Are Technic sets getting less complex?

[merman]

is it just me, or are Technic sets getting less and less complex? I like gears. And pneumatics are nice but it also means less gears so less complexity. Let's be honest: 8258 and 42009 were much more interesting on a technical level than 8110, 42030 or 42039

[MrTekneex]

is it just me, or are Technic sets getting less and less complex? I like gears. And pneumatics are nice but it also means less gears so less complexity. Let's be honest: 8258 and 42009 were much more interesting on a technical level than 8110, 42030 or 42039

[davidmull]

is it just me, or are Technic sets getting less and less complex? I like gears. And pneumatics are nice but it also means less gears so less complexity. Let's be honest: 8258 and 42009 were much more interesting on a technical level than 8110, 42030 or 42039

Pneumatics vs gears? No contest really ;)

[Epic Technic]

Pneumatics vs gears? No contest really ;)

Pneumatics rule, they actually have a soul unlike linear actuator!

[andythenorth]

Building mindless gearboxes is boring. Gear, gear, dog clutch, driving ring, gear gear gear. There's no real sense of what you're building, or the mechanical principles involved. Maybe I'm too rooted in old school (1980s) technic thinking though

8109 Flatbed Truck was interesting, because the mechanism is intricate and pleasing. 8043 is a good use of gearboxes to multiply functions, and shows routing two functions through the turntable. 8110 is mindlessly boring, too big, badly performing, but the portal axles, torque tubes, compressor are all interesting technical components.

[nicjasno]

Thery are getting less complex. That is my observation aswell.

[Ondra]

Pneumatic is more realistic than linear actuators.For me is pneumatic set more challenging and complex to build than gears.

[DrJB]

Either that or ... we're sticking too long with this hobby. For new comers, the Unimog, 42009 crane and 42000 racer were fantastic. For those of us who've been at this for a while, it's only repeats and 'upgrades' of prior sets. So is life it seems, even the technology used in real automobiles has matured (i.e., no foreseeable mechanical revolution), and the basic components (gearbox, suspension, differential) have not evolved for the past few decades. So, while it appears that sets are getting less complex (need a metric to properly measure this), I think it's got more to do with 'no substantial novelty'.

Edited January 14, 2015 by DrJB

[nerdsforprez]

is it just me, or are Technic sets getting less and less complex? I like gears. And pneumatics are nice but it also means less gears so less complexity. Let's be honest: 8258 and 42009 were much more interesting on a technical level than 8110, 42030 or 42039

I am confused about the post. It seems to contradict itself. It supposes a linear trend in decreasing complexity of models. However, by this rationale, the sets should then be presented in a linear fashion right? But they are not.

8258 released in 2009, is given the thumbs up in terms of complexity. 42009, released in 2013, was also given the thumbs up in terms of complexity.

8110 however, thumbs down, was released BEFORE 42009. well before. 2011. 42030 and 42039, both what I interpret are given the thumbs down, more recent, in 2014.

Given the small N size of the examples given, and the lack of linearily in terms of a trend, I find it hard to say that there is some form of trend going on here......

[Erik Leppen]

At the moment, proper well-argumented discussion on the subject of the complexity trend of Technic is being overruled by expression of nostalgic feelings and personal preference. Also, "complex" is confused with "interesting". They are not the same thing.

I (still) think Technic sets are getting more complex.

Pneumatics might be preferred by some AFOLs (not by me) but that is a whole different thing than whether they are more complex. What we prefer does play no role in the answering to this question. Are pneumatics more complex? I think it depends on the set. I think 42008 is a very complex set, given how much they managed to fit in a small space. And 42009 I think is the most complex Technic set ever. But how do you compare it to a set like 8455 (without letting personal preference play a role!)?

Maybe some sets from 2014 and 2015 are less complex than 8258 and 42009. But that's hardly a reason to say that Technic as a theme is getting less complex. A theme getting less complex means to me that the most complex sets are old sets. They aren't. So Technic is not getting less complex.

And yes, some old sets are complex, like 8880 and 8480 (which I thin kare the two most complex studded sets). But are they more complex than 8043 and 42009 (and if so, how?)

Edited January 14, 2015 by Erik Leppen

[nerdsforprez]

Lastly, the range that is being considered here is large... 2009-2014, or a five year span. Given that only 5 examples are given, 5/5 year, on average we have 1 example from each year. Hardly a large enough sample to really consider a trend going on in my book.

[Anio]

I think 42008 is a very complex set, given how much they managed to fit in a small space.

Unstructured mess and real complexity are 2 very different things.

I could sum up this difference with 1 word, though : skill.

[aol000xw]

My answer is no. Just compare the mobile cranes for example.

Anyways there is a ceiling for the complexity achievable with a given part count. If your budget is of 2000 parts and you start by building the chassis and adding gears and mechanisms you may find pretty soon that you can't afford a body.

[Nalyd997]

Coming from avselling point of veiw, Technic has a target audience and sadly it is not us. Lego is now widening that audience to suit younger kids.

Anyway that is how I see it

[Paul B Technic]

I think some of us are living in the past....

What I consider "complex" now as a 32 year old who has been building with Technic for 25 years is very different to what I thought was complex as a 7 year old.

[Meatman]

I admire the cleverness of building techniques that seems to constantly evolve every year with the new sets.

[andythenorth]

+1 to Erik's point about confusing complexity and interest.

Whilst I feel very sad about being the one to bring dictionary or wiki semantics to a forum discussion (can indicate the poster is an idiot, oops)....complexity is often used to describes systems with a high degree of interconnectedness or coupling, sometimes with many modes of behaviour which can be hard to predict.

http://en.wikipedia....wiki/Complexity

So gearbox sets with a single motor are at the higher end of Technic complexity. Pneumatic sets with a large number of pumps and valves are at the higher end of Technic complexity.

42008 Tow Truck perhaps does not have very connected systems, but has hard to predict behaviour. Is that complex? (I just enjoy disliking that set )

8110 is barely complex at all. It's just a big frame with modular components on it. The only complex thing is not putting the centre diff in the wrong way round

Edited January 14, 2015 by andythenorth

[Blakbird]

My impression, having built all of them, is that the general tend is towards MORE complexity (but not necessarily quality) in recent years. Most of the original Expert Builder sets are very simple by comparison to modern sets. You can't compare individual sets because obviously there are a wide range of models available at any given time, but that's why I refer to the overall trend.

I also assume we are referring to technical complexity, not just building complexity. For example, the Silver Champion is nearly impossible to take apart, and therefore could be said to have a complex build, but technically there is not that much going on.

[DrJB]

How do we measure complexity? One 'metric' is by the amount of connectivity between components. For only this metric, one can easily build connectivity matrices and based on how sparse such matrix, come up with an objective metric for complexity. However, degree of connectivity is NOT by itself a measure of complexity as one can add how elaborate the parts used are. For sure an LA would score more points than a liftarm. While we still have no metric, all statements in this thread are subjective at best. To me, the two most complex contraptions I've ever built were the 8258 Red Crane Truck (we all agree on this) and D3K's SwingLoader II.

One thing I've sure noticed with Technic, especially going to studless, is that official sets/designs tend to be more hollow, and 42000 is a prime example.

Edited January 15, 2015 by DrJB

[Osuharding1]

If I am looking for a satisfying complex build I do not go buy an official Lego Technic set. I turn to Rebrickable and hunt down some of the fantastic MOCs that are out there. MOCs don't have the same constraints that official sets have and were most likely designed by an AFOL who also enjoys the complexity of a build. Problem solved in my opinion. Maybe Blakbird can weigh in on this cause he has built all official sets and many of the great MOCs out there.

Edited January 14, 2015 by Osuharding1

[andythenorth]

@DrJB yair, the most complex set I built was the 8860 Car Chassis http://brickset.com/...0-1/Car-Chassis then again, I was 9, and it had for example

- turntable plate steering that came apart easily

- hand-built shocks

- a fiddly engine set up using the old pistons, which had to be aligned correctly using the X holes in 24t gears

- fiddly elastic bands for the seat adjustments

(Many) years later, 8258 was quite a simple build for me, mindlessly putting one gear in after another, and locking it all in with liftarms and pins. The complexity comes with that set in trying to operate the functions, the controls on gearbox sets are non-obvious imo.

Will we end up concluding "it's all relative"?

Eh, I have no point, just talking on the internets.

Edited January 14, 2015 by andythenorth

[Josephiah]

I think the over-simplified instructions of recent years also has a big impact on perception of complexity. The 42009 (my first and only recent set so far) never felt difficult because of the simplicity of each step; many of the older studded sets, while perhaps less complex technically, feel much more complex while your building them.

Another aspect is that with the studless system, the nature of the pieces means that it's not always immediately obvious what is structure and what is mechanism until you've finished building the given subassembly!

[Blakbird]

I think the recent posts have helped highlight that complexity of a design and complexity of a build are quite different things and not always directly related. I think recent years have produced sets which are more technically complex but actually easier to build. This is partially due to the 600 page instructions and partially due to the studless system. Both types of complexity have value to an AFOL, but TLG specifically tries to simplify the latter.

Apart from designing your own models, your best bet if you want both types of complexity is fan designed MOCs. They can be complex and hard to build!

[1974]

- hand-built shocks

Sure? I thought that version actuallly never hit the market?

[andythenorth]

Sure? I thought that version actuallly never hit the market?

That sounds more likely. I don't actually remember very well, it was...1987. Brickset shows the hand-built shocks version. But maybe 8860 went to market with the grey pre-assembled shocks as new parts? The hand-built shocks would have been weak.

Edited January 15, 2015 by andythenorth