Subject:
|
Re: Didn't Lego state is was to be an "Imperial Year?"
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.starwars
|
Date:
|
Mon, 30 Oct 2000 20:58:09 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
496 times
|
| |
|
|
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
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Didn't Lego state is was to be an "Imperial Year?"
|
| (...) Actually, Lego did say that in an interview over at FBTB (for the link go to (URL) And I think this is an imperial year. There are no rebel sets (besides the escape pod which isn't from Episode 1 by the way). So the year couldn't get any more (...) (24 years ago, 31-Oct-00, to lugnet.starwars)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Didn't Lego state is was to be an "Imperial Year?"
|
| 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 (...) (24 years ago, 30-Oct-00, to lugnet.starwars)
|
14 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
|
|
|
|
