To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.starwarsOpen lugnet.starwars in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Star Wars / 9580
9579  |  9581
Subject: 
Didn't Lego state is was to be an "Imperial Year?"
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.starwars
Date: 
Mon, 30 Oct 2000 20:44:03 GMT
Viewed: 
510 times
  
So I look at the new sets and I see two Imperial craft, 3 if you count the
AT-ST, which doesn't even come with an Imperial Officer or Pilot.  The Junk
Shop and Droid Transport can't count as it's the wrong movie.  So that leads
us with 2 ships, the TIE and the Shuttle.  A little weak if you ask me.  And
don't get me started with the Technic Stormtrooper.  They should have done a
Technic RD2D(not Mindstorms) with the C3PO, and continued to work on the
Stormtrooper for a little while longer.  Maybe later in the year they will
announce a few more sets, one can only hope. :( And where is our big set for
the year, it's not the Junkshop, is it?

Jason F.



Message has 2 Replies:
  Re: Didn't Lego state is was to be an "Imperial Year?"
 
I don't think LEGO ever said that, no. I think that people said that after seeing the AT-ST, TIE fighter, and Imperial Shuttle on the leaked list, which we all now know to have been correct. eric (24 years ago, 30-Oct-00, to lugnet.starwars)
  Re: Didn't Lego state is was to be an "Imperial Year?"
 
(...) That stinks. We need a ... minifig scale ATAT. with 2 pilots, 10 ST, and an officer (Veers). (...) Very weak. (...) Dear Lego....Get the clue. We don't want watto! We want..err..Stormtroopers!! (...) God I hope not... Rick (24 years ago, 31-Oct-00, to lugnet.starwars)

14 Messages in This Thread:





Entire Thread on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR