Today I've solved my Crazy 3x3x3 (type Mercury, one moving circle). I've got it two days ago and I have to say, this seems much harder than the Crazy 4x4x4 Type I and II and the Crazy 2x3x3.
What are the experiences of others?
Type I was a piece of cake, Type II much harder. The 2x3x3 took some time.
But this one seems really hard.
Probably there are much faster methods, but this is how I have approached it.
I'll make it a "hidden spoiler" (as I understand now what it means ).
Please, highlight, if you want to read it. (It's not much of a hint, anyway):
[
1. Do all the edge pieces - the outer and the adjacent pieces inside the circle
2. Place and orient the 8 outer corners. (Straight forward 3x3x3 methods)
3. Place the "corners" (the little triangles) inside the circle. I've found a pure three cycle doing this. My sequence requires sometimes several setup moves. It's very easy to get lost then, because the starting configuration looks pretty much scrambled. After I had learned "how to", I messed it up several times.
]

Mercury and Jupiter are probably the easiest of the eight combinations as they only have the white face different from the rest. I bought the Neptune (three moving centers around one corner; each moving center opposite one fixed center). I would imagine if you could solve the circle pieces into an orderly fasion on the Mercury or Mars, then all you would need to do is point the white face down, and carefully use a sloution that does not require "D" moves. As for the more advanced versions, I haven't a clue what the best method for solving would be. However, with the Neptune, one could possibly scramble and solve using three-face "fused-cube" algorithms without disturbing the orbits of the circle pieces. That was my reasoning for getting the Neptune.

Mercury and Jupiter aside, I imagine the solutions for the other puzzles would be very convoluted indeed!

Also, with Mercury and Jupiter sets, you'll have access to all the pparts to make any combination you want, including standard circle cube and standard 3x3x3. I've yet to play with mine, so I'll see how it performs when I get home from school.

I've got a Neptune as well. Before I attack that one, I'll make a regular Circle Cube out of the Mercury.
I assume that the regular Circle Cube is much easier than the Mercury, because it is completely symmetric (6 stationary circles), while the Mercury is highly asymmetric (1 moving circle 5 stationary circles). When you make a move of a stationary face, 20 little pieces are moving, on a moving face you have 8 pieces more that are turning.
I'm interested getting more information about practical experience - and theoretical observations.
Come on, guys (and girls )

The regular circle cube is pretty disappointing. I bet you'll already be able to solve it, it's just a *SPOILER* super cube. Solves like a regular ol' supercube.

You are right Vdude, that is very simple to solve, indeed.
Why have you wanted a regular, anyway? (I recollect several posts from you about modding a Crazy to a regular)

After solving it, I think theVDude was a bit disappointed and lost interest. I've known this since before they came out and am still waiting for a regular circle 3x3x3.

Alex

I find Mercury extremely difficult, because unlike regular circle cubes (3x3x3 or 4x4x4), it can't be projected onto any 'simple' puzzle you already know how to solve.

Every piece other than the center caps is completely independent to one another.

I've solved my second Crazy 3x3x3. It is a Neptune (opposite faces are pairs of stationary versus moving circle). The Neptune is even a bit harder than the Mercury.
BTW The edge pieces inside the circle live in certain orbits on the Mercury. 4 in orbit 1, another 4 in orbit 2 and the remaining 16 in orbit 3. The corner pieces inside the circles can indeed all go to all 24 possible positions - a single orbit for all.
On the Neptune there is a single orbit for all 24 circle edge pieces.
I had to adapt my Mercury strategy quite a bit for the Neptune.
I think, all 8 of them provide different challenges. (And if you are looking for a challenge, forget the regular Circle Cube. It is so easy! )

can anyone give some hints on how to solve the Mercury!!
I tried a lot but i cannot solve it!!!!!!

Have you had a look at the hidden hint in my original post? I've not seen a different strategy, so far.
The first steps are pretty much intuitive, before you reach the state with the little triangles are scrambled, but the rest of the cube is solved.
I have reused some of my ordinary 3x3 algorithms.
EDIT: I guess, if you start with solving the circles it is difficult to find algorithms that solve the rest of the puzzle outside the circles. If you leave the "corners" inside the circle unsolved, it is not so hard to adapt normal 3x3 algorithms. At the end you have to fix the little triangles only. I'm really interested which other strategies are used.
So far, nobody has responded to the original question in my post.

Exact, but how I solve the little triangles?

My algorithm consists of 16 moves. It does a 3-cycle of three little triangles and lets the rest of the cube unchanged.
It is easy to remember but not really a short sequence.
If you want, you can send a PM and I'll tell you my sequence.
I had started this thread to find out, if others have much better strategies / algorithms.
As nobody has responded to my original question, I do not know how to interpret that.

BTW, I've solved two of them so far (Mercury and Neptune) and do not believe that there is a big difference regarding the difficulty of the two. I'll leave the other variants for later until a reasonable DIY becomes available.

I do not believe that this approach will work.

I used to think just the same as you.

But later, a friend told me that the edges and corners outside the circle can be solved by the freestyle BLD algs!
When using these algs, remember not to move the white face.

Have you solved a Crazy 3x3x3 Mercury this way? And what about other Crazy 3x3x3 variants (e.g. Neptune with 3 adjacent faces with moving circles)?

Yes, I have. And Venus can also be solved in this way.

Neptune is much harder for me. I only saw someone else solve it once. And his method is like what stardust4ever said.

I've made a google search for "freestyle BLD algs". The most prominent hit was this site: http://cube.garron.us/BLD/freestyle/index.htm
I've tried a few of those algorithms, but nothing useful came up (where no inner circles are changed).
Can you give a better hint to those "freestyle BLD algs", you had mentioned?

Another thing is that I didn't find so far an easy method for building the inner cycles, without taking care of the outer pieces. My own algorithm for solving the "circle corners" (little triangles) is 16 moves long. This is a pure 3-cycle of the "circle corners", but it is pretty long.
So far I'll stick with my own method. (It had the advantage that it could be pretty easily adapted to a Neptune, the only other Crazy 3x3x3 I've tried so far.)

I'm sorry that I made a mistake in my first reply.

In fact, these algs are just commutators. I forgot to mention that.

First, solve edges(both inner and outer pieces).

Then "circle corners". Now we can take advantage of the white face -- RU'L'UR'U'LU (the white face as Up) is a 3-cycle, ignoring the outer corner.
There are several similar algs.

Last, the outer corners. Still those algs, but now we must not move the white face.

So far I do it in the same way.Actually, I use the same algorithm, but I reverse the outer corner permutation in a mirrored sequence. This makes my sequence longer, but it gives me two advantages:
- the solved outer corners make it easier to remember how to reverse the setup moves
- my three cycle affects two circles only (easier setups)
My conclusion is that the two strategies are pretty close to each other.

BTW, how is this connected to "freestyle BLD algs"?

EDIT: Another advantage of my method (outer corners before circle corners) is that it can easily be adapted to the Neptune variant.
Here is my algorithm (please highlight, if you want to read it):
[White (the bandaged face, moving circle) is back:
(R U’ L’ U R’ U’ L U) y’ (turn the whole cube anticlockwise around a vertical axis)
(L’ U R U’ L U R’ U’)

Note that the second part is the mirrored version of the first; it is a very common sequence for exchanging 3 corners on a normal 3x3x3.

Circle corners (little triangles) move from U(LF) -> B(LU) -> B(RU) -> U(LF)
(the notation of a circle corner = little triangle is: face (position on that face)

You need setup moves very often e.g. R2 F2 R2
You’ll need inverse and mirrored versions of the algorithm.]

I have a problem solving the edge pieces. All the inside and outside edges are in correct place, except for two outside edges that need to swap. I never see this in a normal 3x3x3. How can i fix it?

I can't agree more And at first I use the 16f algs like you.
But anyway the method I mentioned above is faster. That friend of mine can solve the Mercury in about four minutes.


Haha you can ignore this, because those algs are just commutators.
And you also use commutators. So it's the same.


Thank you! I still want to solve by myself first

Hint: The four outside edges around the white center is connected to the center piece!
So here is the way to fix it:

Move the two edges to the white face, then do a edge-3-cycle PLL, like
R U' R U R U R U' R' U' R2.
Now we have the white center rotated. The center rotation has an effect of 4-cycle of edges.

I have tried it and - as I had expected - I have confused the reversing of some setup moves twice. Therefore, I was much slower. (I'm in no way close to the mentioned four minutes.) Certainly, the number of moves is much lower, if you do the outer corners in the last step. At least currently, it takes me much longer to decide the next step und do the proper setup moves.
Probably, I will not make so much mistakes, when I practise this method a bit more.

Here is a commutator that does a similar 3 cycle of the circle corners. It has the advantage that only two circles are involved:
Highlight
[ hold white as the R face: R B L' B' R' B L B' --- F(UL) -> R(UF) -> R(UB) -> F(UL) ]

BTW, I find it interesting that so few persons have posted in this thread about real solutions. The two methods discussed here are quite similar.
What does that tell us?
Two answers seem possible:
either
- Not so many have solved this puzzle at all.
or
- Not so many want to share their achievements.

Hum very good, now I can solve it!!!

1- Solve all the edge inside pieces.
2- Solve all the edge outside pieces
3- Solve all the corners
4- Solve the little triangles

Thankyou so much for your help.

I know this is a bump but I didn't have any Crazy Planets at the time and I think it's a good thing to keep all these solving notes together.

It sounds like you guys have a completely different method for Mercury/Jupiter than me so I thought I'd share mine. I think it's incredibly simple/intuitive but I don't think it will translate to the harder planets as much.

I first learned the 3x3x3 cube by solving, the U face, middle layer, then D so I'm sorry if my notation seems upside down.

*SPOILERS*

Jupiter (U/White is only face not locked): Basic idea is to reduce to a Rubik's Cube.
Edge Pairing
1. Pair center-edges with outer edges using the U face when both pieces are in the U face. You can easily do this for 8 complete edges and store them anywhere but the U face.
2. Half-pair the remaining 4 edges so that they all have one center unpaired. Once an edge is half-paired, flip it so that the unpaired face is on the U face. I use (R2 D' F' R F) to flip the UR edges.
3. Shuffle the half-paired edges with R2,L2,F2,B2, and D* so that they can all be paired with 1 U turn. This can be made easier if you intentionally leave the last centers-edges to be pair to be the same color.
4. Solve the cross on U/White. This is so you can freely rotate U for corner-center pairing and not worry about messing up your edges.

Corner Pairing (almost exactly the same as Edge Pairing)
5. Pair center-corners with outer-corners using the U face when both pieces are in the U face. You can easily do this for 4 complete corners and store them in the D face.
6. 2/3rds pair the remaining 4 corners so that they all have 1 center unpaired. Once a corner is 2/3rds paired, rotate it so that the unpaired face is on the U face.
7. Shuffle the 2/3rds paired corners so that they can all be paired with 1 U turn. Again, this can be made easier if you intentionally leave the last centers-edges to be pair to be the same color. I like to save Yellow for this because you can quickly rotate U to fix the cross and it makes F2L slightly easier for me.

Reduction completed
8. Solve like a normal Rubik's Cube without using U.


Mercury (U/White is only face locked): Basic idea is to reduce to a Circle 3x3x3 Cube. You must know how pieces are "attached/bandaged" on a circle cube. When I say "pair" here, I mean to replicate these relationships.
Center Face pairing
1. Using the U face, pair the center edges with the center faces. This only needs to be done for the R,L,F,B faces.
2. Do a quick solve of the cube for just the super center rotations and the outer edges(The quick solve can be corners+centers only or edges+centers only I think). This is to tell if you have a center rotation parity issue. If you cannot get the D super center face properly rotated, then you need to fix it by rotating the center-edges around one of the centers other centers. Here's what I do: (R U R U' R U R U').
3. Rotate the R,L,F,B super centers so that they are solved.

Edge Pairing (keep the R,L,F,B super centers solved when doing any U turns)
4. Pair the center-corner pieces with their respective outer-edge piece. You do this by having the center-corner in the U face and the outer-edge in the middle layer while doing a U turn. You easily and safely solve 8 of the edges and store them in the U and D faces.
I like to pair the U face edges first and then solve them. Then I solve the D face edges and store them in the D face.
5. Half-pair the remaining 4 edges so that they all have one center-corner unpaired. Once an edge is half-paired, flip it so that the unpaired face is on the U face.
6. Shuffle the half-paired edges so that they can all be paired with 1 U turn.
If you do like I did on step 4, you'll have just the FR, RB, BL, LF edges left and their respective center-corners will be just white/yellow and that make it really easy to finish this pairing.

Reduction Complete
7. Solve like a normal 3x3x3 Circle Cube without using U.

Thanks for sharing this with us.
I didn't have the time to look at your post in detail before.
I have tried your method for the Mercury today. (I assume that it is a good training for the Crazy Megaminx to revisit the Crazy 3x3x3.)
Actually, my method for the Jupiter is a simple reduction method as well, but I have not thought that a similar reduction method works for the Mercury.
It is very simple and intuitive, as you say.
Still, it is not so easy regarding pattern recognition and recognizing which circle corners have to be grouped together with the edges.
(I think you should be better use the word "group together" instead of "pairing". In my understanding "pairing" is applicable only for two things. But I'm not a native speaker )
I like it that you describe your method in a way, where one has still to come up with some details on his own.

Now, the question is: Is it possible to use a reduction method on other planets as well?
Jupiter and Mercury are certainly the easiest versions. (In my opinion, Jupiter is very close to the normal Circle 3x3x3 - which is just trivial )
I'll consider a reduction method for the Earth (having two adjacent blocked faces).

No problem. I was kind of surprised that you guys didn't it this way and I'm kind of dreading trying it your way
Yeah, I'm a bit slow on Mercury too which is why I prefer the Jupiter more. I really wish I knew my color scheme better. I can reconstruct it, but I can't instantly pick out the adjacent colors given 2. I do enjoy the quick edge-only solve part to check parity however. Though now that I think about it, this be done quicker with corners-only instead right?I liken it to edge "pairing" on a 4x4 or 7x7 where there's 5 things to "pair." But I get your point.
I'd start with Uranus because it uses Jupiter style reductions which are certainly easier. I can almost imagine how to solve it (but I'd need one in my hands to know for sure). It'd take an extra step or two to solve the edges while dancing around the other unlocked face not to screw stuff up. Corner solving would barely be hindered. Solving a standard Rubik's Cube with only 4 faces should still be straight forward too.

Yeah, Jupiter is pretty easy, but I still enjoy it. I find the pairing more enjoyable than on the 5x5x5. I also like how you have to juggle the first 8 edge paired edges. I really like doing that, don't know why.

Actually, I have used a reduction method on Uranus, when I had got it early December. You are right, it is pretty close to Jupiter.
Yesterday, I have tried a reduction method on Earth (two stationary circles on adjacent faces). The method is pretty straight forward, but it is easier to make mistakes compared to the very regular Mercury.
I think it is a good refresher, before I go for my Crazy Starminx (Earth).
For those who have never tried a Crazy 3x3x3: With GuiltyBystander's hints you have a logical method, at least for the easier versions. The nice thing is, that it remains a challenge. The principle is relativly easy, the doing (the details, the necessary setups) needs some new thinking for every solve.
I have never understood, that so few people have taken on that challenge and see it as e.g. "convoluted" and cry for a normal Circle Cube.

EDIT: I'll copy a post here I had made in the Crazy Megaminx thread:
Solving the Crazy Megaminx "Earth" has been one of my hardest solving experiences.
As I've explained above, finding a method (given the fact that I had solved the corresponding Crazy 3x3x3) wasn't that hard. The problem was the really high concentration necessary and the sheer amount of parts (60 circle corners, 60 inner edges (or how should I name them? circle faces? outer circle centres?), 30 outer edges, 20 corners (150 pieces total) OK, a Teraminx has more pieces, but the confusing or dazzling factor is much, much lower.
Using a reduction method on a Teraminx is pretty straight forward and no complex setup moves are necessary.

I have not tried GuiltyBystander's reduction method on the Earth Megaminx. Earth has 4 bandaged faces that I may not turn after pairing an outer edge with a circle corner. Therefore, I have done the circle corners in a last step.

Here is a picture from scrambled to solved:

Thanks Konrad, for drawing attention to these great puzzles. I bought the complete set of crazy/planet cubes from mefferts.com recently and I am treating myself to one per month. I started with Jupiter, and on Tuesday (Feb 1st) I will unpack Mercury. So by mid-August I should be able to comment on whether my ranking of the relative difficulty of the planets matches that of other posters!

@GuiltyBystander: I quickly gravitated to a reduction method similar to yours. My way is completely reduce all the cubies of the '0'/unlocked face first, and then move them all onto the '0' face with correct orientation except for two diagonally opposite corners. I use those positions to move in pairs of other corners, making a 180 degree turn to swap their inner pieces (which obviously has no visible effect on the other '0' pieces), until all reduced. Then I move all the '0' corner cubies back onto the '0' face, correctly oriented, and do the same reduction with pairs of edges at a time. Then I solve the cube without making any '0' face turns.

Slightly off topic: One nice touch was that when I opened up the box from Meffert, the outer gas planets were on the outside, leaving of course the inner rocky planets on the inside (of a 2x2x2 overall arrangement). While it is possible that this was a coincidence, I prefer to believe that whoever packed the puzzles did this on purpose, knowing that the recipient might notice and delight in the connection between puzzles and actual planets, which I did.

I'm a little bit surprised to see this post revived. I solved these cubes several weeks ago using a simulator and this post was dead at that time. For Jupiter and Uranus, I used a reduction method. For all the others, I used a method similar to what fermf described.

I didn't even try to use reduction for Mercury because I found it hard to determine which color should go where, and for which pieces grouping/pairing is done.

Here is my ranking of the relative difficulty:

- Reduction: Jupiter < Uranus

- Not-reduction: Mercury < Venus < Neptune < Earth < Mars < Saturn (I think Saturn is way harder than the others, combined )

Since I use different methods to solve the two categories, it's not easy to directly compare, for example, Jupiter and Mercury.

I also tried crazy megaminx's Jupiter and Mercury using a simulator. But I found them pretty tedious. So I give up solving the other ones. I know some of them are quite challenging. Maybe I will resume solving them.

Hi guys,

I just posted the simulator I used to play the Crazy-plus puzzles here:

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=20285

Please let me know if there is any problem. Thanks.

The applet does not start on my W7 x64 with IE V9 Beta. The space where the picture should be remains empty.
I have tried the 32bit and 64bit version of IE.
It is not so important for me, because I have got all 3x3x3 planets anyway.
I just wanted to let you know.
I had problems with older Java versions running the Gelatinbrain applets. (This seems to be OK now)
I have not tried changing the security settings of Java.

Thanks, noted.

I got the app running in opera (under linux) for most cubes (some 4x4x4 do not show) after changing the line 21 of CircleCubes.htm to:

line 21 to
<script type="text/javascript">

and lines 31 and 32 to

var order=document.getElementsByName("order").item(0);
var Speed=document.getElementsByName("Speed").item(0);

After that the java app starts up (allthough not rock stable )

Michael

I’ll respond to the two posts in this thread here, because I believe that related things should be kept together.
First, a reminder of the various Crazy Plus types:

The Mars has the white, green and yellow faces bandaged (=1, = moving). I have got the black version with stickers, therefore, mine has the specified colour scheme and I'll refer to this specified colour scheme below..As I have solved all of them, I have tried to reuse methods partially, I had found for other types before. Therefore, my method for the last edges may very well be not so efficient in this case. At least it is easy to be reproduced. I combine the white edges as the last step in edge grouping (="pairing" of the outer edge with the two corresponding inner edge pieces = "circle edges"). So, my start situation is: all other 8 edges are grouped already (for convience they are at the right location, already).
1. I create a white cross of inner edges:
3-cycle flipping the circle edges
white U; green L
L U F U’ F’ L’ (an algorithm very common in normal 3x3x3 solution. I recollect that David Singmaster came up with it first.)
(U R) -> (U F) -> (L U) -> (U R) notation: first Face, second position on face
Here is a net of the result (starting with a solved cube, picture without all corners, which are irrelevant at this stage)

2. Flip the white outer edges
white U, L and F NOT green:
(L U F U’ F’ L’ U L U F U’ F’ L’ – flip outer edges UF and UR)

After achieving an all white cross, the rest should be easy using Sune, Antisune (e.g. R' U2 R U R' U R) algorithms with R, L = green (cycles the complete triplets) or NOT green (cycles outer edges only).
There is the parity situation, though, discussed above.
I'll repeat Cielo's algorithm here (I had found a similar algorithm myself, but mine is harder to explain):
R U’ R U R U R U’ R’ U’ R2 U
I think that the ranking has to do with this problem, exactly, that we have discussed above. I find that grouping the last edges is hardest on Saturn. It has taken me quite some time, until I could reproduce this reliably. Similarly as described by you, I have solved it "somehow", before I could find a method. I share schuma's ranking above, completely, and recollect that I have described the same ranking somewhere.annoying but fun Can somebody enlighten a non-native speaker what this expresses? Tedious but fun anyway?

Thanks for the long good answer and the algs you use.
It's interesting, that in the last two days I realized, that the last part is actually (in principle) the same edge combining as the rest. That means with the turns of the front and right faces you can never invert an edge. So you can juggle around the solved and unsolved pieces with those turns. To pair I turn the (top) white face and replace the paired piece with an unsolved edge. hmmm, difficult to explain. It works quite good now.
Even the parity works. I solve it by a quarter turn of the white (top) face then solving the broken edges again (with even permutations). This way I also solve parity issues on the 4x4x4 and 6x6x6: correcting the parity by a single move (mostly) and solving the partly broken rest again. More turns than an alg but even in halve a year or more I know how to fix the parity, since I don't need to remember the alg.
Search the web for the 'ultimate solution', he explains this method.

I will try your algs to see how it works.

You have solved the Earth Megaminx, do you try the other planets too? Or was it difficult enough?

cheers
Michael

ps: maybe I order the Saturn some time since I cannot mod the Mars to be a Saturn

Probably, you have a different colour scheme, where white is a 0 (= unbandaged = stationary) face. I think, we need your colour scheme and a definition witch colours are at "front" and "right", in order to understand your explanation. If U is a 1 face, there would be no "broken edges", right?When I have solved the 4x4x4 back in 1981 (or 82?), I have solved the parity in the same way. Later, I have found parity algorithms, but I had to reconstruct some centres after applying my own alg. Now, I use an efficient set of algs from bigcubes.
I know Phil Marshall's Ulimate Solution
I assume that Saturn will be the hardest Crazy Megaminx as well, but I'm not sure that I will spend so much money again
Unfortunately, schuma's applet does not run on my W7 x64 notebook.

sorry for messing up the colors. My turning ("1") faces are blue, orange and green, unbandaged are white,red,yellow.

I solve the last edges (white) while holding the cube this way:
top:white, right:green, bottom:yellow, left:blue, front:orange, back:red

(unbandaged are up,down,back)

I will try your way.

The javascript on the page for the applet is messy. Did you try it with opera after my patches?

Michael

@Konrad:

I tried it (I think your way) holding the cube such that the last 4 edges are on a "1" face on top. The right face is a "0" face, the front face a "1" face. Now I can orient it using only F/U/R turns. But doesn't this mean that the edge pairing on the mars is exactly the same as on the saturn? I do not turn the back face, which is a 0-face on mars and a 1-face on saturn...

The corner pairing is different since you don't have a 1-face opposite the 0-face to combine the corners and store them away, this may be a little bit easier on mars.
Solving the combined 3x3x3 is the same, you even have four faces to chose from.

Michael

The two sequences I have described for building the white cross, rely on the fact that I can either have two "1" faces involved (U = "1"; L = "1"; F = "0") or two "0" faces (U = "1"; L = "0"; F = "0")
On Saturn you have always a combination of two "1" faces and one "0" face on three adjacent faces.
Maybe, you have done it similarly to my Mars method, but certainly not identical.
You are describing a scenario with two "1" faces only and I would be interested how you can achieve both, flipping the outer edges and the circle edges, with that little standard algorithm L U F U' F' L'. I have not found this easy. (Actually, on Saturn this is the hardest part.)
Maybe, you should get a Saturn (or make one) to prove that it is not so hard after all.
All I can say, is: I have found it hard and schuma has the same opinion.
My method for the corners is easy (but tedious) for the Saturn.

yes nearly , ...plus a 0-face as the right side. So I use two 1-faces and one 0-face: top and front are "1", right is "0".
With this scenario you can turn the edges and this scenario applies for mars and saturn.

I have read the you can mod the centerpiece to remove / add bandaging. I think I will change the bandaging on my cube (which originally was a neptune) to get a saturn cube to if I'm right.

cheers,
Michael

That's what I understood, two 1 faces out of 3 leaves one 0 face
If you have an easy way flipping the outer and the inner edges, just using moves of the described 3 faces, you can solve the Saturn.
But this part exactly has been hard for me.
Can you show us your sequences, please?

or the other way round: If I solve the edges in the same way on both cubes and most others say the saturn is harder, than my method for solving is unnecessary complex when used on the mars

Hello all,

I’m new to the forum, this is my first post. I want to say thanks Konrad (and others) for your knowledge over the past few months of web crawling. I like the way you give hints to allow me to develop my own method. I have the Earth 3x3 and Earth megaminx. Your hint to solve small circle edges last helped me to solve right up to that by myself, and now I can use your small circle piece alg to solve the rest. I also think there will be a better way to do these small pieces.

Highlight [
I use the white bandaged face as D for most of the solve.

First I solve the inner circle edges. The last few with the alg R2 [U or U’] FB’ R2 F’B U2 FB’ R2 F’B [U or U’] R2 (3 cycle). I do setup moves to allow doing this with a bandaged face as R & D (R & U is possible too). (I try to get 3 inner edge pieces in the top belt). If I need to exchange one from the centre belt to achieve this I can position the bandaged face on another face. Hence cycle one inner circle edge from the centre belt to the top belt, by making the bandaged faces as [F or B] & D). If you try it on a solved Earth you will see what it does.

Next I solve all outer edges. The bottom layer (white outer edges) are easy (F2 slip it on F2). Just avoid the bandaged face. I use the Ultimate Solution (R’FRF’ etc) for the middle layer (unbandaged faces as R and F) to solve the outer edges. For the two middle layer edges that touch the bandaged face I apply F2 to take them away from the bandaged face then place the edge then put the D (white) edge back on then F2 to put it back. Then for the U layer outer edges I switch to my `above` alg R2 [U or U’] FB’ R2 F’B U2 FB’ R2 F’B [U or U’] R2 (3 cycle) applied to unbandaged faces this time (bandaged face as L & D) to solve U layer outer edges. Oh, and `you’re parity fix` for the 2 edge parity. I haven’t figured out a way to make it smooth yet. I turn the U layer (unbandaged) until one of the two incorrect edges is on the bandaged side, use `that` side as F and the other bandaged side as D, and perform R U' R U R U R U' R' U' R2. But I always have to repair and it’s clunky.

Next I place and rotate all outside corners. Corner placement (R'FRF')X3 (and mirrors & inverses) and corner rotation (F'RFR')X2 U (RF'R' F)X2 (and the mirror & [(F'RFR')X2 U]X3 and mirror). I do this quick because I convert this to the R and U faces. (looking down on it).

Then I use you’re alg for the small circle edges.
]

You will all know about the methods I use for sure, but I have posted my method because it might help someone, I hope. For me, I have drawn a lot of the conclusions myself and it's fun to unscramble a difficult puzzle albeit with a little help.

Burgo.

PS Sorry for the lack of knowledge of cubing language, this is my first attempt. And most of my solutions I have got to myself and with `hints` so it's hard to explain.

PPS It is funny because I had started working on the megaminx (in my avatar) and got all that way without a method. Now I have a way to start it, but I don’t want to mess up all that work!! It’s so pretty like that too, ha ha.

EDIT: I updated this method on: Sun Mar 06, 2011 6:49 am on the next page.

Thanks for your post, Burgo!
First of all, it proves that most people taking on this kind of challenge, will come up with individual solutions.
Regarding the parity algorithm: If you make U a bandaged and R an unbandaged face, just add an U move as the last one and you'll find just the outer edges UR and UB swapped. That might help to avoid repair actions.
BTW, what does nemisis in your signature mean? I do know the Greek word nemesis (Νέμεσις) only, the goddess of righteous wrath.

Yes I do put U at the end, but the damage that happens is `scrambling of some outside edges`, usually involving the displacement of a white (bottom bandaged) edge so I have to rebuild the lower edges again and redo FURU'R'F' etc. It works but it's clunky. It would be worse if I had placed outside corners already with F2L. My method is still a work in progress.

nem·e·sis (nm-ss)
n. pl. nem·e·ses (-sz)
3. An opponent that cannot be beaten or overcome.
4. One that inflicts retribution or vengeance.
5. Nemesis Greek Mythology The goddess of retributive justice or vengeance.

It means an opponent that you cannot beat, a life challenge. The villain in a comic book for the hero, the one that will not die.

Glad you share my humour,
Burgo.

I tried to teach my wife this cube but she just rolls her eyes at me!

PS I put in some pics of a solve for fun:
PPS My bandaged sides are orange & white

Regarding Parity:
On standard Earth (white and green bandaged) make white = U and red = R
This is the Cube after the parity operation:

If you bring up two yellow edges as a setup by R2, B2 , apply the parity algorithm and reverse the setup it looks like this:

All inner edges and all outer edges, except of RD and BD are in place.

Thanks to schuma and Dr. Bo Hu for the simulator. And thanks Michael for the patches in the Java script!
It works now with Opera on my W7 / x64 notebook!
This is what I have used to produce the pictures (+ Photoshop).

Thanks Konrad, that will make my parity much smoother. I can even tell which edges will flip. Also thanks for the great diagrams, very impressive. It does not matter (to my solution) that corner pieces are displaced either, smooth. I like it.

I am getting used to your small corner piece alg too. It's very easy to remember, and I am getting a lot better at `setup` and `restore` moves for this part. It's not fast, but I like doing it. Solving the `outside corners` before doing the `small corner pieces` helps visualise `setup` and `restore` moves.

Also, on an earlier topic, I have a `standard` circle cube. When I got it I did not have a supercube, hadn't even heard of one! So I went about inventing a method for it and `then` I found out what a super cube was. I got one and `used my circle cube method on it` . I think it helped me be less daunted to attempt the crazy cube. And I like solving it, just to watch all the pieces sliding through each other, it's visually spectacular (compared to a picture cube). I don't know why they didn't mass produce them (I got a SmaZ). Just my opinion.

My next decision is `whether it is a significantly different challenge` to get a Saturn and a Mercury (harder and easier than earth). Are the challenges significantly different enough to warrant it? Or which 2 would you choose for different challenges? Maybe `Jupiter or Uranus` instead of Mercury? I would like hardest and easiest but different challenges.

Thanks again,
Burgo.

regarding the simulator:
I made a patch to the code to allow defining the color of each side; I'll post the diff if anybody wants to try it...

Michael

You can try the reduction method on Jupiter or Uranus, described by GuiltyByStander above.
The reduction method on Mercury may be shorter than my own method, but it is certainly a bit confusing.
Anyway, a reduction method is a quite different method.
I share schuma's opinion expressed here:In my personal ranking for all eight planets, Jupiter is not much harder than the Normal Circle Cube (which means close to a 3x3x3 Super Cube). The Saturn is for me (and schuma) the hardest. I see two challenges: the two steps "build the complete edges (triplets) at the correct location" and "place the circle corners". I need a 34 move algorithm for exchanging two circle corners. Other sequences change 4 circle corners, which makes setups much harder.
Has anyone a shorter sequence?

My recommendation is: Get Jupiter and use the rdeuction method as the easiest and get Saturn as the hardest.
I'm highly interested what you will say about Saturn

I think reducing the corners of the saturn, after the edges are placed, works quite good.
All the edges except the four of your top 0-face are scrambled around after reducing, but this doesn't matter, since they are all still correct oriented.

After looking at those crazy megaminx diagrams I not sure which of earth or saturn is the harder megaminx...

Michael