Fuppylodders

lol! That brought a smile to my face

Bricklink.com is your friend :)

My mum randomly bought me the republic frigate which I received on Saturday.... no idea why, she doesn't normally do that So I might drop hints how the Death Star will most likely be on sale too

Corrected your sentence for you It looks really nice how you have managed to do the printing with tiles/bricks instead! Good job =D

Mutley, what are your intentions for all those 22 clone commanders? :o (I'm not going to ask for freebies or to buy them btw :P I genuinely am interested because thats a lot of commanders that will need a heck of a lot of troops under them )

It appears more chibi, but I'm probably nitpicking

Obi: Sorry Mace, I have a question! Mace: Yes? what is it Obi-wan?! Obi: When is Yoda coming?!!?! I think that would be what he is trying to convey. A cute and simple little vignette

Don't know why, but I laughed so hard when I suddenly saw that come up in your text I haven't seen TCW series yet, only a handful of episodes on sky... Personally, I like the minifigs, I'll only start to hate them when they become more like that humungous 'Hulk' which is all preformed and looks like it belongs in the duplo sets. Regardless of where the minifigs are based to come from, it is nice to see so much versatility of minifig heads to allow us a much wider variety to choose from when it comes to customising our own creations. They have given us such a vast collection of heads and different expressions etc to choose from. What is wrong with that? If you don't like them, it is simple to buy a load of yellow headed smilies off bricklink to replace them when need be and sell TCW heads you don't like. There is no need to miss such great sets just because of a few minifig heads that are easily interchangeable.

"This is a serious question. I think that this speeder is scaled too big in comparison with minifigs, but they doesn´t look bad together:" What is the question exactly? Do the minifigs look ok in your snowspeeder? If that is the question, then I'd say yes they most certainly do! You captured the style of the UCS Snowspeeder so well. The cockpit is nice and tidy, perhaps the cockpit canopy is a little too wide, but then perhaps a 4 stud wide cockpit would then be too narrow for the size you have attempted. I personally think it looks just fine as it is. (I'm arguing with myself now ) The wings are a great job! Tidy, with the right amount of detail =D Maybe a little bit more greeble on the gun on the middle section of it? Brilliant use of those collector minifig base plates! Overall it is really well done!

Very good photoshop skills too then because I can't see at all where it could be photoshopped out, other than the fig is above the 1x2 technic brick of which he is perched upon in his later added pic!

Very much this. People want an army out of general rank and file troops, not loads of commanders. Now they made this BP with specialised ARF trooper and the ARC commander (I think I have that right?) what are people going to use to make their rank and file troops from? They would have to release a 'rank and file' troop style battlepack of the same races. If they did, then the Commander BPs (imo) will vastly drop in sales because in armies, there are more rank/file troops than there are commanders... Release a BP with 2 rank and file troops, 1 commander and 1 ARF trooper, you are getting something more suitable to army building with room for customising those extra commanders quite easily...

Definitely worth a pickup if it is on sale, I received this set as a present and am glad I got it, it really is a decent set! Brilliant review, nice clear pics and in-depth too. Levitating astromech pic made me laugh

Oh wow! I absolutely love this! You conveyed the scene very well, and sooo tiny too! Each vehicle is represented very well too. Love the way you have used the SNOT 1x1 brick to represent the boarding walkway for the At-ATs! I'd love to see a Cloud City next, which would include the landing platform and a uber mini Millennium Falcon!

Cavegod isn't involved, I must apologise for bringing him into it if my mention of his name in a previous post, has brought him into this. I also apologise for offending you Anio. It was not my intention to, but I clearly have.

I was also wondering this, but the effect you did to make him look like he is jumping is really good too, it most definitely makes him look like he is jumping high and fast!

Anio, drop the name calling, I'm not here to throw school child insults around. Those 6 stud high wedges don't stop you adding more plate width in between them. Those 6 stud high wedges are fine, they are a good basis to work from. I am saying they themselves do not stop you adding more than just 3 studs width of plates in between, a 4th or 5th stud could be implemented.

**edited out** @Marshal_Banana I'm not hating it, I'm only pointing out things I feel could be improved. I don't know when pointing out more than 1 improvement became such a crime

I responded in red inside the quoted text from you. At the end of the day, this is your MOC. But this is my constructive criticism for which are things I feel are incorrect/could easily be represented/changed or whatever, which it appears you do not like to hear any of... And my opinion won't change because no matter how much I twist my head left and right while blinking and waving my hands in front of my eyes, I can still see a lot of things that could do with addressing. *edit* @Darth Dino I'm not going to lie and not criticise, but instead post 'awesome job dude!' just to boost ego for the wrong reasons or because I don't want to hurt his feelings or because it is his baby. I genuinely feel there are things wrong with this that are major design flaws, not simple minuscule things. When making a simple moc, that's fine. But when classing it as UCS, you now set yourself a much higher barrier of detail to achieve. I am not being rude by constructively critising. If I post a moc, I will take all the criticism I can to not only better myself, but better the model itself. The criticism isn't thrown about for the sake of it, people usually criticise for reasons.

Have to say, nice work on the minifig, it doesn't look like it's been amaturely coloured, but expertly weathered and 'beaten'! Really great job on him! As for the moc, It looks quite nice, I am assuming it is some broken platform/bulkhead thing? Going on that assumption it looks pretty neat! I think it needs more background or something, to help explain what is going on, or explain the scenery a bit more...? (perhaps this is just my complete ignorance of TFU)

I have to say, I am unfamiliar with TFU2 so can't really understand this scene too much other than they use their forces more which explains the jumping Jedi. The fig on the right looks pretty decent, a close up of him would be appreciated =D

I have to say I'm very lucky to own the 7675 AT-TE, 7676 RGS and the (TY GF ) 10195 Dropship . It is a toss up between these 3, of which all are so brilliant I find it difficult to choose from, but would have to say the Dropship because it can carry various brilliant vehicles adding their own awesomeness to its own awesomeness Grievous star fighter comes in closely behind them because the latest version is such an improvement in every way, especially the minifig, I'd say it has hit its best.

11 I only have 2 of them, and I don't even collect the droids, it is just too good an offer to pass up! Mutley, your army rabble of Geonosians is looking very vast and intimidating already! The clear brick mountings also make them look presented very well! I can at least live my dreams of having any hugely sized race's army through seeing Mutley's brilliant armies. Although you are saving me a heck of a lot of money I don't have

Firstly, I'd like to congratulate you on such a nice build. It overall looks aesthetically pleasing. I am impressed the hip joint is articulated as well, kudos on that! *edit/forgot* Secondly, that snowspeeder is brilliantly small, it is done really well especially for its size, which I think is a good accurate representation! But please do not take this the wrong way, I feel your thoughts to the AT-AT being as detail accurate as possible for its 'size' being correct, is in fact, incorrect. I feel largely inclined to side on Aeroeza's opinions about your AT-AT. While perfect for a higher detailed system scaled set, does not meet what I would believe to be UCS detail. Firstly, blatantly jumping out at me is the side armour plates. In the central body armour plate, I see you used the 6x4 tiled pieces with a few studs around the edge to represent the loading bay doors. If these are used to represent the loading bay doors and the hatches, why do you have 2 of them in the upper center armour panel, where there is only supposed to be one escape hatch? You then have the 'ladder steps' just to the right of them. They simply do not go as far up as you have made them to. They only go up to the top of the loading bay doors, or, just below half the body height. For something that is so detailed compared to other 'UCS' AT-ATs, I feel that is a hugely visible mistake to make on something which is supposed to be focused on detail and getting detail correct. The atmosphere intake slope (and the one on opposite side) isn't really matched in scale to the rest of it. They are too small. There are random bits of 1x2 tile with grill and lever on the rear side armour plate which don't accurately represent any particular detail but are just added for 'random feel' of detail. The head I feel is far off being close in detail to an AT-AT head. It just has 2 sides, a top, a front, and an underneath to it. There isn't really anything that shouts it is detailed to be an AT-AT head, other than having the same guns on it, and the viewing port. The front of the head is just far too thin/narrow. It needs to be wider. The detail on the head is far too minimal and not closely related. The hump on the top is just 1 tile tall. The hump on an actual AT-AT is more prominent than any other detail on it, but on yours, it just feels as though it is more of the 'random detailing' because it is the same thickness as the rest of your random detailing(1 plate/tile width tall), it is not actually prominent at all. I feel as though any form of detailing for the underside of the head has been totally ignored. The chin gun mountings are huge circular mounts/laser battery cells. I see none of that (in any circular form). The side guns have greebling which look nice, but just don't look detailed close enough to the real thing. They are only a little bit too long, as they do come out further than the head as they should, but using the 2x cone brick pieces make the tips look far too big than they should be. It should remain close to the size of bar they are pushed onto. So perhaps a 1 1/2 tecnic pin would be better suited. The same goes for the targeting rangefinder on top of the side guns. They also have a cone brick on them which makes it far bigger than it should be on the head. On the top rear panel on the 'real' AT-AT there is an awful lot of greebling on roughly 1/4 of it ( http://www.modelermagic.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/kg_at-at_-041.jpg ). This has not even been attempted This part has a lot of potential and especially at your scale/previous proven ability. ''I did the whole interior in the body. I tried to be as accurate as possible. I did some redesign, though.'' That is a complete redesign. You either are being as accurate as possible, or you are not. You can't be accurately different! I feel as overall, (not including the legs, they are fine) you are just meeting the standard basic shape, and not putting effort into making this as detailed as you claim it to be. I do not feel it is anywhere near good enough in detail to be called UCS I quote what Cavegod said, "I'd suggest you start again from the legs up". The neck pieces are looking good so keep them I feel that due to your thinking of 'big isn't better', it has severely hindered an authentically felt 'highly detailed UCS'. In this case, small isn't better either. Making it to be your 'small' while meeting an optimized piece count has actually compromised its priority of detailing for accuracy, as well as the lack of detail effort in the first place. I'm sorry if this sounds too harsh or blunt, is just meant as constructive critisism, without sugar coating it.

7929 on Amazon, going for about £15 atm, which is pretty good for the lego you get with it as well as the 10 droids you get with it. *edit* Forgot to say, if you are a JarJar hater, then for each set you get, you get to maim his lego body as much as you like

Hans face in the second to last pic is spot on! That last pic of leia is such brilliant imagination =D The whole thing just screams Star Wars, and to achieve that with no themed pieces is brilliant!