CCBS should be replaced

LEGO
50

Totally agree with you here. The only reason I posted what I did was because I had repeatedly made the claim that CCBS was costing Lego more in materials than non CCBS figures; a claim which is not supported by evidence. I felt that I had a duty to share that, so that others would have the most accurate information possible for this debate.

Are Vader and 2016 Bionicle good or bad in your opinion here? I quite liked 2015 Vader, and some sets in 2016 Bionicle, though I concede neither is perfect. [quote=“Ghidora131, post:43, topic:40509”]
Darth Vader
[/quote]

Are you referring to the 2015 version, or his 2018 re-release? UGH. Lego, come on. The removable helmet isn’t going to be that cool, and the old one isn’t even off the shelves. [quote=“TealFire, post:44, topic:40509”]
the new ccbs line
[/quote]

Is there a new CCBS line I’m unaware of?

51

…The only difference is it doesn’t have the pin holes. That’s it. Otherwise the ball joints line up exactly.[quote=“Azani, post:46, topic:40509”]
Again, there is value to prefab parts. Plenty of commonly used system parts remain so.
[/quote]

There’s also little value to useless ones. LEGO made the torso better by taking away the top ball connectors and adding axles at a shorter height. There’s not much to save.

Vader’s fine, but I was specifically referring to the Bionicle 2015 sets. Over their previous wave they were much better builds but were aesthetically far worse, and the fans proclaimed it right to the cemetery.[quote=“DinosaursUnited, post:50, topic:40509”]
Are you referring to the 2015 version, or his 2018 re-release?
[/quote]

We’re not going to discuss leaks, potential leaks, or anything of the sort. Sorry, that’s against the rules.

1 Like
52

I remember when there was a whole topic devoted to just that. I feel so old. In any case, mea culpa. [quote=“Ghidora131, post:51, topic:40509”]
Bionicle 2015 sets
[/quote]

Ah. Yes. Them. I understand completely where you’re coming from with this, excellent point.

Although, I think that those sets do help explain why @Azani says that the bone torso is difficult to replace with a custom build like @Likus made. There’s no way to attach the 2015 gearbox to the custom. You need the pinholes. However, I will grant you that for at least 90% of HF, @Likus’s custom torso would have served just fine.

53

Can I ask how, as a Mod? And can I ask why, as a Mod, you are trying to moderate this conversation? I recommend taking a nice look over our site rules again, under “Behavioral Rules”.

8 Likes
54

It’s not a matter whether or not I like it - it’s a matter of how useful it is. I don’t really have any issues with whether you understand how CCBS works or not - that said, I do believe that the functionality is significantly altered when you remove six connection points and screw with the stability. Any jokes that you might make about it being a “useless” part don’t chnage the fact that it objectively is useful as a pre-fab element. It’s cheaper to include in sets, more stable, and includes more connection points. It’s really as simple as that.

55

Except it’s not useful, and you seem to like it. See where I stated that they improved it later.[quote=“Ghidora131, post:51, topic:40509”]
LEGO made the torso better by taking away the top ball connectors and adding axles at a shorter height.
[/quote]

To be honest, I don’t know what you’re trying to prove here.[quote=“Azani, post:54, topic:40509”]
that said, I do believe that the functionality is significantly altered when you remove six connection points and screw with the stability.
[/quote]

Hm… I think that, with a few more editing pieces, you could significantly increase the stability and use other pieces to make up for the lost connections. A little creativity goes a long way.[quote=“Azani, post:54, topic:40509”]
Any jokes that you might make about it being a “useless” part don’t change the fact that it objectively is useful as a pre-fab element.
[/quote]

Um… Show me the piece’s existence on Darth Vader.

Not only can LEGO get away with not using it, but they can do it easily, and make more money by charging for more parts. Currently they’re increasing the number of pieces they can shove into a standard inika build CCBS character by throwing unnecessary pins and little bits that add virtually nothing to the model and often confuse the builder as to why they’re even there. With a newly redesigned torso construction using more than one piece to make the skeleton, you’ve increased the part count and made the set a bit more worth it to buy.[quote=“Azani, post:54, topic:40509”]
It’s really as simple as that.
[/quote]

I think you’re thinking I’m trying to prove LEGO should sell Likus’ model of the standard frame. I’m not. I want them to make a new frame.[quote=“DinosaursUnited, post:52, topic:40509”]
Although, I think that those sets do help explain why @Azani says that the bone torso is difficult to replace with a custom build like @Likus made. There’s no way to attach the 2015 gearbox to the custom. You need the pinholes. However, I will grant you that for at least 90% of HF, @Likus’s custom torso would have served just fine.
[/quote]

The pinholes do prove problematic, but aside from one of the holes (which goes right through a ball in the waist) they can all be worked around depending on the type of connection required. I imagine most of the 2015/16 sets would unfortunately be incompatible without some heavy redesigns - as if they didn’t need them anyway.[quote=“Chronicler, post:53, topic:40509”]
And can I ask why, as a Mod, you are trying to moderate this conversation?
[/quote]

I’m sorry, I wasn’t trying to moderate. I apologize to you and to @Azani. I’ve removed the offense from my post.

56

LEGO would never sell my frame. It wouldn’t pass sturdiness tests and parts cutting isn’t allowed for regular kids’ set because scissors are sharp.

3 Likes
57

No, I fundamentally believe that it is useful, and that said fact is pretty self-evident. I don’t think that that implicitly deems the alternatives “useless”, and I think that it’s fine to like all of them for their respective benefits, in conjunction with their drawbacks.

You know, you’re right - I shouldn’t have said that. Not trying to sound like a jerk.

That’s not what I’m arguing, man. I’m a MOCist as well, and I understand how to work with and manipulate the system. Said fact does not eliminate the benefit of certain prefab parts, because som of those parts retain benefits that exceed those of the sum components.

I’m going to go ahead and give you the benefit of the doubt here with this one.

I think that you understand that this isn’t how you go about proving something one way or the other.

I’ve been arguing this since the start of day one. At the end of the day, TLG is going to lean in the direction of bringing in more profit. Sure, that might not guide everything that they do, but they’ll see if they can work it in.

If they can suceed at both providing opportunities for creativity and innovation while saving money by avoiding the creation of new molds, than they’ll do it. That torso piece that you seem to dislike so much is pretty obviously versatile in a million idfferent ways - it was used in Savage Planet for beasts, in HF for XL figures, in Chima for figures with tails and long necks, for the 2015 Masters, and for most standard humanoid builds. That’s what TLG wants, and I frankly don’t have an issue with that if they continue to switch it up with two or three figures each year, as they always continue to do.

Even though you might not see it this way, that’s a totally subjective “issue” that really depends upon what you personally like and desire for parts.

Nope.

I’d like that too, yeah.

I guess that it’s unfortunate that you disliked the Masters so much. Tough luck sometimes; I sure as heck don’t like everything that TLG does either. That said, it’s not so clear-cut.

58

But I thought Bunkle was fer xperiensed buldurs :c[quote=“Azani, post:57, topic:40509”]
No, I fundamentally believe that it is useful, and that said fact is pretty self-evident.
[/quote]

Merriam-Webster:

Definition of useful
1 :capable of being put to use; especially: serviceable for an end or purpose | useful tools

2 :of a valuable or productive kind | do something useful with your life

So you’re right, it is useful - technically, so is Galidor, so there’s that.[quote=“Azani, post:57, topic:40509”]
Said fact does not eliminate the benefit of certain prefab parts, because some of those parts retain benefits that exceed those of the sum components.
[/quote]

Yes, but could they use other pieces? I remember many of my friends overjoyed with the ugly butt-gears introduced in Bionicle 2016, solely for the fact that they now had waist articulation. It couldn’t be that hard.[quote=“Azani, post:57, topic:40509”]
I’m going to go ahead and give you the benefit of the doubt here with this one.
[/quote]

Um…[quote=“Azani, post:57, topic:40509”]
I think that you understand that this isn’t how you go about proving something one way or the other.
[/quote]

It’s a good example of a good set that does away with the piece, makes up for it in every way, still uses the CCBS armour plating, and still makes monies. And, out of the SW Buildable Figures, I think it’s received the least negative reaction.[quote=“Azani, post:57, topic:40509”]
That torso piece that you seem to dislike so much is pretty obviously versatile in a million idfferent ways - it was used in Savage Planet for beasts, in HF for XL figures, in Chima for figures with tails and long necks, for the 2015 Masters, and for most standard humanoid builds.
[/quote]

You mean, they found a zillion ways to do it, despite most of the models being pretty ugly in conclusion. That’s kind of the have-to when you’re LEGO. You make a part, you find ways to continue to use it or it’s gone, y’know?

(Although to be fair LEGO has dropped a significant number of perfectly fine pieces for little reason at all.)[quote=“Azani, post:57, topic:40509”]
Even though you might not see it this way, that’s a totally subjective “issue” that really depends upon what you personally like and desire for parts.
[/quote]

How exactly?

I just got the Death Trooper, and the instant I had him together I regretted making his legs. The new hip armour makes them look so deathfully out-of-proportion that I instantly scrapped him for parts.

This isn’t something new. We’ve gotten tons of horrifying builds thanks to this standardized system, like Fire Lord, Onya Master of Onions, Rocka XL, most every set from Brain attack… The system leaves an incredible lot to be desired. And the main offender to this is the torso. When LEGO disregards the rules of its piece or the piece entirely, the sets don’t end up that bad.[quote=“Azani, post:57, topic:40509”]
I guess that it’s unfortunate that you disliked the Masters so much. Tough luck sometimes; I sure as heck don’t like everything that TLG does either. That said, it’s not so clear-cut.
[/quote]

I mostly dislike the Uniters, for doing the job right and yet still failing at it. The only Master I don’t like at all is Onya.

59

I’m not going to keep debating this. Everything that I’ve said on this subject is very straightforward and frankly shouldn’t come across as controversial - it doesn’t even oppose your desire to see a new frame. Nothing is wrong with that.

You’re welcome.

60

did this topic turn into which is better left or right?

which can simply be awsered with the question if I chuck both at a wall which one stays together

6 Likes
61

Then, why were you defending the old one so hard?[quote=“Azani, post:59, topic:40509”]
You’re welcome.
[/quote]

I think we’re done here.

63

Or conversely, If, after being thrown at the wall, they break, which is easier to repair? :stuck_out_tongue:

In any case, the point being made is that the bone pieces can be replaced, (by the one on the left) sparking the debate as to whether or not that’s true. But I don’t think the entire argument about replacing CCBS hinges on whether or not ONE piece can be replaced by system(ish) pieces.

2 Likes
64
5 Likes
65

Hey I’ve broken some CCBS pieces, granted they were shells but still

2 Likes
66

How would you manage such a thing.

67

Honestly, idk. I just tried to pull the chest armour of my self moc and snapped a piece of the plastic making up the ball socket

1 Like
68

That’s rough, dude.

4 Likes
69

CCBS bones have come snapped in packaging before, especially for those in the UK for some reason.

I’ve only had one CCBS bone bust on me.

1 Like
70

Wow , I really like those ergonomic designs , especially the first one . You are awesome , sir . How hasn’t lego hired you by now ?!:laughing::grinning: