Fallenangel

:laugh: I never did understand why LEGO reused the wing-opening mechanism from the 4502 X-wing for their ARC-170s; the T in the middle is obtrusive, the Technic ends up looking messy, and the wings take too long to open. If you ask me, click hinges or bars with clips would have worked so much better... Brickdoctor's is quite humorous as well. It reminds me of another picture I saw, where there were two clone heads with eyes pointing in opposite directions. They were looking at each other. Does anyone know what I'm talking about? I like the 'classic' clone you've used there. Might I ask what you've added to the tip of the rifle piece?

If I remember correctly, the royal guards actually do seem to be wearing darker armor under their cloaks, so dark red would be accurate. These 'TTfigs' are slightly bizarre, but very creative as well! Have you done any other droids other than the B1 (B-2, 2-1B, 3PO, etc.)?

There are a lot of things to be considered in that question, but I'll say yes, for the most part. There are a couple issues that are created by the wings being only six studs long as well as the larger engines. The size of the cargo bay area and the greebling behind the cockpit as defined by the placement of the astromech droid are also debatable. But for the most they aren't all that obvious seeing as only I, the pedantic X-wing nerd, see them. To be honest, I'm not 100% sure about the angle of the wings. What do you all think? Yes, I think that may be due to the fact that the two X-wing MOCs that influenced me the most were Bruce Lowell's and Brian Tobin's models, both of which I understand were made quite some time ago. (In particular, you can see many details taken almost directly from Bruce Lowell's model - seven-stud wide fuselage, three-stud wide nose, cockpit, etc.) Some of the more recent models (roguebantha's and marshal_banana's, for example) were also referenced, but their style of building is really different from older work so I think that may have caused me to shy from them a bit. (The fact that those two individuals didn't post many closeup shots of their MOCs is also a factor. ) And of course, I'm not a big fan of using SNOT wings for the X-wing; the studded plate look just feels better for me, something that's also reflected in the way the nose is constructed. I guess this is where I think more like an MOCer rather than a modeler. (So you see Anio and Brickdoctor, you and I are not so different in that aspect.)

First page updated with pictures of the finished work.

Indeed. All this discussion about tiny pictures, and preliminary images at that! Considering all the new molding LEGO has been doing lately (what with the collectible minifigures and all) a new droideka mold is almost expected, although I'm a bit worried that it might end up like the Grievous action figure minifigure in 8095. As long as it can roll up...

After several days, I've finally solved the enigma that is the rear fuselage. But it's not finished yet, so I'll hold off taking pictures until it's complete. Greebling is an issue at this point. Yes, all of the life-size models in the hangar did have landing gear. So I'm currently trying to put some decent landing skids on my X-wing. Yes, I think survival equipment would come in handy for a Dagobah vignette, which would be very nice indeed. The cargo hold area shown in my last batch of pictures is intended to be the final design, as altering it at this point would take too much time. Since you are tinkering with your set Churchill, here's one thing I would recommend: following the instructions, you build the back part of the X-wing first, right? Skip it and make your own from scratch. The way I see it, the rear of the official X-wing is completely wrong; the detailing is printed, the wings are wrong, the guns are wrong, the cargo hold is off, the S-foil system is messy and unnecessarily complicated, and the back just looks terrible. One of the things that many mods suffer from is the use of the provided S-foil system for their X-wings, which force them to include the Technic bricks in between the engines and the main fuselage as well as the T-shape in between the wings, neither of which look very nice in my opinion. (It proved one of the few things I didn't like about errbt's own mod of 4502.)

Yes, but they can't seem to tell the difference between accurate and inaccurate, or at least they wouldn't care one way or another whether Cody's visor was grey, orange, or hot pink. Also remember that 6212 is one of the ugliest sets we have and it sells pretty well (considering they've used the same design since 2004). Yes, but two of the three System renditions we've had were terrible and some of us aren't willing to pay so much for the third System rendition nor the UCS. Including a new AT-ST would really have made the set, especially since it would work well with the Ewok traps. (Knowing LEGO's affinity for flimsy designs, it shouldn't be too hard to make an AT-ST that would slip on rolling logs, right? ) The only aspect of Hoth that LEGO hasn't covered yet is the inside of the base. In other words, the control panel for the ion cannon, the hallways, the bacta tank... which would probably mean a whole lot of minifigures (General Rieekan!), but it IS Empire so I think that would justify the price. A decently done Echo Base in this fashion would make a very nice Exclusive indeed. We haven't had a droideka since 2007; I think it needs an update, or at least a re-release. I was hoping for one in the Battle of Naboo, but I was disappointed. Of course, there's also the possibility of a new mold... Seeing as the N-1 is the X-wing of the Prequels, I wouldn't be surprised if they do the same thing they did with 4502 and release the same ship with more minifigures.

:laugh: In any case, the MOC looks pretty accurate to the real thing, both in size and detail. As others have mentioned, the front seems a bit off, but it's not that bad.

Yep. I wish LEGO would remember that anyone who plays a Star Wars video game nowadays would know all the Original Trilogy and Prequel ships already (as well as some Expanded Universe ships, but I guess they've learned some kind of lesson from the TIE Crawler and TIE drone). The LEGO Group's ignorance of video games is beginning to annoy me.

Not that I'm complaining, but it always seems to be you two... I'm not too sure about that, but I would like to see how it turns out if you ever decide to make an X-wing. It certainly does appear so. It would have been nice if LEGO had molded a new canopy for 6212, but they didn't, and from what I've heard that set isn't due for a redesign anytime soon. *groan* None of the studio models used in the Death Star sequence had retractable landing gear, so I chose not to incorporate any. I do think I could modify the bottom engines to include legitimate landing skids, though they certainly won't be retractable. Yes, building the entire length allows for a smoother nose. Of course, I can't take all the credit, as I did see it on Brucey-wan's model first. I really don't understand why LEGO decided on those pieces that leave such awkward bulges. Nothing looks weirder on a model than a curve where it shouldn't be (people over at LEGO who have designed the last couple Delta-7Bs, are you guys listening?) And both the markings and SNOT have been added, which is a first. Oops! It appears that the rear fuselage should actually be narrower in that area. The plates will be gone.

Hello again everyone! Now that all the commotion over the new sets has gone down, here’s another work-in-progress pic: You’d think that such a small, one-man fighter wouldn’t take so long to build. That’s what I thought too. And then I actually tried building one of these things. Not wanting to destroy the plate mass I’d built inside the nose before Brickdoctor encouraged me to go ahead with a SNOT approach, I’ve started work on a second nose using the cheese slopes. (The beginnings of version 9, I guess?) Speaking of Brickdoctor, it turned out that his suggestion of 1x1 plates with clips turned out to be quite large indeed – so large, in fact, that they actually overlap when the wings are open. Of course, this isn’t an issue when the S-foils are in attack position, but I did want to maintain a sense of elegance, so I ended up keeping the jumper plates. It’s a shame that the pneumatic T-pieces wouldn’t stay in the engines. Fortunately, I found an alternative. Who knew minifigure faucets would ever come in so handy? Here’s the cockpit, which turned out surprisingly similar to that of the previous rendition. In the end, less out of convention than out of necessity, I’ve used the classic printed piece to represent the X-wing’s canopy. I was pretty enthusiastic about using a brickbuilt method until I realized that marshal_banana’s innovative approach was far too bulky to be applied to my model, and that BaronSat and mikepsiaki’s brickbuilt cockpits wouldn’t properly allow for certain features such as the white lines that define the look. Still, I am aware that the canopy isn’t very close to the actual shape of the cockpit, so I at least remembered to incorporate a one-plate offset, as errbt did with his model. One thing that is new about this cockpit is the main console, which I’ve improved with the 1x2 cheese piece. And yes, a minifigure fits quite snugly. Alas, I was sorely disappointed when comparison with the studio model revealed that the angle of the wings was, in fact, too small! However, that’s a quick fix (removing the rail plates) so I’m not too upset. The bottom, which is more or less finished. The rear fuselage is now 15 studs long, making the entire thing 42 studs. The cargo bay area has been extended to six studs; I’m wondering whether it doesn’t look too big compared to the rest of the ship. The rear fuselage of the X-wing is supposed to be quite long, and it already looked a bit stubby due to the wings being only six studs in length, so I lengthened the cargo bay. Now, some of you may be wondering how I built the rear fuselage in two days and yet I haven’t been able to complete this after three. There are a couple reasons. One of them is that the ship keeps falling apart on me, as usual. Another is this: With plates, I’ve maintained the seven-stud width of the rear fuselage all the way to where the cockpit begins, in accordance with the studio model. The 45 slope bricks indicate the maximum height of the rear fuselage as defined by the engines. What I still have left to accomplish is create a double row of slopes that continues to the end of the rear fuselage and stays within the prescribed height while at the same time leaving a gap on the bottom large enough for the wings to open all the way, a three-stud-wide gap in the middle that runs all the way to the back for greebling, and the upper part of the hexagon below the slopes that isn’t the same angle as those achieved with the click hinges. Yeah, it’s fun. With HJR’s AT-XT having made the front page, I presume it isn’t too far-fetched to hope that my X-wing will also end up there…

And like the case of 6212, they're using the minifigures to re-release a set that hasn't been adequately redesigned. But they'll probably include another bag of clone gear for kids who want to customize their clones, so there's still hope. Now, if only they could give Cody a jetpack and a Phase II helmet with a modified visor...

Oh, you're right. I wonder if that means we'll finally have brickbuilt thrusters for the thing. Never mind - I think it's just a black dish piece attached to a white slope. It's near the bottom left corner of the Confidential stamp. Seeing as stormtroopers got nice printed legs in 7264, it's a possibility. I just hope it won't become standard, or else Clone Wars sets will be even more expensive than they already are. Indeed. Is it just me, or have LEGO's speeder bikes actually been getting larger each time?

Not sure why you've posted this here (perhaps in one of the reviews?) but I would have to disagree with you on that statement. First, the head - in comparison to the studio model used in Empire, the head on the current rendition seems to me to have too steep of an angle on top - 2x3 wing plates just don't work here. In the older 4483 the same is achieved using 2x4 wings, which is closer to the look of the actual vehicle. There's also the issue of the guns - look around 6:57 in this clip and you can just barely see the AT-AT's side-mounted cannons, which are shorter than the chin-mounted cannons. On the 8129, they are even longer than the chin-mounted laser cannons, which of course is incorrect. In contrast, the older 4483 has shorter guns, which are closer to the correct length. Look also at the leg joints of the AT-AT. You can see in the clip I linked to that the rear section is considerably larger, both in width and length, than the length of the leg joints. On the 8129, the joints are almost the same width as the back, and the length of the back only extends one or two studs past the rear leg joint, meaning that the entire back section is too small in relation to the legs. The 4483, in comparison, has a considerably larger back, as can be seen from this. Even though the leg joints are even larger on the 4483 they are still well within the breadth of the back. I'm sure there are other aspects that can be debated, but those two are among the most conspicuous. Agen Kolar? Stass Allie? Adi Gallia? And from the Clone Wars, Foul Moudama (since they have a Talz mold now) or, to kill two birds with one stone, Roron Corobb. Both did play fairly significant roles, so I wouldn't be surprised if they were to make Neo-Clone Wars appearances. Looking at the new pictures, I'm beginning to think that the nose on the Scimitar may in fact be too long, in comparison to the studio model; I'm hoping it's just the angle. Interesting to see they've used the rare 3x3 facets. I see a large grey shape in the back - I really hope it's not that printed TIE windscreen piece. Nice to see they've included a full dome piece and and an improved cannon for the Nantex, which also appears to be larger and improved from the previous rendition. Still, the last one was pretty close to the right size, so I'm wondering whether this one won't be too big. There appears to be a one-stud wide transparent black piece in the Dathomir speeder; anyone know what it is? The mandibles appear to be bigger on the Falcon in comparison to the last one after all. Still, the slope of the boardlike structure in between them looks rather steep, which isn't all that great.

Isn't it? But I think Reto may have done an even better (bigger?)job. Only if you're going off of LEGO's sets. Accordihg to the excellent resource you've located for us, there does seem to be a cargo storage section in the nose of the Scimitar, so maybe they've included some "devices of evil intent"? A working ramp would have been nice as well... we haven't seen the back yet, so there's still hope for that. Of course, the old printed piece would be more likely. Such a shame.

Quite an unexpected but creative alternative. I understand perfectly. I never would have thought of the tiles with clips. Of course, the issue here would be that the section directly behind the flashback suppressors would end up too thick; as can be seen in this picture, that part should be very thin. With the length of the proton torpedo launch tubes standardized as 4 studs (by Brucey-wan's fantastic model) the section behind the flashback arresters would have to be around one stud long. But that would mean the current solution is too thick as well, so I think I can make it work... I had actually been considering that a few months ago. Of course, I think that would actually work better if the nose were built using plates attached with SNOT, as you had suggested in the thread about marshal_banana's X-wing. But I was considering alternatives to the brickbuilt nose, so I think that might work very well. Thanks!

Of course I did! But I couldn't resist trying to prove my point. Please accept that there are some pedantic people in the world

Hello everyone, thanks for all the comments! I've spent most of the last two days reworking what I've already built (e. g. finalizing the nose) so there's not much to photograph. I thought I'd have this thing finished by Christmas but it looks like it will take a little longer! I can't, actually - the reason I'm using white pieces is because I don't have them in grey. More on the laser cannons: in the end I didn't have to extend the nose as Brickdoctor said, but I did end up extending the cargo bay area because it looked too stubby. There were some alignment issues as well - I won't go into the details, but let's just say it's very frustrating having to tear apart something you spent half an hour on because your reference pictures tell you that X has to line up with Y or that A actually extends past B. It's fun. I'm very glad you like the nose - I wasn't sure about using that method at first. Besides, in the WIP picture I posted the front looks a lot like what errbt was doing with his X-wing before scrapping the idea. But I've pretty much finished up the nose area at this point, so I guess there's no turning back now. Doing it this way was actually kind of a difficult decision for me - it is true that the hinged bricks provide the taper, but both the original 7140 X-wing and Brian Tobin's fantastic rendition use 45 slope bricks to capture the hexagonal cross-section. Also, I wasn't even considering the three-stud connection at first because I thought it didn't have the tapering look of the X-wing's nose cone; I only incorporated that detail after somebody pointed out that the the nose cone on the 6212 was too fat in comparison to the area directly behind it. It looks better than I thought it would. Yes, there is some debate around that. The 2x2 inverted dishes provide the curved look, but the 1x2 plates have the correct width. The best solution would be cutting up the 2x2 inverted dishes (I've seen it done on MOCpages) but we don't want to mangle our legos do we now? I decided after version 7 that the inverted dishes don't look right, and I finally have more than three grey 1x2 plates with single stud, so that's why I went with that solution. Now, I wonder why LEGO still uses the cones for the tips... And Churchill, don't feel bad about not having part names memorized - it's really not essential. It is true that I like to refer to parts and sets by name/number (or at least link to the appropriate peeron page) but that's only for clarity. At the moment I've tried attaching these to the jumper plates to approximate a curve, but then the curve is in the other direction. It would be much more convenient if I could have the jumper plate facing the other way, as I could then use the flick-fire missile pieces or Technic half pins for the tips of the cannons (which are a more accurate length than 4L bars). But the cone I've got there doesn't allow me to attach it that way... any suggestions?

A Sith torture chamber? And maybe a new way to eject Maul's speeder... Agreed. If no one left constructive criticism on someone's MOC the MOCer would be left with a model that may or may not be awesome but nonetheless could be improved. I think that that would more appropriately belong in this thread. The new Scimitar looks fine to me - besides, I've seen MOCs with a "studded" look, and they're all right. I'm glad LEGO has gone in that direction with the nose - those slope bricks on the last rendition were just too much.

I'm sorry if this starts to sound rude, but I would have to disagree with that statement. Most of the errors that I point out in others' MOCs are those which are correctly done on others' MOCs or which I see as being easily fixed within the limitations of LEGO elements. For example, in the case of Anio's UCS model which i being discussed here, I mentioned that the bars above the stabilizer fins should connect into the ship at an angle because I was aware that it was possible, since I saw it pulled off fairly well on Amun-Ra's model. I always try to base my standards for accuracy solely on what I've seen others achieve with bricks. And as for the space between the laser cannon housing on the Red Three model, while I don't know the exact distance, I would say looking at this image that the distance would be closer to the thickness of two plates on a scaled LEGO model rather than the width of two studs, as it was done on marshal_banana's and roguebantha's models. And I have seen multiple MOCs in which the laser cannon housings are in fact quite close to each other (dateman, Brucey-wan, Niko, lowlead, etc.), so I know that it can be done in bricks. I feel that it's very difficult for a LEGO model to resemble its real-life counterpart if certain conspicuous details aren't right - I believe this was the case in the last rendition of my X-wing (my current avatar picture) in which the angle of the wings, the length of the wingtip laser cannons, and the "T"-shape inside the air intakes were not right, which is one of the reasons I decided to address those errors first. Whether or not the distance between the laser cannon housings falls into this category is debatable, but it's noticeable to me, which is why I pointed it out.

Huh? The maitrakh specifies in Dark Force Rising that it was actually 48 Noghri years and 44 'standard' years. I guess I should just accept it as a retcon and move on...

I realize I'm going against what I just did, but it is KielDaMan's thread, so... Judging from the amount of attention that minifigures have been getting lately (and, of course, the noticeable decrease in set quality as rehashes begin to sport less and less improvement from the previous renditions) I would advise you to continue your buying strategy. As I've been saying, the ship is in fact most of what you pay for when you're buying a LEGO set, and when the ship is well below one's standards and you're on a tight budget, it seems more reasonable to forgo the pricey junk and steer your money toward what you want (which, lately, appears to be the minifigures). I've seen your MOCs, and they are of far superior quality than anything LEGO's released in the last ten years; it's clear you have no need for LEGO's vehicles, except for parts. And I think that buying all the parts of a set on bricklink just might be cheaper than getting the actual set - especially in the case of older sets - so that shouldn't be an issue for you. (I should try that myself, though Internet shopping isn't something I'm terribly familiar with... bye now, I'm off to order all the parts for three of 7140 ) Being a ship-based buyer myself, I find it hard to believe I'm writing this right now. I've always had a sort of contempt for minifigures, and lately it's pained me to see so much attention being lavished on them while the actual ships are neglected. But I guess I should learn to adjust to the 'inevitable change in the franchise', as KielDaMan called it. And who knows, maybe LEGO's just accepted that their non-UCS sets will always look crappy compared to fans' beloved creations. (Because most of them do, you know.) EDIT: I just remembered that I had a question of my own to post here. In Dark Force Rising, when Leia finds out that the soil on Honoghr had been tainted for 44 years (which would be since 35 BBY - The Thrawn Trilogy takes place five years after Jedi, which puts it at 9 ABY) she realizes that the devastation of the planet had occurred during the Clone Wars. It appears that Lucas actually remembered this and featured the event in Clone Wars Volume 6, but that takes place in 20 BBY. (It was in the first issue to feature Phase II clones, if I remember correctly.) With the Wars established as taking place between 22 BBY and 19 BBY it appears that the event featured in Volume 6 was not the event discussed in Dark Force Rising. Is there another war I don't know about, or is this just one of those retcons that nobody really noticed? (I didn't notice myself until watching Sith one day and remembering that there was only a 21-year gap between Episode III and Star Wars). While I was looking up the needed dates, I noticed that Wookieepedia says 35 BBY was also the original date for the end of the Wars. In addition, it's said that Anakin was knighted 30 months into the war (in the last year of the war). The former contradicts the events of Clones while the latter contradicts the Neo-Clone Wars, in which Anakin is shown as a knight in the first year of the war (though the Venator and ARC-170 appear to be well used at that point, so I guess it is actually the last year of the war). I'm confused...

While I don't appreciate the derogatory use of the word, I suppose I am a bit lacking in empathy, seeing the number of people who have labeled me as insensitive and rude lately. But I'm trying to change... I think when Amun-Ra posted the MOC he said that he didn't have certain parts in the right color, so I think that would account for the back.

*ahem*

I'm out of it for a little while, everyone gets delusions of grandeur. Having made considerable progress on Version 8, I thought I'd see what I'd missed after two (three?) days of not reading the Rumours thread. To be honest, I was surprised at the small number of comments on my WIP, some of which were lacking in substance (seeing how much I have to say on others' MOCs, I figured others would do the same for me - thanks Brickdoctor KielDaMan and Walter Kovacs) but now I understand that everyone was simply too preoccupied with current events. (Right...?) With pictures of the long-awaited fall line, I'm a bit surprised that most of the conversation is about the minifigures. What about the ships guys? Isn't that most of what we're paying for? Before I say anything else, that Falcon is a major disappointment. After seeing the post-UCS remakes of the X-wing, T-47, and Y-wing, I'm shocked at what they haven't fixed. Namely, that cockpit - it looks almost exactly the same. And from the angle, the mandibles aren't much to look at either. The docking ring and part of the upper hull appear to be built the same way as the previous rendition, and even the 3x3 pieces for the holes in the mandibles are the same. Granted, there does seem to be some improvement in the rear, but it's not very clear. Besides, you would think that when improving a set they would start with the biggest mistakes. (See what I did there?) It is true that these are preliminary pictures, so I guess I shouldn't be complaining, but based on what I've seen, this may join the 6212 X-wing as one of my most hated LEGO sets. And to jump into the minifigure discussion, that bothers me a bit as well. Remember what I said earlier? The only minifigures I can clearly make out are Vader, Han, Chewie, Ben, and Leia. I see TIE lasers to the left of the ship, so I'm assuming this represents the escape from the Death Star. Given that assumption, what the heck is the point of including Ben and Vader?! Both were already available in cheaper sets (Ben in the X-34, Vader in his TIE Advanced x1). With six, this has more minifigures than the previous rendition. And Artoo is nowhere to be seen - wasn't Artoo the reason they were making this trip in the first place?! I see that they haven't fixed the fat middle section of the Consular. I must agree that the front really doesn't look all that different from the last rendition. Even though I admit 7666, 7749, and the T-47 in 8089 were certainly below expectations, I disagree with that statement, especially since the entire first half of 2011 and a significant portion of the last three years have yielded Neo-Clone Wars sets and their offending minifigures. By the way Brickdoctor, the folding panels on the Scimitar are supposed to be curved. With all the discussion about minifigures, it doesn't look like anyone's pointed that out. (The offending aspect of the panels on the last rendition is that there was also a long straight bit where the large curved pieces attached to the click hinges, which kills the look of the ship completely.) Unlike the Consular and the Falcon, there does seem to be some substantial improvement on this model. Still, I don't really see the point of this set other than a way to introduce new minifigures. I mean, what the heck did this thing even DO? It's not like the Slave I, which actually did something significant (found and transported Solo's body to Jabba the Hutt despite being boarded and mostly blown up in the process - see Shadows of the Empire). Dooku's NEW apprentice? Whatever happened to Grievous? :laugh: Ooh, a Nantex! Haven't had one of those in a while. Finally, we get something to pit our V-19s against! (Not that I could actually afford that set...) Hooray for Ewok traps! Though I don't see an AT-ST. There does appear to be a nondescript grey thing at the far left, but I'm going to assume that's part of the box art. Might I ask who the minifigure with the top hat might be in the grey thing to the left of the Ewok Attack set?