| | | | |
| |
| My Own Castle Competition.
We are hereby happy to announce the official
castle-building competition for the Castle Room at
BrickFest 2004. The competition is pretty
straightforward, but a lot can be done with it. It is
the hope of the BrickFest 2004 Castle Room
coordinators that this will stimulate all sorts of
creative ideas, and will result in a great number and
variety of contesting MOCs.
Your challenge, should you choose to accept it is very
simple:
To make the best, most impressive and overall most
kickass possible minifig-scale, wait for it...
... CASTLE!
This building challenge came about because we wanted
to stimulate people to build castles without feeling
they had to build one of the biggest MOCs in the room
in order to get noticed. When building a castle MOC,
one almost always ends up building on a scale far
smaller than what would be realistic. Inevitably, the
most impressive castle MOCs are often the largest ones
if only for their sheer size. But the time and
brick needed to put together something really big is
beyond many Castleheads. And even if you do build a
massive castle, actually transporting it to BrickFest
might simply be prohibitive.
So the idea with this competition is to get back to
the basics, building a castle not much bigger than the
Lego sets which introduced us all to the castle theme
in the first place. While we all commiserate about the
evils and woes of juniorization, and how disappointing
some of the more recent lego castle sets seem to us,
think of this as the AFOLs' chance to show ourselves
just how much better we can do ourselves - while
working within a somewhat comparable scale. This
competition is intended to level the playing field a
little, so that those who dont have an endless
supply of brick and time wont automatically get
their MOCs overshadowed by the biggest castles in the
room (and it seems there will be some big ones).
We are basically interested in seeing how much detail a
good builder can cram into a relatively compact castle.
Size:
The castle itself can take up a footprint of up to
1536 pegs. If you wanted to make it as big as possible
(and don't feel that you have to), one natural
solution would thus be to build it on a 32 by 48 peg
baselate. If you want to build a castle on some raised
landscaping, that landscaping itself can take up up to
2304 pegs (a 48 by 48 peg baseplate or area of
equivalent size), just so long as the actual castle
itself is no larger than 1536 pegs at the most.
Basically we're looking for castle MOCs in a similar
size to the largest lego castles which have been
released as actual sets, such as for instance King
Leo's Castle. So no massive 5 foot tall towers on a 32
by 48 peg baseplate please. There is also a height
limit: The castle can be no taller than it is long.
Appearance:
This is a castle building competition, and we are
interested in seeing actual CASTLES. In some ways this
is kind of flexible, and in some ways it kind of
isn't.
What we are NOT looking for with this competition, is
for people to build say a keep or a gatehouse or
great hall or a siskindian style half-timber building
and enter those MOCs in the competition. Do by all
means build those sorts of MOCs, and feel free to
incorporate them into the CCC display if you like.
They may well be eligible for possible prizes within
other yet-to-be decided categories. But if you are
building a MOC to enter into the My Own Castle
Competition, it should be a free-standing and complete
castle. It's walls can open up in classic
Crusader/Black Falcon style, and if you like, it can
be compatible with say, the CCC standard. But it
should ultimately be able to stand alone as complete
castle in its own right.
Style:
Having said that, there are all kinds of castles you
could build, including certain kinds of structures
which might typically go by other names, including
walled fortifications from outside the actual medieval
period (hence all this crossposting). In short, the idea
is to open this up to as many builders as possible,
including those who may not think of themselves first and
foremost as castle builders.
For the purposes of this competition, consider
"castle" to refer to any self-enclosed walled defensive
fortification up until right before the modern age. So
no WWII era bunkers or sandbagged hilltop firebases
please - but a walled American Civil War era fort
would certainly be acceptable. If you just saw the
movie Troy and felt inspired, and want to have a go at
an ancient citadel, thats totally cool. I know
there are some people who make beautiful Oriental
style castles, so lets see what you guys can do if
you scale it down to 32 by 48 pegs. If someone wants
to build an early medieval motte-and bailey type
wooden castle, give it your best shot - I still
havent seen a really impressive one of those done
yet in lego. Maybe an ancient Roman fort, or
fast-forward over a millenium to a 17th century gun
fort? If you want to build a ruined medieval castle
being visited by 21st century tourists, see if you can
give that a try. Or perhaps go for a haunted or
fantasy or fairy tale style castle. And of course last
but most definitely not least, the ever-popular
European medieval stone castle is also warmly
encouraged.
Scale:
Again, entries for the MOCC should be in minifig
scale, not microfig scale or anything else bigger or
smaller.
Ideas/suggestions:
Aside from the above limitations, feel free to
interpret the rules as widely as you like. If you want
to see if you can add motors or even a light up a
fireplace or two, we'd love to see that. If you want
to use the pre-fabricated castle wall sections, go
straight ahead, but if you don't want to, don't. Feel
free to take your inspiration from lego sets if you
like. Did you ever wonder how much cooler the Black
Falcons Fortess might look if it were just that
little big bigger? Did you ever think that the
Kings Castle was a great set, but was just missing
a large keep-like tower somewhere? Did you ever wonder
what the classic Yellow Castle would have looked like
in gray? Or tan? We're not asking you to just tack on
an extra wall or tower to an existing lego set (in
fact, please do not do this), these are just ideas.
A note on prizes and categories:
If you want to build a Castle related MOC, but don't
think it will fit in the MOCC, don't worry. Any
castle-related MOC will be welcomed in the Castle Room
and appreciation will be shown for all MOCs regardless
of how big or small they are. There will be a prize
for the best MOCC castle, but it will not be the only
prize that the Castle Room awards.
It is the hope of the Castle Room co ordinators and
the BrickFest 2004 organizers that the inspiration to
build will not be primarily fueled by a desire to win
a very big lego set. The prize for best MOCC castle
has yet to be determined. It may be reasonably big, or
quite honestly it may not be. But there will be
something cool, and best of all of course, the winning
castlebuilder's name will become renown, nay legendary
across the lands as bards and poets spread his or her
name across the AFOL community. Minifigs for
generations to come will speak in hushed whispers of
awe as they recount the great MOCC challenge of 2004,
and being the winning master castle builder will in short
just be a pretty cool thing to be.
If there are any questions, please feel free to ask.
So castle builders, on your marks, get set go!
Good Luck
Magnus
BrickFest 2004 Castle Room co ordinator.
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
| In lugnet.castle, Magnus Lauglo wrote:
> My Own Castle Competition.
>
>
> We are hereby happy to announce the official
> castle-building competition for the Castle Room at
> BrickFest 2004. The competition is pretty
> straightforward, but a lot can be done with it. It is
> the hope of the BrickFest 2004 Castle Room
> coordinators that this will stimulate all sorts of
> creative ideas, and will result in a great number and
> variety of contesting MOCs.
>
> Your challenge, should you choose to accept it is very
> simple:
>
> To make the best, most impressive and overall most
> kickass possible minifig-scale, wait for it...
>
> ... CASTLE!
>
> This building challenge came about because we wanted
> to stimulate people to build castles without feeling
> they had to build one of the biggest MOCs in the room
> in order to get noticed. When building a castle MOC,
> one almost always ends up building on a scale far
> smaller than what would be realistic. Inevitably, the
> most impressive castle MOCs are often the largest ones
> if only for their sheer size. But the time and
> brick needed to put together something really big is
> beyond many Castleheads. And even if you do build a
> massive castle, actually transporting it to BrickFest
> might simply be prohibitive.
>
>
A castle competition sounds cool but there are wayyyyyy too many rules for
something that is supposed to fun. Granted Im not a castle builder but I highly
suggest simplifying the rules a bit if you want people to consider building
something for it.
OnDrew
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Yea big, yea high, four walls, minifig scale, not 20th century.
What was too complicated about the rules?
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
| In lugnet.castle, Erik Olson wrote:
> Yea big, yea high, four walls, minifig scale, not 20th century.
> What was too complicated about the rules?
The write-up was extensive (yet interesting to read) so that may be a part of
the problem. I agree that the rules, thoa, are not overly restrictive.
Maybe a summary post of the rules, would be in order?
Here is my attempt at a short summary:
1. castle must fit in a 1536 stud area
(note: this is the area of a 32 x 48 baseplate)
2. surrounding lands must fit in a 2304 stud area
(note: this is the area of a 48x48 baseplate)
3. castle must not be taller than it is long
4. a castle is defined as "any self-enclosed walled defensive
fortification."
5. you're not limited to era or geography, except nothing older than 19th
century
6. minifig scale, meaning minifigs are appropriate with the model
That is all I could get for rules. The rest was all suggestions and such to
help build the excitement. :) But I am not an organizer, so maybe they should
comment.
- Alfred
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
| In lugnet.castle, Alfred Speredelozzi wrote:
> In lugnet.castle, Erik Olson wrote:
> > Yea big, yea high, four walls, minifig scale, not 20th century.
> > What was too complicated about the rules?
>
> The write-up was extensive (yet interesting to read) so that may be a part of
> the problem. I agree that the rules, thoa, are not overly restrictive.
I agree.
> Maybe a summary post of the rules, would be in order?
>
> Here is my attempt at a short summary:
Great summary! Thanks!
>
> 1. castle must fit in a 1536 stud area
> (note: this is the area of a 32 x 48 baseplate)
> 2. surrounding lands must fit in a 2304 stud area
> (note: this is the area of a 48x48 baseplate)
> 3. castle must not be taller than it is long
> 4. a castle is defined as "any self-enclosed walled defensive
> fortification."
> 5. you're not limited to era or geography, except nothing older than 19th
> century
EXCEPT I think you mean nothing NEWER than 19th century here.
> 6. minifig scale, meaning minifigs are appropriate with the model
>
> That is all I could get for rules. The rest was all suggestions and such to
> help build the excitement. :) But I am not an organizer, so maybe they should
> comment.
Who, us organizers, guilty of elaborating as a way of drumming up excitement?
Never. :-)
Larry Pieniazek
Display Coordinator, Brickfest 2004
August 13-15, 2004
See you in Arlington!
http://dc.brickfest.com
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
| In lugnet.castle, Larry Pieniazek wrote:
> In lugnet.castle, Alfred Speredelozzi wrote:
> > In lugnet.castle, Erik Olson wrote:
> > > Yea big, yea high, four walls, minifig scale, not 20th century.
> > > What was too complicated about the rules?
> >
> > The write-up was extensive (yet interesting to read) so that may be a part of
> > the problem. I agree that the rules, thoa, are not overly restrictive.
>
> I agree.
>
> > Maybe a summary post of the rules, would be in order?
> >
> > Here is my attempt at a short summary:
>
> Great summary! Thanks!
>
> >
> > 1. castle must fit in a 1536 stud area
> > (note: this is the area of a 32 x 48 baseplate)
> > 2. surrounding lands must fit in a 2304 stud area
> > (note: this is the area of a 48x48 baseplate)
> > 3. castle must not be taller than it is long
> > 4. a castle is defined as "any self-enclosed walled defensive
> > fortification."
> > 5. you're not limited to era or geography, except nothing older than 19th
> > century
>
> EXCEPT I think you mean nothing NEWER than 19th century here.
Right. Quite often, my mouth (and in this case, my fingers) don't actually
repeat what my brain was thinking.
>
> > 6. minifig scale, meaning minifigs are appropriate with the model
> >
> > That is all I could get for rules. The rest was all suggestions and such to
> > help build the excitement. :) But I am not an organizer, so maybe they should
> > comment.
>
> Who, us organizers, guilty of elaborating as a way of drumming up excitement?
> Never. :-)
You know I love exposing secret plots. :)
>
> Larry Pieniazek
> Display Coordinator, Brickfest 2004
> August 13-15, 2004
> See you in Arlington!
> http://dc.brickfest.com
-Alfred
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
| On Thu, 3 Jun 2004, Larry Pieniazek wrote:
> In lugnet.castle, Alfred Speredelozzi wrote:
> > Maybe a summary post of the rules, would be in order?
> >
> > Here is my attempt at a short summary:
> > 1. castle must fit in a 1536 stud area
> > (note: this is the area of a 32 x 48 baseplate)
> > 2. surrounding lands must fit in a 2304 stud area
> > (note: this is the area of a 48x48 baseplate)
> > 3. castle must not be taller than it is long
> > 4. a castle is defined as "any self-enclosed walled defensive
> > fortification."
> > 5. you're not limited to era or geography, except nothing older than 19th
> > century
>
> EXCEPT I think you mean nothing NEWER than 19th century here.
>
> > 6. minifig scale, meaning minifigs are appropriate with the model
I don't think item two is accurate. The actual announcement applies the
2304 stud limit to "raised landscaping" on which the castle is built, not
generic "surrounding lands", which could include, oh, a green baseplate.
This is actually quite a bit more limiting than what I initially thought
(I thought the CASTLE AND surrounding lands had to fit on a 2304 stud
area, with the castle occupying up to 1536 of those studs).
Interestingly, there is no height limit on the landscaping.
I'm still trying to puzzle out if item one is accurate. The announcement
talks about a "footprint", and I have yet to find a satisfactory
definition of "footprint" (okay, I've only checked dictionary.com and
m-w.com, which incomprehensibly combine the 2-d concept of area and 3-d
objects like buildings). Is the obvious test case (a structure 32x48
studs at the base with sheer walls and a headlight brick with a shield in
an outward facing wall a few bricks up) admissible? Beats the heck out of
me.
TWS Garrison
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
| In lugnet.castle, Thomas Garrison wrote:
> I don't think item two is accurate. The actual announcement applies the
> 2304 stud limit to "raised landscaping" on which the castle is built, not
> generic "surrounding lands", which could include, oh, a green baseplate.
> This is actually quite a bit more limiting than what I initially thought
> (I thought the CASTLE AND surrounding lands had to fit on a 2304 stud
> area, with the castle occupying up to 1536 of those studs).
I think this is indeed a bit confusing. I am pretty sure it is meant that the
ENTIRE MOC fits on a 48 x 48, and the castle can occupy up to 36 x 48 of that.
>
> Interestingly, there is no height limit on the landscaping.
I think it would be good to get that cleared up. How about the landscaping can
take up to ~12 bricks? Anyone think this is reasonable?
>
> I'm still trying to puzzle out if item one is accurate. The announcement
> talks about a "footprint", and I have yet to find a satisfactory
> definition of "footprint" (okay, I've only checked dictionary.com and
> m-w.com, which incomprehensibly combine the 2-d concept of area and 3-d
> objects like buildings). Is the obvious test case (a structure 32x48
> studs at the base with sheer walls and a headlight brick with a shield in
> an outward facing wall a few bricks up) admissible? Beats the heck out of
> me.
I think it is fair to say a flag, shield or a even few bricks here and there
hanging over the allowed castle base of 36 x 48 is OK, but having a sunstantial
section of a tower overhanging the footprint (i.e. 36 x 48 area) may be
contrieved as cheating... Easiest solution is to let people decide by themselves
what they think is fair. If judges think you went overboard interpreting the
rules, it will be reflected negatively in your score.
Paul
>
> TWS Garrison
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
| Hi folks,
Sorry for whatever misunderstanding there may have been regarding the size of
the castle. I'll try to clear things up a little.
In lugnet.castle, Paul Janssen wrote:
> In lugnet.castle, Thomas Garrison wrote:
>
> > I don't think item two is accurate. The actual announcement applies the
> > 2304 stud limit to "raised landscaping" on which the castle is built, not
> > generic "surrounding lands", which could include, oh, a green baseplate.
> > This is actually quite a bit more limiting than what I initially thought
> > (I thought the CASTLE AND surrounding lands had to fit on a 2304 stud
> > area, with the castle occupying up to 1536 of those studs).
>
> I think this is indeed a bit confusing. I am pretty sure it is meant that the
> ENTIRE MOC fits on a 48 x 48, and the castle can occupy up to 36 x 48 of that.
I'm not quite sure where the confusion lies, but I'll try to rephrase. The
castle itself can take up no more than 1536 pegs at the base. Assuming it was
rectangular, it could be 32 by 48 pegs, or if you wanted a long thin design,
perhaps 24 by 64 pegs. If you wanted a square design you could build it 39 by 39
pegs (39 x 39 + 1521). It doesn't have to be square or rectangular of course.
The castle can sit on a baseplate or area which is up to 2304 pegs. This could
for instance be a 48 by 48 peg baseplate. Or maybe two 32 by 32 baseplates next
to one another with an additional 16 by 16 baseplate tacked on somewhere.
If you had as large a castle as possible (1536 pegs) on as large a baseplate as possible (2304 pegs), there would be 768 pegs of area on the baseplate outside of the actual walls. You CANNOT have a 1536 peg castle surrounded by 2304 pegs of raised landscaping!
So, some possibilities/examples:
-A 32 by 32 castle centered on a 48 by 48 baseplate. This would give an area
around the walls 8 pegs deep, which is enough to raise the whole thing up a bit,
perhaps even involve a shallow dry moat. Or you could use a blue baseplate to
simulate a castle in the middle of a lake. The castle itself would not be the
largest possible, but would still probably be about as large in area than the
legendary King's Castle, which I believe sits on a 32 by 16 and two 16 by 24
baseplates, and has a lot of unused baseplate space at the front and sides.
-A 32 by 48 peg (or 39 by 39 peg) castle on a 48 by 48 peg baseplate. This would
allow you as large a castle as possible, but limit the possibilities to do much
in the way of landscaping.
-A smaller castle, less than 25 pegs along each side in the middle of a 48 by 48
peg baseplate. This would allow you to build a substancial motte/hill. This
would be a smaller castle, of a similar size to say the Black Falcons' Fortess.
-A raised 32 by 32 baseplate connected to a 32 by 32 peg baseplate. Build a
small keep surrounded by a wall on top of the raised baseplate, and still have
32 by 16 pegs or maybe more of normal baseplate space to fill up further down
with a lower bailey type area. A design like this could work for a motte and
bailey castle.
> > Interestingly, there is no height limit on the landscaping.
>
> I think it would be good to get that cleared up. How about the landscaping can
> take up to ~12 bricks? Anyone think this is reasonable?
12 bricks high is a decent guideline, but I don't feel the need to make any
rules about this. I don't want people to go over the top with landscaped cliffs
which are dozens of bricks high. The spirit of this competition is meant to be
to build a castle which the Lego Company could feasibly sell for no more than a
few hundred bucks. The point is not to build the biggest castle, but rather to
see what you can do with a modest but perfectly decent sized structure.
> > I'm still trying to puzzle out if item one is accurate. The announcement
> > talks about a "footprint", and I have yet to find a satisfactory
> > definition of "footprint" (okay, I've only checked dictionary.com and
> > m-w.com, which incomprehensibly combine the 2-d concept of area and 3-d
> > objects like buildings). Is the obvious test case (a structure 32x48
> > studs at the base with sheer walls and a headlight brick with a shield in
> > an outward facing wall a few bricks up) admissible? Beats the heck out of
> > me.
>
> I think it is fair to say a flag, shield or a even few bricks here and there
> hanging over the allowed castle base of 36 x 48 is OK, but having a sunstantial
> section of a tower overhanging the footprint (i.e. 36 x 48 area) may be
> contrieved as cheating... Easiest solution is to let people decide by themselves
> what they think is fair. If judges think you went overboard interpreting the
> rules, it will be reflected negatively in your score.
I agree completely. We'll be sensibly flexible. But if it seems you are pushing
the limits of the spirit of the rules, it is quite simply less likely that your
castle win. If you have a flagpole and some shields sticking out of the side of
a gatehouse of your 32 by 48 peg castle, that certainly won't be counted against
you. But if you build a 40 by 40 peg square castle (which in and of itself is
slightly over the limits but we might just turn a blind eye to), and then have 4
corner towers, all of which project an additional 3 studs beyond the main wall
in every direction, that's beginning to make the competition a little unfair to
those who built their castles within the acual size constraints. It wouldn't
disqualify your MOC, but it would probbaly count against you to some extent.
I guess this post ended up kind of long as well, but I just felt a need to make
myself understood on the size issue, and give a few examples to make it clearer.
Feel free to post here or email me privately if you aren't sure whether your
planned castle fits within the size limits. And do ask any other questions too
of course.
thanks
Magnus
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Oh, and please remember to fill out the MOC card forms on the BrikFest website!
http://dc.brickfest.com/
thanks
Magnus
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.castle, Magnus Lauglo wrote:
|
Basically were looking for castle MOCs in a similar
size to the largest lego castles which have been
released as actual sets, such as for instance King
Leos Castle. So no massive 5 foot tall towers on a 32
by 48 peg baseplate please. There is also a height
limit: The castle can be no taller than it is long.
|
Hi Magnus,
Would you consider relaxing the height limit a bit, to allow for some style
variation (say, a cliffside fortification and
narrow
multi-story or ruined structures), by allowing castles in the competition to be
up to 1.5 or 2 times higher than they are long?
Craig
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Craig,
In lugnet.castle, Craig Hicks wrote:
|
Hi Magnus,
Would you consider relaxing the height limit a bit, to allow for some style
variation (say, a cliffside fortification and
narrow
multi-story or ruined structures), by allowing castles in the competition to
be up to 1.5 or 2 times higher than they are long?
Craig
|
Thanks for showing interest in the competition!
You mean like say building a castle which is 24 by 32 pegs, but twice as high as
it is long? So 64 pegs in height, whatever that translates to in brick?
Im definitely open to the idea, but have asked some of the other BrikFest 2004
coordinators, what they think, and we havent quite finished discussing this
yet. The decision is ultimatley mine to make, but Im interested to hear various
opinions.
So if anyone here has any opinions for or against Id be happy to hear from them
(ASAP)either by private email or here.
Thanks
Magnus
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
| Hello all,
In view of the request that the size and height limits for the MOCC be relaxed
somewhat, I have decided to change the rules to make for a more flexible
building challenge.
First though, Craig, that pic you had a link to basically looked like a large
tower/keep to me. Maybe the tower/keep is called a castle, and maybe it was
part of a castle at one point, but it would seem to me that it wasnt an actual
free standing catsle all by itself. If you were planning on building a single
building like that youll have to take a closer look at what I said about
avoiding individual towers/keeps/gatehouses. A tall ruined castle is fine, it
would be great for a fairy tale style castle, but give it some walls, an
entrance etc.
Having said that, I am changing the rules to become more flexible in regards to
height.
Initially the rules stated that a castle could be no larger in area than 2304
pegs (which is equivalent to the area taken up by a 48 by 32 peg baseplate), and
that furthermore the castle not be any taller than it was long. This height
limit was to prevent people from entering a 6 foot tower on a 32 by 48
baseplate, vastly larger than any conventional looking castle.
Im going to allow for more flexibility so that if you want to build in height
you can do this, at the expense of overall footprint. The idea being that you
can build a taller castle as long as it is correspondingly narrower. Im not
entirely sure how to word this, but basically, if you want to build taller than
the castle is long, you have to take away area from its footprint. If you are
building castle 32 by 48 pegs, following the original rules, you may build it as
tall as 48 pegs, whatever this is in brick. And this has not changed. However,
if you built it on a 32 by 24 peg area, you would only be utilizing half of the
maximum space in footprint, and with these new rules could accordingly build it
twice as high, giving you a castle which was effectively four times as high as
it was long.
If you choose to build it even higher than that, and can take away from the
footprint, give it your best shot. But remember were looking for castles here,
not towers.
I didnt make the decision to change the rules hastily. Im aware that people
may have started to build castles, (I hope some of you have started:) ), and I
realize that there maybe someone out there who would have liked to build
something tall and narrow, but has started on building a more grounded design
and might be annoyed that Im changing the rules now. Having said that, there is
nothing stopping you from starting all over again (or building more than one
entry for that matter), and nobody is getting a head start over anyone else at
building a tall castle. The rules have become more flexible and open to various
sorts of designs, rather than more limiting. If anyone has any isue with the
rules changing, feel free to email me personally or post here.
I hope the new rules for height are clear. If you have any questions, fire away.
The best way to figure out whether your proposed castle would be cool, would
simply be to email me or post online with the approximate dimensions.
Before anyone asks if they can increase the footprint by making a castle which
isnt all that high (sacrificing height for footprint), Ill just say right now
that you cant. This is mainly because I dont want the rules to become so
complex that even I dont understand then:) The maximum footprint stays the same
- 2304 pegs.
thanks
Magnus
| | | | | | |