anothergol

For techniques: https://www.flickr.com/groups/788191@N24/

"conductive black" technically counting as a color, that would make it 1 (I believe) as well

Pretty cool. Aren't the thrusters rotatable?

Thanks. Yeah, nearly all of my MOCs seat a minifig, I've always liked figures in cockpits, in toys. When I was a kid, one of my brothers was into WW2 fighter planes kits. I kept breaking the windshields to steal the pilots inside, that always got him really mad :) Since it's not attached to the vertical axles, the cockpits can rotate. The 2 middle parts of the ring are fragile, it was really frustrating to build.

Joke aside, I wonder how many adults break their MOCs apart. When I've spent hours to days to design a MOC, and it costs less than 100eur, I know I'm not gonna disassemble it, other than temporarily if I need a special part that's easily accessable.

Pretty cool

Couple of new very interesting parts/colors recently listed (yeah of course none in stock), I'm glad that Lego is adding some more small/basic parts: 25214, 24201, 26047, 25269. 24246 tooth not yet listed in LBG (it will go well with that 1/4 circle tile), I hope it won't be just in the Beetle set.

But not at all. The majority of entries, good or bad, have no votes. Let me list a couple of the "ending soon" projects that are average (or even above), -nowhere near- the quality of that Platypus thing, and hardly have more than 100 votes: https://ideas.lego.com/projects/106764 https://ideas.lego.com/projects/108127 https://ideas.lego.com/projects/108739 https://ideas.lego.com/projects/108745 https://ideas.lego.com/projects/108942 https://ideas.lego.com/projects/109247 So you can't conclude anything about the quality, from votes alone. Hey, even my entries have no votes except one, but I didn't conclude "oh it's because they're crap". I'm well aware of the reason one got votes: Star Wars. But here's how I understand the problem: I'm seeing a lot critisizing those large 5000+ parts projects, claiming that they pollute Lego Ideas. Those projects are *good*, are voted for, and there are what, maybe 1 of them per week? Not only they are wrongly accused of polluting the website, I also find it strange that, in this case, no one cares about "hurting anyone's feelings". And why is that? Because those authors are grown-ups who can handle it, and I suspect that some of you believe that the authors of the bad projects are weak or retarded people. But I find it more insulting for them to believe that, than critisizing their projects. No one's making fun of a toddler's Duplo tower posted on his parent's Facebook page here, those are supposedly serious Lego Ideas entries, they are there for a reason.

hum no, I'm talking about that "Perry the Platypus", that's a license. If it looks like it's original, it's because it ressembles nothing like what it's supposed to. If you read the guy/kid's (he tells about school, so I will assume kid) descriptions, he wants to become a Lego designer. How delusional is that? Those positive project comments are definitely NOT helping him. I don't know, personally I do prefer to be told when something I've made, sucks. Although usually I'm aware of it, simply by comparing it to what's already there, which this guy obviously didn't. And I think that'd be good for him. It's like school, afterall. Give a crap homework, you won't get positive comments not to hurt your feelings. There -are- such hippie-like private schools, though, where no notes are given, etc. And usually, the people who come out of those schools, while they enjoyed it better, have troubles finding their place in the society, which those schools didn't prepare them for. It may not be a bad "idea", but where I come from, ideas (unless you're really inventing something, like a new kind of motor) are worth nothing. I mean <insert your favorite show> + Lego isn't an idea. The build however is below mediocrity, let's be honnest. If someone adds a project that's a really good rendition of that character, and many are talented enough for that, then I'd vote for it. You're right that there are tons of projects that are just below average, but not bad enough to be funny, that's the majority of them. I have hardly seen any of them here. The ones that have been mocked here, we probably spent more time commenting them than it took their authors to build them. That one would indeed be an example of something mediocre that's not bad enough to be funny. But come on, it's bad. It's just "skip to next" bad. He most likely was, and that's the whole point! I'll compare it again to those bad movies that were so bad they became cult movies. Or those internet "stars" who became stars out of being bad. There are really 2 ways to handle this, either you get offended, or you surf on it. The Star Wars kid chose the first path, Tron Guy chose the second one. The authors of those projects are good at one thing: being bad, and that's a talent too. Btw I think this other project https://ideas.lego.com/projects/16689 explains it a bit for me. What the author apparently failed to explain (I guess) is that his entry isn't "Perry the Platypus", but a toy version of it (the "inaction figure"). Well, I assume that's the case, since it looks like on the screenshot. So here you have the difference between a project good enough to be presented, and a crap one.

This Surface, with LDD on it:

What kind of constructive comment can you give to that thing? It sucks, & it's obvious why it does. If an adult didn't make that, then the father is to be blamed for not telling his kid "keep working on it, if it ends up not sucking, I'll post it for you". Also quite possible it's not all Lego in there. I don't recognize those plates/bricks with 1 hollow stud on them. Some studs don't have the logo either. I don't know, maybe Lego should make a new website which would be to Lego Ideas what the Paralympics are to the Olympics? And if there's something destructive here, it's the project's comments (also for his "Shrek's house" which, of course, looks like poo), telling him his stuff is great. The kid will fall from even higher when the truth will hit him, don't you think? It's because of false encouragements that some people end up in dumb reality shows & are made fun of.

But what does it depict? I can't even tell if it's a living character or a machine. Trailcroc, half-trailer half-crocodile?

For the footprints on the base I have to credit this MOC (but it's probably not the first): http://www.hothbricks.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/i-scream-clone-hoth-battle-moc.jpg It's a cost-effective way to make them.

Yeah I've seen it in reviews, I'll certainly switch to it.

I have plenty of shots of the interior (of the past versions) in my flickr though:

No LXF because, as you may have noticed, the plates join naturally better in reality than they do in the LDD. Which didn't matter for the way it was built, but did matter a lot precision-wise the way the new front is built. I had made a version that was fitting very precisely in the LDD, and didn't work in real life, so the final result is adjusted outside the LDD. Here's how it looks. I'd say it's better on the upper part of the face, a bit worst on the lower part, and the shape is more true to the original.

It's all in my Flickr here: I never made a video of the "action", though.

Damn, amazon.de has just cancelled my Brick Bank order, I wonder what their entry was about when I ordered it. I still won't buy it for 20eur more because I'm in the "wrong" country.

I'm rarely excited by Lego's releases, and it's rare that Lego does better than MOCs out there, but this time they really made a gem. Granted, they had to introduce a new part, but it's still very well done, -so- much ahead from the 10187 one. It even brings parts I was so waiting for in LBG. True, & of course the 2 cars look alike, but the color scheme susprises me because that's more the one I expect to see a 2cv in.

I've tried making one using the pullback motor generally used to lift hooks in choppers btw. I've already used that motor to close the cockpit in this one, and it works well: Sadly that motor winds up too fast, thus requires a wormgear & the design was getting too bulky. I wish Lego had a wind-up motor like in those Zoïds (when they were motorized).

Thanks Those new 'mighty micros' for kids. They can be done using old 2x2 parts, but with 2x4 it's kinda more solid & the structure is a little different.

I've used handlebars for the thumb:

well I forgot to open it when taking the pictures, but the lesson I learnt when doing this, wear a black hat & long sleeves when making photos. And yet my hands are still too visible :) Perhaps I need to take the pics remotely. I wanted to avoid any large axle & technic pieces, I quite like the thinner bars here. But the problem was more one of precision, not solidity. That is, precision a little off somewhere means that the curve will fail in places. It wasn't that precise in the LDD, but I thought I could get away with Lego's bending, and I did, but then arranging the curve at the bottom messes with the curve at the top. Eventually I got it right, I'll try not to touch it anymore Also the fact that not every hinge part has the same friction, meant that the curve didn't come naturally, not every part was hinging equally. But did you mean 3mm or 4mm hoses? 3mm hoses would have worked until the sides (there it would have been bent too much), but that would have meant no more thin panels, & thus more weight to deal with. But yeah, if it had failed, that would have been a solution.

So I'm still building this, it was kind of a nightmare, to hold without any column in the middle. Weight wasn't even the problem, it was more a problem of precision to link those bars, the lack of lengths for bars, etc. Still waiting for parts for the display stand. Meanwhile the eye will be similar to this standalone one, with a guy inside:

Tachikoma-style, they share the same structure & they open the same way. https://www.flickr.com/photos/137434519@N08/albums They were a good use for this new part: