BrickCommander

This set comes from a time when stability wasn't the top priority it is today. I have one built Death Star II at home for years now and it still amazes me. It survived a move (partly disassembled) half around the world and several young, playful kitten enthusiastically brushing against it on a daily base when growing up. All it took was attaching the underside of the base to the board with sticky stuff. The flexibility of the stand allowed the model to stay in one piece. The superlaser disk has sagged a bit inward, but not so badly that I felt like attempting a repair. Of course, the cats have stolen all the superlaser beams anyway long ago ;)

Looking at photos of various LEGO Millennium Falcons taken under sunlight or studio light conditions makes me think the light gray color works really well. Especially on the UCS Falcon. There is probably a reason why LEGO Falcons have never been white, not even in polybags or advent calendars. Or in mini and midi-size, for that matter. I guess there is just no way to please every single consumer. Luckily our competitors have offers for more, erm, otherworldly tastes. Look, is that a white (radar) dish!? ;)

I am working with the regular LDD version too, since LDD Pro (our internal LDD) is still in development. It helps to get an infusion of brand new elements every now and then though ... :) Staying true to the Falcon's character was more important than trying (futilely) to match the color scheme. The mix of light and dark gray (plus a bit of dark tan) accurately reflects the ship's age and battered condition, even though it is not even close to how the ship appears on screen. But that look also depends on lighting, anyway. LEGO white is a very bright, clean white. In terms of RGB values it may be closer to the "true" color of the Falcon, but a stark white Falcon would look like coming fresh from the factory. Possibly the worst choice. Sometimes I wish our "very light gray" (appeared in Mosaic and Mindstorms) had made it into the standard LEGO color palette. It would be an awesome color for Star Wars!

Phew ... boy you had me worried for a second .... ;)

Erm ... no, there are no interesting stories about the transport, sorry :p Is there anything you would like to know about, say, the Millennium Falcon? I almost always start building in LEGO Digital Designer and go through several iterations before finally building a copy with physical bricks. Depending on the size of the set, this saves me many days or even weeks in development time. From that point on, I always keep the LDD version updated in order to quickly try out new ideas or calculate a price. Currently I am working on all the new material we get from Lucasfilm.

Very well, since all the sets have been released by now, why not! No more secrets! Well, maybe one or two ;) Anyway, early concept images are not per se more difficult to work with, as long as they are conclusive and detailed enough. There's just the inconvenient risk that the final version showing up in the movie was still changed after our development deadlines are past and it was too late for us to alter our design. You all saw the concept images of Kylo's shuttle with straight wings. Basically those were the same images we had to work with, plus some untextured 3D renderings. But in the teaser the ship had apparently grown itself some V-wings - damn! So what happened here? The truth is: we really don't know. My personal theory? Based on his sense of aesthetics demonstrated in two Star Trek movies, this was a last-minute change director J.J. Abrams requested. While the straight wings look really imposing on pictures, they are probably a bit static and much less impressive when the shuttle is in motion. Keep in mind, this is just what I believe happened. But at that point (when the teaser was released) it was water under the bridge anyway. We were all working on other new sets, so there wasn't even a point in asking for new reference pictures. The color of the set - dark gray - was a design decision to differentiate the shuttle from other mostly light gray sets. At one point this became a problem when the new X-Wing set also changed color to dark gray/orange ... before finally nicely settling on black/orange. With my own set - the new old Millennium Falcon - I had similar issues. I even started out without any new reference images. Later I got pictures of the movie set under construction and shots of the messy interior, and finally images of the new "dish" - which wasn't actually a dish anymore. Exciting! Something new to build! But this is a different story .... :)

Well spotted! :) Only the panels at the back are supposed to have a bit more height. This error has, in fact, been noticed, but the building instructions were delivered too late for final check to have errors fixed. I'm still kicking myself about the OTHER error though, but so far NO ONE seems to have spotted it or seems bothered, so maybe I'm a little too harsh with myself here. And no, I'm not going to tell what the error is! :p On the subject of "missing" bags: I can't help but think that if boxes were glued shut again (as they once were) instead of just "sealed" (taped) the number of such cases would drop significantly. That's just my theory though. Checking boxes for tampering you plan on buying from brick&mortar stores can never hurt.

Ok, if this is your interpretation :) I was merely asking for a little more confidence in your favorite LEGO theme's designers - something that often seems to be in low supply on these forums. While I cannot comment on rumors or leaked material in general, I'll be more than happy to share my knowledge on Episode VII model design AFTER the official release. So, no promises for now! For all I said or didn't say, you may still have to stuff the big walking carpet into the cockpit sideways ... ;)

Oh ye of little faith ...

Wow, good work. I didn't see this one coming ... ;) I would try to get rid of some of the studs though to achieve a sleeker, less plate-y look. Nothing to be done about the studs on all the wing plates, of course, but otherwise there's some potential in the middle of the front. And I think you got the color of the engine glow wrong, but no worries ... it happens to be the best of us ;)

You are quite welcome! Doesn't mean you were wrong about crazy or sarcastic though ... ;)

The who with the what now ..? This is quite a letdown after THAT headline ... Edit: But since you were asking for ideas/suggestions, which is a somewhat legitimate request, I would suggest that you a) finish your current project first, b) show what you have done so far, so we can link something to your name, aaaand c) don't post about your plans on building something someday. Really, what's the point?

When comparing with publicly available reference, this design of the Ep.7 X-wing doesn't seem to be very accurate, particularly the bow pieces between nose and cockpit stand out. And the wings are most definitely wrong. Are we looking at a regular X-wing redressed as EP.7 version? I'm afraid it takes a little more work than this, but I guess Baronsat had to work fast because of a close publishing deadline?

Hi LEGO fans! Time flies - five months ago 75060 came out, and our fellow UCS builder and LEGO Ambassador Anio thought it would be a good time for a follow-up on the interview in the building manual, so he compiled a list of questions which I am happy to answer. Here we go! Q: Many LEGO designers render models in physical bricks right from the start, but you use LEGO Digital Designer ("LDD") instead. Why? How important is LDD for set development in general nowadays? Hans: Every designer has his/her own way of working, but later in the development process we all have to "go digital" anyway. I prefer to do so right from the start because it offers many advantages. Building is a lot quicker, changes can be applied (and, if neccessary, reversed) much faster. I don't have to build a fleet of slightly different physical copies, and I am always in control of my budget and which types of elements I use. Slave One looked pretty much the same as the final product after one or two weeks already. I also enjoy working with LDD, although I miss some functionality our internal LEGO developing tools have (like grouping of elements, or moving elements in a controlled fashion). Q: The skirt of the LEGO Ultimate Collector Series ("UCS") Slave One is dark red and the glow of the engines light blue, but in the movie they appear to be brown and yellow/orange, respectively. Is there a reason for these choices? Parts availability, maybe? Hans: The engines are indeed orange - when they are on! ;) Being serious, I remember I was told to change the color of the engines to light blue earlier in the the development process, and Lucasfilm approved the blue engines. Maybe it’s a mistake, or maybe the glow was indeed blue in the 1980 version of The Empire Strikes Back? Who knows? As for the rest - I used reference material from Lucasfilm and a color guide from a high-quality model kit, so I'm pretty confident that the other details are accurate. Models in movies are subject to lighting which can do funny things to how their color scheme looks. It is a good idea not to rely on "screen-evidence" only. Parts availabilty is not a big issue – we can make existing elements in new colors if we feel it is warranted. Within reasons, of course. Q: How did you develop the skirt of the Slave One? Wouldn't new elements like a wedge 4x3 sloped 45, which by the way I would love to see as an element, open a lot of new possibilities? Hans: New elements other than the new cockpit windscreen were not an option because work on 75060 started late, so I had to deal with the situation accordingly by using existing elements only. Which was fine by me - building with existing elements as far as possible is part of my LEGO design style. In this case though I knew the rear of the ship's skirt/base would cause me a lot of trouble, and I wasn't disappointed! I sketched the shape of the ship in LDD, then made a physical copy to see how much weight I was dealing with and how to make the model stable enough to be lifted. Then I went back into LDD and shifted elements around until things really started to come together. The element you sketched looks really useful and would have made my job a bit easier. But finding solutions without having the 100% perfect shape to build with is part of a creative design process. Q: In many LEGO models we find parts in colours that seem odd and out of place. I like this a lot because : a) having a lot of color makes the building process more pleasant and it's easier to find parts a) it is fun to have odd colors everywhere and see them disappear when the model is complete b) in Technic (a theme I like a lot), it highlights the workings of a function On the 75060 Slave One we can find parts in odd colors like 2x6 green bricks and yellow Technic T-beams. Who decides which part in which colour is appropriate for a model? Hans: As a model designer I am not only in charge of building a pretty model, I also shape the consumer's building experience by keeping the build interesting and reducing room for error. Building mistakes can happen for a variety of reasons, and it is part of my job to anticipate what could possibly go wrong and find ways to prevent it from happening. This means you won’t even be aware of a huge part of my work! Inserting off-color elements is a great way of surprising a builder and keep him/her focused, it is fun, and if possible I look for elements in rare or new colors to use for this purpose (if they are not too expensive, that is). Should I fail in this duty, my colleagues from the building instructions department will not be happy and make me change colors of elements during our final model quality meeting anyway. Also, different colors are a good way of making elements easier to find, but with numbered bags this is much less an issue than in the old days when building a Star Wars set meant sitting in front of an ocean of grey elements! Q: Do other factors play a role, for example which parts are in stock? Hans: At LEGO we have an "active" element pallette that gets updated regularly: new elements come in, other elements will go out. For designers there usually are no restrictions on the use of active elements. We are talking about a basically unlimited supply of elements here, which is probably a dream come true for any LEGO fan ;) An exception could be if I were to use a big amount of the same element. In that case the factory needs to know about this so they can check if they are going to have to make a new mould. Q: Development of the 75060 Slave One started during summer, and the set was released on January 1st. Did the development take just 6 months (which would be quite amazing!), or was it more like 1 1/2 years, which sounds more plausible? Development of a set always takes about a year, in case of 75060 a little less because of the late start. Keep in mind that release dates of UCS sets are more flexible than launch dates of a whole wave of new product. Q: Do you prefer working on UCS or retail models? Hans: For me the process is pretty much the same, only the UCS is a much bigger set than your normal retail set. And there are not more than 2 per year within one IP such as Star Wars, which makes them certainly special! One gets much more recognition for a UCS set, with the designer video, your portrait and an interview in the building manual. Which is very nice especially for a new designer. With playtheme models, after half a year even your own colleagues hardly remember which sets you have done ... Q: The Slave One is tricky to reproduce in LEGO because of its shapes. Many Star Wars ships that seem easier to make as UCS only exist as playset. Who decides what ship will be made in UCS? Hans: This is a very complex and arcane process between the LEGO Direct team, Marketing, and our Creative Director. It is like electing a new pope! Of course there are some favorites that are literally no-brainers. The X-Wing comes to mind. Other sets take more of a leap of faith to make. Nobody wants to develope sets that are unpopular. UCS Slave One certainly was a risk. Sure, Boba Fett is a surprisingly popular character, but his ship has very little screen time and features a rather odd shape. But in this case taking a risk paid off nicely: 75060 turned out to be an extremely successful LEGO Star Wars set! It seems consumers appreciate the occasional oddball set if it comes at an attractive price point and is reasonably well made *cough*! Q: Besides 75060, which other sets have you designed? Hans: I worked on all 3 years of "Legends of Chima" and joined the Star Wars team almost a year ago, which means that my first Star Wars retail set will release soon. I'm now working on my 6th new Star Wars set nobody outside LEGO has seen yet ;) But here are some of my Chima sets: 2013: 70005 Laval's Royal Fighter ($39.99), 70012 Razar's Chi Raider ($39.99), 70104, 70109, 70110, 70111, 70112 (Speedorz sets $14.99), Chima Brickmaster book (with Sam Johnson) 2014: 70124 Eagle Legend Beast ($9.99), 70132 Scorm's Scorpion Stinger ($39.99), 70143 Sir Fangar's Sabertooth walker ($39.99) 2015: 70220 Strainor's Saber Cycle ($14.99), 70228 Vultrix's Sky Scavenger, 70227 King Crominus' Rescue ($79.99), 3 Chima Magazin models Q: During the interview in the instruction book of 75060 you also mentioned that you received help from Anders Gaasedal. Since other designers mention him as well he seems to be some kind of guru. What role exactly does he have? Are there more persons like him at LEGO? Hans: Anders is a technical coach, working with designers throughout the development process and the model review sessions, focusing on the technical aspects of a model like stability and functions. We designers sometimes get tunnel-visioned, which happens when you are focused on something for a very long time. Anders helps us identify and fix flaws in the construction. He and his colleagues - yes, there are several more - also conduct tests that we designers can't do, like having a robot test a model's function thousands of times over the weekend. But we are always looking to hire more, as it is a very, very specialized job and difficult to find qualified people. If you have an engineering background and maybe even some LEGO knowledge it may be worth to apply ... Q: Finally: what Star Wars ships would you like to see as UCS in the future? Hans: As a sucker for capital space ships it keeps amazing me how very few LEGO has released over the years. But then again, the movies have surprisingly few that would make good LEGO sets. Calamari cruisers: boooring. Nebulon-B frigate: cool looking, but a structural nightmare, even worse as a play set. Others are just too obscure and people wouldn't even recognize these ships from the movies. I hope Disney will put many new capital ships in the new movies. Especially designs pulled from older computer games and such. For decades the Victory Star Destroyer was the recognized predecessor of the Imperial-class Star Destroyer, but sadly failed to show up in the REBELS tv-show so far. Otherwise the show is an absolute blast, and I have high hopes for future seasons. I would totally volunteer to make any new UCS Star Destroyer! :) That's it for now. Thanks for reading, and to Anio for being so inquisitive! I hope you had a good time, and maybe I will meet some of you on the LEGO Inside Tour next week! Hans

No, they won't.

This is much appreciated. But also a bit worrying since you seem to hardly enjoy any of them ..? Would it be more accurate then to categorize you a as super-NOT-fan of Chima? Ah. Hmmm, ok. Well, no need to state the obvious, good sir. *cough* (*talking with a soothing voice, avoiding any rapid movements while slowly walking backwards*) Your wise and insightful commentaries over the years certainly brought that point across, and always in an entertaining fashion, if I may add. Let's hope, everybody, that LEGO, as a company, at last will see reason and liste... (*turns and runs!*)

Indeed. Just another pointless post by PublicChimaHater#1. The Lion Chi Temple in particular was a very successful product that also won numerous awards including "Best construction toy" at London Toy Fair. Maybe your ongoing mistake is to compare LEGO sets to brick-heavy fan creations that would cost multiple times a set 's price tag?

Some fun facts: $200 is exactly the price point 75060 was developed for from the start. Currently the only known problem with this set is that it is selling faster than we can make more. The initial production run sold out in no time, and it wasn't a small number of sets either. It is still the best-performing LEGO Star Wars set since its launch in January. Now I am a little sad that you, Anio, are not satisfied with the final product. Of course you are more than welcome to post your own opinion. Even repeatedly and unrelatedly so if it makes you feel better. But you have to be aware that making wild (and wrong) assumptions and operating under misaligned expectations makes you come across as a disgruntled fan builder who knows better than the whole LEGO Star Wars team and everybody concerned at Lucas Licensing combined. Isn't this way below you, as a Star Wars builder of some reputation? Just let go of your anger :) Bonus fun fact: the way element bag packing works these days makes the number of different elements mostly irrelevant in set design, and only a secondary monetary consideration for packing. On the contrary, using too many elements of the same kind can cause problems in production. And at the end of the day still 1996 elements have to be packed for your 75060 building pleasure! :D

Amazing review/comparison! 15 years old or not, for me 7144 is still the best! That may be nostalgia speaking, though ;)

See? We DO care ... :) Replacement sticker sheets were sent out to consumer service earlier last week, they should have them by now. Just don't all call at once, ok?

The sliding doors on the shown model are not correctly assembled - they are missing a layer of plates (see page 22 of booklet 1). That's why they fall out of the frame. Spare light gray 1x4 plates usually aren't ... well, spares ;)

Doesn't look Star Wars-y to me. I'm confused. Did you post in the wrong forum?

Heh, you may be on to something here! What a devious move by LEGO to stick Sir Fangar into ... ummm ... "Sir Fangar's Saber-tooth walker". It's such an obvious ploy that I almost missed it. Well spotted!

Turning the cogwheel as shown in the building instructions, no matter how fast or slow, is the way to release the vehicle. The "lever", which isn't a lever at all but a stopper, doesn't lower the ramp far enough and gets the bike stuck pretty much every time. So yes, it does make a huge difference.

There is no lever - you're doing it wrong ...