Latest impact of other themes on historic themes

[Metanoios]

40 minutes ago, 1974 said:

They are cheap, they work and they come in 32x32 and bigger. And a lot of layouts depend on them

The new system with twice the height is not cool. You may ask all those Modular collectors if they think they're cool as well

The added height actually makes the sidewalks more realistic because most sidewalks in reality are elevated towards the street level. Also if you owned all 15 Modular Buildings you would only have to buy 15x4 + 2 (because of assembly square) = 62 Lego Arts plates. The current price on bricks and pieces is 4,20 € for them and EUR 3.36 (new Bricklink 6 months avg) and used only EUR 2.61. So if you were to update all 15 Modular Buildings you would have to pay between € 160 and 260. Prices would go down even more if they were released in more sets. Most collectors of the Modular Buildings obviously have no trouble spending >$ 150 every year for a Modular Building. So it is actually not that big of a deal to adopt the new system. Also it would be possible to display the old ones alongside the new because I know cities where the pavement elevation changes between street corners and with the new system lego could release an adapter brick to create a smooth transition between the two and include it in the next five modular releases and on bricks and pieces

Edited May 3, 2021 by Metanoios91

[Lord Insanity]

OK, baseplates are in system.  A baseplate resting directly on top of studs is exactly one normal plate high and can be built with accordingly.

Anyone that has built any sort of portable layout with multiple heavy sections that all line up to form a cohesive whole will know baseplates are essential.  They slide across tables, plywood, floors, and such without catching on anything.  Regular plates and bricks catch on everything and once you start making heavy sections of terrain, will usually crack and break where they catch rather than stopping.  If LEGO actually stops making baseplates people that make large portable layouts will buy third party ones by necessity.  20 years ago there were no quality alternatives, today there are.  I don't believe LEGO is so clueless they would hand their competitors sales like that.  The last thing LEGO wants is the general public seeing those giant layouts at conventions and shows and being told they need a foundation of third party products to make them possible.

[BaalTheBuilder]

Hmm with relatively light changes the new Friends 41683 Riding Stable in the Forest could fit beside the new 3-in-1 castle or inside an expanded moc of it as a castle stable. The blue roof and yellow wall coloring are close enough to that of the castle’s for me. Don’t like that set’s price though for considering that. And you definitely would want some proper horses!

[Wardancer]

The New City Lions will make fine chariots. There has always been this Elven Tiranoc Chariot in Warhammer which I wanted to recreate.

[Lyichir]

18 hours ago, 1974 said:

You have never build the Taj Mahal or the Robie House then?

I have in fact built the Taj Mahal. It's a very different build all in all than the Colosseum, with the base constructed more like a typical building rather than needing to have a raised "street level" encircling the below-ground section of the Colosseum. it's also VERY hard to pick up and move (the easiest way to do so is to separate it into its component "sections", something that would be obviously impractical for the hinged elliptical shape of the Colosseum which can't just be split into rectangular sections nearly as easily). It's plainly obvious that what worked for the Taj Mahal probably wouldn't have been the best solution for the Colosseum.

That's my point—not that baseplates are bad, but that they aren't a "one size fits all" solution that is ideal for any sort of set or build. Again, this discussion started with worries about the 4+ Mickey Mouse bases, which like the Art bases used for those sets or for the Colosseum, are designed for a particular purpose that has its own set of distinct considerations. Treating vacuum-formed baseplates as some unparalleled ideal just because that was used back in the day is a little silly.

[1974]

Which I don't. In fact I don't own any myself. But they do fill a gap in that I do not see standard plates, the new Technic bricks nor the new half-baked roadplates

They have worked in decades yes, they suddenly do not stop working just because TLG decides not to sell them anymore. In fact I'm prettu sure that'll just drive customers to the competing brands

 

[danth]

4 hours ago, Lyichir said:

Treating vacuum-formed baseplates as some unparalleled ideal just because that was used back in the day is a little silly.

Wow, you're still really good at the whole insulting strawman thing. No wonder people respond to you like this:

3 hours ago, 1974 said:

they suddenly do not stop working just because TLG decides not to sell them anymore.

Well said.

[MAB]

Sure they still work. But if LEGO thinks something else works better, then they will change and things may disappear. 

I remember as a kid that these were common baseplates for many of my builds 

They didn't warp anything like the thin baseplates of similar sizes and they could also be used within a build for upper floors unlike thin baseplates but they still eventually got phased out. I see the new base styles as the recently discovered descendants of these.

[Aanchir]

On 5/3/2021 at 4:33 PM, 1974 said:

Baseplates do not bend at all with bricks and plates above.

So you've never encountered an instance where the corners of modular buildings start to bend upward when the weight is distributed unevenly, as described here? Because from what I've seen, that's a pretty well-known issue, and is often brought up in modular building reviews and/or the comments of those reviews.

And adding a full layer of plates on top of a baseplate just to keep it from bending or warping pretty much renders the baseplate redundant — you could just as easily build your model on full-thickness plates WITHOUT baseplates underneath, just like the vast majority of LEGO sets 2012 (and many others long before that).

On 5/3/2021 at 5:09 PM, 1974 said:

They are cheap, they work and they come in 32x32 and bigger. And a lot of layouts depend on them

The new system with twice the height is not cool. You may ask all those Modular collectors if they think they're cool as well

Anyway, I don't use them and have sold all, I much prefer regular plates. But I still think TLG should keep them

Isn't the fact that you felt compelled to choose BETWEEN traditional baseplates and standard plates a pretty strong sign that baseplates are needlessly restrictive? This isn't a case of LEGO introducing incompatibility that wasn't there before. Rather, baseplates were ALWAYS less compatible with the rest of the LEGO system than standard plates — and now, LEGO is increasingly introducing options without those inconsistencies. In my opinion, that's a good thing.

To put it another way: If LEGO still used baseplates as widely today as they did in the 1980s, they'd still have the same compatibility issues with standard plates as they've always had — including in sets like 6080 and 6040 that were DESIGNED to be linked together.

Whereas if all LEGO sets had been built on standard-thickness plates (like the bases of all Friends, City, and Creator sets since 2012) and/or on double-thickness plates (like the 4+/Juniors bases and the new road system), those compatibility issues would never have existed in the first place — these types of bases can be linked together without any issues or any need for elaborate workarounds.

In other words, most of these compatibility issues are not the fault of these newer parts or systems, but rather of traditional baseplates for having a different thickness from the rest of the LEGO System in the first place.

To circle back to the topic of historic stuff… some of the new City Wildlife Rescue sets include 8x16 road plates in Sand Yellow and Dark Azure as mudflats and bodies of water. Both those parts could have similar uses in historic layouts!

[zoth33]

If you like baseplates use them if you don't then don't.  It's a pretty simple concept and trying to tell someone why you think they shouldn't use baseplates really doesn't make sense.  I like baseplates for some builds and regular plates for other to each there own and leave it at that if the man wants to use baseplates let him.  I mean people on here are literally telling someone what to do or think which is messed up.  

Those lions are going to be very useful.  The will make good mounts.  I wonder how they will look next to the wargs from LOTR/Hobbit.  

Edited May 5, 2021 by zoth33

[Lord Insanity]

20 minutes ago, zoth33 said:

.  Those lions are going to be very useful.  The will make good mounts.  I wonder how they will look next to the wargs from LOTR/Hobbit.  

The lions do not have "saddle cutouts" like the wargs do.  The lions do have 2 studs on top though.  It looks like the body itself is the same as the regular "big cat" mold.  Which makes perfect sense really.  Would be easy enough to hitch them to a chariot or wagon but they would look a little off for a straight up mount due to the lack of saddle compatibility.

[zoth33]

10 minutes ago, Lord Insanity said:

The lions do not have "saddle cutouts" like the wargs do.  The lions do have 2 studs on top though.  It looks like the body itself is the same as the regular "big cat" mold.  Which makes perfect sense really.  Would be easy enough to hitch them to a chariot or wagon but they would look a little off for a straight up mount due to the lack of saddle compatibility.

There are some ideas out there to get around that.  I will be experimenting once I get some.  

 

[Rockstaremcee]

2 hours ago, zoth33 said:

If you like baseplates use them if you don't then don't.  It's a pretty simple concept and trying to tell someone why you think they shouldn't use baseplates really doesn't make sense.  I like baseplates for some builds and regular plates for other to each there own and leave it at that if the man wants to use baseplates let him.  I mean people on here are literally telling someone what to do or think which is messed up.  

Those lions are going to be very useful.  The will make good mounts.  I wonder how they will look next to the wargs from LOTR/Hobbit.  

Exactly, LEGO is so broad and diverse now, you make it how you want it.  Personally, my current city modular shelves all have road plates on base plates. I'm sure it will change many times in just the next year lol.

2 hours ago, Lord Insanity said:

The lions do not have "saddle cutouts" like the wargs do.  The lions do have 2 studs on top though.  It looks like the body itself is the same as the regular "big cat" mold.  Which makes perfect sense really.  Would be easy enough to hitch them to a chariot or wagon but they would look a little off for a straight up mount due to the lack of saddle compatibility.

I'm very excited for the Lions also!

[1974]

9 hours ago, Aanchir said:

So you've never encountered an instance where the corners of modular buildings start to bend upward when the weight is distributed unevenly, as described here? Because from what I've seen, that's a pretty well-known issue, and is often brought up in modular building reviews and/or the comments of those reviews.

And adding a full layer of plates on top of a baseplate just to keep it from bending or warping pretty much renders the baseplate redundant — you could just as easily build your model on full-thickness plates WITHOUT baseplates underneath, just like the vast majority of LEGO sets 2012 (and many others long before that).

Isn't the fact that you felt compelled to choose BETWEEN traditional baseplates and standard plates a pretty strong sign that baseplates are needlessly restrictive? This isn't a case of LEGO introducing incompatibility that wasn't there before. Rather, baseplates were ALWAYS less compatible with the rest of the LEGO system than standard plates — and now, LEGO is increasingly introducing options without those inconsistencies. In my opinion, that's a good thing.

To put it another way: If LEGO still used baseplates as widely today as they did in the 1980s, they'd still have the same compatibility issues with standard plates as they've always had — including in sets like 6080 and 6040 that were DESIGNED to be linked together.

Whereas if all LEGO sets had been built on standard-thickness plates (like the bases of all Friends, City, and Creator sets since 2012) and/or on double-thickness plates (like the 4+/Juniors bases and the new road system), those compatibility issues would never have existed in the first place — these types of bases can be linked together without any issues or any need for elaborate workarounds.

In other words, most of these compatibility issues are not the fault of these newer parts or systems, but rather of traditional baseplates for having a different thickness from the rest of the LEGO System in the first place.

To circle back to the topic of historic stuff… some of the new City Wildlife Rescue sets include 8x16 road plates in Sand Yellow and Dark Azure as mudflats and bodies of water. Both those parts could have similar uses in historic layouts!

The trick is to lift the building not grab the baseplate by the edges

When I'm talking about baseplates, I don't only mean the plain ones, but also road, space and crater plates. There are really no substitute for those unless you build something yourself. And takes a metric ton of parts. Kids do not have that

Yeah, 6080 should never have sat on baseplates, quite a blunder there

I got rid of mine (+200) because I had to scale down. If I still had the space I would still use them

It's been a few years since I was a LEGO exhibition/LEGO World but I do remember seeing vast amounts of baseplates, roadplates and yons of blue plates used in pirate layouts. Can't really see that being replaced with standard plates, especially since there are NO new fancy roads with turns (wtf TLG?) and 16x16 blue plaets are rather hard to come by in massive numbers

Anyway, let's just agree to disagree

[Metanoios]

Question to @danth , @Lord Insanity and all those that still think Lego should stick with the old baseplates: Do you still use Windows 95 or an old Nokia mobile phone by any chance? Because those were the hot shit when they came out in the 90s. The best technical solution ever. Think about that fact: Lego sold the baseplate system to you at least ten times longer than any of the aforementioned systems were even on the market (3 years till Windows 98 and the baseplate is more than 30 years on the market). Things change. New solutions are developed. If people clamored to their flip phones or Win 95 like you do to baseplates we never would have gotten touchscreens or better computers. We would still be stuck with Windows 95 because how could there be anything better than that 800x600 pixel graphical desktop with the first ever taskbar, am I right? Just look at those crisp 480 pixel images.  I think it is ok, if Lego slightly alters or updates their product platform, like roadplates or baseplates every 20 years or so. Which is still a remarkable long shelf-life for a product compared with other brands or technical products.

 

[1974]

The (modern) 2x4 3001 LEGO brick is +60 years old. Do you want it updated? If not, why?

[TeriXeri]

I personally have no issue if LEGO retires baseplates, but then again I have no table layout, and the 16 wide roads are better for shelves. (I don't have custom shelves)

I'm talking from a single-set perspective here, where regular plates can offer a lot more in terms of shapes/variation compared to a 32x32 or 16x32 (that is, if a set would come with a good amount of plates instead ,of equal or near equal ground area)

 

But I 100% can understand people with large layouts to be affected, it's a very different situation from a single set.

 

I don't have the Roller Coaster, but that set has a huge ground area, yet LEGO chose regular plates there.

Barracuda Bay is lovely and if they just kept it on baseplates like the original submission I think the island mode wouldn't be as dynamic, and right now those large blue plates can be used for much more, and the 45 degree corners wouldn't be possible.

Raised Baseplates looked quite interesting, I only had one via the Islanders theme back then, but right now , especially for Castles, I see them more as a limitation, and not a benefit, but I prefer the ability to hinge walls over a static hill.

Yellow Castle and King's Castle were on baseplates, regular plates 8x8/8x16/16x16 didn't exist, but looking at Knight's Castle, or Black Falcon's fortress, LEGO did use regular plates, almost seems to me that LEGO always preferered using regular plates where possible.

Looking at 1584: Knight's Challenge , which uses both green baseplate (8x24), and smaller regular plates, since the baseplate was already in production, and the build is 8 wide, it does make sense to use the baseplate there.

8x16 regular plate didn't exist until 2011, 6x16 was the largest plate for the longest time, and that part has been in use for 55 years by now.

Many late 1999, to early 2000s sets were on 8x16 Bricks in themes like Ninja/Castle/Harry Potter.

 

 

Edited May 5, 2021 by TeriXeri

[Metanoios]

59 minutes ago, 1974 said:

The (modern) 2x4 3001 LEGO brick is +60 years old. Do you want it updated? If not, why?

Actually Lego has released around a few hundred updates and variations of that brick over these 60 years already. You know them as the 6249 Brick Modified 2 x 4 with Pins, 3709c  LegoBrick, Modified 2 x 4 with Top/Side/End Holes with Solid Studs, 18892 LegoBrick, Modified 2 x 4 with Wheels Holder with 2 x 2 Cutout and Hole, 6232 Brick, Modified 2 x 2 with Pin and Axle Hole, the 1x4 ... (just go wild in the Brick modified section in Bricklink https://www.bricklink.com/catalogList.asp?pg=2&catString=7&catType=P ) .

Some of those moulds have long been retired, some are still in production.

Maybe it helps if you see the new baseplate design (like the 16x16 Art technic plate or the new road plates), just as new moulds that add to the diversity of the overall Lego system. The baseplates were a part, that was used a long time. But as so many other part moulds the baseplate is retired some day (I know that technically it is vaccuum-formed and not a traditional moulded element, but nonetheless it's a lego piece like any other). It might even come back one day. Even the solution after the old baseplate may face the same fate and will also be retired in 10 or 20 years and be replaced. Maybe in the future we can then sharpen our pitchforks together and fight the young rascals on the Holonet 5.7, that dare to question the superiority and usefulness of the Arts technic plate  

Edited May 5, 2021 by Metanoios91

[1974]

Those wariations are pointless. You wanna stack a bunch of 3001s to create a building, what good is one with pins? No need to go with the BL cat, I got that practially memorized

The actual 3001 brick has looked like that for ages because it just works

Too much diversity means diluting. TLG have produced tons of crap that aren't much use today. And on the other end they've produced too little of some parts/colours to be actually usefull in MOCing. Go ask the Technic MOC'ers about that

My point is there is NO point in retiring the base AND roadplates. It's just because TLG wants to and right now they haven't even gotten a decent alternative. It's impossible for a kid to make up a decent town unless (s)he buys quite expensive sets and only drives the vehicles in straight line . There is no water for the ships. no crater plates for the space stuff and so on

"But you can just buy 16x16 plates on BL" is definitely not the answer

 

[TeriXeri]

38 minutes ago, 1974 said:

My point is there is NO point in retiring the base AND roadplates. It's just because TLG wants to and right now they haven't even gotten a decent alternative. It's impossible for a kid to make up a decent town unless (s)he buys quite expensive sets and only drives the vehicles in straight line . There is no water for the ships. no crater plates for the space stuff and so on

LEGO does try to sell gimmicky products like the Road and River Tape, such weird products  Do they really expect a kid to stick it on their floor like they suggest?

It's cheaper compared to City road plate sets (it offers 15 meters of road/water) , but still a very questionable product.

I'm not saying the product is entirely useless, but for a LEGO product it's a bit odd, personally the main thing I could see a use for it, would be to have a smaller road or river decoration on a shelf space, for a floor space, there are much larger non-lego alternative playmats.

Cardboard Road/Water/Grass 32x32 sized playmats were also tried in the last few years, but those already retired rather quick.

Sorry for going too offtopic (Historic Forum).

Edited May 5, 2021 by TeriXeri

[DaleDVM]

I am sorry.  I just want to note that people are comparing LEGO parts to software and cell phones?  I suppose since LEGO bricks are older than baseplates we should stop using them as well?  I don't discount your opinion, but the logic of this argument is faulty.  

I speak from VAST experience.  Both baseplates and plates have VITAL uses.  There is literally no need for a debate.  If TLG stops using baseplates altogether (as reported) it will hinder their fans in the future, especially those of us that build BIG.  My full castle display is 30 baseplates x 4 baseplates.  That is, 120 baseplates holding together around 500,000 pieces.  Yes, there are tons of plates stacked on top of the baseplates, However, I added the plates more for aesthetic reasons.  The fact that they add stability and tie the baseplates together is important as well. 

The display sits on plywood.  If the base was made of plates/bricks it would still sit on plywood, but it would be much much much MORE fragile.  Over time, moving such a large display to shows all over North America, if the base was made up of plates/bricks it would separate by tiny little amounts every move because of their own inflexibility.  I would constantly have to push the display back together.  How do I know?  Due to large vertical variations in the display, I have sections of my display that are built solely on plates and large lego base bricks.  Like most MOCs baseplates can only be found in the bottom most layer of my display.  The upper large structures suffer much more from slowly separating than I ever see down at the baseplate level even though you would think the bricks/plates would be more sturdy.   

There is one thing that is just as hard as putting large plates onto baseplates.  That is stacking large plates on top of each other and getting them fully attached to one another.  

The integrity the baseplates add to a build is lateral, not vertical.  And that is what is essential for very large MOCs.  The large surface area of a 32x32 baseplate means a large 40" x 40" (1m x 1m) section has only 16 baseplates that need to be bound together.  The vertical integrity is provided by the plywood, which is never even seen at a show.  There is literally nothing that TLG could ever produce that will provide stability like the wood does because it is cut to size and perfectly fits the display.  It doesn't bend and is one solid piece.  

Finally as mentioned already.  Baseplates can be moved onto wood smoothly.  Plates/bricks catch at every imperfection.  When driving, the display does move slightly on the wood base.  Without the baseplates at the bottom the display would tear itself apart.  

I just went and counted how many baseplates I have for the second half of my display.  I have over 100 and can't believe I need to start buying more because I don't want to be left short next year after they are discontinued.  On the plus side, my hundreds of baseplates will go up greatly in value!

[MAB]

1 hour ago, 1974 said:

My point is there is NO point in retiring the base AND roadplates. It's just because TLG wants to and right now they haven't even gotten a decent alternative. It's impossible for a kid to make up a decent town unless (s)he buys quite expensive sets and only drives the vehicles in straight line . There is no water for the ships. no crater plates for the space stuff and so on

It is simple to construct corners with the modern road system. So they don't have to drive only in a straight line. And that works fine for grid based cities. Of course there are no smooth curves (at least yet). And even with curved road baseplates, the curves were all 90 degrees to fit into a square based system so it is not that big a change.

Although do kids really care about roads anyway? My kids tend to prefer buildings, then just move cars around the buildings pretending where roads are (or drawing them on the back of wallpaper on the floor). And in that sense, I'd prefer they separated the new road system from building sets like the old road plates used to be separate.

[1974]

Yes they do. They do like those curved corners. All kids 'cept those in TLG's focus groups

Those tape rolls are retarded. An idea that shoud be found in the darkest corners of Wish, but no, it's an official TLG product!

So DaleDVM, tell me how do you like those baseplates?

 

Edited May 5, 2021 by 1974

[Metanoios]

1 hour ago, DaleDVM said:

The integrity the baseplates add to a build is lateral, not vertical.  And that is what is essential for very large MOCs.  The large surface area of a 32x32 baseplate means a large 40" x 40" (1m x 1m) section has only 16 baseplates that need to be bound together.  The vertical integrity is provided by the plywood, which is never even seen at a show.  There is literally nothing that TLG could ever produce that will provide stability like the wood does because it is cut to size and perfectly fits the display.  It doesn't bend and is one solid piece.  
 

You add some valid points that I do not negate. In fact I mentioned your exact technique with plywood in previous posts. But answer me this question: How do you fasten or fixate the baseplates to the plywood? Do you drill through some of them to use screws? Or are they just resting on the wood? Once you lift or transport the display in a car, how do you make sure that the whole baseplate assembly doesn't slide off the plywood in the case of sudden braking or if a friend, who helps you lift the plywood, suddenly slips and one side angles down?

The Art technic plates offer a new mould that allows them be mounted to walls. A slight modification of that brick could be used to fasten these plates to plywood. So in my eyes there is at least one thing that TLG can do to improve your plywood display solution.

One point I want to add that was implied in my previous post, but could be clearer. Your 120 baseplates suddenly don't stop existing, once Lego doesn't produce them anymore. You will always have those and noone is forcing you to replace them. The new solution is a supplement to the system not a destruction of the system as a whole. And the comparison to computers and mobile phones is fitting because the argument is about a progressive vs. a conservative mindset (not in a poltical sense, but about how one perceives change, which is an inevitable force both in nature and human culture). The argument is that some (with a conservative mindset) want one solution to be everlasting and overlook it's shortcomings in the favor of a feeling of security and consistency. The other person (progressive) perceives change and iterations as necessary to come ever closer to an ideal solution that can't be envisioned directly. In the case of computers or software these iterations and changes are fast and ever moving and accepted by most, because to write me this message you were most certainly not using a typewriter. Although concepts of the typewriter still endure to this day in the layout of your keyboard. In the case of the lego system we have a huge variety of interconnecting pieces that are used to create anything. The 1x4 brick endures because it still has uses today like the concept of the typewriter in your keyboard. But similar to the typewriter and computers the initial idea and concept of the 1x4 bricks has been expanded by 1000 of new pieces that are all equally useful and complement each other. The evolution of the system continues. A conservative mindset gets easily stuck at one development stage, but with a progressive mindset we reach the variety of solutions we have at our disposal today.

Edited May 5, 2021 by Metanoios91

[1974]

Things can co-exist you know. Many brand new ideas are great on paper but suck in real life. I mean, we're not all riding Segways are we?

We're not luddites for prefering to walk

The 3001 works just fine with just about any new part TLG makes, that do not mean they'll dump the 3001

I really do not think your analogies are working, heck the keyboard just about everyone is using is NOT good, due the QWERTY heritage of the mechanical keyboard. Much better designs are around, but because of the familiarity, ease of use and simply QWERTY just works. Just like baseplates. They'll keep being around as long as there is a demand. They'll just not be from TLG in the future

 

Edited May 5, 2021 by 1974