# (Canceled) Petition to make Kilominx/2x2 Megaminx an official WCA event.



## Solar (Aug 5, 2016)

I've recently started a Petition for Kilominx/2x2 Megaminx to be an official WCA event. I have no idea how it will turn out, but it's worth a try because of the rising popularity of the puzzle.

Link to the Petition: chn.ge/2aOOsfo
If you want to support the petition, please spread the word about it, and be sure to share it with your acquaintances. (This is optional, of course.)

EDIT: Petition closed.


----------



## Matt11111 (Aug 5, 2016)

Hi. Welcome to the forums.

I love the idea of the Kilominx becoming an event. Gotta get one though. 

anyway, I'll definitely sign it, but there's no way the WCA can be so blind about what people like to solve. If this does come about, I think we should call it a Kilominx. Just a thought.

Waitaminute, never mind about that last thought. I read the petition and you make a good point.


----------



## Berd (Aug 6, 2016)

Signed!


----------



## James Hake (Aug 6, 2016)

that would be cool to add it to the WCA, but I think there should also be gigaminx, team bld, or fisher cube added too


----------



## tx789 (Aug 6, 2016)

We already have 18 official events. I doubt anything new will be added for a while. There was talk of Skewb for years before becoming it became official. It adds nothing new, adding something like Gigaminx, 8x8+ is stupid because they take too long. I think we should stick with the events we have already. 

See how popular kilominx is in a year or two. It'll most likely die down. We don't want to many events because of time. What's the point in having like 50 events if you can only run around 20 of them due to time constrains.


----------



## Daniel Lin (Aug 6, 2016)

I agree with @tx789. Kilominx adds nothing new. We already have 2x2 and Megaminx, so we don't need kilominx. If we add kilominx, we might as well add gigaminx, master kilominx, master pyraminx, master skewb, super square 1, or any of those events blindfolded...

I think a better idea would be adding the helicopter cube, since it's different.


----------



## Solar (Aug 6, 2016)

I agree with the number of events that can be done, but more 2-day competitions could accommodate. As for "It adds nothing new" I can agree too, but all we have is NxNxN Events for Cubic puzzles, can't we have NxNxN for Minx puzzles? Kilominx is the most viable answer for that, it doesn't take long to solve so it wont hold up the schedule (Gigaminx takes a long time, and so does Master Pyraminx). Also this puzzle just seems like it fits, I really can't explain, but it makes sense to imagine people competing in Kilominx rather than people competing in something like a Cuboid or something like a Curvy Copter.

I hope you understand my opinion.


----------



## Kit Clement (Aug 6, 2016)

Solar said:


> I agree with the number of events that can be done, but more 2-day competitions could accommodate. As for "It adds nothing new" I can agree too, but all we have is NxNxN Events for Cubic puzzles, can't we have NxNxN for Minx puzzles? Kilominx is the most viable answer for that, it doesn't take long to solve so it wont hold up the schedule (Gigaminx takes a long time, and so does Master Pyraminx). Also this puzzle just seems like it fits, I really can't explain, but it makes sense to imagine people competing in Kilominx rather than people competing in something like a Cuboid or something like a Curvy Copter.
> 
> I hope you understand my opinion.



2-day competitions will fix this? Nationals barely gets through all the events now as a 3-day competition, and people complained about us cutting rounds this year.


----------



## tx789 (Aug 6, 2016)

Kit Clement said:


> 2-day competitions will fix this? Nationals barely gets through all the events now as a 3-day competition, and people complained about us cutting rounds this year.



Then have 4 or 5 day comps. Forget about how this affects cost and competitors and add 20 ish event.



Spoiler



If anything events should be removed rather than added. But there is no event with a good reason to remove. Mahad one.


----------



## Thatoneguy2 (Aug 6, 2016)

I think it would be a pretty cool event, it shouldn't take super long and the world records wouldn't get down to pure luck. If they ever felt like adding an event I think this one would be cool.


----------



## JustinTimeCuber (Aug 6, 2016)

"Don't add x event because it's hard for competitions to hold all events"
"Remove x event because it's hard for competitions to hold all events"

Do you think feet solving is hard to get in? How about 7x7!? The fastest feet solvers are sub-1 and the fastest 7x7 solvers are sub 3. I never seriously practice feet solving, but if I do a solve I can easily get under my 7x7 average. What about clock? Clock is a serious problem? Right. Clock makes all the competitions slow, totally. Getting rid of it because it isn't a normal puzzle seems pretty unfair to serious clock solvers. Most people might not care about it, but some do.

To the people arguing that competitions are getting overwhelmed by having too many events, *THAT IS COMPLETE NONSENSE. *No competition is being forced to hold every event. I get that Nationals, Worlds, etc. would try to hold all/most events, but this year Nats didn't have feet, and to my knowledge no one was terribly sad about that. I don't want to sound like I know everything that goes into organizing Nationals, but the way to fit Kilominx seems rather obvious: lower the cutoffs for side events, or lower the competitor limit (*GASP*). Make a somewhat harsh cutoff for Kilominx itself. Again, I want to stress that I don't know exactly how this works, but I believe it's likely that using the exact same setup as Nats 2016, just with harsher cutoffs for Friday's events, Kilominx could have been hosted that day (if it were an event). Other option? Don't hold an event. Feet wasn't held. I don't think that they shouldn't drop the same event(s) two years in a row. Here's another thing: If Kilominx became official on January 1, 2017, and Nationals did not hold a round or rounds of Kilominx, then it would be holding the exact same events which it would if Kilominx were not added as an official event. Local competitions miss events all the time. Hardly any competitions have all events. If I practiced Skewb (lol I will never), learned full Skewb EG, and did tens of thousands of solves, and there is a competition in my area that does not hold Skewb, should I complain? They weren't taking into consideration how much effort I put into Skewb and just ignored it. It's not the responsibility of every competition to hold every event, even bigger ones. If every competition had every event and a super high competitor limit, it is just basic math that the cutoffs would be insane. Many of us would never get, say, a 6x6 mean, given that they would need to make a harsh cutoff. tl;dr More events is not worse. That is stupid.


----------



## Lucas Garron (Aug 6, 2016)

There is pretty much only one realistic path to making Kilominx an official event: get as many competitions as possible to hold it unofficially.

If lots of people truly find it a fun and interesting puzzle, it should be possible for them to convince organizers that it's worth holding sometimes. I suggest focusing on that.

(In general, I wish we encouraged competitions to hold more "unofficial" events to the same standards as official events, like back in the old day. If unofficial events were common, it would be easy to prove the viability of an event. We could even trigger a vote once an event has been held at enough competitions. Unfortunately, right now adding a new event is an uphill battle without a summit in sight.)


----------



## JustinTimeCuber (Aug 6, 2016)

How many competitions were holding Skewb unofficially in 2013? I think it's a good idea, though, to hold Kilominx unofficially.


----------



## irontwig (Aug 6, 2016)

Rising popularity? What? Where?


----------



## OLLiver (Aug 6, 2016)

I like this idea


----------



## Sajwo (Aug 6, 2016)

OLLiver said:


> I like this idea



Me too. There should be more variety in events. It's always fun to see how people create new methods, triggers etc. And be a part of it. If there are too many methods, then just remove feet.


----------



## rumarfer28 (Aug 6, 2016)

There is only one brand that produces that puzzle (I don't count the flowerminx), and only since a few weeks. It's imposible that this become a WCA event anytime soon.

And I also think it's too similar to a Megaminx. It makes sense a puzzle similar to a 3x3 becoming an event, like 2x2, but not a puzzle similar to a puzzle similar to a 3x3, since megaminx is actually very similar to a 3x3.

In my opinion, only mirror blocks should has potential to be an event any time soon. It's related to a 3x3, but different, specially if the solve is blindfolded without inspection, has been produced by many companies during some years, and there are some people who takes its unofficial speedsolving very seriously.


----------



## Rcuber123 (Aug 6, 2016)

Mirror blocks blind is a better idea IMO


----------



## FastCubeMaster (Aug 6, 2016)

Daniel Lin said:


> I agree with @tx789. Kilominx adds nothing new. We already have 2x2 and Megaminx, so we don't need kilominx. If we add kilominx, we might as well add gigaminx, master kilominx, master pyraminx, master skewb, super square 1, or any of those events blindfolded...
> 
> I think a better idea would be adding the helicopter cube, since it's different.



Exactly what I think about this.

Why 2x2 Megaminx when there are all those other events that are modifications of other puzzles?
E.g. Square-0, master Pyraminx, master skewb.

My thoughts are that if there is going to be something added, it should be a new puzzle/new variation, not an addition to what is already there (other than 3x3)


----------



## Sajwo (Aug 6, 2016)

FastCubeMaster said:


> My thoughts are that if there is going to be something added, it should be a new puzzle/new variation, not an addition to what is already there (other than 3x3)




But why? Kilominx is fun and a lot of people like it. I think it's good enough reason to hold it officially at comps. But the narrow-minded WCA won't change anything of course. It's just easier for them  Listening to the request of community pays off.. always


----------



## Matt11111 (Aug 6, 2016)

tx789 said:


> Then have 4 or 5 day comps. Forget about how this affects cost and competitors and add 20 ish event.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


But isn't the point of comps to have them on weekends so everyone can come?


----------



## XTowncuber (Aug 6, 2016)

I don't think it's that similar to any puzzle we have right now actually. No other puzzle would the same combination of how easy it is to solve a single piece and how important/difficult lookahead would be. 

Not saying it should be an event, just that it's not all that similar.


----------



## JustinTimeCuber (Aug 6, 2016)

"It's a variation of a variation!"
So is 4BLD. 

Here's something else: Megaminx was an official event from the beginning. Maybe 3x3 is the variation and we shouldn't be doing 2x2, 4x4, 5x5, etc. at all! Then, Kilominx would just be a variation and not a "variation of a variation". But honestly, what's wrong with a variation of a variation?


----------



## Matt11111 (Aug 6, 2016)

JustinTimeCuber said:


> "It's a variation of a variation!"
> So is 4BLD.
> 
> Here's something else: Megaminx was an official event from the beginning. Maybe 3x3 is the variation and we shouldn't be doing 2x2, 4x4, 5x5, etc. at all! Then, Kilominx would just be a variation and not a "variation of a variation". But honestly, what's wrong with a variation of a variation?


Well said. My brain hurts.

I think Kilominx is a better variation squared than the nonsense people come up with like multiblind one-footed 7x7 FMC. I should make a pros and cons list.


----------



## JustinTimeCuber (Aug 6, 2016)

Matt11111 said:


> Well said. My brain hurts.
> 
> I think Kilominx is a better variation squared than the nonsense people come up with like multiblind one-footed 7x7 FMC. I should make a pros and cons list.


The problem with 7x7 MBLDOFFMC isn't that it's a variation of a variation but that
a) It's insanely difficult. Some BigBLD solvers could maybe do 7x7 MBLD, but not with one foot, and the FMC thing adds a whole other layer to it. I would actually like to see someone do a 2/2 MBLD with 3x3s using one foot in under 160 moves total.
b) It makes a joke of the number of events. There are 18 now. Over 30 imo starts to get crazy, i.e. there are events that hardly ever are held. Think of all the events that would pretty much need to be added in addition to 7x7 MBLDOFFMC.


----------



## Ranzha (Aug 6, 2016)

Posted on fb, reddit, and now here.

Some things that are needed in order for new events to become official:
- Community interest
- Community support
- Puzzle non-triviality
- Regulation implementation (event formats, scrambling orientation, misalignment penalties, etc.)
- Scrambler program (random-state preferred)
- TNoodle integration of scrambler program
- WCA website integration
And pretty much in that order until scramble program

Echoing what Lucas said, Kilominx needs to be a regularly held unofficial event worldwide and have people actually compete in it. That should satisfy the first two items, granted there isn't strong backlash from non-competitors in Kilominx.

I define "puzzle non-triviality" as a puzzle being complex enough to effectively resist:
- easy, short scrambles (like 2x2, Pyraminx, Skewb)
- trivially easy solution methods (like Skewb)
- trivial reducibility to other official events (like L/R teamsolving reducing to OH)
I'm pretty confident Kilominx has satisfied the first and third of these, but I'm not sure about the second one. I didn't foresee that Skewb would become a sledging tps fest, and I wouldn't want that to happen again.

A random-state scrambler program would be an interesting development, but what would the notation be? Kit mentioned on reddit that he thinks Kilominx wouldn't be one of the few puzzles where incorrect scrambles don't matter, and I agree.



Sajwo said:


> But the narrow-minded WCA won't change anything of course. It's just easier for them  Listening to the request of community pays off.. always


What the actual


----------



## JustinTimeCuber (Aug 6, 2016)

Ranzha said:


> Posted on fb, reddit, and now here.
> 
> Some things that are needed in order for new events to become official:
> - Community interest
> ...


As for triviality, the Kilominx has six orders of magnitude more permutations than the 3x3. Nuff said.

e: Exact number:
47127804284843793358848000
(47 septillion, 1.09 million times that of a 3x3)


----------



## Kit Clement (Aug 6, 2016)

JustinTimeCuber said:


> As for triviality, the Kilominx has six orders of magnitude more permutations than the 3x3. Nuff said.
> 
> e: Exact number:
> 47127804284843793358848000
> (47 septillion, 1.09 million times that of a 3x3)



Which is an even larger magnitude fewer states than 4x4, another random state puzzle.


----------



## JustinTimeCuber (Aug 6, 2016)

Kit Clement said:


> Which is an even larger magnitude fewer states than 4x4, another random state puzzle.


I didn't say that we should use random moves (or worse, the R++ D++ thing) for kilominx, but that there won't be as many "lolscrambles" as on events like 2x2, pyra, and skewb.


----------



## Kit Clement (Aug 6, 2016)

JustinTimeCuber said:


> I didn't say that we should use random moves (or worse, the R++ D++ thing) for kilominx, but that there won't be as many "lolscrambles" as on events like 2x2, pyra, and skewb.



I think you're missing the point on triviality. What will methods for this puzzle look like once developed? Skewb was method-rich when it started in 2014, and many believed you would need to know many methods to be fast, like Pyraminx is now. Turns out just Sarah Advanced and spamming TPS is the sole thing you need to do to be fast, and other methods fell by the wayside. This kind of trivialized the puzzle. I think that after Skewb, people will want to see Kilo being pushed to the point where we know what the best methods are before making it official, and will want to know if those methods are interesting or not.


----------



## JustinTimeCuber (Aug 6, 2016)

Kit Clement said:


> I think you're missing the point on triviality. What will methods for this puzzle look like once developed? Skewb was method-rich when it started in 2014, and many believed you would need to know many methods to be fast, like Pyraminx is now. Turns out just Sarah Advanced and spamming TPS is the sole thing you need to do to be fast, and other methods fell by the wayside. This kind of trivialized the puzzle. I think that after Skewb, people will want to see Kilo being pushed to the point where we know what the best methods are before making it official, and will want to know if those methods are interesting or not.


The vast majority of advanced 3x3 solvers use CFOP. The vast majority of advanced big cube solvers use centers-first reduction. The vast majority of advanced megaminx solvers solve S2L in one way or another. Just because most people use mostly the same method for a puzzle doesn't make it bad. It just makes that method good. That doesn't mean that other good methods don't exist. Roux imo is just as good as CFOP.

100% of my 3x3 solves are done using CFOP, so, since by that logic, my 3x3 solves are trivial, I shouldn't solve 3x3.
A common method is just that- a common method. It isn't evil. Being fast at an event takes practice, whether or not you use the "normal" method. Go talk to Lucas about how his 1.51 2x2 average took no skill, because 2x2 is trivial. If someone made full CLL for Kilominx, people would learn it, and it would be the superior LL method for the puzzle.

I want someone to tell me with a straight face that this is any worse than a 3x3 solve with a PLL skip when it comes to being "trivial".


----------



## Chree (Aug 6, 2016)

JustinTimeCuber said:


> The vast majority of advanced 3x3 solvers use CFOP. The vast majority of advanced big cube solvers use centers-first reduction. The vast majority of advanced megaminx solvers solve S2L in one way or another. Just because most people use mostly the same method for a puzzle doesn't make it bad. It just makes that method good. That doesn't mean that other good methods don't exist. Roux imo is just as good as CFOP.
> 
> 100% of my 3x3 solves are done using CFOP, so, since by that logic, my 3x3 solves are trivial, I shouldn't solve 3x3.
> A common method is just that- a common method. It isn't evil. Being fast at an event takes practice, whether or not you use the "normal" method. Go talk to Lucas about how his 1.51 2x2 average took no skill, because 2x2 is trivial. If someone made full CLL for Kilominx, people would learn it, and it would be the superior LL method for the puzzle.
> ...



*puts on straight face* 
Kilominx is more trivial than 3x3.


----------



## turtwig (Aug 6, 2016)

JustinTimeCuber said:


> The vast majority of advanced 3x3 solvers use CFOP. The vast majority of advanced big cube solvers use centers-first reduction. The vast majority of advanced megaminx solvers solve S2L in one way or another. Just because most people use mostly the same method for a puzzle doesn't make it bad. It just makes that method good. That doesn't mean that other good methods don't exist. Roux imo is just as good as CFOP.
> 
> 100% of my 3x3 solves are done using CFOP, so, since by that logic, my 3x3 solves are trivial, I shouldn't solve 3x3.
> A common method is just that- a common method. It isn't evil. Being fast at an event takes practice, whether or not you use the "normal" method. Go talk to Lucas about how his 1.51 2x2 average took no skill, because 2x2 is trivial. If someone made full CLL for Kilominx, people would learn it, and it would be the superior LL method for the puzzle.
> ...



Even if you use the same method for 3x3 every solve, there are still a lot of choices you have to make, solving the cross, choosing which F2L pairs to solve first and how depending on all the other pieces of the cube, etc. On 2x2, if you know full EG you can basically plan out an almost optimal solve during inspection so I think it is arguably less interesting than 3x3. Having said that, it still takes a lot of skill and practice to be fast at smaller puzzles such as 2x2 and Skewb.

Personally, I think that if the WCA were to introduce a new event, it'd be better to add something different than just a smaller version of an existing event.


----------



## JustinTimeCuber (Aug 6, 2016)

Chree said:


> *puts on straight face*
> Kilominx is more trivial than 3x3.


How so? Kilominx may not have edges, but more of the solve is blockbuilding which in my mind is less trivial than algorithms. You're comparing apples to oranges. Even if it were more trivial than 3x3, does that mean we should remove every event deemed as more trivial than 3x3?


turtwig said:


> Even if you use the same method for 3x3 every solve, there are still a lot of choices you have to make, solving the cross, choosing which F2L pairs to solve first and how depending on all the other pieces of the cube, etc. On 2x2, if you know full EG you can basically plan out an almost optimal solve during inspection so I think it is arguably less interesting than 3x3. Having said that, it still takes a lot of skill and practice to be fast at smaller puzzles such as 2x2 and Skewb.


Replace the words.
Even if you use the same method for *Kilominx* every solve, there are still a lot of choices you have to make, solving the *first layer*, choosing which *sides to solve and in what order* depending on all the other pieces of the *dodecahedron*, etc.
I just quoted you and replaced a few short phrases.


turtwig said:


> Personally, I think that if the WCA were to introduce a new event, it'd be better to add something different than just a smaller version of an existing event.


Never said they shouldn't. I think 2x3x3 would make a nice addition too because it's a quick event that doesn't take a crazy amount of skill to do, unlike other proposals *ahem* 6BLD. However, being similar to megaminx and 2x2 shouldn't disqualify it. Another event is similar to Megaminx and 2x2 in the opposite ways... and it's the most common event to be held.

I need to correct a previous incorrect statement I made. There are not 47 septillion permutations of a Kilominx but rather 23563902142421896679424000, or 24 septillion. This does not effect the validity of my argument.


----------



## Chree (Aug 6, 2016)

JustinTimeCuber said:


> How so? Kilominx may not have edges, but more of the solve is blockbuilding which in my mind is less trivial than algorithms. You're comparing apples to oranges. Even if it were more trivial than 3x3, does that mean we should remove every event deemed as more trivial than 3x3?



I actually think it'd be a cool event to add. But you wanted someone to tell you that it's more trivial than 3x3, and I'm happy to oblige. Gotta say tho... asking us to compare apples to oranges and then complaining that I compared apples to oranges is confusing.

Either way... I think what Kit and others are was getting at: It's important to wait and see how the community supports a puzzle that ISN'T official first. So far there's not a whole lot of discussion around developing methods, puzzle modding, and other things that indicate people really care about a puzzle... at least not that I've seen. Just a few fast people posting videos of their LL skips... which, btw, are far more abundant on the apples than on the oranges. Just sayin'.

As much as I'd love to see Kilominx as an event, I know it's gonna be a while before that even has a realistic chance of happening. Let's not skip steps here. There's absolutely growing interest in the puzzle, and that's awesome. So now we can watch to see how things progress. Let Kilominx prove itself to both the community and the WCA. Just be patient.


----------



## JustinTimeCuber (Aug 6, 2016)

Chree said:


> I actually think it'd be a cool event to add. But you wanted someone to tell you that it's more trivial than 3x3, and I'm happy to oblige. Gotta say tho... asking us to compare apples to oranges and then complaining that I compared apples to oranges is confusing.



Exactly. You can't directly compare 3x3 and Kilominx methods because they are for a different puzzle.



Chree said:


> Either way... I think what Kit and others are was getting at: It's important to wait and see how the community supports a puzzle that ISN'T official first. So far there's not a whole lot of discussion around developing methods, puzzle modding, and other things that indicate people really care about a puzzle... at least not that I've seen. Just a few fast people posting videos of their LL skips... which, btw, are far more abundant on the apples than on the oranges. Just sayin'.



It's only been released for a few weeks. Unofficial events don't tend to get as much attention just because of the fact that they are unofficial.



Chree said:


> As much as I'd love to see Kilominx as an event, I know it's gonna be a while before that even has a realistic chance of happening. Let's not skip steps here. There's absolutely growing interest in the puzzle, and that's awesome. So now we can watch to see how things progress. Let Kilominx prove itself to both the community and the WCA. Just be patient.



Of course. I didn't say we should make it an event tomorrow night.


----------



## Solar (Aug 6, 2016)

Kit Clement said:


> 2-day competitions will fix this? Nationals barely gets through all the events now as a 3-day competition, and people complained about us cutting rounds this year.


I mean in this case, comps that aren't something like Nats/Champs could be 2 day if the amount of events are overwhelmed.



Ranzha said:


> - Regulation implementation (event formats, scrambling orientation, misalignment penalties, etc.)


 We're working on that


----------



## 4Chan (Aug 6, 2016)

If we have a delegate vote, like in the past, then I'm voting to make this an event.

This puzzle takes skill to do, and I respect it.


----------



## Tim Reynolds (Aug 6, 2016)

I don't have any say in this, but if I did, I'd want to be convinced that people are going to be interested in Kilominx for more than a few weeks. If we added a new event every time that a new puzzle came out and a bunch of people bought them, we'd end up getting rid of a lot of events as people lost interest in them.

If 6 months from now people still like Kilominx, then I might support this.

Regulations should be easy, since we already have megaminx. Writing a scrambler is a fair bit of work, though.


----------



## Ranzha (Aug 6, 2016)

Hey, Justin? I think you're getting too worked up for your own good.

You cannot argue that 3x3 is trivial because of the same reason Skewb has been trivialised. I simply cannot fathom why someone would compare a *simple, easy, spammable* method like Sarah Intermediate/Advanced (note: *2 four-move algs that are inverses*) to CFOP. It's absolutely ridiculous.
Skewb is significantly more trivial than 3x3 in terms of number of states, God's Number, and the near-optimality and quick learning curve of the most common methods.

Sure, Kilominx has a million times the number of states for 3x3. But, since you got pretty concerned with LL:
- Kilominx LL states: 1944. 3x3 LL states: 15552.
- Kilominx OLL is 8.5 moves on average, where 3x3 OLL is 9.7.
- Kilominx OLL has 16 unsolved cases, where 3x3 OLL has 57.
- Kilominx OLL skip probability: 1/81. 3x3 OLL skip probability: 1/216.
- Kilominx PLL is 8.2 moves on average, where 3x3 PLL is 11.8.
- Kilominx PLL has 3 unsolved cases, where 3x3 PLL has 21.
- Kilominx PLL skip probability: 1/12. 3x3 PLL skip probability: 1/72.
You ask us to compare events' triviality and then argue it's "apples and oranges". That makes you look like an idiot.



JustinTimeCuber said:


> Another event is similar to Megaminx and 2x2 in the opposite ways... and it's the most common event to be held.


Yeah, it was the original puzzle. Try again.



JustinTimeCuber said:


> It's only been released for a few weeks. Unofficial events don't tend to get as much attention just because of the fact that they are unofficial.


Then the obvious first step for all pro-Kilominx solvers is to push competition organisers to hold it unofficially. If it gets to be popular enough in the global competition scene, then the first two items on my above list are satisfied.
Additionally, develop more methods for Kilominx! So far, I'm just seeing Megaminx-style solving.



Solar said:


> We're working on that


This is literally the easiest part of it all for Kilominx. It's a matter of altering five regulations.


----------



## Solar (Aug 6, 2016)

Ranzha said:


> Hey, Justin? I think you're getting too worked up for your own good.
> 
> You cannot argue that 3x3 is trivial because of the same reason Skewb has been trivialised. I simply cannot fathom why someone would compare a *simple, easy, spammable* method like Sarah Intermediate/Advanced (note: *2 four-move algs that are inverses*) to CFOP. It's absolutely ridiculous.
> Skewb is significantly more trivial than 3x3 in terms of number of states, God's Number, and the near-optimality and quick learning curve of the most common methods.
> ...






I have them here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/14DtrEt_XiaqfP45mh4XEgUypus2ngQpm1NqDz61c3AA/edit?usp=sharing
Not sure if it's good (probably isn't). Still considering the last one though... Help and criticism is (definitely) welcome.


----------



## Ranzha (Aug 6, 2016)

Solar said:


> I have them here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/14DtrEt_XiaqfP45mh4XEgUypus2ngQpm1NqDz61c3AA/edit
> Not sure if it's good (probably isn't). Still considering the last one though... Help and criticism is (definitely) welcome.


You have to enable link-sharing first. Also, the regulation situation is more or less trivial. It's deciding what regulations to change that makes the difference.


----------



## JustinTimeCuber (Aug 7, 2016)

Ranzha said:


> Hey, Justin? I think you're getting too worked up for your own good.
> 
> You cannot argue that 3x3 is trivial because of the same reason Skewb has been trivialised. I simply cannot fathom why someone would compare a *simple, easy, spammable* method like Sarah Intermediate/Advanced (note: *2 four-move algs that are inverses*) to CFOP. It's absolutely ridiculous.
> Skewb is significantly more trivial than 3x3 in terms of number of states, God's Number, and the near-optimality and quick learning curve of the most common methods.


Hold on. I never said that Skewb wasn't less trivial than 3x3. However, if you are going off "triviality", Skewb, Pyra, and 2x2 should all be removed. I also think Kilominx is wayyyy less trivial than those events (and most would agree), so comparing Skewb to Kilominx on that front is inaccurate.


Ranzha said:


> Sure, Kilominx has a million times the number of states for 3x3. But, since you got pretty concerned with LL:
> - Kilominx LL states: 1944. 3x3 LL states: 15552.
> - Kilominx OLL is 8.5 moves on average, where 3x3 OLL is 9.7.
> - Kilominx OLL has 16 unsolved cases, where 3x3 OLL has 57.
> ...


First, let me clear the whole "apples and oranges" thing up. I wasn't the one who brought up triviality. I responded to that criticism by saying that the LL on Kilominx may be easier but it is so hard to quantify the F2L and S2L that you are left only being able to look at half of each event because the other halves are not easily comparable.
As with the whole LL thing, again, that is just half of the puzzle. Even if you think that the Kilominx S2L is more trivial than F2L on 3x3, is that a problem? What is wrong with a lower number of LL states, anyway? Is 15552 the lower bound? What about 15551? Is that okay?


Ranzha said:


> Yeah, it was the original puzzle. Try again.


So? What if Kilominx were the original puzzle and someone released a 3x3 for the first time?



Ranzha said:


> Then the obvious first step for all pro-Kilominx solvers is to push competition organisers to hold it unofficially. If it gets to be popular enough in the global competition scene, then the first two items on my above list are satisfied.
> Additionally, develop more methods for Kilominx! So far, I'm just seeing Megaminx-style solving.


Great! I'm considering organizing a competition in the next few months. Maybe I'll have a round of Kilominx!
Side note: Maybe people should develop more methods for 8x8, I'm only seeing 6x6-style solving.


----------



## Ranzha (Aug 7, 2016)

JustinTimeCuber said:


> Hold on. I never said that Skewb wasn't less trivial than 3x3. However, if you are going off "triviality", Skewb, Pyra, and 2x2 should all be removed. I also think Kilominx is wayyyy less trivial than those events (and most would agree), so comparing Skewb to Kilominx on that front is inaccurate.


Yes--you never said Skewb wasn't less trivial than 3x3. You said: "100% of my 3x3 solves are done using CFOP, so, since by that logic, my 3x3 solves are trivial, I shouldn't solve 3x3. A common method is just that- a common method" IN RESPONSE TO Kit talking about Skewb devolving into a sledgefest in 2014. That's where my comment came from. I wasn't comparing Skewb to Kilominx in any way, I was instead attacking your piss-poor argument that using a method trivialises a puzzle outright.



JustinTimeCuber said:


> First, let me clear the whole "apples and oranges" thing up. I wasn't the one who brought up triviality. I responded to that criticism by saying that the LL on Kilominx may be easier but it is so hard to quantify the F2L and S2L that you are left only being able to look at half of each event because the other halves are not easily comparable.


Well, consider them compared. I offered a comparison. You said "I want someone to tell me with a straight face that this is any worse than a 3x3 solve with a PLL skip when it comes to being "trivial"", and Chris and others have been doing so ever since.



JustinTimeCuber said:


> As with the whole LL thing, again, that is just half of the puzzle. Even if you think that the Kilominx S2L is more trivial than F2L on 3x3, is that a problem? What is wrong with a lower number of LL states, anyway? Is 15552 the lower bound? What about 15551? Is that okay?


You were trying to argue that a Kilominx is not less trivial than 3x3 because of the practicality of PLL skips. You failed to factor in the probability of such a thing happening, so I did the work for you. It isn't about the actual number of LL states as it is trying to get you to see that elements of Kilominx solving are much more prone to luck (read: trivial states) than the corresponding elements of 3x3.



JustinTimeCuber said:


> So? What if Kilominx were the original puzzle and someone released a 3x3 for the first time?


Then I would use the same logic. It isn't about what could have happened in the past. *You need to face the reality that 3x3 came first* and as a result cannot be compared to Kilominx as you tried, end of story.



JustinTimeCuber said:


> Great! I'm considering organizing a competition in the next few months. Maybe I'll have a round of Kilominx!
> Side note: Maybe people should develop more methods for 8x8, I'm only seeing 6x6-style solving.


Having rounds of Kilominx will help you considerably more than posting in this thread. You're wasting my time.


----------



## Isaac Lai (Aug 7, 2016)

Ranzha said:


> *simple, easy, spammable* method like Sarah Intermediate/Advanced (note: *2 four-move algs that are inverses*)


Skewb nowadays is much more than this.


----------



## JustinTimeCuber (Aug 7, 2016)

1. Where do you draw the line between trivial events and non-trivial events? 
2. More goes into skewb and 2x2 than you are assuming.
3. By "asking people to compare", I was trying to make the point that it isn't easy to objectively compare the trivialities of 3x3 and Kilominx. The mention of PLL was just because the posted solve had a PLL skip.
4. Let's say kilo is 3x more trivial (whatever that's supposed to mean). I ask again: so?

Sent from my MotoE2(4G-LTE) using Tapatalk


----------



## wir3sandfir3s (Aug 7, 2016)

Jesus Christ I feel like I'm back at the HK thread... which you should not search btw...


----------



## Loiloiloi (Aug 7, 2016)

Is there a petition I can sign to make kilominx stay unofficial? Lol.


----------



## Solar (Aug 7, 2016)

I still need some advice for the regs :/
https://docs.google.com/document/d/14DtrEt_XiaqfP45mh4XEgUypus2ngQpm1NqDz61c3AA/edit


----------



## JustinTimeCuber (Aug 7, 2016)

Solar said:


> I still need some advice for the regs :/
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/14DtrEt_XiaqfP45mh4XEgUypus2ngQpm1NqDz61c3AA/edit


A lot of these treat Kilominx like it's somehow special compared to the other events. Example:
- 4d1) NxNxN puzzles and Megaminx are scrambled starting with the white face (if not possible, then the lightest face) on top and the green face (if not possible, then the darkest adjacent face) on the front. This applies to Kilominx.

Here are the 8 regulations I would add/change. Does anyone see something that's missing?

* 3l1a) For Pyraminx, Kilominx, and 2x2x2, the logo may be on any piece.
* 9b1) Rubik's Cube, 2x2x2 Cube, 4x4x4 Cube, 5x5x5 Cube, Clock, Megaminx, Pyraminx, Kilominx, Square-1, Skewb, and Rubik's Cube: One-Handed.
* 10f2) Megaminx and Kilominx: at most 36 degrees.
+ 12i) Notation for Kilominx:
+ 12i1) Clockwise, 72 degrees: F (front face), U (upper face), L (left face adjacent to front and upper face), R (right face adjacent to front and upper face), bL (back left face adjacent to left (L) and upper face), bR (back right face adjacent to right (R) and upper face), dL (lower left face opposite the back right (bR) face), dR (lower right face opposite the back left (bL) face), dbL (lower back left face opposite the right (R) face), dbR (lower back right face opposite the left (L) face), B (back face opposite the front (F) face), D (lower face opposite the upper (U) face).
+ 12i2) Anti-clockwise, 72 degrees: F', U', L', R', bL', bR', dL', dR', dbL', dbR', B', D'
+ 12i3) Clockwise, 144 degrees: F2, U2, L2, R2, bL2, bR2, dL2, dR2, dbL2, dbR2, B2, D2
+ 12i4) Anti-clockwise, 144 degrees: F2', U2', L2', R2', bL2', bR2', dL2', dR2', dbL2', dbR2', B2', D2'


----------



## stoic (Aug 7, 2016)

irontwig said:


> Rising popularity? What? Where?


This. 
I didn't even know this puzzle had this name. Isn't it flowerminx?


----------



## JustinTimeCuber (Aug 7, 2016)

stoic said:


> This.
> I didn't even know this puzzle had this name. Isn't it flowerminx?


The flowerminx was a slightly modified kilominx I believe, but everyone calls the normal puzzle the kilominx.


----------



## stoic (Aug 7, 2016)

Ah, ok.
I must have missed all the times people were talking about it, ever.


----------



## sqAree (Aug 7, 2016)

I don't own a Kilominx and usually I'm against adding new official events (except for Gigaminx but I can see how there is an issue), but I can imagine Kilominx being a quite nice event. Personally, I have a strong doubt that someone will find a solving method that makes this trivial.


----------



## Solar (Aug 7, 2016)

Wait... stupid question to ask but I just can't tell. JustinTimeCuber, are you pro, con, or neutral for Kilominx? REALLY stupid question but I just can't tell.


----------



## Ranzha (Aug 7, 2016)

Isaac Lai said:


> Skewb nowadays is much more than this.


Nowadays, yes. But for the whole of 2014, Skewb was a sledgefest.



JustinTimeCuber said:


> 1. Where do you draw the line between trivial events and non-trivial events?
> 2. More goes into skewb and 2x2 than you are assuming.
> 3. By "asking people to compare", I was trying to make the point that it isn't easy to objectively compare the trivialities of 3x3 and Kilominx. The mention of PLL was just because the posted solve had a PLL skip.
> 4. Let's say kilo is 3x more trivial (whatever that's supposed to mean). I ask again: so?
> ...


1. It's not that there's a line to draw. It's that there are considerations to be made in terms of the rate of improvement and the chance of times being influenced by luck. For 2x2, which is of course the most extreme example, this is a *huge *problem.
2. Are the best solvers the ones who can best deal with lucky cases? I get that people learn loads of algs for 2x2 and skewb and learn to recognise nearly every possible case with many viable solutions in some cases. However, the highly-ranked solvers are so ranked because they got good cases. How much skill does it require to see 4-moves on 2x2 or one move to double sledge on Skewb?
3. You're right in that it's hard to quantify trivialities based on events with much different elements to the common solving styles. However, asking people to compare is a terrible way to try and make that point.
4. Again, putting a number on puzzle triviality is not a standardised measure. I gave my definition of triviality with my initial post. I feel like time will tell just how easy Kilominx may be, and I anticipate that if made official, the event will be dominated by people who are already highly ranked. This didn't happen with Skewb except for the case of Jay McNeill.



Solar said:


> I still need some advice for the regs :/
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/14DtrEt_XiaqfP45mh4XEgUypus2ngQpm1NqDz61c3AA/edit


Your changes don't reflect how the regulations currently read.

I'd do this:

3d3 (megaminx tile thickness) remains as is. Do you know why this regulation exists?
*Change: *3l1a) For Pyraminx, 2x2x2, and Kilominx, the logo may be on any piece.
Until a random-state scrambler exists, use Pochmann Megaminx convention (notation and length).
*Change: *4b3e) 5x5x5 Cube, 6x6x6 Cube, 7x7x7 Cube, Megaminx, and Kilominx: sufficiently many random moves (instead of random state), at least 2 moves to solve.
*Change:* 12d) Notation for Megaminx and Kilominx (scrambling notation only):

When a random-state scrambler is applied, use the notation Justin described by appending Article 12.

*Change:* 4d1) NxNxN puzzles, Megaminx, and Kilominx are scrambled starting with the white face (if not possible, then the lightest face) on top and the green face (if not possible, then the darkest adjacent face) on the front.
4g1 (scramble correctness exception) remains as is.
*Change* 9b1 to include Kilominx.
*Change:* 10f2) Megaminx and Kilominx: at most 36 degrees.
Initially this would be an addition of 8 words to the regs.


----------



## DGCubes (Aug 7, 2016)

stoic said:


> This.
> I didn't even know this puzzle had this name. Isn't it flowerminx?



Can we please have a petition to call it Flowerminx?

Here's a copy-paste of my comment on JRCuber's Kilominx video:


My dumb rant said:


> Anyone else bothered by how this puzzle really doesn't have a sensible name? If a Megaminx is like a 3x3, and a Gigaminx is like a 5x5, etc., a Kilominx should technically be on the order of a 1x1, if we're actually following SI prefixes like we should be. Plus, we can't really call it a 2x2 Megaminx which is at least slightly more logical, because that's another puzzle (that one by WitEden).



Personally, my biggest problem with this becoming a WCA event is its misnomer. I think it'd be a great event to add if people still retain interest in a few months. I'm sure the WCA would think it through a ton, but my two cents is that they should at least wait until the initial cycle of hype dies down before making a decision.

And if that cycle doesn't die down, well, there's our answer (or at least mine).


----------



## Solar (Aug 7, 2016)

So after some consideration by the people who are working on the petition, we will be taking it down, but reposting it in 1 1/2 (EDIT: 2 years) years to see if people still care.

The timing was horrible, and we weren't prepared for many things. We will work for the next 1 1/2 years to make a better approach.

This thread will be removed tomorrow.


----------



## 4Chan (Aug 7, 2016)

That does it, I'm going to hold Kilominix as an unofficial event at Princeton Fall 2016!!

I'll include a prize for the winner!
Let's get the ball rolling!


----------



## Solar (Aug 7, 2016)

The regulations will be kept in a safe document, and will be used again in 2 years. Would you like me to mention you (reffering to Ranzha and Justin)?


----------



## Solar (Aug 7, 2016)

4Chan said:


> That does it, I'm going to hold Kilominix as an unofficial event at Princeton Fall 2016!!
> 
> I'll include a prize for the winner!
> Let's get the ball rolling!


Thank you. Even though the petition will be closed, you're still keeping the hype that will hopefully last for the next 2 years.


----------



## 4Chan (Aug 7, 2016)

Are you closing the thread? Or is a mod closing the thread?


----------



## Solar (Aug 7, 2016)

Here is the update:
https://www.change.org/p/world-cube...-megaminx-as-an-official-wca-event/u/17507576


----------



## Solar (Aug 7, 2016)

4Chan said:


> Are you closing the thread? Or is a mod closing the thread?


Crap, just realized this isn't "a different forum system".
If I can't remove it, then I will consider this dead (I have no idea)


----------



## Kit Clement (Aug 8, 2016)

I think the major obstacle to this event becoming official is the scrambling issue. Some questions to answer:


Is random state possible for Kilominx?
If a solver is found, how many moves is the solution (and thus, how many moves is the scramble)?
Will the scrambles need to be done using 12-sided notation? Or is there a reasonable way to make scrambling more efficient and accurate? (Maybe having scrambling phases with 2-3 rotations in the middle, only turning on parts of the puzzle in each phase?)

If random state is not feasible for computers or for scramblers, is Pochmann notation enough for Kilominx? By that, I mean:
Are key features of scrambles that should be uniformly distributed still uniformly distributed with this random-move scrambling? (example of center permutation on Mega scrambles done by Stefan)
Are scramblers reasonably accurate (>80%) with this notation?

I think once enough support for the puzzle has been held for a long time and these issues have been figured out and enough WCA parties are in support as well, the rest of the issues are trivial for making this an event. But I really think an appropriate scrambler needs to be found for this puzzle, and that's not a small amount of work.


----------



## Solar (Aug 8, 2016)

Kit Clement said:


> I think the major obstacle to this event becoming official is the scrambling issue. Some questions to answer:
> 
> 
> Is random state possible for Kilominx?
> ...


We're working on that. We will hopefully release something in 2 years when we plan to remake the Petition (If Kilohype is alive.)
Right now I have to learn Javascript so I can assist my friend with the scramble program.


----------



## OLLiver (Aug 27, 2016)

So just to be clear, WHEN can kilominx be made an official event?


----------



## JustinTimeCuber (Aug 27, 2016)

OLLiver said:


> So just to be clear, WHEN can kilominx be made an official event?


I think the best chance for it to happen is 2017 or 2018 regs.


----------



## Solar (Aug 27, 2016)

It seems that the hype has gone down, I'd say the odds aren't as good now.


----------



## cuberkid10 (Aug 27, 2016)

Solar said:


> It seems that the hype has gone down, I'd say the odds aren't as good now.


I honestly don't the the hype has gone down. People still really like this event. In fact, more than 1 upcoming comp in the US will be holding Kilominx unofficially.


----------



## wir3sandfir3s (Aug 27, 2016)

Kit Clement said:


> I think the major obstacle to this event becoming official is the scrambling issue. Some questions to answer:
> 
> 
> Is random state possible for Kilominx?
> ...


I'll try and make a scramblers, just learned Java and C++ during the past 2 weeks so this will be an interesting way to test my skills too.


----------



## DGCubes (Aug 27, 2016)

wir3sandfir3s said:


> I'll try and make a scramblers, just learned Java and C++ during the past 2 weeks so this will be an interesting way to test my skills too.



We already have a pretty awesome random-state scrambler from the other thread:



xyzzy said:


> I just finished writing a rudimentary kilominx solver. The "x2" rotations are denoted as "flip" instead of "x2" because x rotations already mean something else, but that can be easily changed. (It's possibly buggy and definitely slow; your mileage may vary.)
> 
> 
> ```
> ...



Although feel free to make your own too; it's a good way to work on programming skills.


----------



## Leery (Aug 5, 2017)

I still love Kilominx... 

_Silence_


----------

