anothergol

I doubt that the author really has anything to say. It's also disrespectful for those who voted. I well understand that Lego can't use retired parts & has to discard illegal connections. But look at what the already not-so-amazing DeLorean project became.. Some projects, like Wall-E, were improved, though. of course it would be a special case of Lego Ideas, I'm not saying they should pick any project that's already there Still, the many votes send Lego a message. You will probably disagree with these again (because, Star Wars), but they got votes. https://ideas.lego.com/projects/144406 https://ideas.lego.com/projects/91535 Even if it doesn't pass Lego's selection, large UCS sets being voted for over & over, that can't be ignored by Lego. And they're cool to look at, unlike all the crap listed in this thread. And they're not that many, they're not crowding Lego Ideas.

I agree, it looks like Lego released great stuff.. that weren't for kids, this year.

Are you talking about Cavegod's AT-AT? Because you wrote AT-ST, which would be my entry, and it's only 800 parts, that definitely fits in the guidelines. Besides, it's clear that Lego wouldn't produce a set like it is, Lego wouldn't produce anything this fragile. However, the original project for the exo-suit had much worst sins than mine (like, retired parts, illegal connections) - and it was still produced, in a redesigned form (which sometimes ends up bad, & is disrespectful for the author, but that's another story). Yet, I don't care, I knew in advance how many votes to expect, as there was already another AT-ST entry. I didn't post it expecting it to pass. Anyone who designs a set purely & only for Lego Ideas, that is, will only show it there and didn't design it for the fun of it, is an idiot wasting his time. If Lego Ideas wasn't public, if entries were to be for Lego's eyes & judgement only, absolutely no one would suggest anything. That would be the same as working for Lego, for free. No, the key here is views, so you see, that's the main reason for people to post projects. Unrelated, I wonder why Lego Ideas hasn't been used for the Lego movies. With the amount of stuff in the movie(s), knowing that everything is (more or less) a proper build, it would have been nice to fill the movie with user entries, even if it's just stuff in the background. Even crap entries would be fun. Imagine the ugly pyramid as a cameo, somewhere in the background.

Pretty nice. You should be able to get 200 more votes easily. I would have added reverb, on the plugs. And/or music, as it's well edited & catchy, but not as much as it could be.

Did feet slide? I wonder if those new caterpillar rubber dots (Nexo Knights) would help under each foot. I recently got them in an order and they don't feel very grippy, though. Here with my much lighter AT-ST, the joints are way more than enough of course, however I've noticed very noticable bending as I only attached them with 2 out of 3 pins. I see LiLmeFromDaFuture attached 2 pins as well, but the opposite sides so that should be better. But that's where I would expect things to fail: mixing technics & plates. Technics bend a lot, plates don't. So in places where technic parts are ensuring the solidity & plates are only decorative, I would expect the bending of the technics to detach (or even break) the plates. Is there a lot of bending happening on these AT-AT's?

I know I didn't start this thread to be angry at mediocre projects, but to have fun with the terribad ones. You can't ignore the existence of mediocre projects (which are the majority), they're crowding the website, making it harder to spot the good projects. But it's not about pointing out mediocre projects, those are boring. Sometimes however it's so bad it's good. Here's an example of what most projects are: https://ideas.lego.com/projects/150872 It's not terribad, not enough to be funny for it. It's not amazing either. We all know it has zero chance to pass. That's a "meh" project you just ignore & move on. There is definitely a point in posting or voting. Cavegod posted his UCS AT-AT, I voted for it. It was more than obvious that it had no chance, but still, it sent a message to Lego: people would buy an UCS AT-AT. Maybe not Cavegod's, but if they managed to make one safe enough.. Also the keyword is "probably". Lego only says that it has less chances, that's all. But anyway, anyone who posts an entry & really hopes to have it produced as a set, is delusional. If it passes, it's amazing, but it's most likely not gonna happen. To me, Lego Ideas works like this: people show their MOCs which they would agree Lego to produce (not every MOCer would, so this is where the difference with, say MOCPages, is). It's not about showing your MOCs which you *want* Lego to produce (again, because the chances of happening are very very thin), but which you would *agree* Lego to produce. I got 2k votes for my entry, I certainly don't consider it a failure. Really? Show me which ones. Here, I read: "We welcome projects based on current licenses like Star Wars, Superheroes, Disney, etc., However, these active licenses are likely to have similar concepts already in the pipeline." So it says it in clear, projects based on existing licenses are welcome.

I'd say it's less than this. Let's face it, most of the projects are horrible, and their true chance of getting 10k votes is absolutely zero. So that leaves the good projects, I'd say a few hundreds, perhaps 1000 at best. So if someone who's not dellusional picks the right subject & posts a good project, *and* promotes it enough, I'd say his chances are 1 in 50 to 100. This last bit of randomness would be the one of that subject being picked by social media, guaranteeing enough votes, and then being approved by Lego, which is too kinda unpredictable. The rest isn't really random, it's up to the project's quality, so I wouldn't really say "chances" here. (still, I maintain that Lego Ideas is a great place to be seen, and that no one should be posting entries for any other reason) As usual those 3 supporters are supporting & following every single project, I wonder what's going on. Why would anyone bother with bots in there? Would they be doing this just to get votes in return? Doesn't seem to work very well.

Can't you compensate for the height by rotating other legs differently, at the hip?

not really, there are studs everywhere else anyway

well ok, it's not atrocious..

Even more impressive that it looks better than the 3 original ones

Ah yes, I tried them too, but they offset too much (they require to be clipped). Perhaps if they had been in DBG they would have been an option.

No way a set with the bags just opened would have the same value as used. Besides, it's very common to find sets sold as "new, without minifigures", which obviously requires opening the bags. It's of course never gonna sell like a graded box, but still. It's just a minor defect like a scratch on the box. There are people (like me) who open boxes & would prefer to buy "like new", at reduced price, because they know they won't get all the possible crap found in used sets. Just ask your kid if he prefers to assemble what has no more value to him than any other set, or a lot of sets that you could buy with the money.

Yeah, it was that part on the pic (2508, DBG) or 4596 (LBG only)

I'm now hesitating between these 2. The "long bar with towball" looks shorter with a filling tile, so it may be ok.

Because that's its real size (5-6 studs). I was using 4 because I didn't have Bandai's model for reference yet, & because the nice car hood was fitting well underside.

As explained in the other thread: Ah, you probably mean the "body's engine" binoculars - they're attached together, and then to the body using a common clip

If you mean the chin's dual gun, it's still attached using a tile+clip & that droid body, and a bar+clip. However the bar+clip isn't attached to a pin anymore, but to a hollow round plate, it's more secure (that is, if you mean it's really detaching. Because as for falling down, when you pose the gun you have to adjust the round thing below so that it locks) I have tried many other designs there, but it was always a problem of room. Be aware that v2 is heavier & has more things not attached very securely, but it's the price to pay for more detail.

Is that join really stiffer than 62712? I only picked that one for the look, but I've played with other forms, they all seemed to have the same stiffness to me.

I've just assembled a new version with the completely redone, 6-studs wide body, as well as the improved bottom lip at the back of the head, & the improved grenade launcher.

the gear (which I've received today, it looks -much- better) is roughly the same thickness, so the trick works with both equally: you need the clip just to go through the disk & lampshade, and on the inside of the lampshade you attack a (trans clear) 20482, and then the bar to whatever you want, like a 18674.

Yes but my point was that you don't need to anchor anything, if you use the extenders. I'm still surprised that those extenders support the weight of mine, and it now weights a lot. Really, your problem will more be the feet joints, they're where things will fail the most. Pretty nice AT-DP he has there, cool legs. As for the AT-ST, my problem with the faceplate is that the slopes that define the eyes look rounded, it gives it a "Cars" look. Also, the 1x4 walls for the sides is a nice idea, but then the slope is missing. I know the slope on the "real" one is less than the one of a 2x4 wedge plate, but it's still something that makes it recognizable.

But I was originally using the same 7-studs bar as you do, and 2 extenders + a 5-studs bar is the exact same length spyglass? Which part is it? Ah, but that road sign has the perfect size, it really is nearly twice larger than the top shield, and nearly 1/3 of the whole width. Only problem with that road sign is to hold it, as the clip takes room.

Nice idea to lock the inter-legs bar, however remember that the extenders make those joints really strong, so it's not needed, as long as you use those extenders. I've changed the grenade launcher on mine too, but to a simple lightsaber hilt, because it really is that small. I've redone the body on mine to be 6-studs wide btw, and thus was facing the problem of the lower "shields". I hesitated using shovels like you did, but I went for (a pair of) skis, it works quite well. The shovel is nice, however the lower shield is supposed to be quite larger than the top curve.

IMHO Speed Champions is the worst as for stickers. And here it's not printed vs stickers, it's the fact that they relied way too much on drawn detail. I got the R8 and it looks nothing like the one on the box, without stickers. Generally, Lego uses grilles & cheese slopes on car fronts, but in this line they just go for large slopes, so there is absolutely no detail if you don't put the stickers on.