x105Black

LEGO Pet Peeves

Recommended Posts

On 03/03/2018 at 11:20 PM, FunWithBricks said:

Amazing. Is it easy to get all the excess liquid and air bubbles out? It must be just a tiny, eenie weenie bit of liquid, right?

You want to use the least amount of Windolene that you can. I apply it with a cotton bud so the brick is only just wet. The excess liquid and bubbles are easily pressed out. Once the sticker is firmly pressed down, the sticker and part can be gently dabbed with a tissue which will soak up any extra fluid.

Apologies to the OP for the digression into sticker placing tips. :blush:  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 03/03/2018 at 11:20 PM, FunWithBricks said:

 

I was thinking about this. Does it mostly just annoy you when it is a UCS set, or do sticker bricks annoy you a little in general too? 
Do many around here dislike sticker bricks? 
How about those who MOC a lot? I'd imagine that sticker bricks would be better than printed, seeing as there would be more variety of options, as in, you can always take the sticker off the brick or even put a new MOC sticker, but it's more hassle to take printing off a printed brick, so it feels more uni-porpose. 

Haha, yes. Yes indeed.

 

Amazing. Is it easy to get all the excess liquid and air bubbles out? It must be just a tiny, eenie weenie bit of liquid, right?

problem with stickers for me, is it then limits me to washing entire built sets in hot soapy water when I'm cleaning my collection.

Set 8860 for example, a really old technic set from 1980 can just be dunked into hot water with soap, left for 30 - 60 mins, removed and then brushed with a toothbrush, hair dried and good to go, dust free sparkling clean, my latest UCS set a snow speeder, good luck dunking that in water and not seeing the stickers float off - that annoys me more. Pros and Cons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, iv-tecman said:

problem with stickers for me, is it then limits me to washing entire built sets in hot soapy water when I'm cleaning my collection.

Set 8860 for example, a really old technic set from 1980 can just be dunked into hot water with soap, left for 30 - 60 mins, removed and then brushed with a toothbrush, hair dried and good to go, dust free sparkling clean, my latest UCS set a snow speeder, good luck dunking that in water and not seeing the stickers float off - that annoys me more. Pros and Cons.

That's a very good point. Also, with buying old and used sets, it makes the process of cleaning more... well, stressful is probably the wrong word, but yeah, as you phrased it, it is limiting.

@AmperZand Thank you, I'm rather looking forward to trying that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 02/03/2018 at 3:13 PM, AmperZand said:

As a yellowist, I would be perfectly happy if minifigure torsos had neither fleshy nor yellowy neck-lines. Some designs such as those with considerable decolletage can't help but be one or the other. But for a lot of torsos, there is no need to show skin at the neck. Exposed neck-lines only serve to reduce the versatility of those parts.

With regards to forum/AFOL community peeves, the notion that minifigure collecting (or MOCing with a focus on minifigures) is somehow a lower form of AFOLdom really gets my goat. For example, for a long time on these forums, a thread that was purely about minifigures - even if they were purist, had absolutely no customisation and were themed (e.g. Star Wars or historical) - was relegated to the minifigure customisation forum. An interest in minifigures was deemed, and still is by some, lesser to 'proper' LEGO MOCing and collecting. :angry:   

Agree on both counts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for all of the responses.

None of these things are anything to get too bent out of shape over.  These are just gripes.  And I agree with many of the additional gripes posted here (no flesh neck lines is one of them).

Here's another pet peeve, but this one is more about the community aspect of LEGO and the forums:

Kid's Toy - I think that everyone here knows and understands completely that LEGO is primarily a toy intended for kids.  I'm getting very tired of that being used in an argument against voicing my opinion about what I would like to see, and what kinds of sets would appeal to me.  There is a large and thriving adult community of LEGO fans, and even if we are a small fraction of the overall market, we exist and should be free to speak our minds.  It's hard enough when adults get criticized by those outside of the LEGO fandom for enjoying a children's toy, one would think that it wouldn't need to be mentioned among other adult fans.
"LEGO isn't going to cater to AFOLs, it's a kid's toy.  Children are the primary audience.  They are going to make what will sell to kids."

What else grinds your gears?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok. So I admit, I do call them LEGOs from time to time, because I grew up saying LEGOs. It doesn't bother me too much now. The part number thing gets under my skin SO much. I wouldn't go on a rant or anything, but it bothers me. Another is when someone calls something like Mega Bloks LEGO. A fourth is when I am displaying something, and someone will say "Is that a kit?" or "Is that for sale?" It just bothers me. I guess it is a pride thing. So those are a few things that bother me.

                                                 -Legostarwars1425

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I called them 'legos' during my kid years (not anymore), only because that's what my parents called them (and still do).

Part numbers: Yes, a number w/o a picture or link is a real bummer. I'll leave the thread if I cannot understand what is being discussed otherwise. Same goes for set numbers. At least, give the name of the part or set in question.

I have gotten the "Is that a set?" question a few times; it does not really bother me. Maybe because it seldom happens.

The real shame is calling clone brands 'legos'. Do the same people call all computers 'IBMs', all cars 'fords' and all toilet paper 'charmin'? In some parts of the USA, all fizzy drinks are called 'coke', regardless of brand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@x105Black

Whilst I'd generally agree with you about the part and set number thing, I will say that in the Bricks and pieces thread a number is much more useful than a picture or a description, but of course I'd prefer all three.

And whilst it isn't a Lego related pet peeve I see it on the forum so I'll mention it, it is when people treat the following words as synonymous : far, very, much, quite, such and mega.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, splatman said:

.The real shame is calling clone brands 'legos'. Do the same people call all computers 'IBMs', all cars 'fords' and all toilet paper 'charmin'? In some parts of the USA, all fizzy drinks are called 'coke', regardless of brand.

They probably call their vacuum cleaner a "Hoover",  their sticky notes "Post-its" and say that they are "Googling" something even if they are using Yahoo. Just like a lot of people. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. odd colors buried inside sets

Example, the new Speed Champions Mustang.  It's really nice, except it's got two 1x1 bricks in medium blue in the rear.  Why.  They don't match anything else.  And I barely have any of that color, not enough to really build with.  They're neat parts, but next to useless.

2. hardcore zealous purists, though it's more funny than annoying

WAAH, THAT IS NOT LEGO! aw, relax, it's mostly Lego, I just stuck a couple Gudi parts on top of the certified genuine lego brand legos

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, splatman said:

The real shame is calling clone brands 'legos'. Do the same people call all computers 'IBMs', all cars 'fords' and all toilet paper 'charmin'? In some parts of the USA, all fizzy drinks are called 'coke', regardless of brand.

If it upsets you, use a 'Kleenex' tissue...

:wink:

44 minutes ago, Agent Kallus said:

Whilst I'd generally agree with you about the part and set number thing, I will say that in the Bricks and pieces thread a number is much more useful than a picture or a description, but of course I'd prefer all three.

Fair enough, but without even a simple description I have to go track it down to see what people are talking about.  Half the time, it's a waste of my time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Space Police XVIII said:

1. odd colors buried inside sets

Example, the new Speed Champions Mustang.  It's really nice, except it's got two 1x1 bricks in medium blue in the rear.  Why.  They don't match anything else.  And I barely have any of that color, not enough to really build with.  They're neat parts, but next to useless.

 

I understand what you're peeve is but that is a bad example, since it only comes in 3 colours anyway light blue, tan and black. Apparently they had a bunch in light blue laying around. 

As small as those parts are and as few as there are, it doesn't bother me that much, though I'd rather have the black ones. 

Actually think it might be sand blue, starting to get quite a few in my collection of that colour, happily. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/16/2018 at 4:25 PM, x105Black said:

Kid's Toy - I think that everyone here knows and understands completely that LEGO is primarily a toy intended for kids.  I'm getting very tired of that being used in an argument against voicing my opinion about what I would like to see, and what kinds of sets would appeal to me.  There is a large and thriving adult community of LEGO fans, and even if we are a small fraction of the overall market, we exist and should be free to speak our minds.  It's hard enough when adults get criticized by those outside of the LEGO fandom for enjoying a children's toy, one would think that it wouldn't need to be mentioned among other adult fans.
"LEGO isn't going to cater to AFOLs, it's a kid's toy.  Children are the primary audience.  They are going to make what will sell to kids."

Maybe its their way of saying that one can build what they want right now, what's the point in constantly espousing what one wants Lego to build for them?

The toy has nearly innumerable connection possibilities, surely whatever one is posting about wanting Lego to make can be created right now by oneself utilizing the several thousand presently available piece/color combinations. Its not like Lego is a human being that's walking around the forums, reading, listening, nodding "yessss" and ready to satisfy those posted desires.

Maybe stop waiting and wishing for Lego to sell you heaven and instead try and MOCreate heaven yourself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Space Police XVIII said:

1. odd colors buried inside sets

Example, the new Speed Champions Mustang.  It's really nice, except it's got two 1x1 bricks in medium blue in the rear.  Why.  They don't match anything else.  And I barely have any of that color, not enough to really build with.  They're neat parts, but next to useless.

As I understand it, that is to make the instructions clearer when a mass of the same colour would make everything just blend into one. Creator Expert instead outlines things in yellow. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Kalahari134 said:

As I understand it, that is to make the instructions clearer when a mass of the same colour would make everything just blend into one. Creator Expert instead outlines things in yellow. 

Yepp. That might make sense in bigger builds. But in a 6-wide car? Well... a bit overkill if you ask me :laugh:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, Capparezza said:

Yepp. That might make sense in bigger builds. But in a 6-wide car? Well... a bit overkill if you ask me :laugh:

Well in this instance the part doesn't exist in the models predominant color, so

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, koalayummies said:

Maybe its their way of saying that one can build what they want right now, what's the point in constantly espousing what one wants Lego to build for them?

The toy has nearly innumerable connection possibilities, surely whatever one is posting about wanting Lego to make can be created right now by oneself utilizing the several thousand presently available piece/color combinations. Its not like Lego is a human being that's walking around the forums, reading, listening, nodding "yessss" and ready to satisfy those posted desires.

Maybe stop waiting and wishing for Lego to sell you heaven and instead try and MOCreate heaven yourself.

I completely understand what you are saying, but new sets make some pieces more available and provide minifigures.  Those are things I can't always accomplish myself in a MOC.

In fact, this is another pet peeve of mine:

- Make it Yourself - When people talk about what sets they want LEGO to produce, they are often told to simply build it for themselves.  This is not always possible because of limited part availability.  This also ignores the minifigures aspect of new sets.

"If you want a new castle so much, make it yourself!"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Johnny1360 said:

Actually think it might be sand blue, starting to get quite a few in my collection of that colour, happily. 

1

It's medium blue, as used in the carousel.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, MAB said:
4 minutes ago, MAB said:

It's medium blue, as used in the carousel.

 

 

Oops, sorry for spreading misinformation. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, x105Black said:

I completely understand what you are saying, but new sets make some pieces more available and provide minifigures.  Those are things I can't always accomplish myself in a MOC.

In fact, this is another pet peeve of mine:

- Make it Yourself - When people talk about what sets they want LEGO to produce, they are often told to simply build it for themselves.  This is not always possible because of limited part availability.  This also ignores the minifigures aspect of new sets.

"If you want a new castle so much, make it yourself!"

That's in fact what many find so enjoyable and creatively stimulating about Lego, the limitation of the medium inherently forces one to get creative in making what they want. If one wants true representational perfection then there are better more accurately depictive mediums like hobby scale modeling, drawing, painting and digital rendering. The parts currently available are hardly limited, if what one wants requires new special one-off limited-use molds to achieve convincing accurate portrayal then that's plenty of other fan's peeves; the parts lacking in cross-theme or other-than box-art-application versatility yet requiring a new five to six figure mold and special printing or sticker, it can basically only ever be the one thing its meant to be. And I don't think it ignores minifigures, there are plenty who are piecing together their own figures with the thousands of available prints, colors, faces, hats, accessories and hair available, minifigure customization, third party accessory and printing.

That idea of the minifigure as the core and an absolute necessity of Lego is other fan's 'pet peeve' as well, that Lego has become less about actually building and more a vessel for selling minifigures 

None of these are necessarily my view but rather often posted by other fans.

Don't take this the wrong way I'm not disagreeing with you, one can voice their desires for what they want Lego to make all they want. But while on the subject of AFOL community there are a great number of posts that are basically identical cloned opines as if being said by a group of robots. That's probably why the responses to those comments are often so similar as well. Maybe just ignore those responses, like how I ignore those telling other people not to say "Legos" (for the stated reason that its technically incorrect) while watching those same people say "bley" (despite that being technically incorrect as well). We can solve what grinds our gears through ignoring.:sweet:

Edited by koalayummies

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, koalayummies said:

That's in fact what many find so enjoyable and creatively stimulating about Lego, the limitation of the medium inherently forces one to get creative in making what they want. If one wants true representational perfection then there are better more accurately depictive mediums like hobby scale modeling, drawing, painting and digital rendering. The parts currently available are hardly limited, .... And I don't think it ignores minifigures, there are plenty who are piecing together their own figures with the thousands of available prints, colors, faces, hats, accessories and hair available, minifigure customization, third party accessory and printing.

 

6

I get the "build it yourself" view and think it is OK to say it if it is in relation to a build. Often what AFOLs want would never be produced commercially, since it would (i) cost too much, as anyone that has MOC'ed a large display will know, and (ii) wouldn't have the market anyway. Plus we have so many pieces available in so many colours, just about anything can be built. Although it may cost a lot of effort.

However, I don't get it with minifigures. Minifigures are so specialised these days, that it is impossible to MOC them to the same standard as existing ones, especially for licensed themes. Take LOTR. Of course, it is relatively easy to MOC someone like Eowyn or Faramir from existing pieces and they will look quite good. A Gondor soldier can also be MOC'ed but they wouldn't have quite the right shape helmet. For some, that is a big deal, for others not so much. They also wouldn't have the correct armour, with the Tree of Gondor on the breast plates. Again, for some that is not an issue, for others it will be. However, a Gondor soldier like that would not look as good as a "real" one, he also wouldn't look as good as, say, Aragorn with his tree printing when standing next to him. One would be movie accurate, the other wouldn't. It's possible to get OK, if not quite right. Even worse are characters like The Witch King, where very specific headgear is needed. Sure he can be MOC'ed and just wear a black hood and look like the other Nazgul, but he looks poor in comparison to, say, the Mouth of Sauron where the movie accurate head gear exists.

It is not such an issue for non-licensed themes where things don't have to look license accurate but even so, I can understand wanting more factions, or continuity of heraldry across armour, flags, banners, etc. Although, of course, it is unlikely that LEGO would release large numbers of factions at once like many AFOLs want, especially in multiple ranks / styles within a faction, and there would be complaints either way - too many factions with too few ranks or too many ranks with too few factions. Or just the wrong factions. Or the right ones but the wrong colours.

20 minutes ago, koalayummies said:

That idea of the minifigure as the core and an absolute necessity of Lego is other fan's 'pet peeve' as well, that Lego has become less about actually building and more a vessel for selling minifigures 

 

2

In some sense, for some (many?) themes it has. SW, SH, LOTR, ... all those licensed themes have collectors of just the minifigures. Although all those themes also have collectors of the sets too. And kids that like playing with them and others that will break the sets up and add them to their buckets. And some people that like the builds and not the figures. The same is true of non-licensed themes too though. You only need to take a look at the "show us your army" thread to see that. Some people like the non-licensed minifigures compared to the building.

I'm not actually sure that the fact that some people are just minifigure collectors and not builders is an issue, no more than people that collect sealed boxes vs builders, or set builders vs MOC builders,  and so on. It is not like LEGO only cater for just one group, the minifigure collectors, at the expense of the other. There are large numbers of sets available for builders. I could understand it if LEGO stopped doing brick-building sets and concentrated on minifigures, but they haven't. Some may complain that the builds are affected since the minifigure is the star and the build is just there to increase the price (which again is probably partly true). However, the build probably wouldn't exist, at least at a builders point of view scale, if it wasn't for the minifigures. It is rare that LEGO make something where the build is the star (for a licensed movie theme), simply because often it is the characters that are the stars of the movies. In SW, some of the ships are the stars too, and this is catered for in the UCS series. In some cases the build is the star in the SH range too - however, those sets tend to be high priced and would not exist if not for the smaller sets in the theme that sell in their 100s to kids for every one large set sold. Some will complain the builds are non-existent / too small / too kid focussed but this is necessarily so, without them, the large sets would not exist. Then there are the non-licensed themes aimed at builders, the modulars for example are hardly about the minifigures rather than the build.

I also find collecting minifigures can inspire building too. Up to about Series 12 of the CMF series, I used to make an 8x8 vignette for every minifigure. No matter what they were, I took inspiration from the figure. In that sense, the minifigure can inspire creativity in the building side, if the builder wants it too.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are many available minifigures and pieces, but LEGO releases more and more every year.  There is also a cost factor, however, that prevents many people from being able to get some existing parts (animals, for example).

When it comes to pieces, there have been some great new pieces introduced in the last few years that have not been in many sets or in many colors.  While I typically use Bricklink or Bricks & Pieces to obtain them, it would be great to see them used more in new sets.

When it comes to minifigures, a very similar point could be made.  There is also the fact that more and more detail is appearing on the minifigures these days than in the past.  There are more great prints that cover more of the body, like the side of the leg and arms.  There is dual molding on arms and legs, which is still fairly limited in availability.  There are many more color combinations that would be great to see.  So many would like more minifigures to keep up a modern standard in their armies.

So while there are myriad parts and minifigures to pillage for builds, there are still areas that could be improved upon.  Until that is done, simply building what one wants to see is not really a possibility.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The short version of "my two cents" is this: the "built it yourself" crowd must have a lot more time and money than me.

The longer answer is: I do build things myself, and I want to keep building things myself, but there are certain things that don't fit into the category of things I can build myself, with the bricks I have (or minimal ordering), that TLG couldn't do a lot more cost effectively than I could.  LEGO sets aren't perfect - and I've been known to do a lot of modding, and it makes much better use of my time and money.  On top of that, some people just aren't good at it - our minds just don't work the same way, so getting official sets and building up around them (like fleshing out a town from some houses and modulars) is what we enjoy doing.

There's also no decent access to bulk new parts - just basic bricks of single colors, like gray for castle, or any color for a specific building you might have in mind.  Not the after market, and certainly not from TLG.  How much does it cost to build something like the Ghost Busters HQ from scratch rather than from a set?

I'm not whining about it - just stating it how I see it.  Over time I've managed to create quite a large collection of pieces, but still never seem to have quite what I need.  I'm not sure where I went wrong.  But without going off on a tangent, it's yet another part of the equation - people often need a long time to build up a collection they can just arbitrarily build whatever they want with.  Can someone just starting out, with a small collection, not just say "I wish LEGO would make ____?" without getting hassled about it?

On 3/19/2018 at 12:38 PM, koalayummies said:

Don't take this the wrong way I'm not disagreeing with you, one can voice their desires for what they want Lego to make all they want. But while on the subject of AFOL community there are a great number of posts that are basically identical cloned opines as if being said by a group of robots. That's probably why the responses to those comments are often so similar as well. Maybe just ignore those responses, like how I ignore those telling other people not to say "Legos" (for the stated reason that its technically incorrect) while watching those same people say "bley" (despite that being technically incorrect as well). We can solve what grinds our gears through ignoring.:sweet:

It's true.  "Legos" is a pet peeve of mine, but I rarely say anything except in a context like this one.  I also have been skipping a lot of threads, and read EB a lot less frequently because the S/N ratio is far too small, and the unhelpful "so build it yourself" posts in threads about what we'd like to see TLG make don't help.  Same thing with the "it's a kid's toy, TLG will never make that!" are a waste, also, because they are often found in, again, threads about sets someone would like to see TLG make, not what we think they actually will make.

Edited by fred67

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, fred67 said:

There's also no decent access to bulk new parts - just basic bricks of single colors, like gray for castle, or any color for a specific building you might have in mind.  Not the after market, and certainly not from TLG.  How much does it cost to build something like the Ghost Busters HQ from scratch rather than from a set?

I'm not whining about it - just stating it how I see it.  Over time I've managed to create quite a large collection of pieces, but still never seem to have quite what I need.  I'm not sure where I went wrong.  But without going off on a tangent, it's yet another part of the equation - people often need a long time to build up a collection they can just arbitrarily build whatever they want with.  Can someone just starting out, with a small collection, not just say "I wish LEGO would make ____?" without getting hassled about it?

 

2

It depends on how close you want to be to the set. Building that (or any) specific set, it will nearly always be cheaper to buy the set at retail rather than buying the parts. However, if you don't mind doing it in another colour, use different sized windows, change a door, switch out multiple 1x2s for 1x4s or larger, or vice versa, or changing the design of a roof slightly, remove a play feature if you are only wanting to display, and so on, you can often build something similar cheaper than the retail cost especially if you can build using bricks that others do not want. Building the set and something like the set can be very different in cost. For example, I recently built my daughter a dolls' house style house. It looks a lot like the MF Haunted House, similar scale and part count. But it came in at about £70-80, so just about half of the RRP for Haunted House. Now this is like the haunted house in terms of size, part count, and so on but then nothing like it as it is mainly done in shades of lavender and pink with a magenta roof, colours often shunned by most AFOLs and so quite cheap but ideal for what I needed - for a younger girl.

That does bring up one of my peeves with LEGO (rather than the community) - availability of bricks across the colour range. Some colours are abundant in 1x2 and 1x4 bricks, so much so that they are very cheap. But try finding the same colour in a 1x1 or 1x3 and they are non-existent, or so rare they are expensive. So bright light yellow, missing the 1x1. Medium dark flesh has recently got much better range, they exist in 1x1, 1x2, 1x3, 1x6, 1x8, 1x12 but miss the 1x4 while having 1x4s with studs on the side, masonry, and log forms. Roof slopes are even worse, some are common in one form in one colour, but don't exist as corners. Whereas the corners will be abundant in another colour but they won't have normal slopes, and so on. That said, would parts packs work? If they made sets like the basic classic boxes in single colours only with a range of parts, would they sell as well as the mixed ones. Bearing in mind that they would probably need to make at least 20 different sets to cover a good proportion of the colours in the lego spectrum, probably not. While they would be good for people wanting specific single colours, they probably wouldn't be financially viable. Plus there would still be complaints that the basic set contains too many wrong parts, and that they want single part boxes in single colours, and those 20 basic sets suddenly need to be 20 different part types in 20 different colours, so 400 service pack type sets. I can understand why they don't make those and have PAB (in store or online) instead.

 

13 hours ago, fred67 said:

Same thing with the "it's a kid's toy, TLG will never make that!" are a waste, also, because they are often found in, again, threads about sets someone would like to see TLG make, not what we think they actually will make.

1

For me it depends on the thread. Personally, I'd like to see wishlist threads completely separate to rumours / future sets threads. These are very different discussions and should not be combined. But also in wishlist threads, language like "LEGO are stupid not to make what I want because ..." or "they would make a mint if they brought back ..." should be allowed to be argued against. If someone says they want classic castle back as they like it, that is fine and there is no argument against it. If someone says they want classic castle back as lego would make a fortune doing it from nostalgia sales to me and people like me, that is different.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, MAB said:

That does bring up one of my peeves with LEGO (rather than the community) - availability of bricks across the colour range. Some colours are abundant in 1x2 and 1x4 bricks, so much so that they are very cheap. But try finding the same colour in a 1x1 or 1x3 and they are non-existent, or so rare they are expensive. So bright light yellow, missing the 1x1. Medium dark flesh has recently got much better range, they exist in 1x1, 1x2, 1x3, 1x6, 1x8, 1x12 but miss the 1x4 while having 1x4s with studs on the side, masonry, and log forms. Roof slopes are even worse, some are common in one form in one colour, but don't exist as corners. Whereas the corners will be abundant in another colour but they won't have normal slopes, and so on.

This is essentially my argument against those that insist that I can build anything I want to see.  Coupled with what I said earlier about minifigures, this shows how it is often impractical to build what I want to build, how I want to build it.  Expanding the parts and color selection on the Pick A Brick and Bricks & Pieces services would go a long way towards solving this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.