Erik Leppen

Eurobricks Counts
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited


About Erik Leppen

Spam Prevention

  • What is favorite LEGO theme? (we need this info to prevent spam)
    <p> Technic and 10242 (yes I know that's a different theme)</p>

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Interests
    Game development, roller coasters, mathematics, LEGO


  • Country
  • Special Tags 1
  • Special Tags 2
  • Special Tags 3

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Erik Leppen

    Scale Modeling Forum future?

    Dear people of the scale modeling forum: please be aware about what you will be merged into ! :D
  2. Erik Leppen

    Scale Modeling Forum future?

    I think it was a good idea to split the two, it has been tried, it didn't work out as we hoped it would, and then it's a good idea to merge them back. It's a waste if models aren't posted because of the inactivity. That's a bit of a catch-22 if nothing else ;)
  3. Erik Leppen

    Arch thoughts

    What could be a way out for @1974's use case about the corner column is using the brick 1x1 with studs on two adjacent sides, and use the 1x3x2 inverted arch sideways on each of the side studs, and then a few studs lower, use the same 1x1 brick with sideways studs and attach tiles to the side. Then the corner column is 1.4 x 1.4. Of course, this has side effects to the rest of the build, because you're using SNOT which makes it more complicated ... but it's an idea nonetheless that may be of use to someone reading this :)
  4. If I were TLC i'd sell a little specialized piece that fits underneath the bottom of a baseplate and brings it up to height with a normal plate, so you can raise baseplate-based buildings and connect them to regular-plate-based buildings, and that brings their height to be the same as that of a normal plate. Then they can keep the baseplates, but overcome the height difference problem. It would also open up building possibilities, such that baseplates can then be used in builds with non-rectangular bases.
  5. Erik Leppen

    Lego Architecture - rumors and discussion

    I think this is how the set should have looked all the time. This is much more interesting as a Lego build than those huge 5000+-piece monsters. This takes a quarter of the space, costs a fraction of the money, it depicts the building as well as the larger version does, sits on a nice brown/black tiled base, and it has more varied and interesting techniques IMO so it's also more interesting as a model. To be honest I don't understand why someone wouldn't like it. I wouldn't care if it's slightly less accurate; that's not what Lego is for, models like these are for recognizability, not for exact recreation. And I think for recognizability and general proportions, this is definitely a successful build. That said, I agree it's not very original or novel as a subject matter.
  6. Give the Wikipedia page I-beam - Wikipedia a read. What matters is the amount ofmaterial at the parts that are in tension (bottom) and compession (top). When holes are horizontal, the beam acts as an I-beam with a continuous strip of material at top and bottom, so this is stronger. I always found it funny how a nearby train station uses I-beams with holes in the construction, proving that the amount of material in the middle doesn't matter much for the strength. All it does is keep the top and bottom strips at the required distance. maxresdefault.jpg (1280×720) (
  7. A large sticker sheet may be the most hurtful part of them all, if it causes you to slip and fall! Same goes for baseplates. If the question is, whichever part hurts the least in any orientation, then I'd indeed say the glass piece from a standard window are good candidates.
  8. Isn't GBC mainly an event thing? As far as I know, GBC units by different builders are joined so they form a giant loop. A single module always needs hand assistance, putting the balls from the endpoint back to the startpoint. It would be fun, but I don't have the required balls, but I may be tempted to order some from Jim's link above if such a contest would be started. And I do have lots of system bricks in all kinds of colors here. But I do think such a contest would need a longer time than usual. I would way 3 months or so. 6 weeks feels too short for something like this. As a non-GBC-builder, I'd say, go for it. After all, there are many people who don't build motorbikes, and we still had a motorbike contest that looks successful. Except for the balls, GBC isn't really that much different. Also, lots of folks here love non-vehicle builds, and GBC would be the perfect showcase for that. I would go fo as little restrictions as possible, but conforming to the standard GBC rules such as bin placement/size etc. so that the resulting builds will be eligible for meetings, if we can keep them assembled until after the pandemic. (Now I say this, wouldn't a GBC build contest be more appropriate in non-pandemic times? Then everyone can use their builds at meetings.)
  9. Erik Leppen

    General Part Discussion

    With the new design, does a bar fit inside the 3L pin?
  10. Maybe it's an idea (for others as well) to just copy-paste the questions onto a text file, add your answers there, and let it sit there for a while, and submit a few days later. Then when you think of new things, you an still add it. March 7 is more than a week away, so there's plenty of time to think of thorough answers. After all, given the amount of feedback we all have, I think it's important we give well-thought-out answers. I never understand why surveys like these are marketed as "it takes 5 minutes". This is like saying "it's not important". But, what if we would make it important, and take more time for this? Wouldn't that be a good thing? This is our chance to formulate our feedback and have it actually land where it matters. And why not use this topic for sharing ideas so others can use those when they fill the thing in? :) For brands, lots of great suggestions have already been made; I'm adding Spierings cranes and Foremost, but I'll also add that I rather see non-licenced sets. For types of vehicles (or non-vehicles), we could think of the sets of yore we all love, such as the space shuttle 8480, code pilot 8479, air tech claw rig 8868, or all the control center sets (dinosaur, helicopter simulator). For buying decisions/triggers, what about B-models? Or missing recolors of common parts in common colors? For technology, hidden functionality and thus lack of educational value. Or the lack of controllers for control+. Or old battery technology.
  11. This is also by the way why I love the EB Technic competitions. They force you to build within a time constraint, eliminating this whole perfecting thing. By the way, super interesting post by @DrJB While too much perfectionism can be a real problem, too little of it is bad as well. In my experience in the software world, I often tend towards perfectionism, because if you do it quick, oftentimes it will need to be modified later, and time spent redoing things often exceeds initial savings. Doing less work now often means more work later. Of course, this problem usually doesn't play within the world of Lego MOCs. Those kind-of sit in a vacuum, and imperfections won't harm other MOCs, so you can be more lenient. I often don't "reorganize" a MOC after it's done. If it works, it works. Things like reorganizing the color coding, reducing the number of rare parts, bringing the weight down, improving rigidity or modularity, or "cleanness" in the design are all nice to have, but not doing them doesn't have any side-effects in the future.
  12. Which is good! It means you're improving. Anyhow. Perfectionism is needed to get closer to perfection, but it also means you're going slower. So I think that's the balance you should strike: do you want to spend a year on one awesome MOC, or do you want to build 3 decent MOCs instead? Also, I see the exact same thing in game development. I can spend ages tweaking code that noone will ever see. One of the hardest things, in any creative work I'd say, is declaring it finished. I'm currently doing February Album Writing Month (, where the goal is to use the 28 days of February to write 14 songs. The goal is to actively go against the urge to perfectionize, and say: good enough is good enough, and have full focus on the creative side, instead of the more "engineering" side of perfectioning something. It's basically a practice in finishing things, going through the whole creative process in fast-forward. If you're too perfectionistic when, say, building a car chassis, you'll never get to the bodywork. So, to practice building bodywork, you have to let go of the perfectionism for the chassis.
  13. I don't really get why this has become a topic on color coding. 99% of users don't mind and are probably even helped by it, and the other 1% is mostly on LUGs like Eurobricks and have enough parts lying around and Bricklink around the corner. Instead of this - honestly quite broken-record-sounding - color coding "problem", we could also focus on actual problems and errors such as a (seemingly) increasing frequency of finding non-working functions in sets (42083, 42110), simplification of functions (42125), sets where more and more parts go into bodywork, (42123, 42125), the disappearing of B-models, or hiding away functions that were previously mechanic into a smartphone app as is done with PU or whatever electric systems exist nowadays, eliminating any possiblity of tinkering with it, which should be the whole reason the Technic theme even exists.
  14. I think this is a very good point. There's outright errors in sets (such as 42110's gearbox not working and clicking/grinding), and there's outright preference (such as color coding). But there's also many, many things that fall somewhere in between, where it's a gray area. Is 42125's flexy chassis a mistake, or just a preference thing? And the fact that 42110's engine only starts running after driving 50 cm in one direction? Is that a bad function, or a preference? Both of these cases I would call bad design and I feel fully justified to point things like this out. Color coding on the other hand, is purely preference, and actually something I'm not even against. I do it myself extensively. Also, in the real world, things are color-coded too, so I don't see the problem (besides part re-usability when MOCing). Also, again ( @XenoRad but also in general) , please keep in mind that adult is not the same as experienced. Cars like that 10295 Creator 911 cater to car fans, not necessarily people with any building experience.
  15. Because a higher cost results in more profit. Why would they ask less than most people are willing to pay? I presume they know what they do, and that they have the sales statistics that back up what they're doing. Maybe this isn't as true as it was in the past. With the market oversaturating and other brands increasing their game, I think customers will become less and less brand-loyal.