141 replies to this topic

[obiwan1011]

I got the instruction from Anio and it is truly a masterpiece - both the design and the instruction itself.

While Anio deserves much praise for his fantastic MOC, I would also hold him partially responsible for the rather disappointing official SSD. Realizing that they had virtually no chance of coming up with a better design, Lego was seduced by the Dark Side and came up with a design that had a flat bottom and a curious inclusion of the command bridge and minifigs.


P.S. I do understand the logic behind limiting some forum features to newbies, but is it really that necessary? In my limited experience, I have never come across a forum that would block the PM feature until you posted enough...

[StoutFiles]

obiwan1011, on 25 January 2012 - 03:14 PM, said:

While Anio deserves much praise for his fantastic MOC, I would also hold him partially responsible for the rather disappointing official SSD. Realizing that they had virtually no chance of coming up with a better design, Lego was seduced by the Dark Side and came up with a design that had a flat bottom and a curious inclusion of the command bridge and minifigs.

TLG has tough guidelines to follow which include stability.  What is the official angle of the bottom? 5%?  To achieve perfect accuracy you sacrifice stability and/or increase piece count drastically.  While I agree Anio's looks better, TLG's seems to be more stable.  I'd also say that if TLG had Anio's detail on it it'd be even more expensive than it already is.  Some things to consider.

obiwan1011, on 25 January 2012 - 03:14 PM, said:

P.S. I do understand the logic behind limiting some forum features to newbies, but is it really that necessary? In my limited experience, I have never come across a forum that would block the PM feature until you posted enough...

Considering the amount of spammers we've had lately, I would prefer it stay the way it is.  10 quality posts takes about ten minutes.  I guess it'd be nice though if users could initiate PM's with new users.

Edited by StoutFiles, 25 January 2012 - 04:13 PM.

[Anio]

StoutFiles, on 25 January 2012 - 04:10 PM, said:

To achieve perfect accuracy you sacrifice stability and/or increase piece count drastically.  While I agree Anio's looks better, TLG's seems to be more stable.  I'd also say that if TLG had Anio's detail on it it'd be even more expensive than it already is.  Some things to consider.

My model has fewer pieces than 10221. ;)
Besides, 10221 is way too strong and stable, hence poor finitions. I mean that the designer could have made a less strong model (but still strong enough) to achieve much better shapes and details. :)

[LEGOman273]

Fallenangel, on 25 January 2012 - 06:34 AM, said:

obiwan1011 needs at least ten posts to send and receive PMs, so Anio is unable to send him one.

Oh.

[Warmaster]

Incredible design! I realy love it. A couple weeks ago i got the instructions and now i'm collecting the bricks from bricklink. I also got the 10221 from lego still in the box, i'm going to build that one later. But from what i have seen on picture's from both i think that the one from Anio is the best looking and has the best design and overal shape, and not to forget the greebles! Those greebles are much much better then what Lego came up with. But i'll be curious how it looks when put side by side.

Edited by Warmaster, 29 January 2012 - 09:51 PM.

[obiwan1011]

Might I ask all you experts why Lego Super Star Destroyers - whether it is the official 10221 or MOCs - are not as wide as the original model? They all seem pretty "sharp and narrow" compared to the Executor's frontal view shown in ROTJ.

[Anio]

Actually, the thing is that my MOC and the 10221 are rather higher than the real ship because it is not possible to build a Lego model which is as thin as the real ship (because of the structure).

Edited by Anio, 31 January 2012 - 01:49 AM.

[obiwan1011]

That still does not answer my question, though. Couldn't they be thick (due to the structural limitations), yet still have the wide wing span as the original model? Again, just curious.

[Anio]

obiwan1011, on 31 January 2012 - 01:51 AM, said:

That still does not answer my question, though. Couldn't they be thick (due to the structural limitations), yet still have the wide wing span as the original model? Again, just curious.

It does answer the question.
In other words, if you want to have the right thickness, you have to make the model much bigger (longer, wider, but same height, so the proportions are ok). But a bigger model is not viable, both for an official model and a well designed MOC.

[Fallenangel]

Anio, on 31 January 2012 - 01:47 AM, said:

Actually, the thing is that my MOC and the 10221 are rather higher than the real ship because it is not possible to build a Lego model which is as thin as the real ship (because of the structure).

Put another way, the width is there; the model only appears to be narrower due to the added height. (Actually, Anio's is a bit too thin if I remember correctly, but that's not why it doesn't resemble the source material as closely as it could).

Edited by Fallenangel, 31 January 2012 - 03:13 AM.

[obiwan1011]

Fallenangel, on 31 January 2012 - 01:58 AM, said:

Put another way, the width is there; the model only appears to be narrower due to the added height. (Actually, Anio's is a bit too thin if I remember correctly, but that's not why it doesn't resemble the source material as closely as it could).

Pardon me for being persistent, but let's say if I used a 10 or 12 x whatever length plate for the wings of Anio's design (instead of the 8 x L plate), would that put too much pressure on the superstructure so that it is unsustainable? No doubt Anio must have gone through various thoughts and iterations to come up with the final design, but doesn't the 10030 - with a very similar superstructure - have a wider wing span? Never having designed a Lego model myself, I am just struggling to understand (and want to know) why a compromise needs to be made between the width and thickness. I think 10221 has even less excuses to make on this particular issue because it is on a flat surface - which means it is more stable and has less pressure exerted on its overall structure (or at least in my mind).

On a separate note to Fallenangle... I am not yet qualified to view the comments that you have posted to my profile...

[Fallenangel]

While I can’t provide as informed an answer to that as I’d like, I can tell you that 10030 was held together with magnets and suffered from a myriad of stability issues, including sagging and bending of parts (presumably due to its sheer size and weight).

EDIT: Lasse's doesn't look too off:

Edited by Fallenangel, 31 January 2012 - 03:22 AM.

[M<0><0<DSWIM]

The sheer awesomeness and beauty of this build has caused me to lose all motor functions!

[Anio]

obiwan1011, on 31 January 2012 - 02:34 AM, said:

Pardon me for being persistent, but let's say if I used a 10 or 12 x whatever length plate for the wings of Anio's design (instead of the 8 x L plate), would that put too much pressure on the superstructure so that it is unsustainable? No doubt Anio must have gone through various thoughts and iterations to come up with the final design, but doesn't the 10030 - with a very similar superstructure - have a wider wing span? Never having designed a Lego model myself, I am just struggling to understand (and want to know) why a compromise needs to be made between the width and thickness. I think 10221 has even less excuses to make on this particular issue because it is on a flat surface - which means it is more stable and has less pressure exerted on its overall structure (or at least in my mind).

Sorry, bet I don't get your point. :-S
Especially when you talk of 8, 10 and 12 lenght plate.

10030 is wider, higher. Well, the is much more room in it.
So, it is much easier to attach everything on the structure.

M<0><0<DSWIM, on 31 January 2012 - 03:41 AM, said:

The sheer awesomeness and beauty of this build has caused me to lose all motor functions!

I'm glad you like it. :)

[Taiphun]

Awesome Model, Anio.

Is there any issues with fore/aft sagging?

Oh, I have one of the older original 10221's, which look to be in a different grey color than the new SSD.  Will that color discrepancy be very obvious if I combine the two to make your SSD?

Edited by Taiphun, 01 February 2012 - 09:35 PM.

[Anio]

Nope.

[Fallenangel]

Taiphun, on 01 February 2012 - 09:24 PM, said:

Oh, I have one of the older original 10221's, which look to be in a different grey color than the new SSD.

'Older original' 10221s? Did The LEGO Group introduce another grey?

[Aeroeza]

Fallenangel, on 02 February 2012 - 12:02 AM, said:

'Older original' 10221s? Did The LEGO Group introduce another grey?

I think he means the old light grey 10030 and yes the two tones look odd together. It's a personal taste 'thing' of course but I feel the new grey or 'bley' blue tinge makes the old grey look rather yellowed and, well nasty!

[Taiphun]

Aeroeza, on 02 February 2012 - 03:21 AM, said:

I think he means the old light grey 10030 and yes the two tones look odd together. It's a personal taste 'thing' of course but I feel the new grey or 'bley' blue tinge makes the old grey look rather yellowed and, well nasty!

Sorry yes, I did mean the old light grey 10030.  Sorry, typo.. playing with versioning systems at work and the numbers are all getting to me.

[Warmaster]

I think that i have what it takes to build one of this stunning looking Super Star Destroyer myself!

[Warmaster]

Today i finished my Super Star Destroyer, i must say it's a beauty! The grrebles of the upper city are insane, i like it a lot. The overal design is very nice. So thank you Anio for the instructions. Some pics:



Close up from the upper city:

[BobBongo1895]

Hey Warmaster,

could you add a detail shot of the engine at the back?

[Anio]

Warmaster, on 17 March 2012 - 08:56 PM, said:

Today i finished my Super Star Destroyer, i must say it's a beauty!

I am very happy you like my model.
It is a great pleasure for me to see that this model is appreciate and reproduced by the community.

And don't forget : I designed the model, but if you reproduced it, it is thanks to Frousmoul. ;)

Thanks for the pics. :)

[Warmaster]

Oh yeah i forgot, also big thanks to Frousmoul!

[billfark]

Anio, on 24 January 2012 - 02:43 PM, said:

Maybe I can PM you.
Let's see...

edit : I can't.
Well, wait a few days to have the right post number, and then we will be able to discuss by PM... :)

edit : e-mail me with the adress at the bottom of that page ("Nous contacter") : http://www.setechnic.com/

Hi Anio - Newbie here.  I tried to contact you via the link you provided, but the "Nous contacter" link on your website just takes me back to the top of the page.  Is there any other way to get your email address so that I can send you the money for the SSD instructions?

Great job on this MOC and on your other amazing models.  You and some of the other builders on this forum have inspired me to come out of my dark ages.  My first (very small) project is to customize the recent (green) Jedi interceptor to the four other colors (yellow, dk red, blue, and black - Darth Vader's) and to build matching hyperspace rings for them to be displayed in.  

Thanks!
Kevin