 | | Re: need help identifying set
|
|
(...) thanks for the reference with pictures, dave. i think my brain mixed the 6582 and 1687 sets together 'cause i'm remembering it differently but those have got to be the only sets that match what i'm remembering. ..jg (13 years ago, 1-Mar-12, to lugnet.town, lugnet.general, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Kartoffelrækkerne
|
|
While I can't comment on the accuracy of the model (I've never been to Europe), I've got to say that is quite an excellent LEGO town. (13 years ago, 29-Feb-12, to lugnet.town, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: The newer magnets... // "Photos or it didn't happen."
|
|
(...) Getting back on a very old topic ("since we all know that a picture is worth a thousand of words" - "Photos or it didn't happen."): (2 URLs) Hope you enjoy (despite of destroying LEGO parts) + Leg Godt! (URL) See more pictures of my models at (...) (13 years ago, 1-Mar-12, to lugnet.trains, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Mathematical proof that you can't build anything with LEGO bricks
|
|
(...) I think it's the higher ratio of piece types to set size that leads him to conclude the sets are not as useful for free-form building as they once were. The argument he makes is that if you have a set of 100 unique pieces, it has less (...) (13 years ago, 1-Mar-12, to lugnet.general, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Mathematical proof that you can't build anything with LEGO bricks
|
|
(...) I've been sort of pondering this, and I've concluded that the researcher's conclusion makes more sense if we use as a sample 100 random elements chosen from the "classic" LEGO era vs 100 random elements from the newer Ninjago era. Whatever the (...) (13 years ago, 29-Feb-12, to lugnet.general, FTX)
|
