Subject:
|
Re: Nailing down the new Moonbase standards
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.space
|
Date:
|
Sat, 6 Sep 2003 04:44:08 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
280 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.space, Jon Palmer wrote:
<snip>
>
> What I think needs to be worked out:
>
> Vertical corridors. We need to work out some guidelines for the size and
> shape of these. Remember that the top of these needs to always end at
> 10,20,30 bricks etc..
> Also we need to discuss strength issues. For instance modules with vertical
> corridors need to be able to support the weight of more modules on top of
> them.
The more I read about this, the more scary it is. I feel like those with
modules underneath someone else's overlayed module will have their work lost,
even more than those who get lost inside a wide-radiating layout. Plus, one
would have to actually dismantle the MB in order to see the interior detail of a
bottom module. Not good times.
I feel that the taller modules should be the inside of the base, the shorter to
the outside, and no more than two or three modules deep (except where the base
branches off in a perpendicular direction, of course) to allow everyone's
talents to be shown off. And a "Race 'Round the 'Base", which someone
mentioned, would be pretty cool.
> Roads: I love the idea of using a simple outline for roads. Like the train
> track I think the roads should be 8 wide and 4 studs from the side.
> Personally I love the idea of the trans (something) 1x1 round plates for an
> outline.
See, I can be an idea guy too, baby. [Goulet]
-Nick
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Nailing down the new Moonbase standards
|
| I've been devoting most of my time to another LEGO project, but I'm back online tonight and want to start nailing down the new features. What I think is settled: First: Corridors will not be widened. Sorry widesters, but an overwhelming number of (...) (21 years ago, 6-Sep-03, to lugnet.space) !
|
6 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
