The Empire of Corrington: Sign-up and Discussion

[BrickOn]

Thanks guys

Ayrlego, I think I have about 20 of them, probably fewer. I might be able to manage a small vignette based off this, or I could just use it as an excuse to buy the GBHQ (I'd probably get in trouble for that though).

[TitusV]

That interior looks good!

[Bregir]

The Military Governor's Office in King's Harbour has been finished.

[Bregir]

And so the long awaited (by me, at least ) HMHV Athena has been posted! Corrington rule the waves!

HMHV Athena

[Fuzzy MacFuzz]

Annetta by the Grace of the Gods Queen of Corrington and the Islands of New Terra, Defender of Reason, Protector of Right & c., to Our trusty and well beloved Charles Howard, Greeting. We do hereby constitue and appoint you to be Major in Our royal Corps of Engineers. You yourself dilligently to execute this commission, and observe such order and direction as from time to time you shall receive from Ourself, Our generals, your colonel or any other your superior officer, according to occasion and the discipline of war. And in all things to govern yourself as unto the duty and place that the rank of Major does rightly appertain and belong. Given under Our sign and seal at Our court of Corrington this 2nd day of April in the 616th year After Empire, Annetta Regina.

Know also that Calling to mind your vigilant eye of care upon all occassions, and the many true services you have done us in divers times and places, we hereby appoint you as Our Military Attache in the Far Islands. Such role being not to command but rather to consult, advise and counsel your brother officers in such ways as shall most profit Our forces, Our Empire and Our Crown. And in particular to submit each and every month unto Our trusty and well beloved Lord Rothsbeard, General Commanding our Forces, a full account of the dispositions, actions, movements and losses of Our forces in the Far Isands; this paper being your authority and power to command all officers in the Far Islands, whatsoever their rank or station on land or sea, to help, abet and aid you in this latter endeavour. Given under Our sign and seal at Our court of Corrington this 2nd day of April in the 616th year After Empire, Annetta Regina.

20160412_212858 (2) by Chris Warburton Brown, on Flickr

Above: At dawn on the day after receiving his promotion, Major Howard rides out in full dress uniform on a tour of all military positions on Annetta. The breast plate, 'flame' plumes, and axe are purely symbolic reminders of the three key jobs of the engineer corps; sapping, setting off explosives, and clearing the road ahead.

Edited April 12, 2016 by Fuzzy MacFuzz

[TitusV]

Lovely dit, and I really like the three symbols and what they stand for

[SilentWolf]

\

The Late Alexander of Wolfhaven

Edited April 13, 2016 by SilentWolf

[BrickOn]

Not looking so boxy now and not long before I am reunited with my bricks :-) One last look at the school progress I before I finish it...

SchoolhouseAlmost finished, on Flickr

Been a bit busy with non-lego stuff and the momentum has slowed since I'm now mainly just tweaking bits, but its been a fun experiment.

Edited April 14, 2016 by BrickOn

[Puvel]

A farm was build in King's Harbour to keep the troops well fed.

I licensed it as a medium plantation. Ayrlego pointed out that dimensions of plantations are different than for the other licenses. Is this allowed to be medium or should I relicense this as a small one?

[Bregir]

32x32 is the requirements for a small plantation, so yes, I think this should be small. :) And btw, it is looking great! Perfect for King's Harbour!

[MKJoshA]

32x32 is the requirements for a small plantation, so yes, I think this should be small. :) And btw, it is looking great! Perfect for King's Harbour!

The unwritten rule is that the next size up in a property just has to be at least as large as the size requirements below it. Meaning, a small plantation can be from 0-32 studs square, a medium can be 32-64 studs square. As this has been an unwritten rule, I'd love if it could be clarified as an official rule or not.

[Captain Dee]

As long as it isn't clarified in writing it will confuse newcomers - shoot, even I had it wrong in thinking (per this particular situation) that a large plantation had to be at least 128x128, a medium had to be at least 64x64, and a small at least 32x32. And all along I was thinking those were minimum sizes!

[BrickOn]

I was working as all those as minimum sizes... if it said 32x32 I think thats what it means, to my mind adding an extra couple of rows of studs doesn't qualify and I've commented as much before on other peoples buildings, when they asked, not unsolicited comments...

Shoot me for using an LDD example, but I've made the building of the school, a little over 32x32 because I wanted to licence it as medium, perhaps I could have gone smaller and argued the grounds are part of the build, and probably if I'd built in actual bricks I'd have done that be happy with the result (with LDD I went bigger than 32x32 just to be safe at licensing medium, call it the LDD bonus). Hmmm while typing this I realised that under some peoples thinking my challenge one build could be licensed as a plantation...?

TerraceFarmingIslanders, on Flickr

But seriously its 4 times smaller than the requirements, so this had never even occurred to me before?

Edited April 14, 2016 by BrickOn

[Bregir]

I think we should be defining minimum sizes, not maximum. People need to exert minimum effort, but there is no reason why we would discourage them from building larger?

And so far, I am pretty sure we have ruled based on minimum sizes.

[CelesAurivern]

BrickOn, considering the elevation, I think it counts as a small plantation. It's never to late to licence it though.

Your lovely 'doll house' however, *drools* I think is sufficient in size to be classed as a large if you added some facilities around the perimeter. A swing in the yard. A pond. That sort of thing.

[BrickOn]

Bregir, I agree, but since I'm currently finishing off a (small) plantation covering 32x32, I would like to add that I found it a challenge to actually get a uniform area of crops to fill the space... I wouldn't be too harsh on people who were slightly smaller in the sizes in the plantation case, i.e. not making the 32x32, but you have to be close to approaching the minimum...

Celes, haha, the dolls house is staying at medium, really considering its functionality as a cottage school, you could easily argue that it is only a small endeavour, but I probably would have stopped fiddling ages ago if that was how we were looking at things.

Edited April 14, 2016 by BrickOn

[Captain Dee]

I think we should be defining minimum sizes, not maximum. People need to exert minimum effort, but there is no reason why we would discourage them from building larger?

My thoughts exactly. Defining sizes as maximums makes no sense to me.

[Sir Stig]

You can come to a consensus here amongst you Corlanders, but for this minimum/maximum size discussion to have any value in how the rules are interpreted, I think the general thread would include more views. And make people aware that such an important point for all builders is being discussed.

When that is said, I can not idly stand by and watch you work yourselves up.

I am clearly on the opposite side here. Minimum sizes and strict enforcement of where the border on a Moc goes is madness (for instance 128x128 filled with only crops?!). It limits my possibility to diversify my builds. If I am to follow these guidelines on a strict minimum size, I need to make all a lot of buildings either one story high or multicolored (especially large ones). Plantations would be one type of crops reworked over and over again. Maybe with time and a thousand BL orders I have enough to make another type of crops. I don't think I am the only one that wants to participate even if I don't have endless resources (I am starting to get an ok collection, but still). I have viewed the sizes as general sizes. So a medium build should be about 32x32, maybe less maybe more, depending on how much detail is put into it. If the sizes are minimums, I am forced (in order to get enough time to build) to make builds of less detail and accuracy. I just can't see your way being the law. It would mean the end of creativity and govern the shape, size and complexity of all future builds.

I am truly concerned about where this discussion is headed. If a representative build is not enough, then are we going full realism? Each build to scale compared to real life?

[CelesAurivern]

I am clearly on the opposite side here. Minimum sizes and strict enforcement of where the border on a Moc goes is madness (for instance 128x128 filled with only crops?!). It limits my possibility to diversify my builds..

I am truly concerned about where this discussion is headed. If a representative build is not enough, then are we going full realism? Each build to scale compared to real life?

Indeed, sir, perhaps 96 by 96 would be a more sensible limit.

But then, your stand of limiting only to crops, I cannot agree with. You are setting limits for yourself.

You can build accessories like warehouses, servant's quarters, etc. An established plantation should have infrastructure.

Nobody wants to see 150 acres of lego wheat. One might as well LDD copypasta to achieve that.

But I would have to say, a 'representative' build is not enough if you want to play the MCRA.

I can microbuild a town to 'represent' the whole settlement, but is it fair for me to MCRA it as a Royal Factory? I think not.

Not looking so boxy now and not long before I am reunited with my bricks :-) One last look at the school progress I before I finish it...

SchoolhouseAlmost finished, on Flickr

Been a bit busy with non-lego stuff and the momentum has slowed since I'm now mainly just tweaking bits, but its been a fun experiment.

The way you built the house and how it opens up, really adds that dimension of playability.

Brought Sylvania to my mind :)

Edited April 14, 2016 by CelesAurivern

[BrickOn]

Hahaha, it was the worst mistake I've made with the the build so far, Lego Digital Designer DOES NOT work well with hinges and I would be getting very worked up over that if anything. Sylvanian families!! I always have to go and see them in a toy shop even if I don't allow myself to buy them, I had a lot of sylvanians :-) (the narrow boat was the best, I still have it, I like toys).

Anyway back to size limits... sure I agree we can diversify this conversation out to the rest, but since we are not exactly making the rules over here just having a discussion, its not the end of the world. And hey we could be talking about this privately and you'd never know our feelings on the subject

I was not actually advocating that the rules should be applied strictly, with borders.

But this is my opinion, if a build is licensed as small it can smaller than the requirements as longs as its within the spirit of the game (I suppose everyone is entitled to their own spirit). But if one aspires to licence bigger than small then guidelines are required, these are set out as minimums because otherwise a range should have been stated.

*snip* and I deleted the rest because I realised I was ranting and it really doesn't matter... what matters is that everybody ends up singing from the same hymn sheet, to use some hideous management speak. If not, this is probably the source of cries of unfairness... edit, one of the sources, if indeed there were any cries at all.

Edited April 14, 2016 by BrickOn

[Captain Dee]

... It would mean the end of creativity and govern the shape, size and complexity of all future builds.

I am truly concerned about where this discussion is headed. If a representative build is not enough, then are we going full realism? Each build to scale compared to real life?

I think we can safely say the charts already govern shape and size (no, the shape is not strictly done; effort is rewarded!) and I dare say something as simple as switching from min. to max. requirements will not limit creativity/complexity within reason: specifically, changing the numbers to reflect a sensible size limit and not suddenly requiring everything to be huge just by the existing charts. Large plantations wouldn't suddenly have to be 128x128; I think we could all agree that effort and building something within the current (or slightly modified range) is more important than a strict, all-or-nothing limit. My goal is simply to remove the confusion: some of us see those numbers as minimum requirements and some of us interpret it to be maximums, which is a mess. I'm not campaigning to suddenly make everything bigger - I just want a clear ruling.

We're not aiming for any level of realism - forget it, it ain't happening (unless someone volunatarily does it!) The three different sizes are objectives with a reward; besides, a 128x128 plantation is not much more than a minifig-scale garden plot anyway. It would still just be representative. I'm going to be bold and say no one wants to require aiming that high on everything; that's not what this is about. We just want a clearly-defined rule, regardless of what the numbers look like before or after. For me at least this isn't about forcing people to go big: simply build with effort, to a size within reasonable bounds according to the charted levels, and everyone should be happy - as long as we all understand those levels to mean the same thing.

[Capt Wolf]

If you look at the property charts, the sizes are labeled "plot size". That suggests a maximum size, not a minimum. However, I believe you are allowed to license a property at a smaller size than the build (i.e., you could license a 32x32 artisan property as a small), but not allowed to license a property as larger than the build (i.e., a 16x16 artisan could not be licensed as a medium, but a 20x20 build could be). Also, my understanding is that this takes into consideration the size of the entire build, not just the structure. I think this was all covered in the general BoBS thread about a month ago.

I'll duck for cover now.

[Ayrlego]

If you look at the property charts, the sizes are labeled "plot size". That suggests a maximum size, not a minimum. However, I believe you are allowed to license a property at a smaller size than the build (i.e., you could license a 32x32 artisan property as a small), but not allowed to license a property as larger than the build (i.e., a 16x16 artisan could not be licensed as a medium, but a 20x20 build could be). Also, my understanding is that this takes into consideration the size of the entire build, not just the structure. I think this was all covered in the general BoBS thread about a month ago.

I'll duck for cover now.

This is exactly how I interpret the guidelines, and I agree with Captain Dee above regarding scale.

I feel a bit bad because my comment originally spawned this discussion. Just to be clear, my point was simply to point out that the plot sizes for plantations were different than those for properties. I was not implying that Puvel should downsize his license and I certainly didn't count his studs! (oh that doesn't sound right !!) In fact I explicitly state that I think with the obvious effort shown in his MOC that it could go either way in my opinion (and that is just my opinion).

I called them guidelines above because I see them as just that. Guidelines. If someone sticks a few stalks on a 16x16 baseplate and claims it's large, then someone else probably needs to point out that isn't quite in the spirit of the game. But I don't think this has happened yet so it isn't really an issue!

I think with this and some other matters recently we all just need to step back, breath and realise this is just a game we all play for fun. I don't think we need to define the rules any more than they are now, I think they were deliberately designed 'loosely' to allow the creativity different interpretations allow.

Anyway rant over - back to enjoying the recent builds before having to go to work! Yay for Friday!

[Garmadon]

As several other people have noted here, the guidelines for the plot sizes for the EGS licences are exactly that - guidelines. There is not an extremely strict rule as to what constitutes (e.g.) a medium rather than a small commerce, and there is a plenty of room for innovation and creative ideas. However, it is a good idea to determine officially whether the guidelines stand as guidelines for the minimum or the maximum size of a build, or the middle ground (there seem to be different members who held all of these ideas!) This is currently being discussed by the leadership and we hope to get back to you all about that pretty soon!

[Jacob Nion]

Why is everyone thinking in baseplates (=squares)?

The license fee difference between small and medium property is 100%, while the size of a medium is four times as large as the small. I think therefore something between 16x32 and the full 32x32 should be totally fine, as long as there is effort put in it. And of course everybody loves irregular bases. I would lovd to see more of them here.