 | | Re: Didn't Lego state is was to be an "Imperial Year?" —Jason Fabisch
| | | | (...) I agree with you, but I think they will release them in pairs, like the Xwing and Tie Interceptor. These two are not comparable in performance as the TIE-Interceptor was designed to go against the Awing, so they are not pairing them up by a (...) (24 years ago, 31-Oct-00, to lugnet.starwars)
| | | | | | | | | | Re: Didn't Lego state is was to be an "Imperial Year?" —James Simpson
| | | | | (...) I'd actually be suprised if they offer a Tie Bomber - again, not a tremendous recognition factor among non-enthusiasts. Granted, the Tie-Interceptor probably has less recognition than the standard Tie, but it also has better "lines," i.e. it's (...) (24 years ago, 31-Oct-00, to lugnet.starwars)
| | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Didn't Lego state is was to be an "Imperial Year?" —Bryan Hodges
| | | | | (...) For UCS I'm putting my money on a Falcon, a TIE, an Imperial shuttle, and a Star Destroyer. Since there's no real scale to worry about with UCS sets, all of these are possible, and would make sense due to the "recognition factor." With any (...) (24 years ago, 31-Oct-00, to lugnet.starwars)
| | | | | | |
