Kristof

That Jango's facelift looks neat! I may like it even more. I think I need to build some shrunken version asap :)

everythung great but these slopes with grille on the front. Those I think aren't accurate and also don't look exceptionaly well.

Hi, I don't know what to think now . As far as I can judge from your videos, posts and your general manners on the internet, you seem like very smart and reasonable guy to me. Therefore I'm really surprised that you seriously consider this to be a real question... I'd understand if this topic was ment in rather ironic way just to share how awfully some people behave but either you are quite good in mocking or this is not the case. If your'e dealing with this for real, I can't give you any more advice than what has already been told, I agree that it's quite straightforward issue and you shouldn't dive into some deep philisophy beyond, because there's none. I can assure you that for me (and thousands of other conscious lego fans) you are beloved and respected iconic builder and we sense the amount of effort you put in creating content we can (and we do) enjoy . None of these things are taken as granted and nobody with functional brain thinks that you would be obligated to do that, or (jeeez) to do more than that. I'll make sure to leave some positive comments bellow your vids since now to improve the normal/hater ratio

Nice, I like the size. Decent but all the details remain. It's quite a shame that BB-8 has such simple design - even the best lego rendition will be a bit boring (unless someone brings with moving version, which is very very unrealistic image ). As long as making smooth balls in lego has always been rather struggle, BB-8 doesn't seem to be the best subject for MOC. With your model, I think you got the best possible result within the scale.

Although it's 'just a sphere with dome on top', you did a great job designing all these patterns and features on it. It looks so real one would expect it to roll away :D

Great news. Can't wait to see :)

Hmm, I encourage you to try yourself :) You may find it very entertining ant the succes tastes even better when you figure out your own working solution. EDIT: On the other hand, such big model is not much fun to drive unless you incorporate some super powerful propulstion, which in this case would be at least 2 XL motors or even better RC bugy motors. Otherwise you end up with snail that barely moves. So maybe in this case it's really worth consideration whether it's reasonable effort to motorize it.

That motion is excellent. Another great work of yours!

Yea, some sets would be pain to operate without that thing. For example the republic frigate - almost nowhere to hold with hands. Even Venator has it, yet it looks quite weird already

^ Which means you can pick it up by hand too, doesn't it? I personaly find it very convenient, if not the only possible way how to lift it.

Check the set 75021. There is technic liftarm you can retract on the top and 'carry' the whole model. Several other sets, mostly heavier flying vessels but also some land vehicles (At-Te) have it. It's designed to hang the model securely so you don't have to wory about falling. I woudln't use craddle if not necessary. That's another complication. But in case you want to grab and play with your models frequently, maybe some hook would be useful. Fixing your string to the ceiling very much depends on your type of construction. But I'd always expect always some drilling, I don't know about any easier solution.

Definitely. Fishing wire of propper choice should hold quite huge load. It's not to stretchy as well. Nylon guitar strings should work fine too, I'd not recommend classic (metal) strings simply because it's harder to deal with. But in general, with either option the strength is your last issue (unless you hang UCS MF or something like that ) More importantly you should focus on anchoring the string to the model and don't rely much on bonds between bricks, unless you glue ( ) these together. You can use the holding levers incorporated by Lego (for sets which have those, i.e. republic gunships, frigates...). Otherwise it's case specific and you better test your anchoring twice before hanging the model high

Well Armstrong, then there is nothing easier than taking the sets that fit your budget and do the simple math. Yet I would not really recommend this, rather pragmatic approach. While price per part is easy to compute, it doesn't equal to (price)/(parts value) ratio. The latter is much harder to figure out and it's still more of a estimation than precise number. Minifigs also matters. Anyway, if you are buying the set to build it for yourself, I think it's not really necessary to think to much about these factors. Your personal feelings about each set is much more important :)

Haha, yea, this is very familiar look But still I spot one major difference - you progress on your gigantic ships while I need ages to rig up small model

Whoo. I wish I had such room So far I have to tide up my (rather small) desk, dig up my sotrage boxes from the drawers bellow my bed, lay it out around as well as I can (which usually means I can't exit the room without stepping over some) and then start building My approximate time to mess up whole table with bricks to the extent it no longer can be called a system is about 20 min Which actually doesn't really matter because this time is usually when I have to start packing everything back in order to do some other stuff in my room. No wonder it takes me ages to build something

I don't have either set but in my oppinion, Imperial Shuttle looks much better. It's iconic ship and it's stands proud being quite different (colorwise & shapewise) from most of the other sets. Also from multiple reviews you can hear positive feedback mostly. FO Transport, on contrary, is quite typical grey angular vessel and at least the visual impression can't measure with Tydirium. Yet if you are more into minifigs and playability ("Prepare for deploy!" -"Roger that"- "Attaaaaack!!!") it becomes quite considerable choice for you :) You make no mistake by choosing either, yet Tydirium is my recommendation. You should at least specify your approx budget, otherwise you won't get many rellevant advces. In general, I think all TFA sets has similar price/value ratio, maybe with one exception of TIE being quite expensive, considering the pieces and especially minifigs (where I see nothing reallyspecial and must-have). That being said, I add in the dame breath that all of the sets are somewhat expensive. Might be just my feeling but I usually check the image of the set, then read the tag and go like 'what?'. I'd consider all prices about 10% off to be standard and fair. Anyway, to me, the most appealing set is certainly Poe's X-wing and it wold be my recommendation. But again, your budget matters in the first place.

Thanks for clarification and for having this discussion in general. I can't say about validity of that connection but it would be great if someone proved it either way. As much as I'm friend with geometry, dimensions of lego bricks is what ruins my attempts for computation most of the time. And since there is quite huge tollerance in LDD (i wonder why, since some connections that actually are valid doesn't work there), I usually rely on the 'feel' when trying to connect and align in real. I wish I had the budget for the set, now even more than before - this interests me a lot, yet I feel quite inappropriate in the discussion since I only judge from building instructions and pictures. Nevertheless, I may slightly disagree about the risk of breaking that brick built studs up section. The orientation of the force applied to that DBG technic brick is less than 45% from horizontal, which means it tries to pull the brick sideways rather than upwards and studs can hold this really well. especially since there are several more rows of bricks and plates above. Also the loooong handle you mention doesn't work like extra leverage here. It's just the mass of the tail section which matters. Thus, assuming that the original construction is strong enough, there isn't much stress added to the cockpit section, I would swear on that :) Actually there should be (if the connection is valid) almost no force bond if we state that the tendency for the gap to even appear is really low (which I still believe, despite some counter examples, i.e. Anio's pic) Still (again, sorry for repeating myself), it's excellent set, gap or no gap. Probably the UCS set I desire the most.

That's right and it's exactly why ArchieNov's fix is great in it's simplicity. All it does is fixing this loose tetragon shape to the refference frame, assuring that it can't rock back and forth. I agree that such extra linkage would make sense if it were thought of originally and put into Lego design. Given by the amount of rigidity tests they claim to proceed, it's a bit surprising that the problem surfaced within the design stage.

^ Perfect response Don't you offer some 'how to reply with style' courses? I'd sign up

Lets start propper - nice mod. I don't own the set, can't judge how crucial this might be, yet it's clearly strenghtening the structure and with all the positives you mentioned (common parts, not many of them), I'm glad you shared it. I can imagine implementing it even as just a 'what if' type of thing. The discussion about the gap might have been unwanted but there it is and I see nothing wrong about it. I believe people who report the issue don't lie on purpose, which means there is scope for improvement. On the other hand, let's be fair - where it is not? This set is (at least in my oppinion) so innovative and interestingly built that I'm ready to accept several little flaws. I can't see why anyone would downrate this set as a whole. This doesn't sound like the best response to (maybe objective) criticism. And reading your argument I just quote, which goes like 'why should we do better if people still buy it' is quite disappointing to be honest. And for example (and for your information), I personally do care about these MF gaps. Not saying the set is bad but in this particular case, gaps are one of the reasons for me not to buy the set. I rather hope that new and better design will come eventually.

First pic was enough evidence for me. No need for more discussion about this. It's sad people with so little respect exhibit their bad manners on this forum. It's almost ruefully naive to take such well known design and bring it to eurobricks audience, where multiple members would recognise it within first glimpse... Hans has full right to be upset - If someone stole my venator design, I'd probably go even less polite... Reporting this topic although maybe it should remain here just as a warning. Mods will know the best.

That's great news. I had exactly the same feeling about the contest :D Much better now. Well, congratz to the winners again, I guess :) Still cool how many people participated without material motivation. That's great fact afterall.

I love it! Just love it! (I'm usually not this pathetic )

Just an idea - since this is turning into quite complex mod, isn't that shame to stick with 'all studs up' concept, especially for the mandibles? Would be serious improvement to reverse the bottom plates. Later on, if you manage to stick on some hull plating from the underside, you can stop calling this 'mod' but 'moc' instead :D

That first excavator bucket looks wonderful in real - what kind of 3d print is that? I guess you used some of these laser liquid resin printers? Otherwise I have no clue how did you manage to print such part :D