The New Method / Substep / Concept Idea Thread

[Platform_]

Ok so this is just reduction to line/flipped line 1LLL right?

It's a method based on solve 1LLL.
In this method create a block 1LLL and in the next to solve it.
Two steps.
Creation block 1LLL.
Solve block 1 LLL.

 

[GAN CUBER]

Since you are new to the forums welcome I will have a look at it

 

[Platform_]

Since you are new to the forums welcome I will have a look at it

Thanks

Inviato dal mio SM-M205FN utilizzando Tapatalk

 

[RPerm (2020GOME05)]

The belt method SUCKS. It’s just a way worse version of cfop so stop wasting you’re time.

Ok that is just mean. I have found something that nobody has thought of making a better version of this method so you are just unreasonable to tell me this.

 

[BenChristman1]

Ok that is just mean. I have found something that nobody has thought of making a better version of this method so you are just unreasonable to tell me this.

The belt method isn’t new if that’s what you’re trying to say. As I said earlier in this thread, when you make a method, 99% of the time, it will suck. You just have to keep trying. But I’m not saying post 100 new methods in this thread every time you come up with something “different.” Think about it before posting, and if it’s something decent that nobody has come up with before, then you can post about it and see what people think. But the belt method does suck, no matter what you say.

 

[RPerm (2020GOME05)]

1. Instead of make the belt first the white cross is first so that edge parity doesn’t happen
2. F2l With the belt that is going to make this the belt method
3. Solve the oll any color that is on the U layer.
4.Pll on both side or the color on the U later
5. If there is a corner parity do the V perm then the blindfold Y perm if this doesn’t work just solve the cube normally
6. If you accidentally make an edge parity I suggest that you first do the corner parity because it’s easier to that first. After you solve the corner parity or you didn’t I suggest doing M U x2 or more until you get the parity correct.
edit: this the worst test/ best thing I’ve ever did

The belt method isn’t new if that’s what you’re trying to say. As I said earlier in this thread, when you make a method, 99% of the time, it will suck. You just have to keep trying. But I’m not saying post 100 new methods in this thread every time you come up with something “different.” Think about it before posting, and if it’s something decent that nobody has come up with before, then you can post about it and see what people think. But the belt method does suck, no matter what you say.

Ok I understand that but what that person said literally hurt my feelings.

 

[BenChristman1]

Didn’t I explain to you already that this method is bad? Then you had to go and make a new thread for it? You knew that the New Method megathread existed, so why did you make a new thread?

 

[DNF_Cuber]

2. F2l With the belt that is going to make this the belt method

Do you mean edges-first keyhole? this is just CFOP again
Proof:

1. Instead of make the belt first the white cross is first so that edge parity doesn’t happen
2. F2l With the belt that is going to make this the belt method
3. Solve the oll any color that is on the U layer.
4.Pll on both side or the color on the U later
5. If there is a corner parity do the V perm then the blindfold Y perm if this doesn’t work just solve the cube normally
6. If you accidentally make an edge parity I suggest that you first do the corner parity because it’s easier to that first. After you solve the corner parity or you didn’t I suggest doing M U x2 or more until you get the parity correct.
edit: this the worst test/ best thing I’ve ever did

 

[RPerm (2020GOME05)]

Do you mean edges-first keyhole? this is just CFOP again
Proof:

well yes but except Pll and oll on both side

 

[DNF_Cuber]

well yes but except Pll and oll on both side

You don't really explain how to do the bottom corners at all.

 

[RPerm (2020GOME05)]

Didn’t I explain to you already that this method is bad? Then you had to go and make a new thread for it? You knew that the New Method megathread existed, so why did you make a new thread?

I don’t know how to make a thread there I only know the basics of this forum

 

[BenChristman1]

well yes but except Pll and oll on both side

It’s still just CFOP. Why would you solve the E layer, do LL, then do an x2/z2 before doing LL again?

I don’t know how to make a thread there I only know the basics of this forum

You just made a new thread. This right here is called a thread. It is a place where you talk about one part of cubing. But there is already a thread for new methods, which you have already posted in, so there is no reason to make this thread.

 

[DNF_Cuber]

Ok I understand that but what that person said literally hurt my feelings.

Well, if you are trying to make a good method people are going to have to be up front about its potential, and what you are doing is making belt more like CFOP, so you are not making a better version of a bad method, but a worse version of a good one

 

[RPerm (2020GOME05)]

It’s still just CFOP. Why would you solve the E layer, do LL, then do an x2/z2 before doing LL again?

Ima explain this.
You solve the cross so that edge parity doesn’t happen right.
Then after solving the cross do F2l but the corners does have to be solve as long it is on it’s correct side.

 

[BenChristman1]

You solve the cross
do F2l

Proof that the belt method is just sucky CFOP. Can you please stop? It’s really annoying having to explain that this is a bad method.

 

[RPerm (2020GOME05)]

You just made a new thread. This right here is called a thread. It is a place where you talk about one part of cubing. But there is already a thread for new methods, which you have already posted in, so there is no reason to make this thread.

Ok

Proof that the belt method is just sucky CFOP. Can you please stop? It’s really annoying having to explain that this is a bad method.

Ok but I am still going to update on this since I really want to make something that has been a joke for over the years to become a better method for speedcubing

Why are people being mean to a 12 year old

 

[CodingCuber]

Ok but I am still going to update on this since I really want to make something that has been a joke for over the years to become a better method for speedcubing

You can’t. You just simply can’t. No matter how many adaptations you make, it becomes a bad version of another existing method or it just has way too many moves and way too many rotations. It’s impractical.

Why are people being mean to a 12 year old

No one is. They are just telling you the forum rules, that is don’t post an entirely new thread for a method and they are telling you that the method is just a bad version of CFOP (which it is). Being 12 has nothing to do with this. I’m 13 and most other people on this forum are around the same age as you or me so I don’t know why you feel you need to mention your age.

 

[DNF_Cuber]

Why are people being mean to a 12 year old

Most people on this forum are around 10-16 years old, your age doesn't make you innocent

 

[Neuro]

I think Belt is in a weird space. I don't see much potential in making it a good method, but it is often dismissed out of hand. I think that it is *possible* to make a good belt method, but almost every proposal is the same as one before it. I would highly recommend anyone making a belt method to actively research old proposals and thoroughly vet their proposal before even putting it on this thread.

The only decent iteration of belt that I've seen is - debatably - SSC. I'll use an OLL/PLL like variant for simplicity. Here's the thread with other variants.

1. EO+BL,FL Edges
2. Domino Reduction
- 2a. Separate BR,FR
- 2b. Form a 1x1x3 "triplet" with the R edge on D
- 2c. Form a 1x1x2 "pair" with the R edge on U
- 2d. ShadowSlice Last Slot
- 2e. Fix E slice (can influence OBL)
3. Separation (Make U/D layers solid colors) *Make sure E slice ends up solved*
4. PBL (Permute Both Layers)

EXAMPLE LINK

I still don't really like it, and it could be argued to be a ZZ variant even. Domino reduction is difficult and is hard to solve quickly. It is still the best belt variant I've seen, though (I define belt as a method that deals with a substantial subset of the E slice in its first step and eventually reduces the puzzle to a state where the U/D layers must be solved.)

As for RPerm's latest method proposal, I am confident in saying it isn't a belt method. From what I understand, this is how it works:

1. Cross
2. F2L (E slice solved, but D layer corners only have to match D sticker to the bottom. Not necessarily solved)
3. U layer OLL
4. PBL subset (?)

This is basically a CFOP variant ending in a PBL subset. It is not a belt method, which by definition solves the E slice (or at least a portion of the E slice) in the first step.

 

[RPerm (2020GOME05)]

2x2 method: Flop there are reasons why I called this the flop method
1. First create the first layer (you can do this with look ahead)
2. Oll you can use the same Oll algs from 3x3 (some)
3. Pll case 1: standard V Perm alg case 2: T perm
that’s about what I can figure out with this method also this is actually for me the fastest method but nothing can beat the Orteg.