 | | Re: My prediction on how the AT-ST walker looks like —Ralph Döring
|
| | | To pick up a recent discussion: your AT ST looks horrible, but... this is a completly new way of building. Taking the limitations we believe a future official set will have and create a MOC based on it. You have done a great job, doing this and I (...) (24 years ago, 17-Aug-00, to lugnet.starwars)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: My prediction on how the AT-ST walker looks like —Andrew Khym
|
| | | | | I agree with your judgement on my model. The head is obviously the most horrible thing of the model. Hopefully Lego will design new pieces for the front of the head (I can't really figure much to do about the slight slop and the windows). The (...) (24 years ago, 17-Aug-00, to lugnet.starwars)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Re: My prediction on how the AT-ST walker looks like —Thomas Weigle
|
| | | | | (...) Ah, yes... :) UCS Naboo Fighter; $100 UCS AAT; $120 UCS AT-ST; $80 UCS TIE; $80 UCS A-Wing; $80 UCS Y-Wing; $180 UCS B-Wing; $180-200... Given the size of the real models, wouldn't that make sense? Also, cheaper-than-$100 UCS models would (...) (24 years ago, 17-Aug-00, to lugnet.starwars)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: My prediction on how the AT-ST walker looks like —Andrew Khym
|
| | | | | | UCS AAT, thats what I would be waiting for. I would like to see how Lego would deal with the Hull. More rebel figs would really help us collectors, probably some from Hoth in other sets other than the Snowspeeder because having a bunch of (...) (24 years ago, 17-Aug-00, to lugnet.starwars)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | Future UCS Star Wars Kits —Sean Harrington
|
| | | | I don't really like the current UCS offerings that much. I think they look clunky and lack imagination in their execution... However... I would like to see any (or all) of the other UCS Star Wars kits that others have mentioned, but I doubt any will (...) (24 years ago, 17-Aug-00, to lugnet.starwars)
|
| | | | |
