 | | Re: next year
|
|
(...) No, I don't think that you can draw that conclusion. There's nothing in the movie to date it (by our timeline) and while it seems to be a retelling of a story (at least from the intro scrolls with each movie) it's not a given. I know the (...) (24 years ago, 31-Oct-00, to lugnet.adventurers, lugnet.starwars)
|
| |
| | Re: Didn't Lego state is was to be an "Imperial Year?"
|
|
(...) I'm convinced that we're going to see a UCS A-Wing, maybe even next. Compact design. Maybe 700 pieces. Can be done in red and white, so cheap to produce with existing stock. Not many new molds necessary; maybe just a canopy. James (24 years ago, 31-Oct-00, to lugnet.starwars)
|
| |
| | Re: Didn't Lego state is was to be an "Imperial Year?"
|
|
(...) The brilliant aspect of such sets is that they in a way become easier for kids to collect, and that the initial step would basically force parents into buying more of them later on. From a marketing perspective, very smart. From a collectors' (...) (24 years ago, 31-Oct-00, to lugnet.starwars)
|
| |
| | Re: Didn't Lego state is was to be an "Imperial Year?"
|
|
(...) <snip> (...) Yeah! That would be very cool. Maybe 4 or 5 small sets with Technic connectors, and perhaps one larger set with a "landing bay" for the Falcon or TIEs. ~Mark "Muffin Head" Sandlin (24 years ago, 31-Oct-00, to lugnet.starwars)
|
| |
| | Re: What is with the Technic Stormtrooper?
|
|
(...) But this points out why the 2000 Technic droid sets 'worked': the EP1 droids were all skeletal and exposed mechanisms. Very TECHNIC-ish. The TECHNIC models were not accurate, strictly speaking. The bits were in the wrong places, the way they (...) (24 years ago, 31-Oct-00, to lugnet.starwars, lugnet.technic)
|
