 | | Re: Star Destroyer Domes
|
| (...) I fully agree with that opinion. When I first got my copy of the lego christmas catalog and saw that half the shield generators were meteor pieces, I was quite disappointed as well. (22 years ago, 21-Nov-02, to lugnet.starwars)
| | | | | Re: Star Destroyer Domes
|
| (...) (snip) (...) I noticed the craters on the ventral halves of the sensor domes in the catalog as well, but I think it's also worth mentioning that the struts or supports (the antenna/lever things) that accompany the domes (8 each) obstruct the (...) (22 years ago, 21-Nov-02, to lugnet.starwars)
| | | | | Re: Star Destroyer Domes
|
| When I first saw the pictures I just thought they looked so glaringly out of place, despite the small amount of cover given by the levers used for supports. On actually getting the model and making it... they're actually not quite so obvious, (...) (22 years ago, 22-Nov-02, to lugnet.starwars)
| | | | | Re: Star Destroyer Domes
|
| (...) Ah, cool. That's good to hear. Also, if you DO happen to be unable to ignore them, you can always explain them away as the results of stray laser fire from some B-Wings and X-Wings or something! (...) Hmmm... I was kinda wondering about that. (...) (22 years ago, 22-Nov-02, to lugnet.starwars)
| | | | | Re: Star Destroyer Domes
|
| (...) I was disappointed with the mere use of the Meteorite base until I read this post. now I want the top piece done in grey too! (because the top would be easier to hit... or something ;-p) Trav (-|-) (22 years ago, 23-Nov-02, to lugnet.starwars)
| | | | | Re: Star Destroyer Domes
|
| (...) Like the gap between the ventral and dorsal sections it's only particularly noticeable if you look at it so the two are in line and you can see right through. I would say it's more noticeable than the ventral/dorsal crack if only because the (...) (22 years ago, 23-Nov-02, to lugnet.starwars)
| | | | | Re: Star Destroyer Domes
|
| (...) Ah, I see. Yeah, I've looked at all the pictures in the folder linked to recently, and noted the magnets along the spine and the angled attachment method along the trenches for the plates, but I figured there would still be some play, mostly (...) (22 years ago, 23-Nov-02, to lugnet.starwars)
| | | | | Re: Star Destroyer Domes
|
| (...) LOL! heh, good point. But aside from having interchangable "damaged" and "undamaged" domes, kinda like the old kenner "blast marked" TIE Fighters and X-Wings, you COULD just take the top half of one (or both) of the domes off, and add some (...) (22 years ago, 23-Nov-02, to lugnet.starwars)
| | | | | Re: Star Destroyer Domes
|
| (...) The four main plates are only held rigidly along the outside. The reason for the peg connectors along the back on the underneath is to attach the four angled plates surrounding the engines, the main plates aren't connected to the back beam at (...) (22 years ago, 23-Nov-02, to lugnet.starwars)
| | | | | Re: Star Destroyer Domes
|
| (...) Thanks again, it all makes perfect sense now. Thought it seems, even with amazing arm strength and some faith in the Force (i.e. a higher power and/or the magnetic strength of LEGO magnets), zooming the ISD around at all, sans stand, would be (...) (22 years ago, 25-Nov-02, to lugnet.starwars)
| | | | | Re: Star Destroyer Domes
|
| (...) I hate to break this to you, but zooming it round sans stand really isn't a possibility - it doesn't lift off the stand! That would be another of the few disappointments, the stand is rather firmly pegged to the internal frame, indeed adds (...) (22 years ago, 26-Nov-02, to lugnet.starwars)
| | | | | Re: Star Destroyer Domes
|
| (...) No no, I know that. Someone else had said that you CAN take the stands off, but you'd have to take plates off and then partially disassemble the stands to get the pegs out of the framework, and from seeing the pics, I can see why. I doubt it'd (...) (22 years ago, 26-Nov-02, to lugnet.starwars)
| |
