nerdsforprez

Actually, I am going to post an unpopular opinion here. I just love how folks project their own interpretations, aspirations, and opinions onto what Lego is "supposed" to be. Like one often does with say a favorite actor, actress, or athlete. They morph into something that initially was never intended. At least not directly. They play a super-hero in a movie, but it is the consumer's projections that try to make them into a super-hero in real life. Folks do the same with Lego. Lego "fans" is short-hand for fanatic. And that is totally fine. No one wants to be rational and practical when it comes to a hobby. That is what real life is for. But the above says much more about the poster's themselves than any objective description TLG ever gave itself. As far as I can tell, the motto for TLG was always "play well" - who are we to dictate what it means to "play well"? If buying things, saving them, and seeing if one can sell it for a profit is a way to "play" for a person when who are we to judge? BTW... everyone knows there are whole websites dedicated to this stuff. Buying and selling Lego like market shares of stock can be a ton of fun for folks. I think its kind of shallow to throw shade upon others just b/c they don't fit your definition of what it means to have a good time....

Having recently gone through this process, well, not from scratch, but totally remodeling an old house and room to my current Lego room I can really empathize with this post. Can't bring up the pictures right now (work thing) but I will keep a close eye on this post. GL @Milan and WOW! that you are taking the time to document it all. Speaking from the other side of the vail I can say it is totally worth it. Mine took (because of the rest of the house) the better part of the year. There will be days when you wonder if you will EVER be done. But you will get there, and when it is all said and done it will be worth it.

I was not sure a better place to post this. I hope it fits here: But can anyone tell me if Lego part 46528c01 (large projectile launcher), https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?P=49743c01#T=C&C=85 on the side that you depress to make it shoot, does it depress flush with the side of the brick? Kinda hard to explain, I guess another way of stating my question would be if it is possible to place these bricks side by side, so that the 2L sides are against eachother, exposing the 6L length?

These are becoming your bread-and-butter! You excel at these types of builds. Well done, thanks for sharing.

THxs to you both! I will post updates as I go along.....

Oh...this is clever. I'm voting for this....

Not Technic... but I started a new project in my Lego room:

Usually I am a Technic builder but as can be seen in my signature block, I have dabbled in other areas as well. Specifically, as well as Technic, I have always loved Sci-Fi ships and greeblies, as my "Tribute to Greeblies" project can attest. Well this past year I completed my Lego Room. The closest room to the entrance looks like this: Cropper and zoomed in to give a better idea: I would like to plate this whole wall with a Sci-Fi look. I am not sure exactly how to word it, but like the armor plating of a spaceship or base, inside of a hangar bay or something. There will be some greebling, but I would like it a bit more structured, with better flow and less random than my "Tribute" project above. Few things I am learning: Depth is important. I began only two studs deep and realized I had more to work with. When I say "more" I don't want the Lego portion of the wall to extend past the moulding of the door frames. But luckily for me, I can go three studs deep without extending past the moulding, so I changed that. Depth allows for more contrast and embedded details. More 3D. Wish I could go four, but then I violate the "extending beyond the frames limit" I set for myself. So that is out. I want to strike a good balance between not being too busy, but not being too boring or block-y either. My "Tribute" project was meant to be random, unstructured, more of an artistic piece than what I am striving here for, which is something much more functional and realistic, though still in the Sci Fi genre. So far, I like what I have achieved. Here are a few pictures for reference. Too random, unstructured, but still something: Here is something much more in line with what I am thinking, I will need a bit more variance because the wall itself (shaped around the door frames) is variable itself, but I could do something like this, or differing renditions of this for the different areas of the wall: Perhaps I will do something like the above with crevices or creases with exposing more of an unstructured, random core (like first picture). At only three studs deep, this is difficult, but possible. I have started, and here are some WIP shots. Few words and thoughts as well. As I begin to work I realize I also liked varying the levels of the Lego-portion, both in depth and the extent it covers the wall. I thought I wanted to cover the whole wall, but I have changed that. See the right side of the below pics. I think I like just the slightest bit of varying wall coverage. Breaks up the blockiness of the project. Also, I thought I would keep the whole thing 3 studs deep; but that seems to be changing as well. I plan on changing to 2 studs as some point, then back to three (see right of the image). Mostly will remain at 3, so as to keep depth perception and 3D nature of things. When I am away from the door frames I may even be able to change to four as some point. I thought I wanted everything to be LBG. I have the most elements for this project in that color and that seems to be my preference for all things sci-fi and greeblies anyways. Even though the wall-portion of what I am covering is not that big, this project will already need several thousand pieces, so that is kinda important. Also, although it is difficult to see in the lighting, that is really the exact color, or really close, to the paint color. The greebling wall will be the same color of the rest of the room, which is planned. But it will noticeably be all Lego because of the differing contrast, shadows, etc. the Lego greebling will offer. But as I began building, keeping it that color is too monochromatic. Not in comparison to the paint, but in comparison to itself. Lego on Lego. So I will be adding some DBG in there is as well. Above is what I have so far. These are just prototypes. None of it is final. It will also all be modular. I am building each section about 20 studs or so high.... which will result in 20-30 sections. But this will allow for easier installation and removal. And in the future, if there is any section I want to look different or change, I can change it out at any time. For additional information or context, video of the complete Lego room is here:

Oh this indeed is great. I will have to look further into this. I would be very interested in building. Doing other projects right now, but sometime in the future I hope to get to it. I would probably go with a different color scheme. The black wheel arches blend with the tires and for some reason it doesn't look very authentic. But I know in the original it looks just fine. Distinguishing the arch from the tire is important, which I found from my own building. Look forward to more. Thanks for putting this together!

Do you have a link to your instagram? Isn't that where updates are?

Wow.. this really is cool. I will also follow. Great job of the shoulder cannon. I will have to check out your instagram for details how it was done...

Racing Water Scooter? You mean Jet Ski? @ 467 pieces? That might be interesting. Though I can't imagine what the functions might be. An impeller? One that steers? Hmmm.... I guess that is no more different than most Technic cars at that scale....

Oh sorry I thought you meant it sarcastically. I do agree clone brands are a game changer. All my comments need to be taken with a grain of salt because I do think that the market can dramatically shift with these. Not so much right now, because they still make up such a minority of sales. But they are growing. It will be interesting to see the field in 3-5 years from now.....

I know this is brought up alot as evidence of TLG lack of acumen at the time. But I wonder if anyone has considered the alternative? The fact that they did almost almost go bankrupt, but didn't, perhaps is evidence OF their acumen not the lack thereof. If I am not mistaken, there was also a change in leadership, etc. at the time. I know there was also a huge shift in philosophy at the time, i.e. going after the SW license, etc. Many AFOLs (at the time) clamored that Lego was losing its creativity, and that sets so specialized would encourage more assembly rather than actual building...but look where the company is now. Again, perhaps we should stop referring to the early 2000's in Lego's history as a dark age and more of evidence they know what they are doing. The mere fact they did not go under at the time, which happened to be a very challenging time for business btw... may be evidence of something positive, not negative...

Interesting. I did not know that. I agree in sentiment with you. The doing away with B models is a shame. But, I see the 20% differently... though it is a shame for my personal interests (and yours), I think in most business models 20% is not a good number. I am sure they also don't want to disappoint 20% of the fan base, but I think it needs to be compared with the other side of that equation. How much it costs to generate them. If it costs a ton to pay Lego designers to design the B models, disappointing 20% may be acceptable...

Thxs. Some folks may think I am taking shots at them. I am not. It just makes sense. Thousands of Lego fans, with a need for collections of bricks in the tens of thousands in order to be creative and productive. That means bricks in the billions. The producer of those will have to cater to the masses, not the esoteric few. Me stating such is not trying to "silence" anyone. Everyone is free to state their gripes (heaven knows I have had my own), I just think it is equally as important to know the context that unmitigated gripes may find themselves in. Many mouths to feed means pretty generic meals and little treats to go around. Choose one mouth's favorite meal (say, pizza) means to disappoint another who likes spaghetti. The fact that we get some new treats (i.e. wave selector, new tracks, etc.) with every new wave should leave us happy, or at least such should be considered when we feel like griping. Here is just a hypothesized model. I think an insightful AFOL should understand you can't have it all every new Technic season. Just like if I'm a kid in a large family at christmas. I'm not gonna get everything I ask for. Too many mouths to feed. If I have a list of ten items, I should be happy to get 2 or 3. And those items I don't get perhaps I should view as a trade-off rather than evidence my parents don't love me. Or leave me somewhat satisfied that my brothers and sisters are getting something as well. Something like ... you can have x and y, x and z, etc.... but not x, y, and z, because there are others who also have their x,y, and z's. And something that every adult should understand is that no one can litigate preferences. These typically are PREFERENCES we are discussing (sometimes complaints are more objective, like I think we can all agree, or most of us, that multi-colored LAs are not the way to go), and no one should think their PREFERENCES are any better than anothers. Similarly, I think that is how TLG approaches each new wave of sets. AFOLs can have this or that, but not this, that and the other. So, we get perhaps new tracks and recolored LA (partially), but not both these AND say 4-wheel drive in the Raptor. Or perhaps new tracks, 4WD raptor, but then no new recolored LAs, etc... you get the picture. The fact that we don't get everything is not evidence TLG does not love us, but rather is evidence there are many mouths to feed, and one's preferences are no more important than anothers, and a company that has several BILLION bricks to produce in a single year, for tens of thousands of fans from an age band that ranges from like 2 to what, like 100 (?) is going to need to cater to the masses and not the few.....

Unfortunately it seems they are including a lot of temporary sales into that for those who have none to minimal interest in Lego, and losing a bit on the long-term buyers, who instead buy their competitors that do offer what they desire. But I know nothing about the works "behind the scenes" in TLG, just seeing more and more fans and parents no longer needing the red square on the box and an embossed logo on the bricks... (I'd be ready to start an inquisition some time ago had someone mentioned that someone could make a better set than the danish ) Maybe. I suppose they know. You know they have their marketing folks working extra hard trying to figure this all out. But I also wonder for long time buyers if they focus less on a single set and what that set can offer in terms of building (like MOCs and stuff).

Except you. actually my friend, my initial comment was piggy-backing off of @Milan's comment. You were not even in the picture when you chose chimed in. You quoted me...and if I didn't know any better, your comments were coming in so as to silence ME. Not the other way around. Let's end the childishness. If you want to discuss more PM me. No more on the thread.

I know you will buddy. l know. Heaven forbid you do something other than what you want or deserve. My point was simply that I am glad TLG's purview and consideration of potential buyer's is larger than yourself. That allows for a much larger product diversity and a much greater crowd to enjoy it. That is all. No one is trying to silence your sacred opinion....

This. +1,000 Folks don't understand that without this we don't have this hobby. At least not to the extent that we do. Someone with an average (more or less) yearly income can have a collection tens of thousands of pieces. Thousands of us, from around the globe. Perhaps tens of thousands. This leads us to pieces in the hundreds of billions. Perhaps zillions? You don't get to this level without the infrastructure, money, politics, etc. that TLG has. They don't get to this level by listening to us AFOLs. They get to this level by selling, selling selling. This is precisely why I think all the griping about sets is so silly. TLG does not listen to us, or at least not to a large extent. Nor should they. And for smart AFOLs, WE SHOULD NOT WANT THEM TO. I honestly think that it is the novice builder/hobbyist who keeps on complaining so much about sets, that they do not meet their every whim and fancy. Spoiler alert... they are not supposed to! I think more seasoned AFOLs understand this point.

I remember years ago a thread about something to the tune of "what are you OCD" (in regards to building) about? I'm not going to take the time to look it up, but I remember pin and bushings orientation being discussed. I personally don't care, but I do know that it has made a difference in my building in the past. I can't remember an exact example, but inserting a bar or something in a pin already used has made a difference in the past. But I do remember a specific example of when the orientation (or direction) of a 3L blue pin mattered. As others have already pointed out, the direction makes a difference in disassembling a model and making things accessible. But a few years ago when I built a Technic Version of the U-wing: I had a terrible time with the wings drooping when in their forward position. They did not droop because the Lego used was not stiff enough, they drooped because their starting point (where they attached to the fuselage) started in a downward position. But by orienting the blue pins like this: (wing direction going left to right) I was able to fix the problem. As one can see the addition "ridge" (i.e. additional ABS) was just enough to lift on the right and push down on the left. Fixed my problem perfectly!

I have to admit, your interpretation seems odd. "to take away" so as to make something break or fragile is not the meaning in the quote "to take away." You are being too literal. That is like the analogy I provided earlier about taking away from writing but also taking away so as to distract or dilute meaning. I think the intended meaning behind the quote can be summarized in the phrase "do not leave anything superfluous". If additional bricks are in a build but they add needed strength then although there is something that can be taken away the additional bricks have meaning therefore they should remain . TLG is incredibly poor at this. Many times, especially in some of the recent large sets (42082, 83, etc...) there were many superfluous parts. So many that it is thought they did so to artificially inflate the part count. AFOLs had these sets minimized, quite quickly, with fewer parts without compromising strength or functions.

Thank you for the explanation. This interests me for several reasons but perhaps most significantly because this is how I feel about writing, which I spend about 90% of my professional time doing (technical writing, I know next-to-nothing about creative writing). I have no training in anything related to STEM or Design. I build with Lego because it relaxes my verbal abilities and stimulates that which I virtually work very little with; my non-verbal abilities. Therefore I find fascinating how this relates to that which I do know; writing. As a trainee one of the best lessons learned was to be parsimonious in writing. Say as much as possible with as little words as possible. Large vocabulary words should only be used when they convey a meaning that would otherwise take many words. I often write long but accurate; editing for me is simply, like your quote from Antoine de Saint Exupery, a process of eliminating as much as I can without altering meaning. Oddly enough, I feel good writing is also modular. Each paragraph should make sense in its own right; and when combined altogether generate a greater, more expanded meaning.

I appreciate these comments here, but am afraid I misinterpreted. Re-reading them I think I understand better. But when you say "Modularity makes the difference between a complex build and a complicated build" are you saying that modularity is related to the former or the latter? And I believe you mean "complex" in positive overtones and "complicated" in negative. Is this correct?

THis is a good reason to bump the topic. Great crane. I have several other projects at the moment, but one-day I would like to give this build a chance. Great job...