# Message #1931

From: schuma <mananself@gmail.com>

Subject: Re: yet more new puzzles and a prize

Date: Sun, 20 Nov 2011 23:08:02 -0000

Hi,

I just completed the solution of {3,7} FT. The save file is here:

http://games.groups.yahoo.com/group/4D_Cubing/files/Nan%20Ma/37FT_solved.xml

It took me 13050 moves and around 19.5 hours. I didn’t use macros. At this time I’ve solved all the three {3,7} puzzles, VT, ET and FT.

About the solution of FT, there’s not much unique thing. All the pieces of the same type are in a single orbit.

One thing in my solution that’s kind of interesting is the order of solving. I first solved the centers, then the central edges, then the large side-centers affecting the centers. So then I had to solve the centers again. Why did I solve the centers twice? It is related to my piece finding strategy. I first solved the center just for setting up a "reference". In this step I had to compare a scrambled puzzle with the initial state a lot in the initial viewpoint (only in this viewpoint can I perfectly align these two states). This is possible only because the centers are large. It’s impossible to do it using the edges because they are too small to see in the initial viewpoint.

Using the centers as reference I solved the central edges. Then using the central edges as reference I can solve the side-centers. But unfortunately my algorithm for the side-centers affected the centers so I had to solve the centers, using side-centers as reference. The logic sounds cyclic but it works. There are not many centers (56) so that’s not much extra work.

Nan

— In 4D_Cubing@yahoogroups.com, "schuma" <mananself@…> wrote:

>

> Hi guys,

>

> I’m currently taking the challenge of {3,7} FT and solving it full throttle. Starting on Friday evening, I’ve used about 10 hours till now. All the large pieces have been solved and I’m going to worry about the tiny pieces from now. I hope I can get it done sometime on Sunday.

>

> Nan

>

> — In 4D_Cubing@yahoogroups.com, "schuma" <mananself@> wrote:

> >

> > — In 4D_Cubing@yahoogroups.com, Roice Nelson <roice3@> wrote:

> > > I know for me, it feels more pure to not have too much help from the

> > > software features. In the early days of MC4D, especially when going for

> > > shortest solves, I used to write my setup moves down on paper!

> >

> > I totally agree. solving with or without aids are two different games. This is also why I hesitated a lot before I sent the previous post about computer aids. They change the nature of a puzzle. I don’t know if solutions with aids deserve your initial grand prize or not. But in either way, whenever a solution is very long, my feeling is basically the same: I start to question the meaning of doing it.

> >

> > Anyway, thank you for making these features. Having the option to use aids is definitely better than not having it.

> >

> > Nan

> >

>