Erik Leppen

Eurobricks Counts
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

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

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. Erik Leppen

    [WIP] 5 axle mobile crane

    Now this is interesting. I'm normally not a fan of solutions incorporating many motors, but yes, it will surely be a challenging 3D puzzle to find out where to put things. At the least, it makes me think: gee, I should redo my latest crane (which I never finished) One thing that's interesting is how you made it 2 studs narrower than what I would expect given these wheels. It's probably a more realistic proportion, but gives you a lot less room to do things. I really like your steering solution with the ball-joint parts, which is kind of similar to how I tried it, and includes the same Ackermann geometry as a bonus. And yes, identical angles on axles 2 and 4 is only logical; the difference would be very small in reality anyway. And yes, the front outriggers being in the way for the steering and drive axles is very well-known, at least, to me Are the wheels touching the outriggers when steering? They come quite close, but the turning point is inside the wheel so you might be good. If they aren't touching, then you have found a really nice compact solution! The way the pneumatic cylinders are mounted is currently quite weak, but I hope you find something for that. The string-based solution seems pretty ingenious. Why did you go for string? As for the battery. Only option I can think of right now is, what if you would place the V6 engine off-center, and put the battery next to it? Would that fit? Anyway, great start and I will be following this
  2. Erik Leppen

    Ugliest B-model?

    Good one, Polo @Maaboo35 I say models with an ugly A model don't count On a more serious note: I think 8465B isn't much worse than 8465A, so that's not really an "ugly B-model", it was just a bit of an ugly set. But that has much to do with the time it was released. Most Technic sets looked like that around 2000. When I think of ugly B models, I think about models that were a step down from other models of the same time. 42008 is a better contender, indeed. But most of its ugliness could have been prevented if the main model would have had dark-gray internals instead of red. In my opinion, 42008B is above all else a horrendous color clash.
  3. There is no difference, but the question "why do you create instructions" is to be asked to the person creating the instructions. If brunojj wasn't the person creating the instructions, then that particular question isn't for him. I fully support both - everybody is free to do his thing - I just put a thought I hadn't seen earlier in the topic, which is that the monetary reward, while good in itself, may also have a darker side, namely: works for sale may be more attractive to copycats. I think we agree (except the "price of an hour" thing. I honestly have no clue how much $ each hour is worth.) Everyone, I think, likes some kind of reward for their time, but different people value different rewards differently. Some rewards can be money recognition fame the idea of having fans the act of teaching the act of learning seeing others improve their ideas seeing other show their own ideas in return etc. So, I think a question for anyone sharing creative works is: what reward are you after most, and what would the an effective way to get that? That's why I'm trying to say: given you have the skills, if your prefered reward is income, then selling is the way to go, sure. But if your most desired reward is recognition, then selling may not be the best way.
  4. Oh, sorry, I did not know that. Then part of what I said doesn't apply to your case.
  5. Some remarks. First of all, I'm fully with you and it's a huge shame these things happen and you have to suffer from it. None of us want that. We all agree it shouldn't happen, but, sadly, it happens and there's nothing we can do. At least, we can't do anything to prevent the copying. So I'm trying another thought. So I was thinking... what would happen if you'd share the instruction for free? I don't say that because I want free instructions, but I see this kind of thing happen the most with paid instructions. Maybe, by asking money you tell the world "this is worth paying for". Or, synonymously, "this has market value". And if copycats find something that has market value, then they sure know a market they can test that to. I'm not saying that you're triggering the copycats, but I do think that maybe, the copycats are triggered by paid material more than by free material. (Note I'm just speculating here. I have no proof on this.) Of course, with free instructions, you don't get the income you have get now, but I don't know how substantial that is. Is the income the reason for selling it? Could be, of course (and it's not something I need to know, so this is a question you can just answer for yourself), but if not, then maybe, the most effective path towards the goal of "sharing and inspiring" could very well be to keep money out of the whole thing altogether. If this is the question, then money has no place in the answer. If the goal is inspiration and keeping the spirit and fun in the hobby, then what we need is a community that shares this spirit. And we already have this, here on Eurobricks and many other forums and places. At least, speaking for myself, I get a lot of inspiration to create instructions that people want to buy from joining this forum and talking about the hobby here. (I'm probably not good enough to create instructions that people want to buy, but I'm certainly helped not to loose inspiration, which is how you stated your question) Maybe, the best solution is ignorance. Now, my instructions and models are probably not good enough to market, but I don't know and maybe it's best that way. I'm not sure I even want to know it if it happens. I can't do anything about it anyway. Again, is the income the thing that compensates for the disappointment? I doubt it, and actually, I expect not. If @brunojj1 would have earned a 20,000 dollars more on this, would he be "rewarded and satisfied"? I think the actual disappointment lies in knowing there are people who steal your work. And if that is the problem, then the solution is either not knowing there are people who steal your work (which is not possible - what has been known cannot be made unknown), or knowing there are people who share your disappointment (which already happens here on EB). First isn't asked to create instructions for second (OK well maybe they are :P ) - first decides for himself to create instructions for second. Why would someone create instructions? Because creating instructions can be a rewarding activity by itself. (Again, speaking for myself here.)
  6. Erik Leppen

    Ugliest B-model?

    Well, there can only be one true winner... But actually, the first that came to my mind is 8052...
  7. I think there are two goals that are being confused. Goal 1 is: make sure the original creator earns fair money for their creative work Goal 2 is: make sure copycats earn as little as possible for their act of stealing 2 has some effect on 1, but I don't think we know how large that effect is. The OP seems to target goal 1. I think the key to getting people to pay for instructions is to make that process as easy as possible. I'\m afraid a crowdfuding thing makes it harder, not easier, to honestly pay for instructions, because the delay between model release and instruction release is lengthened by the crowdfunding time period. So I'm not so sure the effect is positive at all. I'm more interested in goal 2. I think the only way to reduce income for stealers is to make their public aware of the fact they are buying from stealers. My first idea would be to add a very clear watermark on instructions in some way that is not editable. Unfortunately, every file is copyable or editable, so any stealer can just remove the watermark and add their own. Wasn't blockchain a technology that tries to prevent this? Maybe, someone more knowledgeable than me on that subject can chime in to tell us more about how feasible that is, and whether it solves anything?
  8. True, 8265 was a really great set. Good functionality, great looks, not overly large, and I can remember I was surprised by the motorization option. 8043, as @M_longer mentions, is also a good one. Very compact, a lot happens in a little space, and in my opinion a much more interesting rendition of the "full RC construction vehicle" concept than 42030, with 6 (!) motorized functions in less than 1400 parts. It's one of the sets I would have overlooked had I not seen reviews on it (I'm not into excavators myself).
  9. I'd say the Arocs 42043 is the only must-have. (I don't have it, ironically.) But you already have that one. To add a set you don't have yet, I'd suggest the Claas tractor (42054) which I found a very enjoyable, non-repetitive build, in a very nice color scheme with a lot of dark-grey, interesting functions (steering modes), and a very good size, imposing model (2000 parts, not unwieldily large) with good variety and playability. Only thing lacking is a complete B model, but there have been great C models on the forums. If you want to go a bit further back in time (before the 42xxx numbering), the Unimog 8110 was another really nice set. PF + pneumatics (not V2 though) + suspension, a very complete package resulting in a striking orange model. Same B-model problem as Claas though. Also, might be very expensive (I have no idea).
  10. I actually think @Bublehead is right. What effect do such votes have? A handful of votes out of the ~40 votes now cast, is highly unlikely to rig the whole thing. The fact that everyone has to distribute their points among 6 entries, is already a pretty effective way to prevent the contest from rigged voting. That way, noone can inflate the points for 1 entry. It's "only" 10 out of their 26 points. I think any dishonest attempt to "make" a particular entry win, will look suspicious far before it becomes a threat of any significance. And then there's still the staff judging, so any effect on votes counts for 50% anyway. Staff judging can't be influenced (or so I have always assumed ). When the whole judging is done, it's a small math exercise to calculate how many extra votes would have been needed to change the winner. (That said, I don't know how much work goes into checking vote validity right now and whether judges find that "worth it" or not.) Also, I don't know what @Jim meant when he said "public voting". It looks like we assume he meant "voting by members", but he may have meant "voting by posting in a visible topic". If the member's votes are sent in by PM, they aren't "public" either.
  11. 1: 10 6: 6 8: 4 7: 3 2: 2 12: 1 Some entries really surprised me with their technical novelties. This competition surely delivered some cool builds.
  12. I think this is a harder question than I thought. I mean, we probably all have some urge to create, but why? And why Lego Technic? For me, relaxation is a big part, and Lego is a great medium because it's limited to fixed-shape elements that can be combined in lots of ways to create interesting things. It's limited enough to be manageable and not overwhelming, yet offers enough possibilities to stay interesting for many years. But what is it that attracts me in the act of Lego building? I think it's the combination of, being alone, escaping from the real world, relaxation, familiarity, focus on something abstract, creative expression, the sensation of touching the Lego bricks, and probably there's even more things. Many things come together in Lego building.
  13. I'd like to see a "Lego only" class. No SBrick, no BuWizz, no external electric lighting, no rubber bands or non-Lego strings, no custom decals, etc. Only what's available through TLC. I always try to build "pure" and I sometimes feel that using third-party electronics is a slight form of cheating (even though most builds are probably easy to convert to Lego-only). TC11 (battlebots) had a PF category, and it felt to give a more level playing field. But it depends on the theme, whether categories make sense. I think what you should be wary of is the prizes going to the same people every time. Often, winners are people who have already very large collections, and are both good builders and put a lot of time/knowledge into their photography/video editing. A raffle prize solves that problem, and it gives everyone a possibility to win something as a reward for their effort and for joining the fun and keeping the community active. I have the same idea. If "a good presentation will help", then it affects the outcome of the contest (because what other defintion of "help" did you have in mind? ). A lousy build shouldn't win a contest, so this is good. But have we had a great build with a lousy video win a contest lately? Because if not, then that's exactly @aminnich's point. I don't agree with your first sentence - this is a Lego building competition, not a video editing competition. But I'd really like to see a no-effects rule, so that people who have that non-Lego-related video-editing knowledge, can't gain an advantage that way. (People are of course free to show their killer video after the contest ends). Anyhow, this discussion returns with every contest, and I am very much guilty of repeating myself too here, and I think very little can be done. But I really like the no-effects idea. I'm not sure grouping the people is a good idea. I'd say, if you want categories, categorize the builds according to some measurable property. (Size, for example.)
  14. What I notice with every contest is that there are a few people posting only on the last days, posting their finished stuff without works-in-progress. While little can be done about it, I think the most fun of these competitions is seeing everyeone's entries progress, and commenting on their entry-to-be and giving suggestions and tips and exchanging ideas. As for reasons to enter, I'm with @shadow_elenter - if someone else enters for the prizes, but they show a cool build, does it matter? (In many cases, we wouldn't even know - not everyone tells why they enter - and if we don't know, it can't even matter). I think the prize, for me, does not influence the decision to enter, but the fact that there are prizes might make me just a bit more enthousiastic about the whole event. I would lie if I said I was indifferent to the chance to win a cool Technic set ;) And yes, it's a hard subject this time. Maybe next time do something a bit more down-to-earth (literally, seeing all those dizzying thrillrides).
  15. It's 12 new, original, highly inventive builds. Within 2 months. That's quite a feat. I will take my time to pick some favorites and cast a vote. I have seen some pretty cool rides already!