The UCS Hype. What will 2017 bring? (40th Anniversary)

[hunpeter12]

On 2017. 02. 07. at 9:05 AM, brobert said:

Hah :D Thank you! Finally someone shares my opinion. 

That ship really isn't anything interesting. It's a very basic design, and nothing iconic happened on it except for: "It's a trap!"

Make it the Nebulon-B frigate and you got yourself a great set.

Although, afer the amazing moc of mortesv....it wouldn't compare.

 

Because a flying triangle is more interesting... 

[VaderFan2187]

17 minutes ago, hunpeter12 said:

Because a flying triangle is more interesting... 

Not quite a triangle

BTW, UCS Snowspeeder images got leaked. I must say it looks decent. The design has started to grow on me. However, light stone grey would've been much better.

[Fuppylodders]

Eh, one thing i dont like about it, its too long. Which makes the blasters  look way too weedy and long... The forward mount is in the incorrect position because of this and it just irks me >.<

[StarWars8Spoiler]

32 minutes ago, Fuppylodders said:

Eh, one thing i dont like about it, its too long. Which makes the blasters  look way too weedy and long... The forward mount is in the incorrect position because of this and it just irks me >.<

I think the length is fine. The guns are built too thin and the orange stripe up front is 1 stud too wide, which gives the impression that the mount is off.

[Fuppylodders]

1 hour ago, ChristopherLee said:

I think the length is fine. The guns are built too thin and the orange stripe up front is 1 stud too wide, which gives the impression that the mount is off.

No, look at the forward support on the windscreen, it should be in line with/sat just behind the rear of the roof window (if anything, where the stickered support is on the 10-wide screen). The middle side screen is just too wide and should be half the width. There is just something completely off with the positioning/structure of the entire canopy.

[StarWars8Spoiler]

Maybe it's the angle then. Let's wait until more pictures are released.

[RetroInferno]

I really wish Lego could finally come up with a light stone gray again, which some people mentionned in the other thread. 

It's really nitpicking but Fuppylodders is right about the cockpit section and lenght. It's sure nice for people wanting a UCS version of this ship without having to dish out the extravagant amount of money for it but here's a couple things going agaisn't this set.

- Lego over saturated the snowspeeder market to a point where TFOLS and AFOLS are fed up with the design. Heck even kids back in 2014 could get one. 

- The new model sure is more streamlined but the old one aged very well, unlike the old Interceptor and the likes. I've got both models side by side on imgur and the difference between the two is quite minimal ( more greebling, changed the front part, less square? ( even though the ship has a square shape ). 

- It's yet another makeover. Let's sneak up 500 more pieces and skyrocket the price. ( Death Star anyone? )

It's a good looking set for sure, but anything since 2016 screams lazyness with UCS. 

[Fuppylodders]

Oh, most definitely, my point about the cockpit is definitely nitpicking without a doubt . It is a nice improvement, that is for sure, and I will probably end up getting it too. 

[gotoAndLego]

I know everyone give Assault on Hoth grief, and rightly so to some degree, but being a bunch of separate components is the best way for it to be a play set. How are you going to play a full battle with AT-ATs and snow speeders if its all clumped together.

That being said, I never considered it a UCS set in the same way the 2010 Tantive 4 wasn't, regardless of the number of pieces.

Edited February 16, 2017 by gotoAndLego

[Fuppylodders]

53 minutes ago, gotoAndLego said:

I know everyone give Assault on Hoth grief, and rightly so to some degree, but being a bunch of separate components is the best way for it to be a play set. How are you going to play a full battle with AT-ATs and snow speeders if its all clumped together.

That being said, I never considered it a UCS set in the same way the 2010 Tantive 4 wasn't, regardless of the number of pieces.

Its because it was a poor price per piece ratio, it was half system scale sets already released, and the other half of it was half finished modules. The ion cannon was half finished, the main door was unsightly, the trench pieces were just half complete, and there were only 2 imperials. 
How are you going to play a full battle with AT-AT's and snow  speeders when the set didn't come with any ATAT's? Again, another half assed thing.
The shield generator only had 3 module/disc parts, it is supposed to have 4. It wouldnt have taken much to give it a 4th.
That is why it deserved the grief.
 

[VaderFan2187]

@gotoAndLego: JANGBRiCKS explains it really well and really detailed.

 

[hunpeter12]

On ‎15‎/‎02‎/‎2017 at 11:03 PM, VaderFan2187 said:

Not quite a triangle

*snip*

BTW, UCS Snowspeeder images got leaked. I must say it looks decent. The design has started to grow on me. However, light stone grey would've been much better.

*snip*

Yeah, I meant all the people wishing for a new ISD 

 

[Bartybum]

All I want is a UCS Venator SD :(

[blbills]

Where are people seeing pics of this new snowspeeder?

[VaderFan2187]

2 hours ago, blbills said:

Where are people seeing pics of this new snowspeeder?

Go to Reddit Lego Leaks. A quick google search will find you the website. Find the link with "UCS Snowspeeder".

[KevinYoung]

On ‎2‎/‎23‎/‎2017 at 8:21 PM, Bartybum said:

All I want is a UCS Venator SD :(

Amen I feel your pain!!

[Major_Ton]

With the Snowspeeder already confirmed, I so very much would like to see the MF return. I had the original one for a couples of days and sold it (misb) because I was stupid.