Erik Leppen

If you don't know about functions, then that may be a sign that it's not really a suitable theme. My reason for proposing trucks is that I expect that almost everyone will find something they like to try to build. If it's limited to, say, semi trucks, then I'd probably be out for example, because I have zero interest in those. But within the broader range of trucks, I can imagine trying to build a concrete mixer. Or a fire truck. Or a garbage truck. Etc. Agreed, I think a maximum width works best (and a maximum length that isn't too limiting) I'd really like to see a re-run of the Model Team contest. That one has been quite a while ago. I'd be wary of doing themes for which we have seen zero examples. I'm sure Lego musical instruments exist, but if this were to be a contest, I'd expect fewer entries than there are prizes... I do like the animals idea. Speaking of which: I really like the walker idea. Especially if some kind of "steering" is a requirement. That will be fun :) (also, this is broader than just "animals" but includes most of them. So you'd basically still have animals, but allow a broader range of stuff to cater to more people.) Edit: indeed, no size limit for this. Weight is already costly for walking mechanisms :)

On one hand, I like this idea. It's concrete and immediately clear what the goal is small, so overseeable for those with little time On the other hand, we're complaining for some years now about how there are too many cars in this theme the last competition was already set-based, so I'd prefer doing something not-set-based this time. it's hard to judge, because entries look like their respective sets and the differences are mostly on the inside What if the organization just picks a vehicle type, say, loaders, and just does a "build a loader" competition. The TC8 "Build a crane" was one of my favorite competitions, because we saw so many different versions that still were all cranes. OK, cranes bring a lot more variation than loaders or excavators etc., but I think a more "normal" competition to just build the best [pick your construction vehicle] is good to have again. To make it more varied, we could just do a "build a truck" competition. Easy to understand, easy to get ideas for, and you can make it as simple or challenging as you want. I think it's good to have a balance, and variety, between categories like set-based competitions (studless-ify, shrink/grow, ...) "weird" competitions (such as the cops vs bandits) "normal" vehicle competitions (cranes, trucks, ...) car competitions water/air based competitions etc.

The more voters there are, the more things like this are averaged out. Unless, of course, there is a community-wide dislike for red

With all this discussion about voting and point systems, I wonder: has there been a case where there was consensus that a contest had "the wrong winners"? As a rather long-time reader on this forum, I can't remember any such case. I could be wrong, but I believe the current system works in that sense that it generates good results. So I would be wary of making the system more complicated. The harder it is to vote, the fewer people will do so. That would give all the power to the person deciding on the scoring system. Right now we have a variety of people voting, with a wide variety of opinions and values and preferences, which means the models with the most points will be those that do well on a variety of aspects. I think that's a favored result: the winners are models that are generally good. Also, I definitely trust members to do their best to vote in the spirit of the contest as they see it. If we want this to be a community thing (and I believe that's what the idea is), I think we should give power to the community. This includes the power of the vote. We're all adults and we all play well. If it happens that someone does not play well, it seems best to handle that case by itself, I would say. I think it's fine that one person votes using their own system X and someone else votes using their own system Y. For example, That's why I'm still (very much) in favor of a "distribute 25 points among all entries as you wish" vote system (or whatever number, but 25 is very close to 10+6+4+3+2+1). Then if I have trouble picking and ranking 6 entries, but I see 8 entries I really like, I can give them 3 points each and 1 extra for some entry that has something special. I find it somewhat strange that I have to pick a personal best when voting. There can be a community winner, even if I as a single voter don't select a winner, but just award points to entries I like.

I don't think TLC do that kind of testing on their instructions... :p

I, too, prefer to have a voting round, I think. Voting offers a way to "take part" for those who don't have the time to build.

Good to see the Contest Index being added! Great stuff to scroll through :) Memories and nostalgia :D I also noticed some of my own entries' images have dead links now, since I changed my website. So I better set up some redirects I guess

It's great to see all those superb builds on one big image. This image just perfectly shows the amazing quality of Eurobricks builders! There's a lot of stuff I see that I really like. There are some that are very hard to distinguish from their respective sets. Both of the 41999 ones, the 8436 one, the 8109 one. There's some really unexpected sets too. I like the airport fire truck one, that was my first fully studless set. Also, I can't not love the 8446 one, good to see that set still inspiring people :) Some are really cute, such as the Claas or the Unimog. And lots of pneumatic goodness. Great job to all participants! I can imagine it impossible to pick favorites, good to see that the judges were able to do so in the end :) Unfortunately I haven't had much time to comment on builds, but I like them all. Yes, really, there's not a single picture I don't like. Thanks to Jim for the hard, but hopefully satisfying job of organizing everything; thanks for the judges, and of course to all who entered!

There's a saying that goes "time you enjoy wasting is not wasted time". Hence the emphasis on enjoyment rather than on winning or losing. That's the thing. I feel you seem to be focussing almost fully on winning or losing. That's fine, of course, but that's not what these TC's are mainly about. They're - at least in my view - mainly about having a friendly community build challenge, with prizes to reward great builds. (Hence my suggestion to pick wording to reflect that.) I like the analogy of @mdemerchant with art. Lego MOC building, like painting, writing, composing, game development etc. is a creative hobby after all. I feel having a themed challenge can help those in a "writing block" to build something new, but having too formally-defined rules may take the art out and make it more of a sport.

Given the competitions are a large part of this board, it would make sense to have a competition index. I feel the competitions are really separate from things like set reviews and such. Not sure what effect adding another pinned topic would have, but I feel that after 25 competitions it's safe to assume they are here to stay :) By the way, somewhere hidden deep inside the recent rules discussion in the TC25 discussion topic I made the suggestion (that I think nobody has even noticed) to replace the word "contest" (or "competition") by "challenge" to more reflect what I am assuming the organization wants to get out of it. As I said there, Still curious what people think of this idea :)

I myself have done my fair share of complaining about rules in the past, but I try to see it this way: A competition is mostly a community build challenge, which, I think, has two parts to it that make them fun: inspiring people to build something they normally don't invoking community feeling because of multiple people tackling the same challenge, sharing their progress and learning from each other This by itself is valid reason to hold competitions. But as a bonus, there are even prizes offered for these challenges! Of course, there can be questions about what is the spirit of a particular challenge, but I feel that it's pretty clear what the actual challenge here is meant to be: pick a set you like, and build a smaller version of it, while trying to make it similar to the original. Of course, you can find edge cases like taking a 100-part set and building a 50-part miniature, but we all understand perfectly that this is not what this challenge is about. @organization: @Jim: Maybe, a lot of the trouble will go away if you replace the word "contest" or "competition" by "challenge". The firast 2 words emphasize that there is a battle, that can be won or lost, and that the goal is to win or to beat others; the last word much more underlines that it is primarily a way of expanding your building experience and have fun.

The Technic Mars Perseverance rover 42158 has only the 7x11 frame in white. BrickLink Reference Catalog - Inventory of Set 42158-1

Minifig Ring 1 x 1

The electronics are designed as single-use, yes. And they are a large fraction of the cost of some sets. As far as I can see in set reviews, the electronic control+ components come with apps that show that particular model, so the whole experience is designed around specific sets. Which I would define as single-use (or, better, single-purpose). I'm kinda surprised that the designers who have said: this goes against the spirit of what Lego is (I'm sure there have been designers who said that) haven't won the argument. Sure, you could use the 4000 other pieces in the 42100 to build lots of cool stuff. But the electronic components will just lie there unused, which I would consider a waste. I haven't bought a single C+ set yet and don't see myself doing it in the near future. I haven't come across anything I wanted to build that I couldn't do with good old Power functions. No apps, just good old Lego parts and a remote. :)

There are still solutions where a lever is more useful (mostly, function switching), so I expect the 3L ring to stay in use.