Subject:
|
Re: Didn't Lego state is was to be an "Imperial Year?"
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.starwars
|
Date:
|
Tue, 31 Oct 2000 11:50:56 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
484 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.starwars, Jason Fabisch writes:
> 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.
That stinks. We need a ... minifig scale ATAT. with 2 pilots, 10 ST, and an
officer (Veers).
> So that leads us with 2 ships, the TIE and the Shuttle. A little weak if you >ask me.
Very weak.
> Maybe later in the year they will announce a few more sets, one can only >hope. :(
Dear Lego....Get the clue. We don't want watto! We want..err..Stormtroopers!!
> And where is our big set for the year, it's not the Junkshop, is it?
God I hope not...
Rick
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: Didn't Lego state is was to be an "Imperial Year?"
|
| (...) What would you be willing to pay for that 13 minifig set, which should be roughly twice the size of the Falcon in order not to piss people off because of lacking scale etc? With a little luck, we'll get an AT-AT with some minifigs. And I'm (...) (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
|
|
|
|
