Jump to content

anothergol

Eurobricks Counts
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    1,598

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by anothergol

  1. anothergol
    Come on, the "good" one doesn't look like a 3000+ parts project, sure it'd have costed more than 100, but less than 200 I'm sure. I can only imagine one reason this ugly thing sold, the minifigs (which is the only thing that Lego improved here). IMHO it's one of the ugliest things that Lego produced, any basic minifig-scaled car in the most basic set, at least looks like a car. & be honest, if you bought it, it's purely for the license. Had this been a Lego City set, you'd have laughed at it. Meanwhile the original one looked "ok" But still, there is a ton of DeLorean MOCs out there, I can't find any that looks worse than what Lego dared to release. They all have a proper hood.
  2. anothergol
    They have parts in their inventory that were created by Lego. IF Lego wanted to get them in trouble, they certainly could. But it's not a company's best interest to sue the world.
  3. anothergol
    this one, which got voted too. How did Lego reject that? https://ideas.lego.com/projects/8889
  4. anothergol
    I'm not seeing Lego suing the other tools, while they could for the same reasons. Lawyers would sue the world to justify their existence/salary, but there are people above lawyers. I agree about the ease of use, nothing beats the LDD. Collision detection however is so unreliable in the LDD that you have to check manually anyway. In fact, this is where a third-party maintained database would be useful, there could be an optional high-polygon database for those who have good graphic cards or are ok with a slower display, because quite often I've wondered if 2 parts were colliding because the low-poly parts weren't showing it clearly.
  5. anothergol
    EULA's are pointless, no one reads them so they can be filled with stuff that aren't necessarily legal. I'm pretty sure that, in Europe, disassembling on your own side for studying is legal, and that yes, making tools to work on the DATA wouldn't be illegal. I think that the only problem would be that the new parts you'd add to the database, have been protected. But I'd say who cares, since they're made available in other tools. But before caring about laws, IMHO better ask yourself the main question, would Lego not be ok about that & want to fight against it? I'd be Lego, I'd be happy about the community maintaining a tool I chose to discontinue. Plus, Lego is still a family-owned company, not the kind to let lawyers attack anything when they're bored. All this said, I'm a programmer but I've kinda moved to other things and I wouldn't bother myself doing this. Figuring out data formats is something I had to do a lot before the internet was there, and it's quite boring & time-consuming - not something I wanna do again.
  6. anothergol
    I've voted for the good one, and I'm glad it's successful. But that's where the problem of Lego redesigning "winning" sets kicks in: they might end up with worse than the 2 other ones (well ok the one on the left isn't too bad). That's why I keep saying that we should indeed not vote for ideas but sets. It's sad that there was the perfect De Lorean on Lego Ideas, but the worst one won, and then Lego managed to make it even worse. There is a new one again, there is not a single chance it's gonna be produced, but I'm glad it's there, it looks cool, it wasn't a waste of time seeing it. https://ideas.lego.com/projects/128929 What was a waste of time were the many ones around it, like these, that someone's dad added https://ideas.lego.com/projects/128986 https://ideas.lego.com/projects/128180 I've read someone commenting on the "death" of the LDD, that no LDD will result in less pollution in Lego Ideas. Of course, not true, since the existing LDD isn't gonna disappear. But I do agree that it's the LDD that's responsible for the majority of the crap (but also a lot of the good stuff, I assume) on Lego Ideas.
  7. anothergol
    Really, you have duty? Here it's only for specific stuff, like alcohol, perfume, but not toys (unless considered art). How is VAT unnecessary? It's nearly the same as a sales tax, & to the consumer, the same. You can of course expect a foreigner to already have applied it for you, and in some case, it has been, and you normally shouldn't be paying anything - but I've only seen this applied to virtual goods so far. Both applied on import are a form of protectionism anyway. The duty may be a bad thing, but the VAT on import is like, to the state, a necessary form of protectionism. Or we would ALL be buying directly from outside, no? Now where it's bad, it's that we are normally exempt of additional VAT when buying within Europe, however I'm now seeing german sellers applying the target country's own VAT, while if I was to buy in Germany and pass the border, that would be perfectly legal. Those 10-25eur (I've seen EMS apply 25, I don't use them anymore, maybe they still do that) that the post puts in its pocket, now THAT is a complete ripoff. Because the post should already KNOW about that charge in advance, and it should be included in the shipping price. But then of course, their prices would look very bad. And it of course doesn't cost 25eur to fill a bunch of papers for the customs. with that I agree, Lego shouldn't bother doing that, and it's even worse when you remember they stole in the first place
  8. anothergol
    Those who can produce parts.. don't really need Lego's help for the 3D design. In fact, Megablocks has all the nice parts while Lego still focuses on minifig stuff - so I wish Lego was copying others. Quite a lot of the top most useful Lego parts were originally minifig accessories, and suck (extra detail bits that get stuck) for that reason. Lego's biggest value is its name & history, & then the licenses (which are copied a lot and no one needs help for that). I would assume that the value of a new part depends on whether it's in the LDD or not. If a lot of MOCers use the LDD, they won't use as much the new parts that aren't in it (especially the ones that aren't there for decoration), & the new sets should sell less. But sure, adults (either directly or through BL resellers) might not weight much compared to the kids. I don't think it's a big problem that the LDD gets discontinued, it works well. Sure, I can imagine 1000 ways to improve it, but it works well enough, and it's not like a new "system" is gonna pop up tomorrow. All the stuff is already there, the main problem is that the database gets discontinued, and that's what we should be asking to Lego, the file format. It can still live for a long time by only updating the database.
  9. anothergol
    Don't forget that, on BL, old parts are quite often as or more expensive than new parts (I've seen "old" parts for 3x the price of "new" in the SAME shop), while new sets are A LOT more expensive than old sets, especially in pristine boxes (& is generally made for collectors who won't open them, & value manuals & boxes). So by BLing parts, you can get it partially new for the same price. Used, it may be in good shape, or have belonged to the fithiest kid. Stickers however will suck in both ways. Old sticker sheets will be expensive, while used parts will have stickers badly applied as usual.
  10. anothergol
    ok so the next step is to convince Lego to release the format for the part database
  11. anothergol
    Here I'm lucky that the customs are only after the money, they generally don't check what's inside. When they can charge 15eur+21% of the total value by just applying a sticker, why would they bother to do more? There must be a Lego lobby in germany that works with the customs to fight against fake minifigs, so that's understandable - nothing looks more like a fake than a custom printed one. But it's not unnecessary, and probably applies to you as well - it's just there to make you pay VAT. So I guess that you must be paying over 20% on all your foreign orders too, unless the customs are lazy, which was the case here, depending on the country of origin. Until 2015, here anything coming from Hong Kong was garanteed to be untaxed. I was assuming that -maybe- it's because HK was still british, thus "european". In any case, today pretty much everything is overtaxed. The joys of customs.. you get an express package from another continent in like 3 days.. and then it sits for 4 weeks in a customs office.. they send you good old paper laters asking you to prove your purchase.. they wait more.. and they tax you for the "storage time" of your package :)
  12. anothergol
    funny that Lego covered that.. so that young kids can re-enact that bloody scene where he gets chopped up :) I was gonna suggest the sumo wrestler, but he has a one-pack.
  13. anothergol
    Yeah, lift or cut an extremity of your sticker, align it over the part, then press over the uncovered part. Once it's there, you simply unfold the rest of the support while applying it - no dust can get in. As for misaligned stickers, the problem is that even if you align the cutout part well, cutouts are generally misaligned with prints anyway.
  14. anothergol
    Thanks Strangely, in the SW Battlefront game, it's the Endor version that's used on Hoth. There really aren't many shots of the Hoth version anywhere. Version 2 is still waiting for parts but stands up as well btw:
  15. anothergol
    you mean, it was accepted in the first place? ..meanwhile one of my projects got rejected because not every word in the title started with a capital..
  16. anothergol
    The link works here, it's a zip. But on a phone, you probably can't open it, I'm afraid.
  17. anothergol
    Normally I've included LDD-generated instructions in the zip here https://rebrickable.com/mocs/gol/articulated-star-wars-at-st ..which I'd normally not advise.. but if you have no computer, it's better than nothing
  18. anothergol
    thanks sure, LXF here http://www.fiastarta.com/Lego/NanoAT-AT/NanoAT-AT_Final.lxf You will have to look at the pics around the feet, because the parts I used aren't in the LDD. It's the DGB round tile with stud, and the LBG part with a bar on both sides. And of course the light brick is optional.
  19. anothergol
    I think the problem is more to find the right angle to pin a beam to the structure in more than 2 places, if it's necessary to do so. Maybe there's a table somewhere showing which angles match which stud/plate lengths.
  20. anothergol
    Rotated legs is important, but don't you think that eventually you will go for a fixed pose and never change it? You may simply pin beams at specific angles, no?
  21. anothergol
    I got the pieces for everything, pictures at the top!
  22. anothergol
    Well it's ALL the 1x2 brackets that are wrong. I assume LiLmeFromDaFuture knows, he used the large brackets for what's on my pic that simply doesn't work (-at all-) with the 1x2 ones. But playing too much with brackets generally produces gaps, although things will hold fine.
  23. anothergol
    I'm talking about this, I have some MOCs that chain stud inversion a bit too much, and I've easily ended up with gaps created by the intrication
  24. anothergol
    Have you built the top of the leg yet btw? The 1x2 brackets are sometimes troubles, as they're molded wrong (while the 2x2 ones are fine)
  25. anothergol
    I own one of the rare 4598's in DBG btw. But quite often when a new part pops up, it's in many sets at the same time, even if it's one of those obscure parts that probably "no one asked for", like this . Seeing it in a whooping 49 sets this year looks more like "I've been asked to place this part somewhere" than "it was the part I really needed here". I'm not complaining, when a good part is made, it's good to have plenty available for cheap. So much more useful parts could have been made, though. ..this said, I've found myself already using it in my MOCs, so it's not a stupid part, however it's weird to see a compound version of a part that doesn't exist yet. We should be getting a 1x1 with bar first. Plus, if a 1x1 existed, that new part would be more easily (not really hard, though) substituted in the LDD.
×
×
  • Create New...