Subject:
|
Re: 2000 A-Wing comments
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.starwars
|
Date:
|
Mon, 25 Oct 1999 02:32:43 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
498 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.starwars, Jason Brown writes:
> Hmmm... I still like the A-Wing. I really like Slave I, despite what
> other people have been saying! And I must admit, the skiff is pretty
> bad.
Hi, group. I've been reading messages on Lugnet for a few months now, but I
rarely respond to anything. However, this latest hype over the new SW stuff for
2000 has given me reason to.
First thing: A big, heartfelt "THANK YOU!" to everyone involved in getting
those pics online. And, an equally big, hearfelt "THANK YOU!" to whoever it was
that screwed up (if, in fact it was a screw up) by letting these new sets out
months earlier than they should be.
Second thing is this: I have to agree with whoever it was that said that a lot
of the reason that these sets aren't as agreeable to us is simply because the
"newness" has worn off. Overall, I don't think any of the sets are any worse
than the originals [except the MF, if those pics are for real]. If these sets
had come out last year instead of those that did, I feel they would be warmly
welcomed.
Thirdly: All this talk about things being the wrong scale is, in a way, funny.
Obviously some things are severly smaller than they should be (i.e. Sith
Infiltrator). However, if you really think about it, minifigs aren't exactly to
scale with a real human. The average human stands about 6.5 "heads" high. The
"average" minifig only stands 4 (not including the stud on top of the head).
This, in and of itself, is going to throw off scale, a bit.
Finally: I don't understand what's so bad about the escort skiff. I was
comparing it to the pic in the "Incredible Cross-Sections" book and it looks
pretty darn close. Are people maybe confusing it with the entire barge? I don't
know. I was really confused about this . . . .
All right . . . that's all. I'll put my soapbox away now and go into hiding for
another few months. Any input anyone may have would be greatly appreciated.
-Jonathan Little
PS Can somebody explain something for me? I look at the naming of the rebel
ships, and X, Y, A and even V, all make sense, because some portion of the ship
resembles that particular letter. My confusion comes when I look at the B-wing?
Where does the name come from, seeing as how it looks nothing like a "B".
-JBL
|
|
Message has 3 Replies:
 | | Re: 2000 A-Wing comments
|
| (...) ship (...) B-wing? (...) JBL, I think if you have the S-foils in cruising mode (down) and turn the B-Wing upside down so the cockpit is on the bottom, it kinda sorta naybe looks like a lowercase B...just my 2 cents... Demon Slayah (25 years ago, 25-Oct-99, to lugnet.starwars)
| | | Re: 2000 A-Wing comments
|
| Jonathan Little <piano254@aol.com> wrote in message news:FK50EJ.969@lugnet.com... (...) for (...) was (...) out (...) lot (...) the (...) sets (...) warmly (...) I disagree somewhat here. One of the major things that excited everyone about the (...) (25 years ago, 27-Oct-99, to lugnet.starwars)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: 2000 A-Wing comments
|
| Hmmm... I still like the A-Wing. I really like Slave I, despite what other people have been saying! And I must admit, the skiff is pretty bad. (...) -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=...=-=-=-=-=- jmbrown@mines.edu (URL) (25 years ago, 22-Oct-99, to lugnet.starwars)
|
24 Messages in This Thread:
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
