Subject:
|
Re: Didn't Lego state is was to be an "Imperial Year?"
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.starwars
|
Date:
|
Tue, 31 Oct 2000 21:23:31 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
456 times
|
| |
![Post a public reply to this message](/news/icon-reply.gif) | |
Rick Hallman wrote:
> 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!!
Actually, I want Watto, just in a lower cost set. >:o
--
Andrew, Agent 0007
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
14 Messages in This Thread: ![Didn't Lego state is was to be an "Imperial Year?" -Jason Fabisch (30-Oct-00 to lugnet.starwars)](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/246.gif) ![Re: Didn't Lego state is was to be an "Imperial Year?" -Eric Joslin (30-Oct-00 to lugnet.starwars)](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/46.gif) ![Re: Didn't Lego state is was to be an "Imperial Year?" -Nicholas Fezie (31-Oct-00 to lugnet.starwars)](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/246.gif) ![Re: Didn't Lego state is was to be an "Imperial Year?" -Thomas Weigle (31-Oct-00 to lugnet.starwars)](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/246.gif) ![Re: Didn't Lego state is was to be an "Imperial Year?" -Mark Sandlin (31-Oct-00 to lugnet.starwars)](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/46.gif) ![Re: Didn't Lego state is was to be an "Imperial Year?" -Thomas Weigle (31-Oct-00 to lugnet.starwars)](/news/x.gif)
![](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/28.gif) ![](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/28.gif) ![](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/68.gif) ![Re: Didn't Lego state is was to be an "Imperial Year?" -James Simpson (31-Oct-00 to lugnet.starwars)](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/46.gif) ![Re: Didn't Lego state is was to be an "Imperial Year?" -Jason Fabisch (31-Oct-00 to lugnet.starwars)](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/46.gif) ![Re: Didn't Lego state is was to be an "Imperial Year?" -James Simpson (31-Oct-00 to lugnet.starwars)](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/46.gif) ![Re: Didn't Lego state is was to be an "Imperial Year?" -Bryan Hodges (31-Oct-00 to lugnet.starwars)](/news/x.gif)
![](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/28.gif) ![](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/68.gif) ![Re: Didn't Lego state is was to be an "Imperial Year?" -Todd Lehman (2-Nov-00 to lugnet.starwars)](/news/x.gif)
![](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/68.gif) ![Re: Didn't Lego state is was to be an "Imperial Year?" -Rick Hallman (31-Oct-00 to lugnet.starwars)](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/246.gif) ![Re: Didn't Lego state is was to be an "Imperial Year?" -Thomas Weigle (31-Oct-00 to lugnet.starwars)](/news/x.gif)
![](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/68.gif) ![You are here](/news/here.gif)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|