• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  1. Good to know, that definitely works as a provisional solution.
  2. Since spare parts added to sets can be somewhat random sometimes, especially with older sets, I think it would be nice to have a toggle (preferably both a global one and a per-set one) that makes Rebrickable consider or not consider spare parts for calculating piece availability for builds. Spare parts usually don't play an essential role of any sort, but they CAN make a difference, and seeing as how which ones are included in sets is not always reflective of the listing on the page, I think excluding them from calculations altogether would be a nice option to have. If this option is already available and I simply missed it, feel free to ignore this thread. We could go one step further too - rename the "spare parts" section to "possible spare parts" and have them listed in semi-transparent images, so that every owner could manually mark which ones from the possible pool they have with a simple click, and possibly putting in the quantity in a small text box below. I believe this solution would be best for calculations and help some people's OCD when it comes to completionism. I for example always spare parts missing fom the Rebrickable list to "my lost parts" and try replacing them as soon as possible even though they're not even parts of primary importance in the first place. Having a listing that lets you customize your spare part list, or skip it altogether if you have none (as is often the case with second-hand sets) would probably be a solution that satisfies everyone. Let me give you an example. I recently purchased a 8844 Helicopter set. Rebrickable lists its spare parts as 4 chain links only. Not only in my set I have 3 (through fault of either the previous owner or Lego themselves), but I also have a spare 3482 not listed anywhere, a spare 4274 and several half-bushes and regular bushes on top of that - though in the case of the latter I'm not sure if they count as spares, or are just there for the secondary build. I think, considering it's not a "universal set" with several equivalent suggested builds, I think these parts were meant to be spares after all. I would like to be able to list all such parts I have as spares from this set rather than having to list them separately as loose parts. Thanks in advance for considering my suggestion.
  3. This would be hard to implement and probably counter-productive for several reasons. - Lego purists might be pissed - Lego's competitors do not keep evidence of part types as well as Lego does - There are many of said competitors, with different part evidence systems (if any).
  4. Analytics graphs were a great feature, showing how many instances of each part were used each year in how many sets. I'm sad to see it gone. Yes, there is a new graph that compares different mold variations and how they were brought in and phased out - fantastic feature I'm really grateful for. But the early graph showing just how many times the piece was used in any given year was super useful too.
  5. I've managed to get a hold of the set's name, so it can be added. It's a small, minifigure-less set in a small polybag. Here's the thread I made on Eurobricks that helped me identify it: http://www.eurobricks.com/forum/index.php?/forums/topic/143466-help-identify-a-nexo-polybag-set/#comment-2696243 And here's its bricklink designation, also courtesy of the Eurobricks community. http://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?S=271606-1#T=S&O={} If you need help with what parts it contains, let me know - I can disassemble the set and send a photo of all parts separately. Thanks!
  6. The message about combining the pieces didn't appear for two sets. It did however appear for a third set I'm completing, so there might be some inconsistency.
  7. I have noticed that Rebrickable will no longer pool your pieces into a set, even if I have 100% of the parts. Any idea why that might be?
  8. Because you know, you have all the parts needed to build the entire set but no spares, and Rebrickable doesn't judge it as 100%. Similarly, if you add a set to your owned parts because you purchase it say, on bricklink, and it doesn't include spare parts, Rebrickable assumes you have those too, because well duh, you added the entire set. Seemingly a minor inconvenience, but Rebrickable counts those often absent spare parts towards your total part pool which can affect buildability calculations of some models. And well, correcting it all by hand can be tedious, especially if you have no idea what parts were spares and if you even have all of them when you have some.
  9. I thought we were talking obvious replacements. Such as for example the length 2 Technic axle. All three variants are usable, black without notches, black with notches and red with notches. I know purists and perfectionists will insist on having notchless black axles for their 1994 Supercar or else it won't feel the same, but you get my drift
  10. Ok, I'll stay tuned I actually like observing how the pieces are changing over time. For example the 2x2x2 cone - even though the blocked hollow stud variant is older and less functional than the unblocked one, the blocked one can actually have functionality over the unblocked one - it allows you to insert a minifig utensil just a little bit without the risk of it sliding further down, while in the unblocked one there is nothing to limit the depth of insertion. Not like this is an important consideration since minifig poles hold quite securely within stud holes no matter if they're limited vertically (unless unintentional force is applied), so I'm probably overanalyzing Anyway, I consider an "improved part" a part that can do everything its prececessor can and more. For example the new style 24-tooth gear with single axle hole is more of a regression actually, since it lacks the additional two axle holes the old gear has (and has actually failed to replace the older gear, becoming more of a niche piece itself). LEGO claims that the new gear is structurally tougher, but it's not like the old version ever had any structural integrity issues to my knowledge. There are also several more pieces I like comparing, like the 4859 Wedge Plate 3x4 without stud notches and 41813, its equivalent with stud notches. While the former was produced from 1985 to 2010, the latter has been produced since 2003 till present. There was a 8 year overlap in both of these parts' lifetime, and it begs some questions: how do they work together? was producing the older variant 8 years after the introduction of the new one justified? Has the older one without stud notches any measurable advantage over the newer, more flexible variant? I like pondering such stuff
  11. Tell me more about that new relationship link, I haven't really seen what it does
  12. It's more of a long-term goal than anything urgent, but I just thought of something like "brick history pages" or something to that tune. I'm talking about parts that have multiple variants brought into the fold later to improve functionality. For example parts 3942a, 3942b and 3942c which are variants of the 2x2x2 cone. The first one's got a solid stud, the second one's stud is hollow and has a cross-shaped axle holder, and the third one's stud is hollow and has a more modern axle holder. Other than that the pieces are identical. We could create some kind of lists for such pieces with more detailed descriptions of how they evolved and what new functionality the newer equivalents introduced. I'm talking only of parts whose first variants have already been phased out or are used sparsely or parts that we can otherwise be sure that are improvements of others, not just alternatives. Another easy example is the half-bush. It's got three variants. The initial toothed one with a cross-shaped axle hole, the second toothed one with modern axle hole, and the toothless one. Or the 2 length axle that used to come without notches but obviously does now. Etc, etc. What do you think about such a little "part encyclopedia"? It could serve as a nice extension to the part descriptions you already have (which happen to be my favorite on the Net already).
  13. I think an option to toggle the rotation of the 3d brick model should be included. Sometimes I would like to examine the brick without it rotating on me all the time on its own, I'd like only to use manual rotation. If there already is such a feature, please let me know how to toggle it.
  14. I'm not sure about other models, but in case of 8509-1 Swamp there is a conflict between the regular brick list and the "Build this set" brick list. The latter gives parts in wrong colors, like blue and green, which do not appear in this set. The parts were probably changed in one but not in the other... EDIT Sorry, this was just due to me forgetting that I had to tick "Exact" rather than "close" in color matching :X
  15. No probs, I'll keep making updates as I notice them. I'm in the process of recovering my almost-complete sets by buying missing parts. I've already restored 4 of my 6 Toa and 1 of 2 of my Toa Nuva. I've got all six RoboRiders which miss up to 3-4 parts each for completion, so I'll be focusing on these sets in the near future.