Fallenangel Posted May 14, 2011 Posted May 14, 2011 ...I'm afraid I don't get it. What's your point? I agree with The Legonater I don't get it. If you're trying to say it's a Pic from the set/The mini SD is copied from that then that's wrong. Sorry for the confusion. Even my terrible eyesight can see the SSD SD is different than that. I thought I had noticed that the MINI Imperator included was about as big as pedro's MOC, but I was wrong. Yea, that big blob of gray is completely ruined by 2 new figs. Now what will be the selling point? The superior price-per-part ratio, level of detail and accuracy, build difficulty, and generally higher set quality associated with the UCS label? And hey, the big blob of gray isn't too shabby either. Quote
TheBrickHitHouse Posted May 14, 2011 Posted May 14, 2011 An interior...can't help but assume this affects the accuracy of the set, must be a flat bottom. Hmph! Quote
Brickdoctor Posted May 14, 2011 Posted May 14, 2011 Well hey, that's what modding's for! So they included an interior. They also gave you a really nice top half; just scrap the interior and redo the bottom half. Quote
Anio Posted May 14, 2011 Posted May 14, 2011 Well hey, that's what modding's for! So they included an interior. They also gave you a really nice top half; just scrap the interior and redo the bottom half. A well designed UCS model does not need to be modified. :o Quote
Fallenangel Posted May 15, 2011 Posted May 15, 2011 A well designed UCS model does not need to be modified. :o Not necessarily. Quote
Fallenangel Posted May 15, 2011 Posted May 15, 2011 On both mods, I prefer the original set. Eh, to each their own... Quote
Gregorovich Posted May 15, 2011 Posted May 15, 2011 I'm actually happy they've included an interior. IMO, things with no interior are kind of boring. And some people are complaining about the bottom half not being accurate, but why does that matter? The top looks brilliant, so why would you be looking at the bottom half anyway? Have any of the summer wave sets appeared yet? A lot of the other summer sets (Alien Conquest, City harbour, Kingdoms) have all arrived, so I'd expect these to arrive sometime soon. Quote
StoutFiles Posted May 15, 2011 Posted May 15, 2011 I'm actually happy they've included an interior. IMO, things with no interior are kind of boring. And some people are complaining about the bottom half not being accurate, but why does that matter? The top looks brilliant, so why would you be looking at the bottom half anyway? It's a UCS model that's not supposed to be played with, so an interior is almost pointless. It's just supposed to be accurate, that's what were paying for. Some people like myself will be placing this on a high shelf due to its size and the space it would take up. The bottom half will likely be visible, more so than the top. Quote
simonjedi Posted May 15, 2011 Posted May 15, 2011 the minifigs are for the bridge scene from EPV which is hidden under the removable city section, this was confirmed by a member of the lego design team. Do you have a link to a confirmation? or a picture? I take information 'confirmed from someone at lego' with a grain of salt. Quote
Emperor Posted May 15, 2011 Posted May 15, 2011 (edited) Have any of the summer wave sets appeared yet? A lot of the other summer sets (Alien Conquest, City harbour, Kingdoms) have all arrived, so I'd expect these to arrive sometime soon. All the "normal" summer sets are available in Germany (only in LEGO Land, though); someone from imperiumdersteine.de bought some of them and took those pictures of the minifigs: http://imperiumdersteine.de/album.php?albumid=1387 Edited May 15, 2011 by Emperor Quote
Ogre Posted May 15, 2011 Posted May 15, 2011 "Solscud007, on 07 May 2011 - 10:28 PM, said: So DK publishing has a tour to promote their new book. Sadly it is not the Lego Character Encyclopedia. But according to one of the DK employees, the Lego book will be coming out in the US May 15. We shall see if she is correct or just confused with another book release." In another forum.Thought it could come here. Is this true? Anybody? I'm guessing that's the new Harry Potter Character Encyclopedia, since 'mid May' there's a pile of HP stuff being released (mostly sticker books). Quote
Poza Posted May 15, 2011 Posted May 15, 2011 All the "normal" summer sets are available in Germany (only in LEGO Land, though); someone from imperiumdersteine.de bought some of them and took those pictures of the minifigs: http://imperiumdersteine.de/album.php?albumid=1387 That minifigure of Darth Maul looks ugly. He looks funny with his small face. On Wednesday I will have probably two of new sets - Geonosian starfighter and Republic Frigate :) Quote
Fallenangel Posted May 15, 2011 Posted May 15, 2011 I'm actually happy they've included an interior. IMO, things with no interior are kind of boring. And some people are complaining about the bottom half not being accurate, but why does that matter? The top looks brilliant, so why would you be looking at the bottom half anyway? An interior in a display model is a waste of bricks unless you're talking about cockpit detail. If sets without an interior bore you, then clearly you would find playsets more appealing than UCS. As Aeroeza mentioned, those two shouldn't have to cross. Consider the amount of kitbashed detail on the bottom of the Executor as opposed to the top. Then tell me whether the former isn't significant. An MOC that's well done should look good from many angles, not just the top. This is true for UCS sets as well - just compare the underside of 10030 to that of 6211. Quote
Brickdoctor Posted May 15, 2011 Posted May 15, 2011 An MOC that's well done should look good from many angles, not just the top. This is true for UCS sets as well - just compare the underside of 10030 to that of 6211. Agreed. Admittedly, I myself was caught with a lazily 'finished' bottom side on my T-47 MOC, but it really just looks bad when the undersides of models aren't completed properly. (it bugged me so much that I'm redoing it, and I did a full greeble job on my T-16's underside) Quote
Jedi master Brick Posted May 15, 2011 Posted May 15, 2011 If they add an interior they can expand the base below the inside floor can't they? Quote
Clone OPatra Posted May 15, 2011 Posted May 15, 2011 That has to be one of the least impressive set of new Star Wars figures I've seen in a while, especially the non-CW figures. I'd have to say that my favorite is Anakin from the Nightspeeder, and all he has new is the Jedi robes torso print. Both Maul and Padme look pretty awful for numerous reasons. The horn headpiece that is used on Maul and Oppress is a nice idea, but doesn't work all that well. Maul's torso print makes him look sort of like he has breasts, and his face (as has been mentioned) is horribly squeezed. And then Padme - after so many years of wanting a new Padme, LEGO releases the same basic figure and slaps a Hermione head on it; what a let down. Quote
legolandia Posted May 16, 2011 Posted May 16, 2011 Well, this finally settles the problem. LEGO has officially killed the most amazing UCS of these years. WHy didn't they do this to some obscure and useless ship? Why do this to that... beauty? All just to raise its price by 60-70 dollars with a bunch of ******* minifigs???????? I just don't get it. Why all this upset about the minifigs? All Lego has done is add some extras (i.e. minifigures and mini SD) to a UCS set. Nothing wrong with that. After all adding the minifigs to the SSD doesn't mean that the SSD is less detailed. Ultimately whatever Lego does there is no way to please everyone. People will always find something to moan about. Quote
cottonwood Posted May 16, 2011 Posted May 16, 2011 What if the interior is of UCS standard, like the level of detail in 10188? Quote
Fallenangel Posted May 16, 2011 Posted May 16, 2011 I just don't get it. Why all this upset about the minifigs? All Lego has done is add some extras (i.e. minifigures and mini SD) to a UCS set. Nothing wrong with that. After all adding the minifigs to the SSD doesn't mean that the SSD is less detailed. You're missing the point. The minifigures and MINI Imperator don't really mean anything on their own. Because of the minifigures, LEGO put in an interior, which makes all the difference. Aeroeza put it best: Lets face it 10221 looks awesome but if the 'sculptural integrity' of this UCS set is somewhat compromised by the inclusion of play features then it really does change the prestige of the label for me. It simply becomes a glorified playset and if all future UCS sets are like this then my Star Wars collection has probably come to an end and I can look forward to building more 'Landmark' releases.Now obviously most of our posting here is jumping the gun, afterall we have yet to see detailed images of the set, but this is the 'Pictures & Rumors' forum afterall and so we should feel obligated to wax lyrical and discuss some Lego stuff based on very little. My simple point is this. Why make a UCS playset at all? Why not just release it like 10188 or 10198 as an exclusive or funky limited edition piece i.e. a big, spectacular playset without the UCS badge. It would sell just as well and keep the UCS line consistent even if we never see another UCS vehicle or sculpture again.... Furthermore: But TLC should keep system, play-sets and UCS sets separate, because some AFOLs will be very annoyed if the structure or shape or accuracy is compromised by adding a bridge scene in it. If TLG where desperate for a bridge scene they should have done a Home One with the bounty hunters on the 'Executors' bridge, and a DV meditation chamber at the back, with a TIE in the hanger, not potentially ruin or weaken a UCS that is made to look at, by adding a scene that isn't hard to MOC up anyway. What if the interior is of UCS standard, like the level of detail in 10188? I doubt it. 10188 didn't have an outer covering, which would probably affect how much you could put in there. Considering that the exterior detail and framework on this UCS alone would justify a price of several hundred dollars, I wouldn't look forward to much more than this. Quote
Aeroeza Posted May 16, 2011 Posted May 16, 2011 What if the interior is of UCS standard, like the level of detail in 10188? Remember a UCS is a Lego 'model' as opposed to a Lego system set toy and so holds some pretension to accuracy rather than play features. For a UCS to have an interior and to remain a UCS it would need to be scaled in proportion to the model and hold some sort of reality when compared to the actual deck plans of the vehicle in question (not likely with a 17 odd kilometer long Super Star Destroyer recreated in a 1.2 meter Lego model). Maybe the UCS Falcon could have been designed with a 'UCS standard' interior or even the UCS Shuttle (although it isn't documented on film as the Falcon's is) but to throw one into the SSD and call it a UCS is disappointing for people who have loved this range over the years. Now the inclusion of minifigs really has nothing to do with the problem some of us have with with 10221 (apart from the necessary price increase associated with the little guys). In themselves they can add to the uniqueness of any set's collectability. The heart of the problem with this set for a UCS collector is this... Up until now a system set was clearly a system set and a UCS was simply in an impressive league of its own when compared. Assuming the bottom of the SSD is 'disneyfied' by the inclusion of an interior then why have a UCS sticker on 10221 at all? Get rid of that and hey presto! What you have is just a very expensive system set.... Quote
Fallenangel Posted May 16, 2011 Posted May 16, 2011 Up until now a system set was clearly a system set and a UCS was simply in an impressive league of its own when compared. Assuming the bottom of the SSD is 'disneyfied' by the inclusion of an interior then why have a UCS sticker on 10221 at all? Get rid of that and hey presto! What you have is just a very expensive system set.... Going off of the comments in this thread LEGO could have completely BSed the bottom and no one here would have cared aside from a select few. Actually, I'll bet most people here would actually have preferred a big playset over a UCS. A minority within a minority... Quote
Aeroeza Posted May 16, 2011 Posted May 16, 2011 Going off of the comments in this thread LEGO could have completely BSed the bottom and no one here would have cared aside from a select few. Actually, I'll bet most people here would actually have preferred a big playset over a UCS. A minority within a minority... Hey you gotta love Liberal Democratic societies! Keeps us minorities happy! And yes you're right. Quite reasonably many AFOL (and the clandestine under aged ones) wouldn't care. Probably only a few on this site actually own every single UCS dating back to 2000. Its a pretty specific Lego brand to enjoy owning and a financially challenging one to commit to, but just like the Landmark and Architecture ranges a UCS does offer a little something more than a kids toy normally delivers. Its fun that it lasted this long but perhaps the party is finally over (cue dramatic music and exit stage left). Quote
AndyC Posted May 16, 2011 Posted May 16, 2011 As someone who falls firmly into the 'UCS Customer' bracket (but still loves System sets and minifigs) I'd be gutted if they've ruined the exterior appearance of the SSD just for the sake of putting a 'scene' on the interior. I'm reserving judgement till I've seen better pictures, but keeping my fingers crossed as this is the one UCS model I've always wanted TLG to do and after the beautiful 10212 I was hoping for something really special. Quote
Ceroknight Posted May 16, 2011 Posted May 16, 2011 I'm pretty sure a detailed bottom would be alot more expensive than a few figures and a less detailed bottom.... And the $ factor is more important to me and probably some others.. Akso you can actually MOD is later+you can some pretty cool figs Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.