|
 |
| | | Author: | Teup  | | Posted: | Nov 21, 2018 07:43 | | Subject: | Projectile Launcher | | Viewed: | 180 times | | Topic: | Catalog | | Status: | Open | |
|
| So.. what's the deal with the Projectile Launcher category? Currently has
one item:
I proposed this category so various shooters can be grouped together, since they
are now scattered across categories and in my opinion it's pretty arbitrary.
I assume this category is still a work in progress, but anyway I thought it could
be useful to post about it.
Just have a look, (I have left out variants and some projectiles just to keep
the post tidy)
This one is in Vehicle - did you guess that? Even though it also appears as a
fixed shooter.
These are in Minifig,Weapon - even though they cannot be held by a minifig
or are part of a weapon held by a minifig, unlike every single other entry in
this category.
These are in the generic Technic category - which probably is a category that
we want to reduce as much as possible in general, and these shooters are massively
more frequent in non-Technic sets. Actually I struggle to find Technic sets with
them.
This one is in Brick,Modified, even though it has pretty much exactly the same
characteristics as the one and only part that is currently in Projectile Launcher.
This one is in Plate,Modified - while that is not altogether unlogical, I still
wouldn't guess it, especially if a Brick,Modifidish part is already in Projectile
Launcher.
[P=19020c01]
The Bar category is expanding a bit too rapidly to my taste, these items have
limited Bar-like constructional value, and they would do great in a Projectile
Launcher category, or called Shooters & Projectiles or something, grouping projectiles
together with the things that fire them, which are already in that category.
What do you think?
|
|
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Nov 21, 2018 07:48 | | Subject: | Re: Projectile Launcher | | Viewed: | 62 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Teup writes:
That was the point of the Projectile Launcher category: to group all of these
together in one place. However, I'd prefer to wait for the launch of the
parts reclassification project to move these.
The first part of that project will be creating precise written definitions for
every category of parts. Once written definitions exist, then people will have
less room to bring out the torches and pitchforks when parts start moving. 
Don't know if you noticed or not, but people sometimes want change and then
complain when it happens.
|
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Author: | calsbricks | | Posted: | Nov 21, 2018 07:56 | | Subject: | Re: Projectile Launcher | | Viewed: | 352 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | In Catalog, Teup writes:
That was the point of the Projectile Launcher category: to group all of these
together in one place. However, I'd prefer to wait for the launch of the
parts reclassification project to move these.
The first part of that project will be creating precise written definitions for
every category of parts. Once written definitions exist, then people will have
less room to bring out the torches and pitchforks when parts start moving.
Don't know if you noticed or not, but people sometimes want change and then
complain when it happens.
|
Change for the sake of change is often followed by complaints - it rarely serves
any real purpose. Agreed changes often come with compliments and welcoming. There
is a difference.
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Nov 21, 2018 08:03 | | Subject: | Re: Projectile Launcher | | Viewed: | 42 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, calsbricks writes:
| | Change for the sake of change is often followed by complaints - it rarely serves
any real purpose. Agreed changes often come with compliments and welcoming. There
is a difference.
|
That's a reasonable assessment. However, I'm fairly confident that the
changes I've made or coordinated in the catalog so far were all improvements.
Still, I've gotten a number of complaints about nearly all of them.
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Author: | calsbricks | | Posted: | Nov 21, 2018 08:43 | | Subject: | Re: Projectile Launcher | | Viewed: | 182 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | In Catalog, calsbricks writes:
| | Change for the sake of change is often followed by complaints - it rarely serves
any real purpose. Agreed changes often come with compliments and welcoming. There
is a difference.
|
That's a reasonable assessment. However, I'm fairly confident that the
changes I've made or coordinated in the catalog so far were all improvements.
Still, I've gotten a number of complaints about nearly all of them.
|
How does that go - you can please some of the people all of the time but not
all of the people all of the time 
NB - We haven't had reason yet to complain other than taking up the entire
forum with catalogue and inventory change requests ....
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | TheBrickGuys | | Posted: | Nov 21, 2018 11:23 | | Subject: | Re: Projectile Launcher | | Viewed: | 35 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, calsbricks writes:
| | In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | In Catalog, calsbricks writes:
| | Change for the sake of change is often followed by complaints - it rarely serves
any real purpose. Agreed changes often come with compliments and welcoming. There
is a difference.
|
That's a reasonable assessment. However, I'm fairly confident that the
changes I've made or coordinated in the catalog so far were all improvements.
Still, I've gotten a number of complaints about nearly all of them.
|
How does that go - you can please some of the people all of the time but not
all of the people all of the time
NB - We haven't had reason yet to complain other than taking up the entire
forum with catalogue and inventory change requests ....
|
There are certain ones that talk allot about the changes needed yet they disagree
with just about EVERY change made. Hmmmm, makes you wonder.....
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | calsbricks | | Posted: | Nov 21, 2018 11:50 | | Subject: | Re: Projectile Launcher | | Viewed: | 286 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, TheBrickGuys writes:
| | In Catalog, calsbricks writes:
| | In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | In Catalog, calsbricks writes:
| | Change for the sake of change is often followed by complaints - it rarely serves
any real purpose. Agreed changes often come with compliments and welcoming. There
is a difference.
|
That's a reasonable assessment. However, I'm fairly confident that the
changes I've made or coordinated in the catalog so far were all improvements.
Still, I've gotten a number of complaints about nearly all of them.
|
How does that go - you can please some of the people all of the time but not
all of the people all of the time
NB - We haven't had reason yet to complain other than taking up the entire
forum with catalogue and inventory change requests ....
|
There are certain ones that talk allot about the changes needed yet they disagree
with just about EVERY change made. Hmmmm, makes you wonder.....
|
About what?
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Author: | Legolibrarian2 | | Posted: | Nov 21, 2018 21:48 | | Subject: | Re: Projectile Launcher | | Viewed: | 32 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | In Catalog, calsbricks writes:
| | Change for the sake of change is often followed by complaints - it rarely serves
any real purpose. Agreed changes often come with compliments and welcoming. There
is a difference.
|
That's a reasonable assessment. However, I'm fairly confident that the
changes I've made or coordinated in the catalog so far were all improvements.
Still, I've gotten a number of complaints about nearly all of them.
|
Stormchaser, I'm a buyer, not a seller. As a result, I have some flexibility
in the way I arrange the categories in my collection, and the changes you have
made so far make a lot of sense to me. For example: the "energy effects" category.
I was already storing these in a single zip-lock bag and referring to them as
"flames." However, a seller may have to physically re-arrange his stock to reflect
the new category. With more changes on the way, I can hear a large groan.
I really am a librarian, and am quite familiar with categorization schemes and
descriptors. Concepts change, and new ones come along, and library "structures"
must reflect these. One thing that might help is to create a field in each part's
description that includes its previous name and/or category. And make this searchable.
Folks might take some time to learn the new descriptions/categories, and this
will make the "crosswalk" easier.
I applaud your question in response to another posting for information about
search terms used to find a part. I think anything that can be done to increase
the "findability" of parts in the catalog will be an improvement. That may be
accomplished by rationalizing the categories or by adding searchable features
to the descriptions of individual parts.
Enough!!
Happy Thanksgiving.
Kathy
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Nov 21, 2018 23:46 | | Subject: | Re: Projectile Launcher | | Viewed: | 36 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Legolibrarian2 writes:
| | With more changes on the way, I can hear a large groan.
|
You have better hearing than I do. I hear nothing but the adulation of the multitudes
. . . perhaps I just have selective hearing.
| | I really am a librarian, and am quite familiar with categorization schemes
|
That's awesome. Librarians are among my favorite kinds of people and libraries
are among my favorite places to visit. I get the feeling that libraries are
in decline since the internet arrived, which is unfortunate.
Considering that you have experience in understanding and working with systems
of categorization, your input would be appreciated on any future catalog work.
| | One thing that might help is to create a field in each part's
description that includes its previous name and/or category. And make this searchable.
|
I will consider this. All I could really do is add something to the title which
would have to be removed later. I don't feel like there have been many complaints
about actually finding things once they're moved. It seems more that people
are unhappy about having to rearrange their stock. So I don't think the
problem lies as much in locating items as it does in the fact that change has
occurred. I did try to make things easier with this list:
https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1113041
Ideally we could message or email every affected seller when something is moved.
Perhaps we'll have that ability in the future.
The same to you, of course. 
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Nov 21, 2018 08:13 | | Subject: | Re: Projectile Launcher | | Viewed: | 33 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | In Catalog, Teup writes:
That was the point of the Projectile Launcher category: to group all of these
together in one place. However, I'd prefer to wait for the launch of the
parts reclassification project to move these.
The first part of that project will be creating precise written definitions for
every category of parts. Once written definitions exist, then people will have
less room to bring out the torches and pitchforks when parts start moving.
Don't know if you noticed or not, but people sometimes want change and then
complain when it happens.
|
Thanks, ok, that makes sense - then my list is just for future reference
Personally I'd propose including the projectiles into the category, whenever
at least their first appearance was for the purpose of projectile.
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Nov 21, 2018 08:16 | | Subject: | Re: Projectile Launcher | | Viewed: | 34 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Teup writes:
| | Personally I'd propose including the projectiles into the category, whenever
at least their first appearance was for the purpose of projectile.
|
Yes, I agree with that. Once the project launches and I get the definitions
all written I will open the category definitions to discussion and possible modifications
before we actually begin moving anything.
|
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Author: | Miro78 | | Posted: | Nov 21, 2018 08:51 | | Subject: | Re: Projectile Launcher | | Viewed: | 36 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | In Catalog, Teup writes:
That was the point of the Projectile Launcher category: to group all of these
together in one place. However, I'd prefer to wait for the launch of the
parts reclassification project to move these.
The first part of that project will be creating precise written definitions for
every category of parts. Once written definitions exist, then people will have
less room to bring out the torches and pitchforks when parts start moving.
Don't know if you noticed or not, but people sometimes want change and then
complain when it happens.
|
I hope the part reclassification also considers some of the modified bricks
parts reclassification, as it has become a dumping ground. I often find myself
clicking back and forth between modified bricks and curved slopes
categories as there are several bricks with slopes that to me would make more
sense to be in the curved slopes category. There are many others, and
I am sure everyone has their own reclassification wants.
The problem lies in how one chooses to classify parts, as it's in human nature
to label and bucket everything, but in reality there is a lot of overlap. Ultimately
whatever Bricklink chooses to do, there were be complaining. You just can't
please everyone, and I think the majority will be from sellers, as they will
feel more of the burden of rearranging their inventory, if they try to match
the Bricklink categories. As such it would be considerate if Bricklink would
communicate these changes effectively to ease the pain for those that would be
affected the most.
Miro
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Nov 21, 2018 09:14 | | Subject: | Re: Projectile Launcher | | Viewed: | 26 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Miro78 writes:
| | In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | In Catalog, Teup writes:
That was the point of the Projectile Launcher category: to group all of these
together in one place. However, I'd prefer to wait for the launch of the
parts reclassification project to move these.
The first part of that project will be creating precise written definitions for
every category of parts. Once written definitions exist, then people will have
less room to bring out the torches and pitchforks when parts start moving.
Don't know if you noticed or not, but people sometimes want change and then
complain when it happens.
|
I hope the part reclassification also considers some of the modified bricks
parts reclassification, as it has become a dumping ground. I often find myself
clicking back and forth between modified bricks and curved slopes
categories as there are several bricks with slopes that to me would make more
sense to be in the curved slopes category. There are many others, and
I am sure everyone has their own reclassification wants.
The problem lies in how one chooses to classify parts, as it's in human nature
to label and bucket everything, but in reality there is a lot of overlap. Ultimately
whatever Bricklink chooses to do, there were be complaining. You just can't
please everyone, and I think the majority will be from sellers, as they will
feel more of the burden of rearranging their inventory, if they try to match
the Bricklink categories. As such it would be considerate if Bricklink would
communicate these changes effectively to ease the pain for those that would be
affected the most.
Miro
|
To me Brick,Modified vs Slope,Curved is absolutely fine. I never have any doubts
or troubles with it. Brick,Round is round in the XY dimension, Brick,Modified
is round in the Z dimension, and all curves that are not circular are Slopes.
I'm surprised it's Slopes vs Brick,Modified that troubles you and not
Brick,Modified vs Brick,Arch. If the curved Brick,Modified parts were moved elsewhere,
my first thought would be Brick,Round, definitely not slope.
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Author: | Miro78 | | Posted: | Nov 21, 2018 10:44 | | Subject: | Re: Projectile Launcher | | Viewed: | 30 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Teup writes:
| | In Catalog, Miro78 writes:
| | In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | In Catalog, Teup writes:
That was the point of the Projectile Launcher category: to group all of these
together in one place. However, I'd prefer to wait for the launch of the
parts reclassification project to move these.
The first part of that project will be creating precise written definitions for
every category of parts. Once written definitions exist, then people will have
less room to bring out the torches and pitchforks when parts start moving.
Don't know if you noticed or not, but people sometimes want change and then
complain when it happens.
|
I hope the part reclassification also considers some of the modified bricks
parts reclassification, as it has become a dumping ground. I often find myself
clicking back and forth between modified bricks and curved slopes
categories as there are several bricks with slopes that to me would make more
sense to be in the curved slopes category. There are many others, and
I am sure everyone has their own reclassification wants.
The problem lies in how one chooses to classify parts, as it's in human nature
to label and bucket everything, but in reality there is a lot of overlap. Ultimately
whatever Bricklink chooses to do, there were be complaining. You just can't
please everyone, and I think the majority will be from sellers, as they will
feel more of the burden of rearranging their inventory, if they try to match
the Bricklink categories. As such it would be considerate if Bricklink would
communicate these changes effectively to ease the pain for those that would be
affected the most.
Miro
|
To me Brick,Modified vs Slope,Curved is absolutely fine. I never have any doubts
or troubles with it. Brick,Round is round in the XY dimension, Brick,Modified
is round in the Z dimension, and all curves that are not circular are Slopes.
I'm surprised it's Slopes vs Brick,Modified that troubles you and not
Brick,Modified vs Brick,Arch. If the curved Brick,Modified parts were moved elsewhere,
my first thought would be Brick,Round, definitely not slope.
|
Brick arch do not confuse me because arches have voids beneath them. Just speaking
from experience of having to click in 2 groups because some curved parts are
in bricks modified and others in curved slopes. That's just scratching the
surface. There are others as well in other categories, but as I mentioned earlier,
human like to classify things and each person classifies things based on some
definitions that do not always agree from person to person. It's a slippery
slope and ultimately whatever it becomes will be just a nuisance to some degree
to us all. Can't please everyone, and in grand scheme, it does not affect
my life all that much.
Miro
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Nov 21, 2018 11:52 | | Subject: | Re: Projectile Launcher | | Viewed: | 24 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Miro78 writes:
| | In Catalog, Teup writes:
| | In Catalog, Miro78 writes:
| | In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | In Catalog, Teup writes:
That was the point of the Projectile Launcher category: to group all of these
together in one place. However, I'd prefer to wait for the launch of the
parts reclassification project to move these.
The first part of that project will be creating precise written definitions for
every category of parts. Once written definitions exist, then people will have
less room to bring out the torches and pitchforks when parts start moving.
Don't know if you noticed or not, but people sometimes want change and then
complain when it happens.
|
I hope the part reclassification also considers some of the modified bricks
parts reclassification, as it has become a dumping ground. I often find myself
clicking back and forth between modified bricks and curved slopes
categories as there are several bricks with slopes that to me would make more
sense to be in the curved slopes category. There are many others, and
I am sure everyone has their own reclassification wants.
The problem lies in how one chooses to classify parts, as it's in human nature
to label and bucket everything, but in reality there is a lot of overlap. Ultimately
whatever Bricklink chooses to do, there were be complaining. You just can't
please everyone, and I think the majority will be from sellers, as they will
feel more of the burden of rearranging their inventory, if they try to match
the Bricklink categories. As such it would be considerate if Bricklink would
communicate these changes effectively to ease the pain for those that would be
affected the most.
Miro
|
To me Brick,Modified vs Slope,Curved is absolutely fine. I never have any doubts
or troubles with it. Brick,Round is round in the XY dimension, Brick,Modified
is round in the Z dimension, and all curves that are not circular are Slopes.
I'm surprised it's Slopes vs Brick,Modified that troubles you and not
Brick,Modified vs Brick,Arch. If the curved Brick,Modified parts were moved elsewhere,
my first thought would be Brick,Round, definitely not slope.
|
Brick arch do not confuse me because arches have voids beneath them. Just speaking
from experience of having to click in 2 groups because some curved parts are
in bricks modified and others in curved slopes. That's just scratching the
surface. There are others as well in other categories, but as I mentioned earlier,
human like to classify things and each person classifies things based on some
definitions that do not always agree from person to person. It's a slippery
slope and ultimately whatever it becomes will be just a nuisance to some degree
to us all. Can't please everyone, and in grand scheme, it does not affect
my life all that much.
Miro
|
But do you know that all the ones in Brick,Modified have a circular curve
and the ones in slope all have an arbitrary curve? Maybe that helps telling
them apart. The Brick,Modified ones you could hold a round 2x2 brick against
sideways and the curves line up. They're usually a quarter circles; the curve
starts at 0 degrees at the top, and ends at 90 degrees at the bottom. Therefore,
they're not slopes, as slopes start and/or end with a sloping angle.
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | qwertyboy | | Posted: | Nov 21, 2018 12:03 | | Subject: | Re: Projectile Launcher | | Viewed: | 26 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Teup writes:
| | But do you know that all the ones in Brick,Modified have a circular curve
and the ones in slope all have an arbitrary curve? Maybe that helps telling
them apart. The Brick,Modified ones you could hold a round 2x2 brick against
sideways and the curves line up. They're usually a quarter circles; the curve
starts at 0 degrees at the top, and ends at 90 degrees at the bottom. Therefore,
they're not slopes, as slopes start and/or end with a sloping angle.
|
How 'bout this one for an arbitrary slope? There will always be "discussion
items".
Niek.
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Nov 21, 2018 12:18 | | Subject: | Re: Projectile Launcher | | Viewed: | 22 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, qwertyboy writes:
| | In Catalog, Teup writes:
| | But do you know that all the ones in Brick,Modified have a circular curve
and the ones in slope all have an arbitrary curve? Maybe that helps telling
them apart. The Brick,Modified ones you could hold a round 2x2 brick against
sideways and the curves line up. They're usually a quarter circles; the curve
starts at 0 degrees at the top, and ends at 90 degrees at the bottom. Therefore,
they're not slopes, as slopes start and/or end with a sloping angle.
|
How 'bout this one for an arbitrary slope? There will always be "discussion
items".
Niek.
|
Ok yeah.. that one is weird.. I didn't think about these But not a slope
either, just the most random shape ever.. I would say Wedge or Vehicle...
Same for these
None of them are even 1 Brick high, so I wouldn't mind if those were kicked
out of the BrickMod club.
I was just thinking about these:
(wow, new? cool)
To me these have a coherent story and relationship to one another and are very
understandable as BrickMod.
If memory serves, this Slope used to be something else than Slope, either BrickMod
or Vehicle? I don't think they look too well as Slopes, with their details
and multiple sides they kind of break the rules of slopes to me.
None of these things bother me personally though - I know where they are
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Author: | cosmicray | | Posted: | Nov 22, 2018 12:55 | | Subject: | Re: Projectile Launcher | | Viewed: | 32 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | In Catalog, Teup writes:
That was the point of the Projectile Launcher category: to group all of these
together in one place. However, I'd prefer to wait for the launch of the
parts reclassification project to move these.
The first part of that project will be creating precise written definitions for
every category of parts. Once written definitions exist, then people will have
less room to bring out the torches and pitchforks when parts start moving.
|
Which (and yes, I know this would require a technical change) is why some parts
really need a primary category and (one or more) alternate categories. The existing
hierarchical category arrangement does not reflect the multi-use capabilities
of LEGO parts.
Nita Rae
|
|
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Author: | yorbrick | | Posted: | Nov 21, 2018 09:05 | | Subject: | Re: Projectile Launcher | | Viewed: | 37 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
|
There is also the other / older style of technic cannon, which is probably why
the newer one is also classed as technic even though it doesn't appear in
many technic sets.
| | The Bar category is expanding a bit too rapidly to my taste, these items have
limited Bar-like constructional value, and they would do great in a Projectile
Launcher category, or called Shooters & Projectiles or something, grouping projectiles
together with the things that fire them, which are already in that category.
|
I guess the downside of this is if something is introduced as a projectile but
later becomes more widely used as something else. This is like the problem with
the technic cannons. They were originally used in technic sets so it made sense
at the time that they were classed as technic parts.
I wouldn't mind projectiles going in there, but of course many won't
as they will already be in other categories. So maybe it would be wise to have
a list of things that the shooter can shoot as part of the extra information,
just like windows have which glass fits with them, door frames have which doors,
and wheels have which tyres, etc.
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Nov 21, 2018 09:18 | | Subject: | Re: Projectile Launcher | | Viewed: | 27 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, yorbrick writes:
| | I wouldn't mind projectiles going in there, but of course many won't
as they will already be in other categories. So maybe it would be wise to have
a list of things that the shooter can shoot as part of the extra information,
just like windows have which glass fits with them, door frames have which doors,
and wheels have which tyres, etc.
|
This would require a new relationship type. I have been thinking about that
for years and I suggested it some years ago. This would be a relationship type
that shows parts designed to fit and work together which are commonly used together:
* | | 4275 Hinge Plate 1 x 2 with 3 Fingers on End (Undetermined Type)
Parts: Hinge |
* | | 4276 Hinge Plate 1 x 2 with 2 Fingers on End (Undetermined Type)
Parts: Hinge |
A number of parts which currently include that information in the part titles
would benefit from this kind of relationship match:
This type of relationship could be used to show which projectiles can be shot
with which launchers. However, creating that new relationship type won't
happen for a while - I haven't even added it to the roadmap yet.
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Author: | yorbrick | | Posted: | Nov 21, 2018 09:40 | | Subject: | Re: Projectile Launcher | | Viewed: | 26 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | In Catalog, yorbrick writes:
| | I wouldn't mind projectiles going in there, but of course many won't
as they will already be in other categories. So maybe it would be wise to have
a list of things that the shooter can shoot as part of the extra information,
just like windows have which glass fits with them, door frames have which doors,
and wheels have which tyres, etc.
|
This would require a new relationship type. I have been thinking about that
for years and I suggested it some years ago. This would be a relationship type
that shows parts designed to fit and work together which are commonly used together:
|
OK. I assumed it existed already as these types of symbiotic relationships are
already used for windows, doors, wheels, etc. But obviously I don't know
the code so didn't realise they are different types of relationships.
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Nov 21, 2018 15:33 | | Subject: | Re: Projectile Launcher | | Viewed: | 27 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, yorbrick writes:
| | OK. I assumed it existed already as these types of symbiotic relationships are
already used for windows, doors, wheels, etc. But obviously I don't know
the code so didn't realise they are different types of relationships.
|
You can learn more about item relationships here (click Definitions for further
information):
https://www.bricklink.com/catalogRel.asp
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | mhortar | | Posted: | Nov 21, 2018 16:31 | | Subject: | Re: Projectile Launcher | | Viewed: | 22 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | In Catalog, yorbrick writes:
| | OK. I assumed it existed already as these types of symbiotic relationships are
already used for windows, doors, wheels, etc. But obviously I don't know
the code so didn't realise they are different types of relationships.
|
You can learn more about item relationships here (click Definitions for further
information):
https://www.bricklink.com/catalogRel.asp
|
I almost want to use the 'Paired Part' relationship for projectile launchers
and projectiles. The hinge parts would almost fit as well, except the definition
specifically says it's for parts that aren't normally attached to each
other. Projectiles and projectile launchers aren't really 'attached'
though, at least for the definition of 'attached' that I normally think
of. It's just that pesky sentence at the end that seems to exclude the projectile
launchers.
Josh
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Nov 21, 2018 09:21 | | Subject: | Re: Projectile Launcher | | Viewed: | 26 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, yorbrick writes:
| |
There is also the other / older style of technic cannon, which is probably why
the newer one is also classed as technic even though it doesn't appear in
many technic sets.
| | The Bar category is expanding a bit too rapidly to my taste, these items have
limited Bar-like constructional value, and they would do great in a Projectile
Launcher category, or called Shooters & Projectiles or something, grouping projectiles
together with the things that fire them, which are already in that category.
|
I guess the downside of this is if something is introduced as a projectile but
later becomes more widely used as something else. This is like the problem with
the technic cannons. They were originally used in technic sets so it made sense
at the time that they were classed as technic parts.
I wouldn't mind projectiles going in there, but of course many won't
as they will already be in other categories. So maybe it would be wise to have
a list of things that the shooter can shoot as part of the extra information,
just like windows have which glass fits with them, door frames have which doors,
and wheels have which tyres, etc.
|
Well, I think there's a fairly clear-cut difference between shooters that
shoot existing parts and shooters that have specifically designed projectiles
for them. But yes, some additional note about what they should could always be
useful.
The two projectiles I mentioned have specific hooks that can really only be useful
if you use them with the shooter, and I think few users will really be interested
in these parts for other purposes than projectiles. If that "Technic" shooter
would be moved, it would be awkward for its projectile to be left behind, so
at least those types of projectiles are probably going to end up there already.
So then we might as well have those two "bar" projectiles in there.
But I wouldn't go as far as proposing the 3L shooting pins there, as they've
become common non-shooting related parts.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Netherlands, Utrecht
USA, Oklahoma
United Kingdom, England
Canada, Alberta
