phaelon
-
Content Count
102 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Everything posted by phaelon
-
For those of you asking about an ISD on this scale, @SirCharles1977 created the Intimidator years ago that scales nicely with this MOC. Link to thread
-
Imperial Star Destroyer Intimidator MOC-77525
phaelon replied to SirCharles1977's topic in LEGO Star Wars
Also, if you don't like the new UCS Venator, there's also the @thire5 MOC which comes in just slightly longer by 2 cm. -
Imperial Star Destroyer Intimidator MOC-77525
phaelon replied to SirCharles1977's topic in LEGO Star Wars
It was sheer luck that I even noticed. I have a spreadsheet I built years ago that has capital ship lengths and will calculate stud count and scale length based on a manually input ratio. I had been looking at the new Venator and reversed out the scale based on that model's publish dimensions. That changed all the other calculations including the ISD, which went to 59.5 inches. When I came across your post yesterday I saw that exact number again in your dimensions, and it just clicked. Strange how that stuff works out, especially since you designed yours so long ago! Anyway, I'm a huge fan of the Eviscerator and was about to start that build when I came across the Intimidator. Now that the Venator is here and looks so good, it has me leaning heavily towards your design. Have you updated or revisited this beast over the years? And PLEASE let us know if you do build the UCS set with it. I'm dying to see how these two look together. -
Imperial Star Destroyer Intimidator MOC-77525
phaelon replied to SirCharles1977's topic in LEGO Star Wars
Okay, I'm going to resurrect this thread for a very important reason. Specifically because the Venator (UCS 75367) has been released. Why is that important / relevant? SCALE The new Venator is exactly the same scale as the Intimidator that @SirCharles1977 so cleverly designed for us years ago. Here's the math: Venator (length) Lore: 1137 m Lego UCS: 109 cm Scale: 108 cm @ 1:1056 Intimidator ISD (length) Lore: 1600 m Lego MOC: 59.5 in (from initial post), 151 cm Scale: 151 cm @ 1:1056 So here's the question... who will accept the challenge of building both and showing them side by side at the same scale? -
[INSTRUCTIONS] Venator-class Star Destroyer (MIDI Scale)
phaelon replied to Kristof's topic in LEGO Star Wars
Kris, these instructions are PHENOMENAL!!! Besides the incredibly high quality renderings, complete with highlights and shadowing, the red wireframe around each new connection on every single step is just... no wonder this took so long for you to put together! I haven't even begun to bricklink, but I just wanted to say these instructions are amazing. GREAT WORK! -
So super excited for this! Great job Kris! Email sent.
-
The problem with the actual scales of ships in the SW universe is the wide range. It makes it difficult to accurately portray them next to each other when they can be 10 times or 100 times bigger than other "common" ships that you still want to show detail. I always considered the Lucrehulks to be the Death Stars of the First Trilogy, in that they were unevenly massive compared to all other ships of the era. Obviously the actual Death Star is a small moon (well, no moon, but still) in size, so it easily dwarfs everything else by orders of magnitude. But even the SSD designs suffer because of how huge they have to be to show even the slightest detail on accompanying ISDs.
-
I just reread this post, and wanted to give you some numbers. From my (old) post about various ships in this scale, the Lucrehulk-class Battleship would be 147 studs in length and almost as wide, since it's essentially a giant circle. I think that would be an awesome build, but as you said, definitely large at 117cm (46 in).
-
This is just so thrilling. Thanks for the update Kris!
-
[REVIEW] Pure Display - 75192 - Millennium Falcon Stand and Display Case
phaelon replied to Jim's topic in LEGO Star Wars
Thanks for posting this and going through the trouble of putting it on rebrickable. I love the design! -
As bad as 10221 is, I think 10143 Death Star II takes the cake for the most unstable stand design for a UCS set. Glad to know this set doesn't suffer from the same issue.
-
All, I'm having a mid-life crisis of sorts. I have almost all the Star Wars UCS sets since they started in 2000. Each one I have opened and built, so I could enjoy the set and the Lego building experience each one represented. After that, I would take them apart, storing all the pieces in zip lock bags. I never applied any stickers, so I would put those in with the instructions on a cardboard backing with some silica packs. Then the entire box was wrapped in saran wrap and placed in a closet for storage. As such they are in excellent condition considering their age - they only show mild shelf wear. However, I am contemplating selling the bulk of my these sets in order to finance some MOCs that are, imo, better than the stock lego sets. Specifically, I'm wanting to build the ISD Aggressor and Constrictor II by @Raskolnikov, the Executor Star Dreadnought by @onecase, and several CR-90 Corvettes and GR-75 Transports by @mortesv to go along with my Nebulon B. Some of my sets I have promised to my children (7181, 7191, 10175, 75060), and some I will never part with (10026, 10179). Sets I'm willing to let go of: 10030, 10129, 10134, 10143, 10144, 10174, 10178, 10212, 10215, 10221, 10225, 10227, 10240, 75059, 75095. I also have 10019, but I'm on the fence about selling it. The Mortesv version is designed to scale with his Nebulon B, so it is considerably smaller. And although #10019 is not very screen accurate, it is a quintessential UCS set - detailed and delicate. So I'm trying to solicit opinions from other collectors and MOC designers on here about where I should sell, what I should sell, and what I should keep. I don't have a high enough post count to create a poll, but I do appreciate your feedback. Oh, and I'm in the U.S.
-
Good to know. And thanks for all your hard work on it! Looking forward to your reveal! Hopefully all the parts you used are still available if you decide to sell instructions. :)
-
So 10030 is on its way to a new owner. I am now committed to @Raskolnikov's Aggressor because I cannot be without an ISD in my collection. I think 10143 and 10221 will be the next victims. Thanks to everyone for the feedback and advice. It's been very helpful in my decision making.
-
I've been patiently been watching this thread for years @krisandkris12, waiting for the moment when you finally produced a working set of plans. It seems that day is almost here, and I'm very excited you are so close!
-
I was hoping you would comment @Schneeds. You're one of the few on here who has had the privilege of owning the UCS sets AND building the corresponding MOCs I'm looking at. I was never impressed with 10178 or 10221, and it's easy for me to decide to sell those. I already have a tentative sale on 10030, and honestly I can't fathom where I would put 2 ISDs. As it is I will have to convince SWMBO to let me put it in a custom coffee table. I'd love to see how you are going to display multiple 3 foot ISDs! :) And given that the Aggressor is so heavy, and how you never see a star destroyer in motion at a sharp angle, I don't think I could pull off the near vertical display stand that is available for 10179 / 75192. That's just pure Han / Lando swagger. Regarding 10179, both my wife and my 8 year old said 75192 looks better. But the 12 year old says 10179 "looks like Lego". In a sense, he's agreeing with you about 10019 and the C7 metaphor. The good news is I won't have to decide until they choose to retire 75192. I have @anothergol's AT-ST v2.1 parts and plans, but he keeps updating the damn thing! I have my eyes on @Raskolnikov's AT-AT, but @LiLmeFromDaFuture is getting close to showing us the AT-AT he's been working on for at least 6 years now. And @jhaelego has that incredible (though non-articulating) AT-AT as well. Thanks for listing the other small ship MOCs. I honestly hadn't looked too far into those designs yet because I've been so focused on capital ships. Now I have some more MOCs to add to my list. :)
-
Thanks guys.This has been helpful so far, with @jamie75 taking the lead for detail. @Robianco I agree that about 50 - 60% of these sets are really not enjoyable to me to own, and many of the ones that are have much better MOCs that I can bricklink. And the more I look at 75192 the more I'm wondering if selling 10179 might make sense? I know the differences are largely aesthetic, but that cockpit... Seems like the consensus is to get 10030 out the door ASAP. That being the case, is fleebay my best bet, despite all the fees? I just don't know how much traffic the dedicated sites like brickpicker, bricklink, brickowl, etc receive.
-
ISD Aggressor (Star Destroyer MOC w interior and instructions)
phaelon replied to Raskolnikov's topic in LEGO Star Wars
I can see that. LDD is very limiting when it comes to advanced construction techniques. Although Mortesv's Nebulon B Frigate is an insane build, and there are LDD files for it. Of course they have some errors in them. Either way, my question is certainly not a complaint, and I appreciate that you did not take it as such. :) -
ISD Aggressor (Star Destroyer MOC w interior and instructions)
phaelon replied to Raskolnikov's topic in LEGO Star Wars
Hey @Raskolnikov, just purchased this and Interdictor II, and I wanted to make sure I understand. Typically with MOCs the designer supplies the LDD file with the instructions. Are the LDD files available for these two builds, or was that a whole extra layer of pain to attempt? Regardless, thank you for taking the time to revisit your Tyrant design and bring us something that was more realistic to build. You're very talented, and I'm looking forward to building these incredible designs soon. -
So #6118 is in Light Grey because LBG isn't available. Why not #2489 in Light Grey as well? I mean, it's still an insane price of about $10 per piece, but there are more available than LBG. If one were to go with DBG for the barrels and cylinders, would Pearl Dark Grey look good for #6118?
-
You guys may not believe this, but after I ordered all the parts in 2016, I never got to the build. Then we moved, and now its all in a box waiting to be born. I know that @ecmo47 made numerous structural mods to this original build, @mortesv modified the nose and some of the "sword", and @Cjd223 indicated he was going to update the parts list. But were the instructions and LDD file updated as well? My copies are from June 2016, so I'm wondering if all the enhancements have been included in an updated set of plans. Also, I am missing #4854 LBG somehow. Any suggestions for an alternate color?
-
It's in big red letters on the opening post of this thread.
-
[MOC] UCS CR-90 Corellian Corvette – Blockade Runner (Tantive IV)
phaelon replied to mortesv's topic in LEGO Star Wars
Well, I'm hoping that someone with a little artistic talent can show how those connections can be made outside of LDD, because this is a great model to have to mix in with the rest of ships. -
Please don't reply to topics that have been dead for 2 years. Here is the semi-active build thread for these - http://www.eurobricks.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=99152&hl= .
-
[MOC] UCS Nebulon B - Medical Frigate 'Redemption'
phaelon replied to mortesv's topic in LEGO Star Wars
Several of us have bricklinked this. As usual, if you go with used, your cost will be low; new is high. Mine was around $1200 with 95% new parts (you can't get everything new as some parts of no longer produced). I seem to recall others on here getting closer to $800 because they went almost all used.