Is Technic usage in System sets good or bad?

[Zarkan]

As we all know, TLC has increased the ammount of Technic used in regular System sets, especially in certain themes. I've noticed that this is an issue many people here are divided about, so I decided to make this poll to see what everyone's opinion on current Technic usage is.

Personally, I don't care how much is in sets. Heavy technic usage in themes like Mars Mission and Starwars just doesn't seem to bother me much at all. I think TLC is using a bit too much in some sets, but it's not that big an issue to me - you're still building the kits, after all.

[The Cobra]

I voted 25% (as a max), because that includes small pieces too.

If the final result is good, why souldn't there be Technic pieces in city or castle or space sets?

[legotrainfan]

If there are up to 25% of technic pieces in system sets, I don't really care. I don't know the percentage for the train engine shed 10027, but some technic pieces were used for it. And I think the result of that usage is fantastic. I love that set. I don't think TLC uses too many technic pieces in system sets. So I voted "Not really."

[ProducePrincess]

I think the peices should not be in castle set but with city i think a few is fine and with space i dont really care. the main thing that annoys people i think is the large technic peices used in exoforce and racers because there really isnt another use for them.so for me technic beams are fine but im against larger tecnic peices. oh and i hate bionicle parts being used in sets but the ball joint bricks were amazingly useful

[CP5670]

For me, it all depends on how the Technic pieces are used. When combined with stud-based construction, Technic elements can make models exceptionally strong without being heavy. If they are used to add mechanical functionality like actual Technic models, then it's even better. On the other hand, if they lead to empty, hollow models with little stud-based building or possibilities for modification (which is an issue with several of the Mars Mission sets), then that's not a good thing.

Also, the fact that studded Technic bricks are common in other themes is itself a good thing, since most Technic sets themselves have hardly any studded bricks at all these days. That would normally have made it difficult to obtain such bricks for Technic MOCs, but since they're easy to come by elsewhere, they have remained common on Bricklink.

Edited November 1, 2008 by CP5670

[Skipper 24]

I noticed in Star wars but most of that is needed to create frames on large vehicles such as the AT-TE or to get functions to work like landing gears or bomb systems..

[brickzone]

I agree with CP5670's analysis, I think it's pretty spot on as to when technic in sets is good or bad. In general though, I would say that I'm pretty happy with how Lego incorporate technic into normal sets now more than in the past. I don't collect or build technic models, and yet it is most useful to have a supply of technic parts to hand for MoCing. Thanks to recent sets, I have that!

I think as well that it encourages Lego builders to use technic more, and I see this as only a good thing. I don't know how well it plays out with kids, but certainly it can only stimulate the engineering skills of the more resourceful kids. Considering how little encouragement there is in the education system (at least here in Ireland) for engineering, resourcefulness and serious technical thought, I think it is just as well for Lego to do their bit (even if just ordinary Lego system goes a long way in that regard).

[MoonCheese]

It depends on the theme, and how obvious the Technic elements are. Something like a 1*2 with 1 or 2 holes isn't gonna be a problem holding things together. However, I don't like when they use long Technic elements like 1*8 or 1*16 in themes like castle. The holes are too obvious and make it look all skeletal and made of some modern material. It works better in a futuristic theme, but it can still look bad...

[JimBee]

I voted 5% or less, because I just don't like Technic in my System sets. Some necessary pieces don't bother me much, such as a few pins. I voted 'not really' for the second question, as not many Technic pieces are found in the System sets, but there's always that occasional one with a lot. Overall, I'm pretty happy with the amount of Technic in the System sets.

[Phaz-Ing]

I think the technic usage in system sets is the ideal that LEGO should strive for. Technic is for 'experts' but, to be honest, it loses that 'artwork' charm of the system sets. The Hybrid is what makes the best sets work really well. Consider the V19 Torrent starfighter--i have to argue that (although I haven't built/opened it yet) it appears to be the best lego ever built (that i have bought). Its a beauty of both engineering and artwork. DROOL

So yes, technic usage in system sets is very good.

[GIR 3691]

I really love the little technic mechanisms sometimes in System sets. Most recent example I've seen is the side door mechanism on the RGS. Little things like that, or way back when a bunch of sets would have little trap doors. Those were my favorite things to build. Some technic is great, but totally technic frames with plates covering it shouldn't happen.

[Norro]

I wouldn't mind technique in addition to regular system pieces, but the way it is currently effecting the piece counts (especially mars mission) is annoying me. I understand it makes the set look bigger but that doesn't help me

Personally I have a tub of technique that is rapidly filling even though I never buy any specifically. It's a problem...

Great topic btw.

God Bless,

Nathan

[Buttons]

There is a similar topic here I, being a fan of technic am a bit biased but I would say the correct balance between system and technic is found in the Model team line .

[Skinny Boy]

There is a similar topic here I, being a fan of technic am a bit biased but I would say the correct balance between system and technic is found in the Model team line .

But that topic was started 4 days after this one .

I feel there isn't too much technic in system sets. Like what has been said, SW and MM have a good bit, but it belongs there. The combine harvester of next years City line, will have plenty in the framework of the harvesting blades, as we have seen.

[randomparrot]

I don't mind too much i prefer things brick built but sometimes to make something strong that doesn't break it needs some technic pieces But overall i'm not to fussed as long as it doesn't make the set look ugly.

[Inigo Montoya]

Anything that adds to the stability (i.e. playability) and look of the system is a good thing, technic or not.

If the set looks good, and plays well, what difference does it make if it has technic parts in it or not? It matters not one bit to me.

[Norro]

Anything that adds to the stability (i.e. playability) and look of the system is a good thing, technic or not.

If the set looks good, and plays well, what difference does it make if it has technic parts in it or not? It matters not one bit to me.

I assume from your comments that you are not considering the reuseability of the parts by a child to build something else part of the playability?

God Bless,

Nathan

[Zarkan]

I assume from your comments that you are not considering the reuseability of the parts by a child to build something else part of the playability?

God Bless,

Nathan

Who says Technic can't be used to build other things as well?

[Inigo Montoya]

I assume from your comments that you are not considering the reuseability of the parts by a child to build something else part of the playability?

God Bless,

Nathan

Why couldn't they be reused to build something else?

[Norro]

Who says Technic can't be used to build other things as well?

Why couldn't they be reused to build something else?

Please note my use of the word 'child'. Lego traditionally marketed technique to an older age range than system, as the pieces are transferred to system either system's age range should rise, children have become more inteligent in Lego's opinion, or alternate models are being built less frequently. The third option seems the most likely to me.

I have always admired technique but I think it is less inspiring in a pile on the floor for younger builders than system bricks...

God Bless,

Nathan

[Zarkan]

Please note my use of the word 'child'. Lego traditionally marketed technique to an older age range than system, as the pieces are transferred to system either system's age range should rise, children have become more inteligent in Lego's opinion, or alternate models are being built less frequently. The third option seems the most likely to me.

I have always admired technique but I think it is less inspiring in a pile on the floor for younger builders than system bricks...

God Bless,

Nathan

I think you do have a very good point there. Technic is generally geared for older children, and before recent years it didn't have much of a presence in System. I think it probably is a combination of reasons 2 and 3 - lego sets are in general becoming more complicated and complex, and alternate models are far and few between. Still, most themes don't really have that much technic in them IMO - aside from Mars Mission, that is.

[Asuka]

I agree with CP5670's analysis (...)

Same with me. If Technic´s increasing functionality and stability or´s giving us some smart features, yay.

If TLC´s using especially these darned studless beams just to make up for a large set with an impressive

box art picture at a modest price, nay. To MOD such blown up sets is just a pain in the a**.