Most accurate star destroyer?

[Naixin]

I recently just finished onecase's Monarch and it's absolutely stunning. However, I just came across 2impaired's Eviscerator. I noticed that its several thousand pieces more than the monarch, but they're both roughly the same size. Which one is more accurate as a display piece? I would get both but I don't have the space...

 

Monarch

https://rebrickable.com/mocs/MOC-23556/onecase/isd-monarch/#details

Eviscerator

https://www.brickvault.toys/collections/all/products/imperial-star-destroyer

Edited March 29, 2021 by Naixin

[caiman0637]

I think that the Monarch looks a lot better.

[Naixin]

The monarch looks great. I just wonder what more the eviscerator has since it’s so many more pieces but the same size

[Rubblemaker]

56 minutes ago, Naixin said:

The monarch looks great. I just wonder what more the eviscerator has since it’s so many more pieces but the same size

The interior of the Eviscerator is made with about 3 times as many technic pieces as the Monarch. These 2 pictures are really bad ones to make a comparison from. The Eviscerator is a really spectacular looking model, but Onecase really knows how to photograph his Mocs. 2Impaireds ISD is incredibly polished and doesn’t have the studded look that the Monarch does. So if you prefer the studless look (as I do) that’s the better choice.

[AIex]

1 hour ago, Rubblemaker said:

The interior of the Eviscerator is made with about 3 times as many technic pieces as the Monarch. These 2 pictures are really bad ones to make a comparison from. The Eviscerator is a really spectacular looking model, but Onecase really knows how to photograph his Mocs. 2Impaireds ISD is incredibly polished and doesn’t have the studded look that the Monarch does. So if you prefer the studless look (as I do) that’s the better choice.

to add onto this, the panels of the Monarch are straight forward with the angle being defined by the wedge plate, whereas the eviscerator has the panels at an angle so that the edge of the wedge plates creates a straight line down the center. This allows for far more intricate detail along the edges of the top and bottom panels, a detail I have not really seen on any other star destroyer moc that really adds a lot to the design

[lowlead]

...I'm a bit redundant here, but yeah...

Not having built the Monarch or seen the instructions, my guess would be a combination of the internal frame, display stand and the style of exterior detail.

With the Eviscerator, 2mpaired designed an extremely robust frame set atop an elaborate (and beautiful!) display stand.  The resulting pair are both very parts-dense, and the display stand alone accounts for an entire instruction 'book' in pdf format.  The internal frame alone is HEAVY and very tough due to its over-engineering.  While I was building the frame it became evident that any drooping, characteristic of many other Destroyers, would be virtually non-existent with the Eviscerator.

Lastly, just based on casual observation, the Eviscerator piece count may be elevated due to the specific exterior detail treatment - comprised of nearly 1,000 1x1 modified plate with clip (two different styles).  Also the outer edges of each wedge panel of the Eviscerator have a much more elaborate design, using hundreds of 1x1 modified brick with headlight, as opposed to plain wedge plates on the Monarch.  Although very intricate-looking, the Monarch exterior appears to have a wider range of elements making up the outside detail which may not add up to the higher piece count in comparison.

Having said all that, the creators themselves probably have all kinds of specific stats on these monsters.  I'm glad I chose the Eviscerator 2.0! 

Edited April 3, 2021 by lowlead

[thire5]

Both models are stunning for sure.

I can only compare the pictures, but I think that Eviscerator has better details along the sides of the ship as mentioned before. Monarch is using only simple wedges 3x6 with a lot studs visible (in contrast with the rest of the design).

One more thing that bothered me a little on Monarch is the usage of old and expensive parts, for example 124 x Light gray Hinge Tile 1 x 2 1/2 with 2 Fingers on Top (with average price 4euro for one new piece). The Eviscerator would probably be more optimized to use more recent and available parts, but maybe I'm wrong.

[Midlife-crisis]

Clearly the Evicerator not just because of the better part availability and taht beautiful stand. The design of the monarch is great too no doubt, but the fact that it needs 3 stands as a display[sic!] model is a no go for me.

[Lego Spotlight]

@Naixin I had to make a decision between the two as well and I confidently decided to go with The Eviscerator. I've had experience building MOCS from both of these designers and I believe there is no contest when it comes to their Star Destroyers. In my opinion, both look excellent, but 2mpaired's model takes the cake.

Structural integrity is so important when it comes to large models for display and The Eviscerator is built like a tank. ONECASE's builds, though equally nice to look at, are notoriously flimsy. One need only compare the instructions to verify this. With the Eviscerator there is no chance of any sagging or warping of the overall shape over time. The build is laughably solid all around. As for The Monarch, one quick google image search will show you how droopy the set becomes once built, even with the three support stands.

Accuracy is a more debated aspect of these two builds. I really think I have to give it to The Eviscerator on account of the entire bridge assembly being more accurate (The Monarch bridge looks pretty chaotic and malformed) and the slightly raised border of tiles around the edges of the ship (which The Monarch lacks entirely). It's more accurate and my goodness, it's so impressive that 2mpaired was able to capture that subtle but iconic detail.

The base on the Eviscerator is so elegant. The fact that a set of that size and weight sits comfortably on those two arms is testament to the ingenuity of the design. Compare this with The Monarch's three stands, especially the really ugly one at the front, which @Midlife-crisis pointed out is a deal breaker for sure.

There was certainly a time when ONECASE's Monarch ISD was the holy grail of Star Destroyer MOCs, but I think it has been completely dethroned by 2mpaired's Eviscerator and even more so by the recent 2.0 update which only increased the accuracy to the studio model. If you can afford the upgrade, I would say DO IT.

I am finally getting through my build and will be posting vid-docs and a review on my YouTube channel soon!

 

[Sclrouche]

Magnifique mais combien vous a couté cette construction ? 

[Naixin]

On 4/13/2021 at 3:31 AM, Lego Spotlight said:

On 4/13/2021 at 3:31 AM, Lego Spotlight said:

@Naixin I had to make a decision between the two as well and I confidently decided to go with The Eviscerator. I've had experience building MOCS from both of these designers and I believe there is no contest when it comes to their Star Destroyers. In my opinion, both look excellent, but 2mpaired's model takes the cake.

Structural integrity is so important when it comes to large models for display and The Eviscerator is built like a tank. ONECASE's builds, though equally nice to look at, are notoriously flimsy. One need only compare the instructions to verify this. With the Eviscerator there is no chance of any sagging or warping of the overall shape over time. The build is laughably solid all around. As for The Monarch, one quick google image search will show you how droopy the set becomes once built, even with the three support stands.

Accuracy is a more debated aspect of these two builds. I really think I have to give it to The Eviscerator on account of the entire bridge assembly being more accurate (The Monarch bridge looks pretty chaotic and malformed) and the slightly raised border of tiles around the edges of the ship (which The Monarch lacks entirely). It's more accurate and my goodness, it's so impressive that 2mpaired was able to capture that subtle but iconic detail.

The base on the Eviscerator is so elegant. The fact that a set of that size and weight sits comfortably on those two arms is testament to the ingenuity of the design. Compare this with The Monarch's three stands, especially the really ugly one at the front, which @Midlife-crisis pointed out is a deal breaker for sure.

There was certainly a time when ONECASE's Monarch ISD was the holy grail of Star Destroyer MOCs, but I think it has been completely dethroned by 2mpaired's Eviscerator and even more so by the recent 2.0 update which only increased the accuracy to the studio model. If you can afford the upgrade, I would say DO IT.

I am finally getting through my build and will be posting vid-docs and a review on my YouTube channel soon!

 

What’s your channel?

Edited April 15, 2021 by Naixin

[m4st3rt3ch]

What about Intimidator and Aggressor?

EDIT: I'm asking, because instead of hunting for cheap pieces, i thought about buying MOC instructions and pieces from one source. JB Spielwaren for example sells both mentioned above as complete sets. Yes, they may be more expensive, but it sounds like a fair trade for the transaction being absolutely stressless. One order, a couple of boxes, all parts pre-sorted.

Edited April 17, 2021 by m4st3rt3ch

[Lego Spotlight]

On 4/15/2021 at 9:05 AM, Naixin said:

What’s your channel?

Lego Spotlight. There should be a link in my bio!

[Lego Spotlight]

On 4/17/2021 at 3:11 AM, m4st3rt3ch said:

What about Intimidator and Aggressor?

EDIT: I'm asking, because instead of hunting for cheap pieces, i thought about buying MOC instructions and pieces from one source. JB Spielwaren for example sells both mentioned above as complete sets. Yes, they may be more expensive, but it sounds like a fair trade for the transaction being absolutely stressless. One order, a couple of boxes, all parts pre-sorted.

It depends what you're looking to get out of a large ISD model, but neither are very accurate.

The Agressor is for those who want an interior at the expense of accuracy. Many people seem to value having an interior for their ISD, which I can appreciate. The interior is very cool and well designed, but you pay for it with a bulky hull and angles that just aren't right.

The Intimidator is for those who want the biggest star destroyer at the expense of accuracy. While more accurate than The Agressor, the scale at which this set is built, though incredibly impressive and imposing, ultimately works against it. The Lego elements used to execute key areas of the ship are not well suited for the chosen scale making sections of the ship out of proportion relative to each other. The engines and the bridge sections are the most obvious examples of this. I would be interested to know why the designer decided to go with this scale.

Both models satisfy their own niche. It really comes down to what you prioritize as a builder and collector. As someone who values accuracy above all else, I never once considered either of these models, but if you want your ISD to have an interior or want it to take up tons of space then that's cool and we're all fortunate enough to have these excellent models to choose from!

To your point about acquiring parts, yes this can be tedious, stressful and daunting. Parts acquisition for these big builds takes so much time and effort. Accounting for parts alone eats up so much time. If I could have paid more and bought all of my parts for The Eviscerator from one person, I'd have done it in a heartbeat. Though, there is something to be said about the satisfaction of the grind paying off. All said, I wouldn't recommend basing your decision on how convenient it is to get the parts, you should just worry about balancing costs and what kind of model you want. In the end it's worth it!

Edited April 19, 2021 by Lego Spotlight

[lowlead]

18 hours ago, m4st3rt3ch said:

...JB Spielwaren for example sells both mentioned above as complete sets. Yes, they may be more expensive, but it sounds like a fair trade for the transaction being absolutely stressless....

For me, this would be swapping one source of stress for another.  Mild stress, granted, but still....

An ISD order from JD Spielwaren would mean shipping one giant ~$2,000+ order overseas from Germany.  One hiccup or delay at U.S. Customs would probably take years off my life .  A while back before COVID I ordered the Sisyphus Automaton model from MOC Hub - everything worked out in the end, but there was a long shipping delay and a lot of back and forth communication.  Since then, I try to keep things stateside if possible.

[m4st3rt3ch]

21 hours ago, Lego Spotlight said:

 

Excellent summary, thank you!

 

14 hours ago, lowlead said:

 

 

 

My fear is, that at one point i could get frustrated with the process to that extent, i'd bin the whole project. I hope we'll see more offers like the ones from JB in the future.

Edited April 18, 2021 by m4st3rt3ch

[Naixin]

Thank you everyone for the opinions. I ended up finding space for both. I already finished Monarch (AMAZING btw) and will start Eviscerator 2.0 soon.

[Schneeds]

On 4/13/2021 at 3:31 AM, Lego Spotlight said:

 

Structural integrity is so important when it comes to large models for display and The Eviscerator is built like a tank. ONECASE's builds, though equally nice to look at, are notoriously flimsy.

I have no idea on what basis you're making such a statement.  I have Onecase's Executor on display, which I built when it came out, and it has no issues with bending or sagging.  That thing is a razor-thin masterpiece for which there is absolutely no comparison. 

Edited February 6, 2022 by Schneeds

[Naixin]

It seems like a lot of differing opinions. I take it as both the monarch and eviscerator are extremely accurate? And ultimately it comes down to preference over the wedge plate sides and use of 1 vs 3 stands?

[Kage Goomba]

This is what I call a loaded gun thread.

Everyone is going to have their own tastes and preferences and their opinions will be very subjective.

Comes down to you on whether you like variant A over B over C.

 

Personally Structure is a big deal for such a big model - I'd like to be able to move it without it having it fall apart :P

Detail/accuracy are also good - but still.