Aggressor or Monarch?

[Rubblemaker]

As first world problems go, this is about as bad as it gets but I really just can’t decide and thought out of interest I’d throw it out to the community here. If you could afford to build (and had room to display) Raskolnikovs Aggressor or Onecase’s Monarch (but not both), which would you choose? I’m aware of the differences between them, interior in the Aggressor etc, and this isnt a deciding factor for me as I adore the look of both, and they both come out at almost the same cost on BrickLink.

Edited April 7, 2019 by Rubblemaker

[AfolFree]

Personal taste only, because both are incredible MOCs : I would go for the Monarch. Mostly because i don't care about out-of-scale interior and play value.

[Cylo]

Well if you want a playable interior then go for the Aggressor, if not go with the Monarch. Simple.

[Magmafrost]

Id definitely go with the Monarch personally. Its bigger, to start with, so you're getting a bigger ship for your money, but I think the biggest factor for me is how they handle the edges. Maybe its just a personal thing but I really dislike the look of tiles over the top of wedge plates (which the Aggressor does), it gives a really awful jagged look. It looks better to just have some wedge plates on the top and accept a few exposed studs IMO, which is what the Monarch does. And yet despite that the Aggressor STILL has more exposed studs.

Of course naturally there are things on the Aggressor I like better too, but they're much less immediately obvious.

Edited April 8, 2019 by Magmafrost

[SirCharles1977]

I would go for the Intimidator!!  HAHAHA!!  But I may be a smidge biased... ;)

[Rubblemaker]

2 hours ago, SirCharles1977 said:

I would go for the Intimidator!!  HAHAHA!!  But I may be a smidge biased... ;)

Dude, if I had 60 darn inches of storage space in my humble Lego man cave and about 2 grand to spare, so would I! Your bold ambition to make the biggest bastard out there (bar the Chimeara) has unfortunately priced (and sized) me out of your market. Don’t ever take those instructions down though, cause one day....

2 hours ago, Magmafrost said:

Id definitely go with the Monarch personally. Its bigger, to start with, so you're getting a bigger ship for your money, but I think the biggest factor for me is how they handle the edges. Maybe its just a personal thing but I really dislike the look of tiles over the top of wedge plates (which the Aggressor does), it gives a really awful jagged look. It looks better to just have some wedge plates on the top and accept a few exposed studs IMO, which is what the Monarch does. And yet despite that the Aggressor STILL has more exposed studs.

Of course naturally there are things on the Aggressor I like better too, but they're much less immediately obvious.

Does the Aggressor do tiles over wedges? I thought it only tiles over straight plates. It looks to me more like Rasko uses the wedges on the inside of the hull panels approach (which you can see with exposed studs all along the middle seams) rather than Onecases use of them along the outline of the whole ship, which is also what I did with my midi scale ISD moc, but I kind of like Rasko’s approach. Having said all that, the Monarch is indeed more bang for your buck if interiors aren’t your bag, I’m not bothered about them, but having the Aggressor interior does also mean more lovely build time! Like I said, major first world problem this.

6 hours ago, Reaper said:

Well if you want a playable interior then go for the Aggressor, if not go with the Monarch. Simple.

Yeah.. but it’s not. The interior, whilst I’ll never actually play with it, does mean more fun build time, which is just as important as display time, more so, some might say. And the Aggressor really looks badass from the outside. I mean, realistically, who is actually going to ‘play’ with the Aggressor? If you can afford to build it you’re probably of an age where you don’t sit there once your model is built going ‘neowwww, pew pew pew, die puny rebels!’ whilst ejecting probe droids onto the floor. Really the benefit, as I see it, is in the quirky fun of building a canteen on a star destroyer, and then maybe taking a photo of Darth Vader buying a bagel. I dunno, maybe that’s just me. 

But then the Monarch is so. Damn. Beautiful.

Edited April 8, 2019 by Rubblemaker

[Evergreen]

I actually have made the Aggressor and I am planning on building the Monarch as well (not anytime soon though LOL). I personally like the overall visual of the Monarch better than the Aggressor because of the accurate proportions the Monarch has. Also, in general, the Monarch is more accurate and sleek than the Aggressor IMO. However, the Monarch is only good for the looks and nothing else. Even though the Aggressor isn't as accurate to an actual ISD, it still looks great and it even has an interior! The building process for the Aggressor was absolutely great and I think all the techniques that Raskolnikov used to create a stable structure to be brilliant. And the fact that he was able to create a great exterior and an interior while being structurally stable to be amazing. I can't say the same for onecases Monarch since I haven't built it yet, but from what I saw while skimming through the instructions, the building process looks slightly similar to the LEGO UCS Star Destroyer (10030), but I'm sure there are some great techniques that he used for his build. Oh, and one more thing that I think the Aggressor does better than the Monarch is modularity. For the Monarch, I think only the superstructure and the bridge are removable where with the Aggressor you can very easily take off the entire top portion of the build, including the engines (the bottom panel will be alittle difficult but not impossible). So if you plan to move the Aggressor will definitely be far easier to move around. 

So to sum up what I said, the Monarch is just visually more stunning than the Aggressor whereas the Aggressor is better built. Just to make it clear this is all just my opinion and I haven't built the Monarch yet and only the Aggressor. So I hope my little comparison review helps you out in building either one of these great MOC's! 

 

[Rubblemaker]

14 minutes ago, Evergreen said:

I actually have made the Aggressor and I am planning on building the Monarch as well (not anytime soon though LOL). I personally like the overall visual of the Monarch better than the Aggressor because of the accurate proportions the Monarch has. Also, in general, the Monarch is more accurate and sleek than the Aggressor IMO. However, the Monarch is only good for the looks and nothing else. Even though the Aggressor isn't as accurate to an actual ISD, it still looks great and it even has an interior! The building process for the Aggressor was absolutely great and I think all the techniques that Raskolnikov used to create a stable structure to be brilliant. And the fact that he was able to create a great exterior and an interior while being structurally stable to be amazing. I can't say the same for onecases Monarch since I haven't built it yet, but from what I saw while skimming through the instructions, the building process looks slightly similar to the LEGO UCS Star Destroyer (10030), but I'm sure there are some great techniques that he used for his build. Oh, and one more thing that I think the Aggressor does better than the Monarch is modularity. For the Monarch, I think only the superstructure and the bridge are removable where with the Aggressor you can very easily take off the entire top portion of the build, including the engines (the bottom panel will be alittle difficult but not impossible). So if you plan to move the Aggressor will definitely be far easier to move around. 

So to sum up what I said, the Monarch is just visually more stunning than the Aggressor whereas the Aggressor is better built. Just to make it clear this is all just my opinion and I haven't built the Monarch yet and only the Aggressor. So I hope my little comparison review helps you out in building either one of these great MOC's! 

 

Very interesting. Thanks, it certainly does and confirms a few things I thought were the case re: the Aggressor. I haven’t built the Lego ucs SD (I think it’s an ugly s.o.b to be honest) so it would all be new to me. I know Rasko does amazing builds though, I’ve built his at at and it was really good fun. I’m wondering if there’s a way to cross ref wanted lists on BrickLink, say, I bought parts for one of em now, then later wanted to build the other using those parts. I could see how many parts were outstanding and just buy the remainder. I wonder if there is much of a crossover. 

[Magmafrost]

3 hours ago, Evergreen said:

The building process for the Aggressor was absolutely great and I think all the techniques that Raskolnikov used to create a stable structure to be brilliant. And the fact that he was able to create a great exterior and an interior while being structurally stable to be amazing. I can't say the same for onecases Monarch since I haven't built it yet, but from what I saw while skimming through the instructions, the building process looks slightly similar to the LEGO UCS Star Destroyer (10030), but I'm sure there are some great techniques that he used for his build.

You know I think thats an important consideration too, does anyone really know which of the two has the stronger frame? Im sure they're both sturdy but 10030 famously does not have a frame that holds up over time. Given that these are relatively new creations, does anyone know whether they're likely to suffer similar issues? Because if one does and the other doesn't, I think that'd tip the scales pretty decisively.

[Rubblemaker]

18 minutes ago, Magmafrost said:

You know I think thats an important consideration too, does anyone really know which of the two has the stronger frame? Im sure they're both sturdy but 10030 famously does not have a frame that holds up over time. Given that these are relatively new creations, does anyone know whether they're likely to suffer similar issues? Because if one does and the other doesn't, I think that'd tip the scales pretty decisively.

That's a good point, one I imagine only time will tell as we don't know what sort of stress weight the super structure on the Monarch will put on the frame Onecase designed. Maybe he'll read this and reply to give us some insight. Probably not, but you never know.

[onecase]

4 hours ago, Magmafrost said:

You know I think thats an important consideration too, does anyone really know which of the two has the stronger frame? Im sure they're both sturdy but 10030 famously does not have a frame that holds up over time. Given that these are relatively new creations, does anyone know whether they're likely to suffer similar issues? Because if one does and the other doesn't, I think that'd tip the scales pretty decisively.

ISD Monarch by one case, on Flickr

I haven't build Rasko's ISD but I can assume the technics he used to create both exterior/interior and maintain sturdiness is just amazing. My technics are rather simpler than aggressor and similar to 10030 but more sturdier. There is a 3rd assistant stand in the front to prevent warping of the frame. (Executor has 2 assistant stand) I could've put one of the main stand in the front but I didn't like the look of it. With the assistant stand, the frame is pretty sturdy and won't warp overtime. at least until now.

Moving Monarch is not an easy work. The bridge and the building structure underneath comes out easily. but you also need to remove the top panel in order to move it. Removing the bottom panel is possible but won't be easy. 

[Rubblemaker]

9 minutes ago, onecase said:

ISD Monarch by one case, on Flickr

I haven't build Rasko's ISD but I can assume the technics he used to create both exterior/interior and maintain sturdiness is just amazing. My technics are rather simpler than aggressor and similar to 10030 but more sturdier. There is a 3rd assistant stand in the front to prevent warping of the frame. (Executor has 2 assistant stand) I could've put one of the main stand in the front but I didn't like the look of it. With the assistant stand, the frame is pretty sturdy and won't warp overtime. at least until now.

Moving Monarch is not an easy work. The bridge and the building structure underneath comes out easily. but you also need to remove the top panel in order to move it. Removing the bottom panel is possible but won't be easy. 

Thanks for the info. I'll bear that last line in mind should I ever move house... ;)

Edited April 8, 2019 by Rubblemaker

[Rubblemaker]

UPDATE ...not that anyone is remotely interested in the decisions of a stranger on the internet but its my thread so.. meh:

Decided to build the Aggressor. There's just something about the chunkiness and robust build on it that I love the look of. Plus its stood the test of time so far and has had most of its build problems ironed out by now.

Next year.. The Monarch.... the year after... The Intimidator. The year after that.. divorce, bankruptcy and homelessness!

Edited April 9, 2019 by Rubblemaker

[onecase]

4 hours ago, Rubblemaker said:

UPDATE ...not that anyone is remotely interested in the decisions of a stranger on the internet but its my thread so.. meh:

Decided to build the Aggressor. There's just something about the chunkiness and robust build on it that I love the look of. Plus its stood the test of time so far and has had most of its build problems ironed out by now.

Next year.. The Monarch.... the year after... The Intimidator. The year after that.. divorce, bankruptcy and homelessness!

I hope you don't become an aggressive intimidated monarch.. wish you good luck!

Edited April 9, 2019 by onecase

[Rubblemaker]

1 hour ago, onecase said:

I hope you don't become an aggressive intimidated monarch.. wish you good luck!

Got a feeling my wife will once she sees 15,000 pieces of Lego lying around the place. And starts stepping on it. 

 

[Schneeds]

I was barely able to fit all the pieces spread out on an 8x11 rug.  So that gives you an idea of the space you will need :)

[Rubblemaker]

1 hour ago, Schneeds said:

I was barely able to fit all the pieces spread out on an 8x11 rug.  So that gives you an idea of the space you will need :)

Yeah. I’ve done my research on this thing and seen many pictures of what 15,314 Lego pieces on the floor looks like. I’m fully expecting there to be some serious sorting going on beforehand. Probably several days of it. Luckily, I’m quite adept at sorting by now. Still, I know 15,000 pieces is next level shit! Kind of looking forward to the challenge actually.

Edited April 9, 2019 by Rubblemaker

[Evergreen]

2 hours ago, Rubblemaker said:

Yeah. I’ve done my research on this thing and seen many pictures of what 15,314 Lego pieces on the floor looks like. I’m fully expecting there to be some serious sorting going on beforehand. Probably several days of it. Luckily, I’m quite adept at sorting by now. Still, I know 15,000 pieces is next level shit! Kind of looking forward to the challenge actually.

Before you buy all the pieces, rockpig made a spreadsheet where he made a list of all the parts you need for each book for the Aggressor. So rather than organizing 15k+ pieces I would recommend you make 7 wanted lists on bricklink and upload the pieces you need book by book. Good luck on the build! 

[Rubblemaker]

7 hours ago, Evergreen said:

Before you buy all the pieces, rockpig made a spreadsheet where he made a list of all the parts you need for each book for the Aggressor. So rather than organizing 15k+ pieces I would recommend you make 7 wanted lists on bricklink and upload the pieces you need book by book. Good luck on the build! 

Thanks! Bit late on the buying bit though, that part is done (6 BrickLink orders and stupid money later) but that will come in very handy as I wanted to sort book by book so I’ll grab that file from the Rebrickable comments page where he posted it. It had totally slipped my mind. :)

Edited April 10, 2019 by Rubblemaker

[Midlife-crisis]

Probably i'm biased, i built the Agressor. Both have a great design.

When looking over the part lists of both, the Agressor parts are not that rare and should be easier to achieve all over the world, while the Monarch´s partlist shows more rare pieces and some very expensive ones.

Both will cost about the same for "late builders" but with the Aggressor you have a 15K pile of parts instead of 11K. Viewed from this point more value for the money.

 

Edit: my 6 year old daughter defeated Vader with her rey minifig a few times, Aggressor is sturdy enough for Play sessions!

Edited May 6, 2019 by Midlife-crisis

[ProvenceTristram]

Aggressor. Because play features matter.

[Rubblemaker]

12 hours ago, Midlife-crisis said:

When looking over the part lists of both, the Agressor parts are not that rare and should be easier to achieve all over the world, while the Monarch´s partlist shows more rare pieces and some very expensive ones.

I found this too. I priced up both, I already had 1,100 pieces I could use in both, yet the Monarch still came out as £400 more expensive (I originally thought they were the same cost but Id done something wrong the first time I priced them up). This partly had to do with the fact that I was able to get what I needed for the Aggressor from 6 sellers, whilst the Monarchs rare and slightly more unusual parts are such that it needed 21 sellers to get to 100%. The postage fees alone would be crazy!

And here is 15,314 pieces (actually, a few more than that as I’m going to try to mod it a bit):

 

Edited May 6, 2019 by Rubblemaker

[Raskolnikov]

15 hours ago, Midlife-crisis said:

Probably i'm biased, i built the Agressor. Both have a great design.

 

Haha, thanks. Yeah, as you all have said, just depends on what you personally value.

I'm definitely a bit envious of the Monarch's slim profile myself. I do consider accuracy in my own designs, but at a certain point I tend to stop checking references and start making decisions based on playability, durability, and just what I think the bricks lend themselves to. Since the Aggressor was purpose-built for instructions and eventual modding to a VSD, I also did try to use inexpensive/ordinary pieces. Although the cylinders used in the engines seem to have increased in price quite a bit since then.

If I ever finish this blasted Mon Cal, some of the parts usage would present a hurdle for reproducing it. Pretty sure I now have a significant portion of the market's supply of certain old technic panels. And I just used four 4x4 lbg wedges that were only in one AT-ST set like a decade ago--don't think Bricklink could fulfill too many orders of those. Ah well.

[Rubblemaker]

2 hours ago, Raskolnikov said:

If I ever finish this blasted Mon Cal, some of the parts usage would present a hurdle for reproducing it. Pretty sure I now have a significant portion of the market's supply of certain old technic panels. And I just used four 4x4 lbg wedges that were only in one AT-ST set like a decade ago--don't think Bricklink could fulfill too many orders of those. Ah well.

Then you know what to do, make another one! With cheap parts that you can turn into instructions. ;) Otherwise you know full well you’re going to spend the next 3 years answering the question: ‘do you plan on releasing instructions for your big Mon Cal?’

Actually you’re probably going to spend the next 3 years answering that question anyway. You’re damned if you do, damned if you don’t.