Anio

Of course you can. Send me a PM, and we will discuss about how we proceed. :)

I have rarely seen a set as poor as this new 9526. If the minifigs are not considered, the model itself seems to be a model from the 90'.

Or not.

The figs are great. But the skiff is very slovenly, IMO.

Thank you for these great pics. These sets are pretty cool IMO ; Lego did a very good job, excepted on the Starfighter which is kind of meh. Is it a new part for the seat in the Malevolence ?

Thank you. For fun I did the Naboo Royal Cruiser. 238 parts. But I wont do it with real bricks. This ship is not iconic enough to be UCS.

Yes. I PM you. ;)

I don't do that.

The instruction is now available. Of course, Frousmoul did it. :) It was not as hard as the instruction of the Executor or the Juggernaut. Nevertheless, it is still a professionnal building instruction. :p Again, Blakbird did the renders on the cover and on the first pages. :) The price is 10€. It is a symbolical price, and you can give a bit more if you want to encourage our work in the Lego community. ;) To buy the instruction, you can reach my by PM on Eurobricks or FlickR. You can also email me at setechnic@gmail.com Anio

For my MOC, the reason why the bottom is not chromed is not a reason of cost. I mean I do not do MOCs to save money. I do what I have to do. For official set, it is a reason of cost. But this is not the only reason. Restricting the chromed areas also help the eye to focus precisely where the chrome is. That way, you appreciate it even more given that it does not become banal. This is not something easy to explain. This is rather that second reason that lead me to put chrome only on the top. No doubt that if this MOC is turned into an official set thanks to the Cuusoo, the underside will not be chromed.

If you say so... At the moment, no. The chrome is strong. No problem about that. What would be a Naboo Royal Starship without chrome ? I listend to you and put the model on the Cuusoo. If you want that model in your collection, you can support here : http://lego.cuusoo.com/ideas/view/15446#

Thank you for your kind words. The parts are a little harder to clip and un-clip, since there is chrome on them. Besides, the chrome does not leave. It is really chromed, not painted. The quality is equal to the official lego chromed parts. I'm not a big fan of the Cuusoo either. I doubt Lego can produce such a ship. There is a lot of chromed parts on this ship. :/ Yes, fortunately ! Do you imagine 200€ and you still have to pay for chrome ? Thanks for that ! :) Let's say they work fine. Not perfectly, but fine. Yes, it does. Just like other regular Lego parts. The thing is that fingerprints are much more visible on chrome. Thank you for blogging. I do really appreciate what you wrote on the blog. "Like all of Anio’s MOCs, the building style of this one looks like it could be an official set." Despite I doubt TLG will ever produce such a ship, it is indeed the approach I try to have on each of my MOC. And I'm glad you mentionned it. This is something very important to me. Thank you again. ;)

Professionnal Building instruction : You can also email me at setechnic@gmail.com Hi, My latest MOC is a UCS Naboo Royal Starship. It is made of 291 parts only. UCS Naboo Royal Starship by Anio, sur Flickr UCS Naboo Royal Starship by Anio, sur Flickr UCS Naboo Royal Starship by Anio, sur Flickr Designing this model was pretty easy given that I had a good idea of what compromise I had to do. Actually, the most tricky part to build was... the black support ! haha All the chromed parts have been individually chromed. This is a professionnal chroming process. I have been in touch with Aure from Chrom Block City on Bricklink. This seller was VERY kind. I do advise to buy your chromed bricks there. ;) I also have to thank Crowkillers who helped me to get some parts, and Etcknight for his help on the sticker. Brickshelf gallery : http://www.brickshel...ry.cgi?f=502345 The video of the model to appreciate the chrome : Hope you like it. Professionnal instruction available soon.

These AT-AT you are talking about are from being decent for the Lego Group. ?

No need of 5,000 bricks to do a UCS AT-AT. I higly doubt TLG will ever do a UCS C3PO or a UCS Cloud Car.

It does, precisely. Cause the base is wide enough. No, they are not. But there is no other choice possible. Compelled to use them.

You talk too much about things you don't know... And this is pretty irritating. :o Yet another example : "6 studs high is fine, but only 5 studs wide at the top" He, smarty pants, don't you think that a given height (6L) with given wings impose the width of the roof ? As far as I know, wing 2x6 does not exist yet (which would have made a 7 stud wide roof). edit : it would be fine if this topic could avoid locking. I have to post the instruction here, in the future. :p

Sorry, I don't read anymore that kind geek post: Just read two line in the end. I saw the word "compromise". I know what compromise is. Compromise is the necessity to find the best way to build between : - accuracy - good lego looking (which is defintely totally different from accuracy) - stability of the model - strength of the MOC - playability (not much for this MOC, except the roof of the snowspeeder, and the removable panels) - no illegal connection (and for me, no old parts too) - part count used (and in some extent, ref count used) - using the good parts at the right place (SW printed dishes, and no other dish) - include some absolutely necessary features (hinges on the ankles, knees, hips and neck for an AT-AT, for example) - in some extent, modularity (I can remove the leg easily for example ; they are only put on an axle with stop (the stop is inside) ; some for the head) - depending on the MOC, including minifigs. Most criticaster take only accuracy into account. All MOCer take accuracy into account. Many (didn't say "Most") of them take stability of the model into account. Some of them take strength of the build into account. Very few of them take the other parameters into account. I do. End of story bro.

The 4x6 tiles give a very good balance between studded and tiled surface. So, this part is very convenient to "play" with the textures. I do not care of the bay doors which can not be opened in anyway on a MOC of that size. And please, don't tell me official models have bay doors. -_-' That kind of bay doors is not decent for a UCS model. With that observation, it becomes more important to focus on the overall look of the side panel in the whole MOC. They represent the spirit of what you can see on the real model. To be honnest, I'm getting borred that everytime I present a MOC, I have to explains to Star Wars geeks that a Lego MOCer is not a model maker. About the hump on the roof : if I make it 1 plate thicker, the "stair syndrome" appears. And this is terrible on any MOC (excepted sculptures). More generally, I challenge anyone to do - a head of the same size (6 studs height + DBG chassis) - which is hinged with the neck - in which 3 minifigs can fit in (2 of them have to be able to seat) - with some control screens - with the roof that can be easily removed to access the interior - and of course with no illegal build. Take you bricks (it is not a problem if you do not have the right colors), and have a try. For fun. ;) Again, including the big round parts there would have been ugly. But again, you can try that when you do the head (if you try ! ). :p Regarding the cones, they aim at reproducing the nozzle. So no, Technic pin would not work here. For the other things you explained : "To be honnest, I'm getting borred that everytime I present a MOC, I have to explains to Star Wars geeks that a Lego MOCer is not a model maker. " C'mon guy ! Where did you get that crapy pic ? Back to the MOC itself. Adding greebs there would add a an extra thickness which is not welcome. More generally, it does not look very good when greebs protrude on the surface where they are located. The best thing is to incorporate then in the surface where they are. And sadly, this is not possible here because of the 4x9 plates which are absolutely necessary to bring the right angle. And this is where you are totally wrong mate. If someone wants to explain... I'm kind of tired to explain that kind of thing. Moreoever in English, which is pretty hard for me given that it is more like a concept. Nothing to say about that. You think it is not good enough to be UCS. I think it well deserve the UCS label. :) Fine. Disagreed of course. Though, I have to specify that my models are not meant to be only accurate. Wanting accuracy is fine, but not enough for me. I want my build to be strong, optimised, no illegal build. I always want a good balance between tiles and studs, as well as the use of some right pieces at the right place. For example, my AT-AT MUST have the SW printed dishes on the leg. From that point, one of the question is : "How do I proceed then ?" Accuracy is only one of the part of a MOC. At least regarding my MOCs. Eventually, very few of what you say is acceptable IMO. The major criticism I totally accept (and you didn't mention...) is the "hips/shoulders" which may be too long. My goal was too make big shoulder for the vehicle to seem to have big "muscles". To sum up, You seem to know a lot about Star Wars vehicle. Probably more than I will ever know. But trust me, regarding the Lego MOCs and what a built involve, much to learn you still have.

Since EB members are supposed to be more than 12 years old.

Not the AT-AT itself. Just its "big size". Big size is pointless. More generally, I'm hardly impressed by very big MOCs. Especially when, after a short analysis, I can see that the same model can be made in a much smaller version (what is hard is to built small, not big).

I did not said that in the first post. But they can pivot of course. The cannons have a similar length to what I've seen on the Internet. Be sure I will post a message here when the instruction is complete. ;) As for the piece count, I ALWAYS design my MOCs for it the piece-count to be as optimised as possible. When I see that my Executor has 3100 parts, it is very possible that my AT-AT has finally rather 2,400 parts than 3,000 parts. You are wrong. ;) As I said, doing a model which as small as possible IS one of my goal. This is a very important thing to optimise the build. A build pointlessly big is, de facto, not optimised. My AT-AT is 46 cm tall if I remember correctly. And I think it does not need to be bigger to do a good UCS. Never forget that UCS is a matter of details, not size. Look at all the UCS AT-AT you can find on the Internet. They are maybe a little more accurate, especially on the head (I couldn't change the angle 3x6) and the hips (I voluntaraly made them different). But the are definitely not more detailled. Again, my goal is to make the model as small as possible, just like official Lego sets. And for that purpose, I think the size of my model is perfect. PS : for fun, let me remind you that 10221 is exactly as long as my own Executor. 124 cm. More generally, I do not make mistake regarding the size to adopt.

xD Is this some kind of trolling or just jealousy ?

Oh yeah, you are right. :) That was my feeling, you see. And to be more specific, it is not the carapace which is too small, but the hips that are too long. ^^ My plan was indeed to make the hips longer for the model to have big and strong "shoulder" (well, shoulder on the hips ; but you get my point). With big shoulder, I think the model looks mightier. ^^ I think this pic explains what I mean : Sorry, but the way it is build is kind of ugly and weak. I don't build my MOC that way. :s Moreover, this is way too big for my little snowspeeder.

Only 4 snowtroopers you mean ? I do not need more than 4 soldiers. My goal is to reproduce the "spirit" of the model. 1 commander, 2 pilots, 1 officer. And some snowtroopers. I don't need 20 snowtroopers. None of these. I used photo from the net and plans to get some features (overall proportions, how the interior is done, some details, etc). But for the size of the body, the legs etc, I just use my feeling. I built, and then I wonder "Does it look good ?". If the answer is yes for me, it is ok. I go to the next step and keep on building. Designing a good Lego model doesn't mandatory mean doing a 100% accurate MOC or using the dimensions we can find on the net (moreover, these dimensions are very variable from a website to another) ?