Ki-Adi-Mundi Posted May 26, 2013 This is minifig scale falcon http://www.ebay.com/bhp/lego-10179 ;) So we are talking about UCS scale, i see. The term he used got me irritated. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Brickmamba Posted May 26, 2013 Thanks for the barge review cookiemonster, great to see these new sets starting to roll out, can't wait Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Savage Oppress Posted May 26, 2013 (edited) Since the Summer 2013 sets are technically at Toys R Us right now, when do we expect them to hit store Shelves at Target, Walmart, Kmart, and other stores. Edited May 26, 2013 by Savage Oppress Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Drock Posted May 26, 2013 Thanks for the review, Cookie Monster Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Brickdoctor Posted May 26, 2013 So we are talking about UCS scale, i see. The term he used got me irritated. UCS is not a scale; UCS is a style of building. He used the correct term - 10179 is the minifig-scale Falcon. 7965 is a System set, the varying scale that TLG uses for it's main line of sets, which may or may not be minifig-scale. (In 7965's case, it's nowhere even close to minifig-scale.) That having been said (And this is not directed specifically at you, Ki-Adi; I know you were just replying to someone else.), please remember that this topic is for discussion of rumored sets and confirmed sets to be released in 2013. Listing and discussion of sets you wish to see or think we will see in the future belong in Future Star Wars Sets. Thanks! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Anio Posted May 26, 2013 (edited) 10179 is the minifig-scale Falcon. No. 10179 is the UCS-scale Falcon. 7965 and 10179 both have minifig in the ship, and so, both can be considered as minifig scaled. Never forget that minifig scale is not a scale. To sum up : UCS : style of building with high details and accuracy. Sometimes minifig scale. System : same as playset. Very often in minifig scale. Minifig scale : a model in which you can put minifig, whatever the size of the model. Edited May 26, 2013 by Anio Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Brickdoctor Posted May 26, 2013 No. 10179 is the UCS-scale Falcon. No, UCS is not a scale. You even say it yourself later in your post: UCS is a "style of building". Minifig scale : a model in which you can put minifig, whatever the size of the model. If that were true, the UCS Executor would be minifig-scale. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MaceWindu Posted May 26, 2013 What about new Imperial Star Destroyer? Were there any confirmations about this set? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Brickdoctor Posted May 26, 2013 What about new Imperial Star Destroyer? Were there any confirmations about this set? Where was this mentioned? I haven't heard anything about such a set... Although to be honest I didn't pay close attention to this thread for a couple weeks, so I might have missed it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Anio Posted May 26, 2013 (edited) No, UCS is not a scale. You even say it yourself later in your post: UCS is a "style of building". Yes, missuse the word. 10179 is the UCS model. (however, with the word "UCS scale" I rather meant "UCS built" ; in Lego, the word scale means nothing) If that were true, the UCS Executor would be minifig-scale. 10221 is a crappy exception. Saying that a minifig scaled model is just a model in which you can put minifigs is very true for 99,99% of the Lego sets. Edited May 26, 2013 by Anio Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MaceWindu Posted May 26, 2013 (edited) Somebody told about the box with printing "Lego Imperial...". I'm not sure, that that was a real set. Edited May 26, 2013 by MaceWindu Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Brickdoctor Posted May 26, 2013 Saying that a minifig scaled model is just a model in which you can put minifigs is very true for 99,99% of the Lego sets. I disagree; the basic minifig is one definite size and as such determines one definite scale compared to itself based on the ratio of the size of the minifig to the size of a person. (Or, actually, two, maybe three different scales, depending on whether you scale to the height or width of the minifig, but still scales that don't vary that much.) I concede that sometimes compromises need to be made because this is LEGO, but that doesn't mean that anything you can fit a minifig into is minifig-scale. Somebody told about the box with printing "Lego Imperial...". I'm not sure, that that was a real set. Oh, was it the big crate? The general consensus is that LEGO sets wouldn't be shipped like that (and I think the number was also inconsistent with what we've seen in other sets), and it was probably a model for display at a theme park or a store. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nrg Posted May 26, 2013 (edited) Edit Edited May 26, 2013 by nrg Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
8BrickMario Posted May 26, 2013 Let's stop talking about scale, please. And Brickdoctor, there was no previous mention of a Star Destroyer. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Brickdoctor Posted May 26, 2013 And Brickdoctor, there was no previous mention of a Star Destroyer. I beg to differ. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
8BrickMario Posted May 26, 2013 Oh. I came on later than that was posted! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
KurttKrueger Posted May 26, 2013 Anyone know if the Jedi Defender will be released in the UK on the 1st June with the rest of the Star Wars Summer wave? Itching to order it, and would be even sweeter if I can get the Jor-El polybag along with it (I need his head to represent my SWTOR character along with the Zabrak Jedi's armour). Cheers, Kurtt Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TeufelHund Posted May 27, 2013 Cool LEGO Yoda "NY I Love" Minifigure Video Review: Shouldn't it be "NY Love I" given Yoda's particular grammatical disposition? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Fuppylodders Posted May 27, 2013 (edited) Shouldn't it be "NY Love I" given Yoda's particular grammatical disposition? No, they have it the right way round for yoda, otherwise normally it should be I <3 NY, whereas they have it as NY, I love... such as 'Powerful, you have become'. Edited May 27, 2013 by Fuppylodders Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Brickdoctor Posted May 27, 2013 Shouldn't it be "NY Love I" given Yoda's particular grammatical disposition? No, they have it the right way round for yoda, otherwise normally it should be I <3 NY, whereas they have it as NY, I love... such as 'Powerful, you have become'. <starwarsgeek>I've seen examples of both basic arrangements: complement-verb-subject ("Powerful Jedi was he." "A domain of evil it is." "So certain are you.") and complement-subject-verb ("My own counsel will I keep on who is to be trained"* "The Dark Side of the Force are they." "A powerful ally it is."). So both would technically be correct based on what we've seen before. (At least in Empire) That being said, I agree that "NY, I love" sounds better than "NY love I". *This one's actually a little tricky; if you rearrange the basic groups of words you'd end up with the question "Will I keep my own counsel on who is to be trained?" instead of the statement. But the basic arrangement is the same, complement-subject-verb. </starwarsgeek> Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Artanis I Posted May 28, 2013 <starwarsgeek> I've seen examples of both basic arrangements: complement-verb-subject ("Powerful Jedi was he." "A domain of evil it is." "So certain are you.") and complement-subject-verb ("My own counsel will I keep on who is to be trained"* "The Dark Side of the Force are they." "A powerful ally it is."). So both would technically be correct based on what we've seen before. (At least in Empire) That being said, I agree that "NY, I love" sounds better than "NY love I". *This one's actually a little tricky; if you rearrange the basic groups of words you'd end up with the question "Will I keep my own counsel on who is to be trained?" instead of the statement. But the basic arrangement is the same, complement-subject-verb. </starwarsgeek> Actually I think by following the structure of your examples* he would actually say something like (as a statement, not question) "Love NY, I do" or "Love for NY, have I". But I would also expect it to be rendered as "NY, I love" since that uses only the original words. * typo'd exmaples... what is that? A bunch of Canadian ex-pats? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
StoutFiles Posted May 28, 2013 CREATURE: Not far. Yoda not far. Patience. Soon you will be with him.(tasting food from the pot) Rootleaf, I cook. Why wish you become Jedi? Hm? "NY, I love" is fine. I hope this ends the debate. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
8BrickMario Posted May 28, 2013 I apologize for the stupidly uncapitalized "lego" in my last post! Veer away from Yoda grammar, in this discussion should we, hmm? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Darth Malgus Posted May 28, 2013 yes, crazy you may go. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zzz Posted May 28, 2013 Having seen the first non-TLC / non-photoshopped pictures of the Sail Barge now, I am not sure if I like those sails, as they are really shiny and plastic-y. Reminds me of seeing the new Lone Ranger teepee in person, which was quite a disappointment. I had the Barge on my wanted list but I am not sure about it anymore. It's surely something that we can fix easily, but I am kind of a purist and adding a few pieces here and there is another thing than crafting new sails. Looking forward for the first picture reviews! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites