Bublehead

Sorry for suggesting a lame solution, but it was just an idea guys. I was unaware there was a market for more than a few dozen people buying instructions of a particular model. If you are selling so many it would be logistically difficult (hundreds?), I wish that I had problems like that. Is anyone trying to make a sole living selling BI or is this just side money to help defray Lego expenses? Either way, good luck and best wishes. I am not into the BI creation/market scene and I don’t purchase third party Instructions for models, I download the free lame B model instructions straight from TLG website

Here is an Idea for you out there... people talk about watermarks and adding the original purchasers email in them to track where the stolen BI may have come from... why not customize the model for every copy sold but don’t tell anyone? Make step number 137 on page 35 place a part in a different place for every copy? Now look at that part on the suspected knock off and see where they put it. You now know where they got it. Or at least if it is missing, you know they either figured out your ploy or they faked it and built it up from just static pictures, but that may be evident when you look at the rest of the models guts. Not sure how I would feel if a knock off stole my moc. A bit flattered maybe, a little bit mad, but most likely disappointed- a LOT. My dream job has always been to be an official Technic Lego designer... a pipe dream if there ever was one, but a dream nonetheless. If somebody thought my design had enough merit to be considered worthy of being manufactured as a real product, that would kind of validate me as a designer, however a designer helping a knock off company kill the actual Lego company I love. Now that is the ultimate catch 22 and the ultimate unwitting and unparticipating betrayal of a supporter of TLG in my mind. So selling good BI for your MOC may bring you some income, some notoriety, and satisfaction and I am all for that if you want to. When they steal it and use it to compete against TLG, that is when I would stop selling BI for my MOCs if I sold them, and it would make me question wether I would further continue with publishing of my MOCs and designs other than blurry distance shots.

@zux has a point on IP property and making money off of something. You can’t be calling your MOC a Bugatti and sell instructions for it as a Bugatti without the VW Groups permission (i.e. TLG license for Bugatti Chiron) So the same would hold true for a person selling instructions. The die cast model makers have to pay royalties too. Funny thing is the actual shape of a car is protected, so even taking the name off of something might not even make it legal. But all of this is kinda moot. Nobody is making a mint selling instructions, and the third party knockoffs are pretty much untouchable in China. And just like when they rip off TLG, they create their own set of “instructions” for these MOC’s so actual copyright violation is arguable. It is very hard to copy protect a design that incorporates a universal building system at it’s core.

Several people on the “quirks” thread have asked are kids today dumber than they were in past generations. I don’t think kids today are inclined to be less smart, I just believe they are just quick to judge, quick to label, and quick to hate things with a swipe of a touchscreen. We have had a thread discussing the increasing use of color by TLG in Technic models and the discussions on the reasons for it as ease of identification and easy for determining orientation, all of it based on ensuring the child has as much of a chance of completing the model successfully as possible. That is TLG’s main goal here. This is not to address the fact that children are getting dumber, but to address the fact that the child has way more choices today on how to fill their free time. When I was young, my attention was divided between my toys, playing outdoors, my friends, 3 channels of programming to choose from on the tele, maybe listen to music either on the radio or play some vinyl records, or draw or color... sneaking a peak at your Dad’s Playboys... a fair amount of things to choose from, more than my father had to choose from. Now take a child today... what competes for their time today? All of what I had plus the infinitely deep internet, cable tv’s 100+ channels, streaming services like Hulu, Netflix, plus all the premium packages and streaming services. Unlimited porn, downloadable music, videos, YouTube... So TLG has had to do some things to make Lego more appealing and more successful as a Toy brand. This means media tie ins , Lego movies, more things to grab the attention of the child, and also they have had to embrace ANYTHING that gives them any kind of advantage. Completion of the model, for our Theme, and completing It correctly so all functions work as described and/or displayed on the box is the ultimate goal and the reason behind the “Disney-esque” color palette. So are kids today dumber? No, they are just as dumb as we were 50 years ago, but they move on to the next thing faster than you can swipe right.

No mater how you slice it, the big turntable construct from this model is a thing of frictionless beauty. My implementation of it in my Trabant ride made me a firm believer... this construct is going to be used by a lot more builders in the future, and I look forward to seeing the MOCs that it inspires. The ease of motion in this turntable and it’s ability to handle weight is impressive. That it came with a bunch of other parts that make up a RTC was just a bonus, but a little pricey. Wondering aloud to myself right now as to what MOC I would like to use it in next...

@Mylenium, that was not my meaning of not pretending to save money... I wasn’t talking about saving money personally, but that people are pretending to be a TLG designer whose job it is to reduce cost and save TLG money. And I don’t think accepting that paradigm is foolish, or anything, if that is your thought process while you build. I just don’t do things like the other poster said, using a 13L beam instead of 15L beam or limiting the number of parts to reduce costs, but most of the time it is determining if you have enough of a certain element or piece in your inventory to finish a MOC without having to disassemble something else sitting on the shelf. As an older AFOL, my budget for Lego isn’t as limited, but its not unlimited either. I am still amazed at the scale of some system model builders MOCs and their staggering piece counts. You look at them and wonder what the Bricklink bill was for that many bricks. But I still build with a limited “eye to save money” attitude by keeping to single motor, multiple functions when designing. My first amusement ride MOC was all about single motor multi function efficiency and I enjoy the challenge of designing and building using that mindset more than the one motor per function one. I do try to follow the “like an official TLG set” mantra and I am a purist mostly but I am not above creating non-TLG parts for my MOCs but those custom, model specific elements must conform to some actual previously used in an official TLG model format. So no innovating new ways to make an element, but customizing using art or graphics like custom stickers, or customizing a thin film element’s outline and art such as Jabba’s Sail Barge sails or the sail from the racing yacht.

Multi motor monstrosities have the advantage of one thing. Controlled timing and multiple independent actions occurring simultaneously. The novelty of one motor many functions puts a burden on the designer to innovate beyond the necessity of a personal MOC, and as has been pointed out, some try to imitate the existing paradigm of cost verses complexity verses number of functions as if they have to worry about such things like a real designer. I don’t pretend to need to do it to save money, I do it for the challenge of the build and the engineering challenge. Whereas in TC14, I went RC multi motor for the Trabant since I needed variable speed control of two independent functions and intermittent control over 2 other functions, all powered by a single battery in a package the size of a pineapple ? Now could I build it using a one motor-many functions approach? Not easily and get the control I needed, which is a two variable independent speed outputs plus 2 independent reversible functions gearbox that fits inside a split 6 ring stack of curved gear racks AND allows me to control all 4 outputs mechanically through a rotational interface (turntable). Not impossible, but highly unlikely in the 3 weeks I had left to: design, then build a Proof of concept bearing and drive, check prototype and finish the entry.

One wonders the future of PF when TLG start powering a media flagship for the Technic brand with the 2300 PF motors...

I am not worried about rigging, even if it cost me a prize or a medal, because if a MOC is as good as it would need to be to win a medal, wether they won by hook or by crook, it would still be a worthy opponent and it would still be a pretty decent MOC. Now if the same lame entry from the same person wins contest after contest, then you can start crying foul, and when it is as obvious as we have seen just recently, then you have to call it out. I think the rule we have about invalidating suspiciously new members votes when rigging is suspected does enough to counter the small time cheats.

Even- Every axle and every cross axle connection must be even or flush. Spacing and symmetry- everything must be somehow symetric. I have to be forced by a deadline to build anything that doesn’t match symmetry front to back, side to side, and top to bottom, and symmetrical color distribution as well... if I have two 7L beams, one on each side of the model, they better be the same color. If not, and I don’t have two of the same color, I will rework the model until I find a solution that is symmetrical in both shape, placement and color. My last MOC for TC14 didn’t adhere to these rules due to using the parts on hand to finish before the deadline passed.

Just need to ask because not sure anyone would want any more pictures or video of my ride before I disassemble it? The donor sets are screaming for their missing pieces.

@andythenorth, you make good points. I really hope TLG doesn’t pooch this.

I am good with that @Jim. Can’t wait.

With the reduction of complexity in the train controller, the price must have gone down, so I don’t expect any switches on the Technic BB/hub except on and off and every one will come with a cheap controller. So Technic generic BB/hub will be the same guts as train PU hub with AA batteries and a controller... this makes every Technic PU model tablet/smartphone compatible... something I could see them wanting as a standard from now on. We will get a Boost type Technic hub with built in motors and two external ports, maybe a AAA version of the train PU hub with pinhole mounts, but more likely just the same box and using studded Technic beam connections to mount it. My thoughts are, think cheap, then think cheaper... none of what I have seen so far suggests anything else.

I think there is a big “Can I do it?” sign hanging over our heads all the time. We look at something and ask ourselves, could I make this real world thing using Lego, and could I get it to work like the real thing with Technic elements? Can I do it? That part is always in the back of my mind...

Well, I didn’t decide to build an entry until the last 3 weeks, I put up a WIP pic as much as I could, I even had my wife, who was recovering from a bad cold, film my video while I operated the ride. And thanks to @Jim, his extension was really the reason I was able to enter (and I thank you @Jim). Like I posted earlier, the rules could reward entrants bonus points for posting WIP updates and pictures... this would have penalized me in this contest because I chose to enter late, so I would have suffered in the WIP judging category. On classes and skills and the question of level playing fields, I was wondering if a contest could not have classes based on size and skill, and possibly limiting each class by total number of parts by limiting the parts to specific sets, like C model competition, however, as the skill level goes up, the number of sets in the parts pool goes up as well. This way a 1000 piece model only competes with models of the same size. So you start at beginner level, your parts list comes from a 1000 part TLG set, intermediate level adds a second model to the list, Advanced adds a third, and Expert is unlimited... you want to join the competition at the beginner level, then you need only own the first set. You want to enter at advanced, if you own those three sets, you are good. You want to enter as an expert, then you know what snake pit you are getting into and the gloves are off. These are just ideas... I do know, the more complex the rules are, the less participation you will likely get. I joined this latest competition because the theme interests me and I got inspired (although late) and I found the time to build and display an entry. I really don’t think we can ask that much more of people especially AFOL’s. And I understand where the moderators are coming from as well, they want to do things that promote the forum and create content to help defray the costs of running EB, promotes our hobby, and keeps people engaged and discussing all things Lego. This is to be commended and again I want to thank @Jim and @Milan for running the contests in the first place. Either way, I had fun and I am looking forward to the next one already.

@andythenorth, that is some conviction there. But to be honest, I really want to lose this bet . But maybe to clarify my position, I think what we will get is the Boost guts in a Technic bag, or in other words, maybe the arrangement of the hardware might change, we will probably get pinholes or axle hole mounting points, but these are just features on a plastic box the guts fit in. The electronics on the inside will be the Boost architecture, with 2 internal motors and two external ports. No stackable connectors. We will get a two port hub like the train or batmobile with pinholes in it. A selection of motors and the already available LEDs and they are done. No more money needed to develope anything else. Let’s hope you are right and I am wrong.

I love it. I built a line follower fish using NXT some 20+ years ago. The natural (and easy) left/right/left cadence makes the tail work and look great, it also was the easiest thing to program too. Kids loved it. Well done.

So after getting this thing done, and now that I have had some time to play with it, I can see now how the ride operators were able to scramble (or descramble) your lunch with this thing. There is a “sweet spot” where the speed of the base matches the speed of the carousel and the rider starts experiencing the “not rotating” just moving up and down, tilting forward and backwards in your seat ride... if you speed up or slow down the ride starts slowly advancing forward or retreating in reverse so you feel like riding a dolphin going forwards or like you are on a bucking bronco when in reverse. At one point, when the base comes to a stop, the ride becomes a Banyan Curve type ride, then it starts picking up speed as the base turns in positive reinforcement until the ride is at top speed... then the ride starts leveling off and the centrifugal forces reach their peak until the ride then slowly coasts down to a stop. I have been having fun as a carny ride operator There is something about the fluid relationship of the motion around the sweet spot, it is very mesmerizing and fluid, not jerky and mechanical. And the thing doesn’t burn through the battery charge either,,, it will run for a very long time on a single charge.

A gentleman’s wager of $1 dollar? Here is my thinking... Upper management says we need to reduce costs and consolidate our R&D on educational, system, Technic, Trains, and edu-tainment power function development. So we are going with the Wedo/Boost platform and all TLG will adopt this platform for powered functionality. Ok, could I build a Technic model with the Boost brick and possibly but not necessarily (at most) one more smart hub?, yep, it is possible. Well, when faced with going to upper management and saying Technic needs something different/better/bigger, do you think they will say, sure, get right on that? Or would they say, “use the Boost brick. End of discussion.”? I figure Boost has two external ports to run external motors too, so integration will be some functionality near the brick, and port driven external motors for remote mounted functions. But I hope you are right and I am wrong.

The common thread amongst us, we like to see things move, operate, deploy, retract, extend, lift, rotate, engage, disengage, dock, undock, mesh (without clicking), turn, steer, control... We all like things mechanical, we like to see how things work, we took apart our parents telephones when we were growing up. We like to solve problems, and we enjoy the peace of a quality build, be it an official set, or other people’s MOCs. it’s all these things we are all repeating... I agree with a LOT of what everyone else is saying, and I agree a little bit about it all, at some level. Every little quirk about Technic is why I build with Technic. It is so open ended to creativity, yet it has physical boundaries. It makes you have to think... use the old grey matter. How do you make this amusement contraption turn at 60 rpm? By trying to make it turn at 90 and accept the 60 you get . (I’m still impressed with the >60 I got though )

@shadow_elenter, you are the rock star we all want to be, and so you know you are the reason for a good portion of the discussion. And I am not afraid to say it. Let’s face it, you are talented in many different areas, and you have experience promoting your brand. This does not bother me, and it does not not prevent me from competing against you, and as a matter of fact, I enjoy your level of mastery as an opponent. You set the bar very high and give us all a goal to shoot for, and if I had more time, I would be trying just as hard at this as you do. So you are not the elephant in the room, at least not to me

I entered the latest contest because, One, I had a good idea, two, I had found some time to build it, and three, I was able to jump through all the necessary hoops to have my entry accepted. I didn’t enter to win anything other than praise and constructive criticism. I didn’t enter to generate content for any other pursuit, or channel. I did it to join in the fun and comradery and the shared experience, the promotion of the hobby, and the promotion of the theme and Lego. I’m all for fairness, level playfield, and the like, but this is starting to sound like all that fine print at the bottom of a sweepstakes ticket. Wether we have a purist contest or a third party free for all is not really the question, but how do you have a contest that includes everyone, not just the rock stars, the wannabe new comers, or the seasoned but new to the forum vets like myself? How do we take into account the difference in the amount of Lego people have to build with? Or how much time they have to work on it?, or how much monetary investment people are willing to spend? I don’t have any answers right now but discussing it here is how we work this out... One way to do it is limit the scope of the contest to a limited set of parts, and the easiest way to do that is by set numbers... so C model competition or combinations of multiple sets. You want to enter the contest? Ok, do you own these sets? Yes? Then you are good.

@Jim, I think if you want people to act a certain way, you reward them for it. If you want weekly updates on contest entries, have a rule that grants points based on participation. Sort of a you get 2 points per week extra for posting a weekly update for a total of x bonus point available. Not everyone will will be able to, but now you are not penalizing someone for not posting but rewarding people for posting. You would get the reaction you want because we all can mostly post weekly and you could have a rule on pictures as well, +x points per picture a week up to a limited total per contest... but you get the idea. As for classes, if you have enough entries to have classes, this is a good thing, determining what class a person belongs in and how to classify entrants, that’s a bit harder. I would not classify myself as a beginner yet, if we use prior medals as a determinant, that’s where I would end up, which is not fair to real beginners. Self classification is very subjective, but fair if everyone is honest about their skills. Prior participation is one method of classification, so you can be a beginner for your first competition, but must move to intermediate on next contest, and medal winners are to compete with medal winners on all contests... but this starts putting a lot of burden on the contest moderators to validate and keep track of. I think it comes down to how much work @Jim and @Milan are willing to put into it, and what their goal is... promotion of the hobby, the theme, and the product? Fun? Increasing Forum participation? Prizes? Fame? Glory? HOF inclusion? King of the internet?

@Seasider, Rough Terrain Crane = RTC.