Fuppylodders

Absolutely in love with this! Really love the brickwork, the tall tower, the stairs.. the.... ahhhh! Everything! Really good job

Looks really good, especially loving the landing bay areas! Isn't there supposed to be aerials and masts on the back just in front of the engines vertically? http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Lucrehulk-class_Droid_Control_Ship But then, I'm seeing some with them, and some without

LMAO Mr Man Hence why I used the colour blue and black. As I stated, blue *in appearance* (further indepth reasoning in the pm I sent back to you ;)... which is why I explicitly stated in appearance, as that is the 'get out clause' of that situation *edited out some contextually incorrect information, but the same point still stands* Yet each word still retains its underlying definition to summarily conclude, as you rightly mentioned in greater definition to the whole. I am not divorcing it form its marketing context, merely taking it through a 'marital guidance councillor' to take it back to basics to understand its fundamental meaning What the hell are you doing to me, I don't normally type this in depth lol I was using them as reasonable examples to find the (in my opinion) intended definition. I do feel that I used them situationally correct and in context, for the circumstance I was trying to explain. *edit: Perhaps I didn't explain/use my examples in a precise way that could easily be related to the situation I was trying to present* A 10 year history does only on precedence imply, not by statement nor is it in the name. The marketing? As something that is by all expectations greater in everything (detail/size[usually] etc). But as exclusive? If you could point me out to where it says/is clearly indicatively marketed they are exclusive in the vehicles used in the UCS line, I shall happily roll over on this one and change my opinion of that case Im not playing with definitions to give an argument for saying that TLG *should* make re-designs etc, I am simply stating that the definition of the name leaves it open ended should they wish to visit that, and not as decisively closed as some are stating. (But I do agree I think it would be less beneficial all round, and preferable to keep knocking out new ones!) You really are wearing my brain out, it's not had this much use for ages!

I can't help but think the engine nacelles are perhaps a bit too narrow? I do wonder what it would like with the 2x2 cylindrical brick and such pieces to accompany it? Have you tried it at all? The rest of it is rather tidy and very recognisable. I'd say you did a decent job of this! *edit* just had a mess around, its not quite the same as yours, but close enough you get the feel of what im trying to show you :) I'm thinking along these lines for the engines *edit* just realised your blue light is too far forward, it comes out of the rear of the engines ;)

9471 looks like a brilliant army builder/castle extension battle pack in addition to the 9474. I had no intention... but if my money/job situation changes I may be tempted by a few of these

I was worried about getting into a discussion/debate with you as I've seen what you are like when you 'explode' with information @George Orwell, this more shows the close/direct connections of each word's opposite, rather than the words definitions meaning the opposites of the word itself. 1) Something that comes at or forms the end: 2) a. The method or process of solving a problem. b. The answer to or disposition of a problem. 3)Method that forms the end process of the 'Jewish' problem. (The term was an application to a perceived problem, not an actual problem.) Would I be correct in saying I just disproved your theory? (If not, can you explain, perhaps in a pm to me, so we don't totally derail this topic ) From my own (although still vastly limited) knowledge, when a word is used, there is always a varying strength of meaning/definition no matter how far underlying it could be, it will always have some resemblance to one of the meanings...

You can't disregard the definitions of words and then state that they have an explicit meaning of something else. We talk because words have a meaning. Particular words are used at particular times because of their various/particular meanings. These meanings are behind our very use of the words. You can not suddenly ignore the actual definitions to make up your own meaning and call it an 'explicit' meaning. You are totally contradicting the use of any form of communication of language by doing so. Thats like me saying 'The sky of a sunny day is black' when it is blue in appearance by definition. By your logic, definitions of words are irrelevant entirely. In which case, I'll read into it making up my own definitions of your own used words and come to the conclusion you are agreeing with me ^_^ *edit* added: I would like to add though, throughout this thread/discussion, my opinion has been altered, initially from 'I would like to see redesigns' to, Im not against them, however I would much prefer they keep releasing new ones, as they are limited in the amount of different UCS sets they release which means it would be longer to release a new one if they revisited an old one. So, I'm not being stubborn, I am just stating my perception of peoples misunderstanding/mislead expectations of the 3 letters 'UCS'.

Rancor is very impressive, can't wait to see the finished moc!

I have to say, this is by far the best one From your series so far, it is utterly incredibly detailed for a scenario without themed pieces!

Ooooooo awesome! The pics of the packages is to be honest, the most exciting ones! Turning up to where ever to find a huge bundle of packages for you is like Christmas or your birthday all over again, I think this is why it is so fun bricklinking =D I will also be following your building of this as well as the other thread, because its keeping my appetite for one of these baby's down for now :P I prefer to move my parts ordered to a second list of similar name but like ****#2, rather than delete the parts off the list. So If I need to revisit that part and need more of the same I can just order straight form that second wanted list. Thanks for the tips on how to save money, I'll be using them! I know the feeling of your own'someone elses 'muck' on your own parts :P I first felt like this, but as I started bricklinking more, I gradually grew to hate the increased cost, and grew to not caring about second hand pieces because I wash all pieces I receive now that havn't been pre-cleaned =D Its all just personal preference =D

@1) Lots of people assuming doesn't necessarily mean TLG have to suddenly stick to something because it is assumed to be so. Assuming is often incorrect (as much as it also can be correct) 2) Yup, I do agree with this point totally. 3) I see where you mean alienated because of the line stagnating to look back, although, it perhaps means they can get a more modern updated (perhaps better) version, or have the choice of not getting it and saving money for other SW sets. So I personally can see it alienating to a point, but also bringing people together/giving huge LSW collectors a break. 4) Best thing about lego, it can easily be modified! Totally agreed! I wrote to TLG asking for a 'clear' version of their understanding of what UCS means to them. Here are their 2 responses: 1)Regarding your request about the term 'Ultimate Collectors Series', unfortunately I must admit that I am not sure about it, so I have forwarded it to our LEGO product specialist. Once he gets back to me, I will provide you with his solution. 2)Here is an answer that might help you from our product specialist. The Ultimate Collector's Series or "UCS" is a subtheme of large sets. They are predominantly under the Star Wars bracket, but there is also one Batman set in the theme. The "UCS" sets are meant to be more detailed and aimed at older builders. These sets do not generally include Minifigures, but there are some cases (such as 10195 Republic Dropship with AT-OT Walker) where the set is completely compatible. Ultimate Collector's Series sets tend to be larger, more detailed, and more expensive than typical sets. Of course, it may well be possible I might have got a different answer if a different member of the same team replied instead of the person/s that did reply to me, but this particular response gives an insight into their reasoning/intentions behind the UCS sets. I did also ask specifically about whether they are meant to be exclusive sets, although nothing was stated about this in their response, so it is left open ended, and I can only assume people can draw their own conclusions whatever they may be, from this

The thing is, if we look at the definition of the word 'ultimate': 1. conclusive in a series or process; last; final 2. the highest or most significant 3. elemental, fundamental, basic, or essential 4. most extreme 5. final or total The X-Wing has been used as an example only and is not solely applicable to these, however gives the best example. 1) conclusive in which series? The series of UCS Vehicles? In which case, a series of 'ultimate' vehicles contradicts itself by definition. Conclusive in the line of type of vehicle made, ie X wing 4502, 7140, 7191 (ucs), 9493? Clearly not, because there is another released after the UCS. 2) Most significant? Seems to fit because it is the biggest and/or most detailed, which implies it doesn't necessarily have to be exclusive. 3)fundamental/primarily... Doesn't really fit as it isn't basic, or the first. 4) Most extreme... Well, it is the biggest and most detailed version, seems to fit. 5)Final, well, it wasn't the final X-wing made because they recently released 9493, after the UCS version. Applying the definitions to the circumstances already given to us by TLG, I conclude (although others may disagree, and if you do, please do correct me ) there is no implicit promise of, and that the definition falls under points 2 and 4, which rule out exclusivity, but direct towards the biggest version with the most significant detail. I do however, entirely agree with your second statement brickadeer. Personally, I think I would prefer they keep kicking out new ones than redesigns due to the small amount of UCS sets released compared to the variation of system sets.

Im not quite sure I understand how it almost forces them? No one forces them or almost forces them to do anything. If anything, if they get it, then it brings them together because they have apparently 'been forced' to buy something that others did not originally have giving them something in common with those that have only the re-design version. They collect whatever Lego sets they want. If someone wishes to include sets of the multiple variations in their LSW collection then they have already accepted and have no reason to complain about a re-design just because of the first three letters. If they don't like it, then they don't have to buy it. It is entirely their prerogative to buy or not to buy one and to blame someone else for 'making/forcing them to buy it 'just because it is released' is entirely a weak/worthless excuse, in my opinion.

You have probably lost some poor child the last 4 battlepacks that he had to go home for to get his pocket money so he could get them!

That is a very good and valid point... It would depend on the intended interpretation of the word ultimate by TLG!

I have not branched off topic(perhaps the cones was branching off, but only to give a minimal example, but it appears in your arrogance, took it literal, not as the generic example it was clear I was giving.), more corrected your incorrect understanding of a word which is entirely relevant to this thread as it dictates your reply to it. Regardless of ultimate, like I said, that is because it is THE 'must have'. NOT THE 'rarest/limited'. Go look up the word collector in the dictionary, that should give you some clue ( http://www.thefreedictionary.com/collection ), but then you already know, you are just choosing to ignore it because it suits you. I agree, they are both collectors items. no, I have not fallen for a 'limited edition misconception'. ( http://www.thefreedictionary.com/limited+edition ) But again, you are choosing to ignore this because it suits you. OFC they are made in a smaller supply, because of their focused market and high price, but they are always available just as much as any other system set while it is still in production for their (average) 2 year production life. Uhm, Id like to point out that may be YOUR view, but you do NOT know nor speak for everyone. Sure some may agree, but some will not. I wasn't talking about the selfish people, I was talking about the collectors that buy sets for the love of Lego, not elitism or profiteering. 'They buy them because they are detailed and' That is fact, the rest of your sentence is opinion and situational. I bought my 10212 because I love it as a model and the high detail/near minifig size. Not because it will increase in resale value nor because few others will have it. I have no problem whether they do or don't. I've accepted and am happy I won't have some/most UCS sets. So as for those people who jump on the 'I don't get why you feel obliged to have a re-issued/designed one' bandwagon, drop it. That is not my concern. But it would be my own fault if I were to invest in one purely for profitable purposes or if I decided to pay a huge marked up priced one. Just look at the re-release of the Shadow ARF trooper in promotion. Hadn't been done before, but now it has. That's the risk. YOUR risk, which puts YOU 100% accountable if it works out, or if it doesn't. Example: Prices of houses. But I'm sorry, I'm going way off topic and that example has nothing to do with this so you would point out, even though it is relevant to pointing out the truth in what my 'on topic sentence' says. Lego isn't sold by TLG for aftermarkets, nor do they care for it, that is a by-product. AND a gamble. If those people want to make money, they take the risk with it. If it pays off, they get their profit. If it doesn't, no one has wronged them, their gamble just didn't pay off. THAT IS THEIR CHOICE and they must live with it regardless. Why is that so hard to see? They are not unique, they will NEVER... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unique . They are minimally produced/purchased compared to system sets, thus less available *after production*. And no, I have not just contradicted myself, I stated *after* production. I have neither too, but I am also happy to not have them.

I hate to say it but you have fallen for a common, and dare I say it, arrogant misconception. Collector does not mean rare/limited. Collector means something that is collected. I can be a collector of traffic cones. Does that make them rare and valuable? No. **Limited(/Edition)** on the other hand would be the more suitable word for your opinion. Yet there was only a certain amount of 'Limited Edition' 10179s which were the first of the MF's produced. They produced more MF's however with no production number, thus losing its limited edition status for every set produced thereafter, while those people that bought one of the LE production numbered ones had acquired the *true* limited edition sets. Re-issues/re-design would in no way alienate collectors, it would bring them together as those that do not have the set currently, could then afford one that would 'suffice' for the fact they missed out the first time. Those people that *do* have the previous version then have the option of gaining a more 'modernised' version of their version, or... sticking with just the one they had initially due to being more than happy to settle for their first bought version. You are right, it IS Ultimate Collectors Series for a reason, however, because it gives people the opportunity to have a lego set that is high in detail and designed primarily for AFOLs. NOT so people can partially feel a 1-upmanship on being right place/right time/having the money for it. Reissues would only negate a limited edition set. But they would not re-issue a Limited Edition Production numbered item, because that can not be re-produced. As for re-designing, I don't see any problem with it, as they have redesigned many sets, although since the first UCS was released, I dont believe they have re-designed any (that I know of, I could be wrong) and it has been far more years than I could expect a 'redesign' of some UCS sets. Probably due to the fact so few of them are released per year, and they would probably see it more profitable to carry on trickling out the brand new UCS sets than revisit older designs which would then face the problem of the fact lots of people already have the set so those people already are generally satisfied and make the targeted focus market smaller. Let alone the already high demand of circumstances to be in the position to purchase one of these.

Why does the US get a shadow ARF trooper and the UK gets a crappy lil tie fighter thing =/

I have a conclusion which surpasses yours and I don't think can be ruled out. Ever seen Flight of the Navigator? Yeah, that! Now who has the better conclusion

I finally managed to get down to my local Asda yesterday while they had the planets/droid escape on sale, but all were gone. Went there today, the droid escape was there, but they were normal price again... Is that it for the really cheap planet/droid escape sets at asda?

Where is a good place to get Arealight from? Im looking to get some of the 501st heads (the commander appo ones), but AL is out of them, and the only place I can see them is £5.99 each. Is that a normal price for them?

Aeroeza is off again, quick, more updates!

Brilliant! looks very in scale with itself! great job =D

Wow, A huge goodbye and good luck are in order! I am obliged to thank you for doing one of those 'mostly behind the scenes' jobs for this forum that has helped me be able to explore SW Lego with like minded people. All the best! ps... Whats the new job doing at Lego? xD

I don't understand how removing hands from arms is illegal. I am more likely to damage a large plate while trying to pry a 1x2 plate off.... yet that is perfectly legal. The arms(or hands) can't really be damaged as they are not solidly secured in by a mushroom effect piece like the arms to the torso or legs... Removing the hands from arms is no different than removing the head from the torso. *edited spelling mistakes*