Gimmick

Maybe someone mixed the ports in the code xD Instead of: turn the drive motor a bit back and turn the selector at the same time. It does: turn the selector a bit back and turn it .. at the same time :D

@allanp Yes for flexible steering the two sliders are not great and two seperate sliders for throttle are not optimal, too. TLG tried to solve this by adding an option to switch between the three sliders on the image for 'long term movements' and a joystick-control for more direct control. And I think there is a third option? Depends on how you like it I guess... joystick, sliders, PU-Remote, Gamepad, whatever... ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

I have to disagree on this. A while ago I created a PU interface for a bulldozer (with additional remote, but that's not important) and after serveral changes, the most convenient solution was: Slider for speed, horizontal slider for steering, button for reverse (+ things on the remote). All you basically do is: Lower the blade -> drive slowly and straight -> rise the blade -> go backwards -> drive to new position and repeat.... Using two sliders for the speed of each track makes it unnecessary uncomfortable to drive straight, because you have to keep it that way for a while. It's slow anyway, if you map the steering on one slider you can go full throttle and steer it with one thumb. Different story for tanks or other more 'variable driven' tracked vehicles of course.

Maybe I'm thinking too simple, but: Edit: Gear switch is wrong, it changes the interface modes.

In this case I would say: Since there will probably be a supercar next year and the ~200-250€ class this year is relatively simple RC-truck, my guess would be: ~200€ model will be a construction vehicle - with or without RC ;) The Defender? No no no... 2019 flagship was the 42099 - like the 9398 in 2013! :D I will stop calling sets flagship and only reference them by price: mipro-230 -> model in price range of 230€... I don't think that will prevail. xD

And why is last year's flagship not the Lambo? For me, the flagship is the largest annual model of the 'normal' lineup - just to make comparisions easier. Everything else is "special interest". I'm just still looking for a term equivalent to "supercars" though. Megamachines? xD Sounds like a 90s cartoon or US 'documentation' :X

This year's flagship is the Zetros. The larger sets every two years are the equivalent to the super cars.

Lego has changed a lot in terms of "making decisions". It's not the "we follow a constant direction no matter what" company from pre 2000. They will make wrong decissions, but now they react to that and behaive much more analytic. And they try new things, that's something you can only do if you can handle a total and expensive failure. Just out of curiosity I looked up some old reviews and comments. :D "42030 was insanely expensive and 8265 was the better set" "motorized doors -> super cool function" ;-) I would say the <= 150€/$ sets are a way better datasource for a discussion on how pricing/models have changed than ~4000 parts RC models, that did not existuntil 2019. It's always interesting to compair the old complaints and MOCs to the sets released two,three,four years later. Two or three years ago, I think they said "10% of the [total] sales revenue was generated by adults [for themselves]" or something like that. I think that number has grown, but the part of "technic enthusiasts" did not grow accordingly. The problem I see with the new very cheap competitors (like MK, not talking about MB oder Cobi,..) is: The whole concept of selling only parts and packaging, but deliver the idea/manual for free will collapse if you can easily buy all the parts you need much cheaper. But you cannot clone the license/livestyle aspect, I think that's why they added so many licensed models. It would not surprice me if they establish something like "speed champions but technic (and maybe not only cars)" like the 42123.

:D It's not, that I don't believe you... it's just like, if I will not feel the same, it's your fault! Just kidding :) I know it's not the "modding thread", but: Is the L-motor still strong enough to rise the shield, if you change the gearing directly at the LA-connection? (20t black gear)

Great images (*downloading*), this contrast... :D 11 of 10 for building experience sets the expectations very high :>

Sry for the misunderstanding, I meant in the case you mentioned, so when there is no pairing.

@Toastie Wouldn't that mean, that multiple models interfere? So 2.4GHz RC with the downside of 27MHz?

Only disadvantage in the usability compaired to IR is the neccessary pairing. General problem of '2.4 GHz' is that basically every manufacturer does his own thing and you cannot mix different components.

I do not want to disagree, the problem is: The "normal people" have no motivation at all to invest energy in solving such problems. And therefore it's 'just' a problem of the targeted clientele.The whole PU system is based on "try it and solve your problems", yes it's not made of bricks, but the motivational hurdle is the same. A more nerdy subtheme would be nice, I would like that, too.

Nobody understands the age rating :D And actually I do not realy know what a instruction for experienced user has to look like. Sometimes it sound like "Where's Waldo?" with technic parts. :> Or more like an image of the completed gearbox, the parts and that's it? Well track tension works like track tension... will there be a realy usable effect besides setting the distance? Probably not. But nevertheless something that can be appreciated I think.

While I doubt that there will be a second type of remote, the feature to write own commands to the hub and use it with a (or multiple I guess) remote and without smartdevice will come. But definitely not this year.

Well since the gearbox is circular periodical it's technically not "at the other end of the gearbox" but the shortest path is blocked. :D That's actually something that is not needed, but it simplifies the building process a lot. And since you mentioned the 18+ rating: There are currently some discussions in german lego forums about making PU programming/sharing as simple as possible - this totaly remembered me of my job: a total disillusion of what "adult" people are able to do if they are confronted with something new - nothing. The instuctions are made for people who are fans of CAT and build their first Technic model since 10+ years or ever. Maybe it should have been even easier. The other only possible type of customer are the hardcore nerds with years of experience. And they will change things on every model anyway. Should they add two different instructions? :D Some people say things like "sets for display and adults should be Creator expert anyway" and tbh, that's even worse. Multiple crazy SNOT technics -> horrible for beginners, who bought a set only for decoration.

@XenoRad Just ignore the C+ App, if you want to change something.

All RC sets (PF+PU) ordered by partcount (blue). Thin blue: linear fit. Red: Set price difference to the fit. Tbh: I do not like his first videos either, those review are the same way as his current videos: one sided, over emotional and full of implications - just like a good sells man has to do it. ;) I did not care about that, because it did not affect me. Now it does. Sometimes it's almost unavoidable to get insulted - directly or indirectly - if you use social media. I know what he does and why he does it. I'm just pretty sure not everything he sais is correct and that he indeed knows better - but the viewers do not.

@Gray Gear Hm, sry looks like I'm incapable of seeing anything positive about his behavior. A few sentences (>> 1 year ago, I'm not up to date obviously) made me think about the line at which an "unfavorable" formulation or implication becomes a flat lie. @Tcm0 I'm not sure if it's realy neccessary to know exactly the source of the price for each component :D If you realy want to dig into this: you can find images of the disassembled hubs and the prices of the chips for order sizes > 10 000 can be found online, too ;) The manufacturer of the motors is a japanese company, but I forgot the name =( I do not know what the production of the sensor module inside the motor costs, but after very short but very intense googleling around x) it does not sound like 1 cent cheap if you want absolute positioning :D And since even the price of the simple box is extremly high, I guess it's more about selling sets and not cannibalize mindstorms. And in relation to the sets: There will be no "price war" with chinesen manufacturers (especially not mouldking of course and other companies are expensive, too), that would be a war they cannot win (and i think nobody ever won? :)). So did they become more expensive over time in relation to themselfs? I guess not, but the $200-noRC-set-with-functions-gap is very prominent since 2018, that's a long time - not very well thought I guess. That doesn't make published sets worse, it just makes them more unwanted :D

@Gray Gear @1974 To be precise: The source of this discussion was that the reviewer pointed on a model of a different brand and said something like 'That's lego, too'. Which is 1. obviously a provocation 2. something you never do in reviews/tests. Not spoken and especially not written. Even if a brand name is established as generic term. If you do a reputable review: Give things their real name.

Why is that a problem if you add(!) more expensive sets? Because of the feeling that there are more things you cannot pay for? I do not see the benefit of not releasing sets I won't buy anyway.

Some useless statistics: You can fit [MEAN(NON RC PPP)]*1.2*PartCount+75 = Price linear to the costs in € of RC models with a coefficiant of determination R² = 0.97 (also depends on inflation correction, so the 20% PPP increase and 75€ offset may vary a bit, if you use 9.5c PPP it's close enough for demonstration) The relative deviation is the largest at smaller sets of course. This results in surprisingly small absolut pricing distances of +/- ~20€ from that curve but sometimes large absolute set-set distances of ~50€ of two sets that appeared very close to each other (42114 and 42129). It seems that the way RC is implemented does not matter that much, mainly because different implementations only exists in sets with a decent size, so the discrepancy in electronics does not weight enough. The problem with this model is, that it mixes the price of physical things with "experience" which will never be fully comprehensible for everyone. My opinion about the pricing of the CAT, Liebherr, Lambo,...: I have in general no problem with such "special" sets that appear every two years. I don't know why a 42115 or 42083 does / should feel special I cannot "connect" with that. I count those sets as "special intereset sets" and so do I with the CAT and the Liebherr. If they want to release even larger special-interest-sets with even more parts -> I'm sure I will not care and I will not buy, but if someone cares.. feel free to do so. If someone wants to buy a giant model of a ship, building or whatever -> feel free to do so. And therefore I do not think that those models are a good representation of the "general pricing situation". The question should be: How does the price-performance ratio of the normal sets look like. And my opinion for the general situation would be: RC is and always was(!) too expensive to be always used in flagship models - RC is overrepresented pricing of the smaller models is fine pricing of the higher-end models (like 42128) is fine and so are by far most toys sets pricing of the 1:10 cars is way too high pullbacks are in a good position since last year And then are sets that do not fit to their price-class anymore like the Zetros. The flagship range should be ~200-250€, if you leave that range it leaves a giant gap in the product list and it will not make much sense anymore. I mean you can make every small set larger and more expensive - but then there will be no cheap sets left :|

Just to make it clear: The example above is for the original firmware. I use Chrome on Lubuntu, but not as snap package.

Sry, looks like I wasn't fully awake x( Did you enable the Experimental Web Platform Feature in Chrome? Edit: Which linux distri are you using exactly? While there are threading and async libs for micropython, I'm not sure if they work with the hub. But it seems like @David Lechner ( pybricks) wrote a workaround example using yield https://gist.github.com/dlech/fa48f9b2a3a661c79c2c5880684b63ae