|
|
|
|
|
by charcircuit
1427 days ago
|
|
>because they would require different approaches No, but that would be true in the reverse situation if we were going the other way and no longer counting inspection since it adds the ability for new strategies and tricks to be integrated. By counting the inspection time the event devolves into just immediately doing what you see first and makes some strategies unviable. >Also I'm curious as to why people don't use all the inspection time in something that's so competitively min-maxed As the other reply mentioned the more moves you plan the harder it is to know the current state of the cube at the end of what you planned. There's also a difference between knowing the general position a piece will be in and knowing the exact position and orientation of pieces which is necessary for adding more moves for your plan. |
|
On the second point, it seems like there is more room to push the skill ceiling. Being more precise than general would give those cubers an edge in No inspection. I suppose this is like chess or poker where permutations of moves or hands are impossible to memorise for.