Anio

When I look at the final Lego model, this is what comes to my mind.

No, it doesn't.

42039 was certainely an impressive design. But not for good reasons.

Thanks buddy. I am glad you like it. :)

I am not sure there is need for that. a) People review MOC more as a "one shot". A guy likes a MOC, he reproduces it, and does a video presentation he posts on Youtube. Just if you consider the cost (a MOC is about 3 times the cost of an equivalent set, sometimes more with rare parts, not to mention all the time you need to gather all parts), there are very very few people who build loads of other people's MOC. c) With few exceptions, MOCs generally do less views than official products. Indeed, people are more likely to take informations in something they might get/purchase, than something they will always only see on the internet. b) Do you really think someone will reproduce a $$$ MOC and then dare saying "Hi guys, I have to tell you, what XXX did on that project is really a poor build. Look at the way he achieved the steering mechanism ! Haha ! And the wheel arches. Hell, what was he thinking ?" (I wouldn't :D ). If he does, this youtuber would be smashed by the community in less than a day. People are way more likely to nitpick on official models than they are to critisize AFOL's MOCs. And I think that this very topic made my point. =)

We can agree on that. I generally think that the way TLG approaches a subject (no matter what it is : a crane, a fire truck, a crawler) is often more interesting as it takes more paramaters into account than MOCs.

The thing I think I understand from your messages is that you value the quality of a model only in absolute terms. I consider the model as a whole thing. Final result is only one of the many factors to be considered. As much as part count, ref count, building experience, sturdyness, weight, efficiency of part used, cleverness in the design, how the model catches the spirit of the real vehicle, playability, maneuverability, and probably many others. Not only the final abilities of the model. Honnestly, I don't think it is very interesting to design or reproduce a MOC where the main goal is just to have "good capabilities". Not sure my wording will be relevant. But let's imagine a 2,100 part MOC with climbing abilities that could be rated at 85 (imaginary unit). With several motors for driving, and a powerful motor for steering, blablabla. And a 1,200 part MOC where climbing abilities would be only 60. => I would totally go for the 1,200 part model as I would consider it as a much smarter build. In this regard, I tend to agree with allanp : 42099 will very likely be better than every MOC crawler. Just like 9398 was at the time. Which, if you ask me, was totally hilarious : with one single model made out of 1,325 elements only, TLG totally crushed the work of AFOLs who were working on their TT's for years (there was a lot of hype in TT at the time). That was totally fascinating.

Actually quite the opposite. Couldn't agree more.

Don't want to point fingers, but unfortunately, in most cases it does. It totally does, and I am sorry for you if you can't see it. And this concept has a name : the simplexity. Something that virtually all MOCs are missing.

It is indeed a growing trend at TLG. And I don't like it very much. Still, I think offical models have some cleverness in many aspects that most MOCs just don't have. Modular design for example. Or strong/reliable build without using gazillions parts.

I did when I designed my AT-TE in 2009 or my Speeder Bike in 2013. But definitely not for this project.

You made your opinion by only looking at playability (typically, RC MOCs with 1 motor per function) and other thing made to easily dazzle people. Typically : combo big size + LEDs. MOCs are generally poorly optimised and offer a meh building experience. edit : you see constraint as a limit. Think outside the box, and you will see constraint as a way to necessarily boost your creativity.

Disagreed.

Thanks guys ! Frontpage is much appreciated. :)

Well, with skill, obviously. :p Just kidding. Actually, the thing is to catch what the ship really is. And to put a lot of effort in what strongly defines the identity of the ship. On the TIE Silencer, I can mention : the angular red windscreen, the tapered rear engines, and the simple and streamlined wings. Generally, I try my best to make the design as simple as possible. I optimise the build as much as I can. And this naturally gives some kind of elegance and finesse to the final model. The way you can "decrypt" how the whole thing is built also participates in how delicate the model is perceived. Hence the modular design. You may find it silly, but I think that the piece count is generally a good indicator of how optimised the model is. It gives an interesting perspective between the means used (all the parts) and the final result that could be achieved with them. For example, if you can achieve the same thing in 1,400 or 1,700 elements, then always go with 1,400 elements. Not because it is cheaper. But because if you do it the right way, you will always have better result with fewer elements.

Thank you guys. :) Well, regarding the build itself, I guess it could more or less be turned into an official set. But I doubt we will ever get any UCS set from Episodes 7, 8 and 9. For such products, TLG seems to commit on Episodes 4, 5 and 6 only.

And maybe you can be patient and wait some time before TLG releases more Technic parts in Olive Green ? You can't have everything available with one single set...

Hello fellows, This week I completed my latest Star Wars model : the UCS TIE Silencer. UCS TIE Silencer by Anio, sur Flickr UCS TIE Silencer by Anio, sur Flickr UCS TIE Silencer by Anio, sur Flickr UCS TIE Silencer by Anio, sur Flickr UCS TIE Silencer by Anio, sur Flickr UCS TIE Silencer by Anio, sur Flickr FlickR gallery : https://www.flickr.com/photos/anio-ucs/albums/72157709153591627 Brickshelf gallery : http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?f=577799 And a small video to see the model in flesh in bricks. So, what can I say about that model ? I started working on that project about 1 year ago. And quickly I gave up as I couldn't find a nice way to achieve the windscreen. And recently, I tried again to design that model. And I figured out a way to build the model with a pair of 30372 trans-red windscreen. That was the starting point of the whole design process. It was pretty tricky to make those windscreens fit into the build, as they are longer than needed (only the front part of the windscreen is necessary to design the required shape). So I had to find how to build with/around them in a strong and discrete way. As you can guess, I used some SNOT techniques. I also tried to includ some black lines in the windscreen with part 51739 , like the real ship. Designing it was not as easy as it looks. One thing I struggled a lot with was the half plate offset I had to deal with on the side of each SNOTed windscreen. To fill that gap, I used this type of bracket: . Basically, they are used as they were some kind of half thick tile 2x4 inverted. And of course, the ship has an interior, with detailed cockpit. UCS TIE Silencer by Anio, sur Flickr To be honnest, it is not exactly minifig scale (the ship is a bit bigger). But like UCS Y-Wing #75181, I think that it works pretty well visually speaking, so I went for it. The build is modular. Here are the various sub-assemblies of the model : As you can see, the core of the build has a Technic frame to provide stability. Besides the trans-red windscreen, one thing I am happy with is how the various modules fit together at the rear of the ship : In the end, the model is rather big : 60cm long. But it has a very reasonnable part count : only 1481 elements. I don't have much material to present the design process. Basically, the only thing I have left is the wing design. On the picture below you can see the 2 versions of the wings. The design on the bottom of the picture was the first version, and was obviously wrong after I studied more carefully all the reference pictures I gathered. I you have any question or want some more details about the build, feel free to ask. Will do my best to answer. Hope instructions will come some day. :) Cheers,

I know for fact that TLG didn't pay any license to Caterham to release 21307. Caterham was glad to have its brand promoted by a Lego product and so didn't ask for any other compensation. Excepted on product where license is a huge part of the design (42083, 42056, some Ferrari sets and some other brand here and there, in Speed Champions for example), I think it is safe to say that there is generally no financial compensation but just a win-win partnership. Take 42100, remove licensed stuff, change a few details, and bingo : you have a regular mining excavator. To be more specific, the idea behind a Liebherr excavator and a Bugatti Chiron is totally different when it comes to a Lego product. When you do 42083, you do the Bugatti Chiron, which by the way is a supercar. But when you do 42100, you do a mining excavator, which by the way can be Liebherr licensed.

Really ? Never heard anything like this with Bugatti new parts.

Anyway, call customer service and just order parts. Problem fixed.

Discounted at 280£ on Amazon a few months after release, I think that's totally a possibility.

Quite unlikely.

All parts are available in the right color. :)

Full plastic, I think. Plastic might be damaged with metal parts.