Question about LDD and Older Official Lego Sets

[moop2000]

So I've been working on creating some official Lego sets in LDD, and was wondering something. Is it better for the results to be completely accurate to the instructions, forgoing missing pieces, or is it better to make something that looks aesthetically similar to the instructions. For some of those older pieces and older sets, I'm just not quite sure which would be better. What's the general conciseness? I'd love to hear people's opinion on this, and if need be, can provide specific examples for my question.

[Brickdoctor]

I think it depends on the piece. If it's a piece that really determines the look of the set, I think it works better to construct an alternative.

[Calabar]

Personally, I prefer a good custom replacement.

Besides in some cases missing parts causes the set to be indexed as "incomplete" (for example, if any minifig missing).

Nothing prevent you to create an alternative version, however.

For example you can provide a complete lxf file with custom bricks and pertinent modifies to fit that in the model as main lxf, than provide a secondary link to a "clear" model, without custom solutions.

[Superkalle]

Whatever you chose to do, I think it's important that you make a clear note in your post which pieces where omitted or replaced by custom parts. The reasons for this is that if the missing pieces show up in future LDD versions, it's easier to know which parts can then be added/replaced.

[moop2000]

I appreciate the replies. For some pieces, I am skipping them, but some I am using a replacement. I think I'll continue using replacement pieces. One thing I have done, besides noting the replacements, is also creating subgroups for the replacement pieces. It makes it a lot easier when typing everything up.