The New Method / Substep / Concept Idea Thread

[ProStar]

I suppose it's technically 3 substeps but I still consider one step(like L6E)

What substeps would you use to accomplish this?

 

[zimlit]

What substeps would you use to accomplish this?

crafto's method O2E, OL5E, and L6EP

 

[brododragon]

What are the advantages?

 

[ProStar]

crafto's method O2E, OL5E, and L6EP

I may be understanding this wrong, but f you orient 2 edges, then orient 5(leaving all oriented), then permute 6, you'd have one edge unaccounted for

 

[efattah]

As the creator of LMCF I would say I like this variant suggestion and in fact it parallels some recent developments I've made in LMCF. Solving extra edges on the EG face is very useful, then, after than, I have started solving more and more edges during the transition phase (i.e. solving edges on U/D faces and ignoring the E-slice). In fact in some solves I actually solve all the required edges during the transition phase because this has much better ergonomics than solving edges on the R/L. During U/D solving, you can do U+D moves at the same time, and there are absolutely zero regrips. The only problem is that as you finish solving all the edges this way, you must still do a Z/Z' rotation to enter the L6E phase, converting the E-slice, to the M-slice.

During U/D edge solving, I solve edges mostly in pairs but I've started solving triplets lately as well. The important reason to solve extra edges on the EG or CLL face is because during U/D solving, your EG-face is still on D, and you can't see the D-face that well, so the fewer edges that need to be solved there, the better.

 

[zimlit]

I may be understanding this wrong, but f you orient 2 edges, then orient 5(leaving all oriented), then permute 6, you'd have one edge unaccounted for

During OL5E you place one edge

 

[Solvador Cubi]

What are the advantages?

My initial goals (for EoCoL8) were:
around 55 moves
fewer than 20 algorithms
short steps
some intuitiveness

and that is how the beginner variant was settled on.
I then wanted to lower the move count, so I looked into different steps and assembled the other variants.

Those also have low numbers of algs and no new alg sets to learn.


-= Solvador Cubi

 

[Username: Username:]

I came up with this method a looonng time ago but I realised it was the SSC method.

 

[brododragon]

My initial goals (for EoCoL8) were:
around 55 moves
fewer than 20 algorithms
short steps
some intuitiveness

and that is how the beginner variant was settled on.
I then wanted to lower the move count, so I looked into different steps and assembled the other variants.

Those also have low numbers of algs and no new alg sets to learn.


-= Solvador Cubi

The beginner's makes sense. It's a low move count, low alg count, somewhat intuitive. The problem is that you can solve the cube with less algorithms and less moves with SSC, which this method is very similar to.

 

[Solvador Cubi]

All good points, thank you all for taking a look.

I suppose to me, the beginner SSC variant seemed a little complex for a true beginner, so I started down other paths.
One that had defined steps that focused on a few pieces at a time.

There was also a request for an example solve, so here is one:

Scramble: D2 F2 U' R2 U' L2 D2 R2 D' B2 U L' B' D2 F' D U2 L' B U2

Beginner:
B U' L R' B // EO (5/5)
U L U L2 // CO D (4/9)
U' R U R' U' R U2 R // CO U (8/17)
U' L2 U L2 // CS (4/21)
R' D R' F2 R D' R // CP (7/28)
R2 D2 L' E2 L D L' U M2 U' L S2 D R2 // E-lyr (14/42)
D U M' U2 M' D' // DL/DR (6/48)
U2 M' U2 M U' M2 U // UL/UR (7/55)
F2 M F2 M' // EP(m) (4/59)

It's not the most efficient example since I did E-Layer poorly, but you get the idea.


thanks again!

 

[fun at the joy]

F2 M F2 M' // EP(m) (4/59)

M' U2 M U2 // EP(m)

 

[Cubingcubecuber]

I know this is a bad method so you don’t need to tell me: Hawaiian Francisco:
Triangle
E-Slice with DR instead of FR edge
Insert DR
Last pair
HKOLL
HKPLL

Also I think that the WV/HKPLL variant of Petrus-W should be called Hawaiian Petrus

 

[ProStar]

Also I think that the WV/HKPLL variant of Petrus-W should be called Hawaiian Petrus

I think it'd be Hawaiian Petrus-W, because it's still Petrus-W instead of Petrus

 

[Cubingcubecuber]

I think it'd be Hawaiian Petrus-W, because it's still Petrus-W instead of Petrus

Yes

2x2x3 + pair( can be done in many ways, i.e. 3/4 cross and pairs, 1x2x3 + 2x2x2)
Last pair with corner orientation(like ZBLS with corner)(could be WV or SV)
L5EO
HKPLL

With some tweaking:
2x2x3 in back
Pairs
HKOLL
HKPLL

But is that just Hawaiian CFOP with blockbuilding?

How about
2x2x3
EO
Pairs
HKZBLL(how many algs would it be?)

Or Pair + other edge
CPLS
HK2GLL(Again, how many algs?)(also not actually 2 gen, cuz DF edge, so I will name it HKLLL)

 

[brododragon]

Can you intuitively solve all corners?

 

[Deleted member 51471]

Can you intuitively solve all corners?

You just use ZZ-d style stuff.

 

[WoowyBaby]

Can you intuitively solve all corners?

You just use commutators.

 

[brododragon]

You just use ZZ-d style stuff.

Doesn't that require algs?

You just use commutators.

I meant without commutators. I'm to make a beginner-friendly CF without algs and commutators.

 

[Etotheipi]

Doesn't that require algs?

I meant without commutators. I'm to make a beginner-friendly CF without algs and commutators.

You can do CO->CP, which is decently easy to do, but I don't know how beginner friendly it would be.

 

[WoowyBaby]

There is a way of solving corners intuitively without using commutators or algorithms that hundreds of people use. (In FMC, DR/CO -> Solved Corners w/ intuition)

But, it isn't as easy on beginners. In fact, algorithms are actually the best for beginners. Memorizing 2 short 8 move algs is much, much easier for beginners than using intuition to solve corners, as they don't really know how the cube works in the same way that you do.

People have this misconception that algorithms are harder on beginners than nice intuition, but the actual fact is, it is exactly the opposite.