Jay Psi

I strongly suspect someone influential at TLG thinks otherwise, with Mindstorms on ice and programming haphazardly being bundled with Technic as Control+. Even then, as you have said many times, it would not be an exorbitant cost to include a physical remote control. Smartphone functionality could still be offered as additional play value. Let's be honest, the lack of a physical remote is a cost-saving measure, partially disguised as resource management/customer concern. The point about obsolescence should be a big concern to TLG, but perhaps the relative market share of Control+ sets means TLG are fine with dumping it in time, as they have done with Dacta and Mindstorms previously. Or their current structure means it makes more financial sense to come up with a brand new system when the time is right.

8455 says hi. Japes aside, the comments about TLG departments lacking agility/flexibility are on the money. With the current directive, the designers - who are clearly talented enough to produce high-quality sets - will hardly ever be given the chance, given the restrictions and targets imposed on them.

I thought TLG's near-collapse was more a result of spreading resources too thinly (throwing stuff at the wall and seeing what sticks), and that the "silo" approach was a symptom of trying - and failing - to keep track of it all. This would seem to be more of a "one size fits all" situation with regard to most departments, Technic being the one that it actively harms the most.

My cynical self would assert that TLG ignoring MINDSTORMS conveniently removed a large impetus for closer integration between the app and Technic developers.

The answers to the app questions stand out - with the majority of app-capable sets being Technic, it would make sense to bring that development into the Technic team, or at least have app developers on the Technic team (or vice-versa). It's a shame to see that the current direction won't change. I understand that TLG feel like they have to align to customer/market values (licensed sets, cars, colour vomit, etc.), but there was a time not so long ago when Technic set the trend in these areas and others followed. It does sound like the Technic team, and probably other set-focused departments, are beholden to the commercial juggernaut Lego has become. I suspect this video (thanks @kbalage for chasing this up) will only reinforce the attitude reflected in the thread title. There's still lots to love about Technic, but not as much as their used to be.

Monkey's paw: The set is an Animal Crossing licensed car. Back on topic, unfortunately, the increase in Technic licensed cars, and licenses in general, produces good numbers for TLG, either externally (sales) or internally (focus groups). But honestly, look at the first few pages of this forum, and you'll still see licensed cars over-represented, in alternates or modifications, even in such a discerning audience. By contrast, outside of the headline-grabbers (flagships, innovative/novel designs) the other sets have gained relatively little traction. I don't see the trend being bucked anytime soon. With that said, I've personally enjoyed most of said licensed cars. The Audi RS Q e-tron is my go-to recommendation for a Control+ starter set, the Peugeot 9X8 is the set 42039 should always have been, and both it and the Ford GT will hopefully start a new trend of relatively dense and functional ~1:10 models instead of the 1:8 empty shells that the Porsche 911 RSR and Ferrari 488 GTE were. The blue Bolide is just as cool as its yellow counterpart and the Monster Jam sets are still great gifts to youngsters getting into Technic. Outside of the licensed cars, it's hard to avoid the Liebherr LR 13000-shaped elephant in the room. It's as impressive mechanically as it is flawed aesthetically and priced outrageously. The other sets represent a good range of purposes to me, with licenses being used more astutely to represent and demonstrate the ingenuity of the real-life counterparts, albeit they still were not required to do this in all cases, except possibly the Perseverance Rover. Special mention must go to the AR app for the MT-10 SP; I know it's not to the taste of most here, but it is just as big a step in Lego's use of software as the new gearbox parts the set comes with is for its use of hardware. My biggest concern is the increase in price, beyond inflation and increased production costs. My cynical half says the licensing spree is an pre-emptive effort to justify price rises with their perceived value to the customer.

This is a good suggestion, perhaps with links to the entry/WIP threads for people to peruse if they wish.

@Unbrickme Thanks for the video, I enjoyed it. It didn't cover new ground for regulars of the forum, but there will always be newcomers or "Dark Age" returners who would appreciate collating most of the discussions into one place. However, I'm surprised TLG haven't (yet?) been in touch with regards to the title. While I am glad they do not stifle criticism from ambassadors, LUGs, etc., "...How To Fix Lego Technic" implies that it is broken or significantly damaged. Taking a leaf from @allanp, "How To Make Lego Technic Better" would be more appropriate to me, acknowledging what is good while addressing long-standing issues. The Technic Pub thread would have been a good place for this video, if it hasn't been mothballed by now.

That's a nice percentage. On a more serious note, there's a small but non-trivial chance you're right, depending on the lead-in times for new parts. Regardless, exciting times are ahead. The rotary catch was a huge step as well, but it's been a while since that came out and we're overdue the next step.

I really enjoyed seeing the creativity on display in this contest, you've all put me to shame. 4: 10 5: 6 9: 4 8: 3 2: 2 10: 1

Sad to hear. Sales will obviously be a large part of the motivation, but I can't help thinking that Lego have dug their own hole with so many distinct but overlapping "build/code" themes and products. To my mind, Mindstorms - EV3 in particular - was the one that I found the most intuitive and feature-dense. The specific mention of Spike Prime (amongst other avenues) does have me worried slightly. In our education establishment, we've avoided Spike Prime, Boost, etc. exactly because our students find it far too limiting. If Lego commit to expanding the functionality then it may work out, but the way they (and Powered Up) have been handled so far makes me sceptical.

I could say that, but I'd be lying, wouldn't I? Even with the caveat of using an FDM printer, it doesn't sound out of place at all. You've clearly done a good job with the design of the parts.

Disclaimer: When it comes to Lego electronics, I've never been satisfied by the in-house options; I've found third-party solutions (SBrick, BuWizz, FxBricks, PyBricks, etc.) to be worth the teething issues for the functionality they provide. Control+ has potential, but in its base form, it is held back by a number of factors. For me, the most significant one is using a touch screen. This is easily rectified in a number of ways, but all of them require extra steps compared to simply turning on the battery box and the Powered Up remote, and immediately playing. If you're comfortable with coding though, the options for integration are large. On the other hand, Powered Up isn't going to offer you any more than it currently does. I've never been a fan personally, although for what it's worth, PU has been much better at showing non-AFOLs what Lego can do, even now. <British weather joke>The fact the remote is infrared, and therefore suffers in strong sunlight, hasn't been a significant hindrance in my experience.</British weather joke> As for the 42129, if it has exactly the Control+ parts you want and it's decently discounted, then go for it. I'd recommend looking at 42124 if you want to see what C+ has to offer at a cheaper price.

The move seems logical to me. From what I remember before the split, Mindstorms topics didn't generate much discussion; hopefully, with the lines between Mindstorms and Technic becoming more blurred, the move back would see more discussion. I don't think the relative lack of activity is to the same extent as the scale model forum was (I'm happy to be corrected), but they would definitely receive more attention in the Technic forum. If the response from the Mindstorms forum is positive, then go for it.

This thread cannot go on without mention of the single greatest pneumatic set ever to be released. Two cylinders, seven switches, ten pumps, thirteen t-pieces, over 4.5m of pneumatic hose, all in just over 700 pieces. And it fits almost perfectly. Not a single function is out of place or awkward to operate. Quality over quantity. 8455 Back-Hoe Loader.

I hope the price drop works out. It does seem that €15 has become a "soft ceiling" for instructions of alternate models. FWIW, I was happy to pay €20, the implementation of diagonal drive in Lego is one worth studying.

It does. His spoken English is also very good, but I can understand Sariel not wanting to do his own voice-overs for various reasons. As for the set, this what I thought Dom's Charger was going to be like. The new-ish black panels are welcome additions

I remember taking an afternoon out to read this the first time, it was as inspiring then as the "new chapters" are now. I hope you get to enjoy the fruits of your labour for years to come. It's also made me a bit nervous though - if that's what circa-60,000 pieces looks like properly organised, my current collection (105k pieces, 8-10 display models) that's half sat in their original boxes is going to need some serious work!

My pie in the sky contest idea would be animals. I doubt it would be popular though, it's a niche of a niche. Why yes, I have been looking at @grohl's MOCs, how could you tell?

I think that's been borne out in what Jim has already said (emphasis mine): For what my opinion is worth (having not entered a contest yet), I'm okay with a jury doing some form of (pre-vote) screening as long as it is well communicated, but the above reads like a red flag. I definitely would be more comfortable with a larger jury that had a range of opinions/tastes. It would reassure contestants that there would have been some deliberation and/or compromise in the selection, even if the final result does not differ significantly, if at all.

It wasn't just the outsiders that voted for the coolest entry though. Given that most of the votes were from other contestants, a significant number of "insiders" also voted for the coolest entry as well, even though they were more knowledgeable and aware of the criteria they were supposed to vote by. I'll be honest - one of the reasons I didn't vote because I was constantly double-guessing whether I had adhered to what you & Milan had asked for in the voting. With that in mind, I would be in favour of a jury selection first, it will be the best way of ensuring whatever spirit the rules were meant to convey (depending on the quality of the entries). Of course, deciding how to do so is another topic entirely! Related to this, unfortunately it's not hard to see arguments over the jury selection; the "spirit" of the rules would need to be communicated clearly throughout the entry process. No, it won't stop all complaints, but at least there will always be something to refer back to when somebody argues about the interpretation of the rules. About the points, I do think it's time to expand on them. The old F1 (10-6-4-2-1) points scale was made for a time when you would expect ~15 cars to actually finish the race. If we're going to have more contests with such a large number of amazing entries, then it makes sense to have more points to be awarded to more entries. Again, one of the main reasons F1 shifted to its current points scale is because many more cars could be expected to finish the race. Edit - Credit to @Gray Gear for this from the results thread - an expanded jury would also be worth considering. There'd be less pressure on the jurors with more people involved in the selection process.

It almost feels like digital BI were set up to fail. If you're going to go to the effort of having a B-Model, that model (and therefore the instructions) should be put in front of as many eyeballs as possible. Even with near-universal access to digital content, most people who buy a set won't be downloading digital BI, for a number of reasons. I understand the reasoning to save paper, but in doing so, the designer's efforts are essentially wasted instead. Back on topic, flipping the actuators over is an incredibly simple solution, but only to those with the skill and experience to see it! Thanks to you & @M_longer for this instant purchase.

It's a common sentiment amongst United fans that Old Trafford could use a few new bricks, but this is probably not what they meant... More seriously, it's about time they got rid of that knock-off brand that does the rounds in the megastore. If it's up to the usual standards, this might be my first non-Technic purchase in a decade.

Could you not just dilute the mixture again to make it 3%? A 1:1 ratio of solution to water (ideally distilled) would halve the concentration from 6% to 3%. If only we could do the inverse to increase the concentration of sunlight in the UK!