricted with what blocks you build.

Oh.
Lol worth a try anyway

 

[crafto22]

I do not like this meme.

That isn't a meme.

 

[2180161]

Hey guys. I was using PCMS the other day and came up with an idea to make it better:

Steps:

1. Build the pairs but without worrying about permutation of any pieces. Edge orientation may matter depending on how many algs you want to use.
Exec. time: 2-3 seconds
2. Orient U layer corners using one of 7 algs.
Exec. time: 1 second
3. Permute the columns.
Exec. time: 2-3 seconds
4. Solve the last 8 edges. My strategy for this is to solve 2 or 3 edges of the first layer with the centers followed by the last FL edge. At this point, you'll be left with ELL, which consists of 29 algs. You could also orient the LL edges while solving the last FL edge, which would leave EPLL.
Exec. time: 4-6 seconds

Total time: ~11 seconds, give or take

I'm guessing, if you're colour neutral, you could plan at least 3 pairs in inspection, and from what I've seen, the odds you already have 2 pairs solved are quite high, so one could plan the pairs step in inspection.

The disadvantage to this method is the mildly high-ish alg count. PBL has six cases, so combined with the edges, that's 6*(8 distinguished cases) = 48 algs, or 30 if you don't count mirrors. However, if you solve edge orientation of the pairs, that number drops to 12 algs. If you were willing to do a z2 or an x2 in the middle of the solve, the original number would drop to 40 algs, and without mirrors that's 25 algs and 10 algs if you orient the pair edges. I doubt 48 algs is unreasonable to most. Another disadvantage is the move set for the last 8 edges. <MSU> isn't that great, hence my time estimate for the last step. I'm guessing it would take a pro at least 4 seconds to solve the last step (PLEASE PROVE ME WRONG!).

So I think this *might* have some potential. I'll check it out, but I noticed that if I'm colour neutral, I usually get at least two pair solved. This means I can usually one-look the pairs. Recog wouldn't be that bad some the columns step because you basically recognise the PBL case then you recognize the edge case (diag swap, adj swap or solved + EO)

Tell me what you think. I'll post some example solves later to clear up any confusion.

what do you mean place the pairs with out worrying about the permutation of the pieces? you mean like this:
Scramble:B2 D F2 D2 U' F2 D2 B2 L2 D' B2 F L R' B R B' D F2 D2 U'
z F U' F' U R' U R D M' D' U2 r' U' r

 

[crafto22]

what do you mean place the pairs with out worrying about the permutation of the pieces? you mean like this:
Scramble:B2 D F2 D2 U' F2 D2 B2 L2 D' B2 F L R' B R B' D F2 D2 U'
z F U' F' U R' U R D M' D' U2 r' U' r

Yes but not with all pieces, only the SB

 

[2180161]

I mean for that PCMS variant.

 

[theawesomecuber]

Step 1: 2x2x3 on DL without the FD edge. This can be done in 2 ways: 2x2x2 in DBL then insert the FLD+FL pair, or FB plus DB edge.
Estimated time for pro/intermediate user: 1.5s/3s

Step 2: EO. Just like petrus, except you can also use the M layer. Insert the FD edge during this step.
Estimated time for pro/intermediate user: 2s/4s

Step 3: 2-Gen F2L
Estimated time for pro/intermediate user: 2s/4s

Step 4: LL. You can use OCLL/PLL, COLL/EPLL, ZBLL, or you can do something like WV while solving F2L.
Estimated time for pro/intermediate user: 1.5s/3.5s"

I thought of a variation for this.

Step 1 and 2 are the same.

Step 3 is incredibly similar, but you don't place the FD edge.

Step 4: COLL/CMLL to solve the corners.

Step 5: L5E with oriented edges. Is there an algset for this?

This method also has probably been created before, but I still think that this has tons of potential.

 

[shadowslice e]

I thought of a variation for this.

Step 1 and 2 are the same.

Step 3 is incredibly similar, but you don't place the FD edge.

Step 4: COLL/CMLL to solve the corners.

Step 5: L5E with oriented edges. Is there an algset for this?

This method also has probably been created before, but I still think that this has tons of potential.

Essentially M-CELL. There are no real algs for it because you can just do it intuitively with no real loss in movecount

 

[Renox]

Since this is also a concept/idea as well as a method thread, I was wondering if partially orienting the edges while you solve the cross to reduce the amount of rotations in a cfop solve is viable/efficient?

 

[shadowslice e]

Since this is also a concept/idea as well as a method thread, I was wondering if partially orienting the edges while you solve the cross to reduce the amount of rotations in a cfop solve is viable/efficient?

I think some already do. But really, it's not worth it unless you do all F2L edges IMO. Cool idea tho. You should try it.

 

[Renox]

I think some already do. But really, it's not worth it unless you do all F2L edges IMO. Cool idea tho. You should try it.

I actually might try to adopt this idea, but it's more of a thing that you do once every few solves since it might not be worth it unless you can do it quickly and/or with a few more moves than normal cross. And when I said partially orient the edges I meant the f2l edges, I should've clarified that. Plus are there any fast/notable cubers that actually do this?

 

[Berd]

I actually might try to adopt this idea, but it's more of a thing that you do once every few solves since it might not be worth it unless you can do it quickly and/or with a few more moves than normal cross. And when I said partially orient the edges I meant the f2l edges, I should've clarified that. Plus are there any fast/notable cubers that actually do this?

Eo cross is generally considered to be a terrible idea.

 

[shadowslice e]

Eo cross is generally considered to be a terrible idea.

He's not talking about EO cross. Just a partial orientation so he gets nicer F2L pairs.

 

[Aiminer357]

CPELL: A 1LLL concept

Edit: This has been thought of. But continue reading if you like

This method is too obvious and I won't be surprised if somebody came up with it already. If somebody did, tell me. Thanks If nobody has came up with it, I'll call it CPELL (Corner Permute Edges Last Layer). Pronounced "Spell".

This method is only used for CFOP users. People that are using methods that automatically orient the last layer edges will find this rather useless.

This method is used with the Winter Variation and the Summer variation. For those who don't know, Winter and Summer variation orients the corners of the last layer while inserting the final f2l pair. This leaves only four possible outcomes, one is all the edges are orientated and the others need an OLL alg.

We will use the four possible outcomes to our advantage. If all the edges are orientated, then we perform the 21 PLL algs. For the other three, we just have to perform a 1LLL.

I have counted all the algs for the 1LLL. Excluding mirrors, it takes about 80 algorithms. That is if you are willing to do the mirrors on the fly. However, including mirrors, it takes 114 algorithms. It's quite a big number but it is possible to learn. This is way less than the 300 algorithms for ZBLL.

This comes with a major flaw. This method is used with the Winter and Summer variation. Each variation has 54 algorithms. In total, you will need to learn an astonishing 222 algorithms!

But that is including mirrors. So this is a great alternative to ZBLL. It uses around the same amount of moves

There is bound to have a minor or major miscalculation. Tell me any mistakes I made. Tell me about any flaws. Tell me if this is reasonable or not. Tell me anything. I'm a good man.

 

[molarmanful]

Has been done, I think. This would also be effective with WV/SV -> OLLCP-A -> EPLL which is what I use a lot. Oh yeah, alternative, shorter WV-like algs would be much better in my opinion.

 

[Cale S]

COALL?

 

[Aiminer357]

Honestly, I have never heard of that method in my life. Thanks.

 

[gyroninja]

How are you calculating case count?

I get 29 ell * 6 cp + 21 pll = 195