Jump to content

Anio

LEGO Ambassadors
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    2,245

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by Anio

  1. Anio
    You used the inventory at its best ! So many fonctions with such a basic inventory... It is a very impressive model, nicely built, with great playability. Bravo !
  2. Anio
    Hi, Very, very nice MOC. It is worth the UCS label. :) I mean I doubt a UCS Ghost would much bigger or more detailed than your MOC. :) You made a stable build, with good joints between all fairing elements. 2 points that are not ideal IMO : - as Beaver said, the transition between the Ghost and the Phantom could be more smooth - the bottom of the ship : waaay too blocky IMO. Maybe it very accurate, very close to the real ship. But still, I think it does'nt look good. Very true.
  3. Anio
    http://www.techlug.fr/Forum/topic9396.html
  4. Anio
    You've got all measurements here : http://www.techlug.fr/review-lego-star-wars 37 cm wide, 25 cm tall.
  5. Anio
    Only one click and you had the answer. http://www.bricklink.com/catalogItemIn.asp?P=15100&colorID=11&in=A
  6. Anio
    Definitely illegal if totally compressed. The natural position of shock absorber is decompressed. They can however survive if they are a bit compressed (by 10 or 20%), even on a long period. If you consider sets like 8446, 8285, 8448, trans-clear shock absorbers / cylinders do break if fully compressed for a long period. Lipko, as for your mechanism, you should look at the instruction of 10240.
  7. Anio
    It is quite simple. TLG produced new arches for 8097 which are IMO very specialised parts. They used it in this Slave again, and it does look good, but still, I do not consider that part very useful. They could have produce a new sort of sloped wedge. Something like a wedge 2x3 sloped 45° left and right or similar. Anyway, you get the idea. This part would have been very useful and versatile.
  8. Anio
    The more poorly executed part is the skirt for me. And I am surprised that non still pointed it out in this thread. I mean those stacked bricks, slopes and wedges make a terrible shape. Absolutely terrible. And yes, I think it really ruins the model.
  9. Anio
    Not myself. I design MOCs, and a friend design instructions.
  10. Anio
    Oh, really ? :O
  11. Anio
    This is indeed very very sad news... :( He dedicated so much efforts into SR 3D. He will be deeply missed.
  12. Anio
    If you ask me, I do not appreciate 8479 very much... :) 1400 part set with a nice arm in front, but basically, only 3 functions (arm, dumper, steering). The pilot system was very messy. But I guess it was a good start for Lego to get into RCX and Mindstorms some years later.
  13. Anio
    I think 42039 confirmed a trend : a Technic set with regular green parts is bound to be a huge fail. 8063, 42008, 42039...
  14. Anio
    42036 just can not be even close to that MOC. I see 3 reasons : - the first is the part count : this MOC may have twice the parts of 42036. I doubt Lego will ever release a 800 part Technic bike at 60€. - the second is that if this MOC looks good it is partly because it has illegal/weak connections more or less everywhere. Lego can not do that. - and the third is the stickers : I doubt Lego will ever produce such detailed/complex stickers (or printed parts)
  15. Anio
    Not motorized ? Thanks god ! It is a 1K part model, but chassis uses a lot of these parts, as it is very special. There are also caterpillars... The model has not that many functions (and I bet it has no fake engine), but I am fine as the model is still very innovative. More functions does not necessarily mean more fun. ;)
  16. Anio
    I think the answer is quite simple. The A model - the one you see on the box - has to be popular. This way, more customers are likely to buy the box. And I guess bikes are more popular than choppers. This is also why there are some construction vehicles we will hardly ever see in the Technic line. At best, we can hope to get them as B model (scrapper, shovel excavator, spider exacavator, etc).
  17. Anio
    Well, if you compare this MOC to 42036, I am sorry to say that you definitely do not understand the restrictions and standards an official model has to deal with.
  18. Anio
    I wrote 60 Technic review on Techlug. 8041 is definitely the model I consider the crappiest among all of them.
  19. Anio
    It is this inverted : Already seen in micro SW sets (AT-AT) prelim : (plate thickness is kind of wrong on this prelim, but it is definitely the same part)
  20. Anio
    Well, I do not need 42039 prelim to think that final version of 42039 is plain ugly. The thing with prelim pic is that we can say that the project had a very good start... And thus it makes the final model even more disappointing.
  21. Anio
    So, to make it short, you prefer every aspects of the prelim model, like most people here.
  22. Anio
    I would not be surprised if 2 designers worked on 42039... I can not imagine the designer who did the prelim 42039 designing this very poor final rendition... All other sets seems to be very promising.
  23. Anio
    The trick is pretty simple. Drive normally when you look at the right of the car. And use only reverse when you look at the left. Problem solved.
  24. Anio
    Yes, they are.
  25. Anio
    Well, there are some awesome sets right now on S@h. So I guess they will retire... something awesome ?
×
×
  • Create New...