Aeroeza

A "full UCS line-up supplied by Lego"? Does this mean we finally get an official definition of what constitutes a UCS with 'exclusives' thrown in for good measure? Or will the 'true believers' find out their faith in the 'pure' UCS will finally be signed, sealed and displayed in all their non-playset glory?!? I'll be waiting with baited breath to find out the answer to this one.... ...and I bet they'll still get it wrong!

Nahh! Stylistically 10221's Imperator is a different animal to Anio's and suits the set well so I can live with it being three studs short of the mark. Besides I could call it a new Snub-nosed ISD belonging to the 'Septum' class!

KimT- don't knock 'turo blasers'! They are warm and extremely comfortable to ware- not to mention being hand knitted by disabled yaks who have large families to feed.

You've covered all my sources there FA (and I'd expect nothing less). So what do I think of 10221 so far? I think much of our speculation was spot on! The top and rear look pretty darn good with the super structure greebling being a real standout. There is much to like here just as our poll reveals which belies many of the negative posts in this string. I give it 'above average' for now but suspect that once I build this monster it will change to 'outstanding' (with qualifications) because it's just so darn big and also a little crazy! Okay. We knew the underside would disappoint so I'm not going to bang on about that- what I really wanted to know was if the profile also suffered from the infamous 'flat bottom'. The photos reveal that the studs up approach utilizes a slight graded layering of plates (three thick) and although this has obvious ascetic and 'accuracy' issues when viewed from underneath it does do some justice to the profile of the hull's wedge and also means there aren't going to be any stability problems present (this is a good thing). When considering other stand out SSD MOC's Lasse's model appears fragile and prone to drooping whereas Anio's is too bulky (but stronger) when viewed in profile. If these MOCS were available to buy I'd probably have gone with Lasse's first because of the more accurate profile. Unfortunately two years later I'd then probably wish I'd purchased Anio's because there's nothing worse than a saggy weapon of mass Imperial destruction to impress lounge room guests with. (BTW love your work guys ). Kurt's solution is in some ways a compromise between the two builds but we lose a lot of hanger bays and structural detail along the way. Perhaps this is a fair call to make when having to consider pragmatic design issues for commercial products- no floppy nose and no need to order replacement parts every now and again. I'd say Lego has to enforce the kind of product standards which some of our favorite MOCS out there have the luxury to ignore. Any criticism of 10221 has to keep this in mind. The upshot is that by doing this Kurt has really managed to create a strong build and keep much of the needle-like subtlety of the Executor's hull intact despite the model being 1.2 metres long. Kudos! Despite the disappointing underside hull. As for the minifigure bridge... Well us UCS lovers have banged on about that too so I'll add only this. It's very well integrated and wonderfully hidden. I can't see how the build might have been compromised by its inclusion and as others have already noted it adds a little something for everyone. To call this UCS set just a glorified playset would be unfair but its hybrid qualities do seem to herald the end of an era. I can live with that (I'm tough) so long as the build isn't messed around by the play features and stay very, very hidden... As for the price. Can you really put a price on happiness? (Don't say under US $399.99 please - it was a rhetorical question).

Is Piett really confirmed? 'Cause the way that mini figure looks to have that 'choking to death' kinda pose on the poster would suggest it's Ozzel. edit: ...and Vader looks to be using 'force grip' on him!

Price be dammed! I'm more worried about that missing 0.8 of a brick! Let's face it, 3.2 Lego bricks for a UCS set is a real stretch even for the best MOCers out there....

A chap called Skodyna reviewed 10212 on Brickset after motorizing it. This is what he had to say about the process... I will not tell you how exactly put the motorization together, every builder have it's own way, but here is the list of parts essential for proper function: 2x M-motor 8883 (one is not strong enough to pull both wings up, XL-motor is too big) 3x Extension wire 8886 (the shuttle is quite large, you'll need that to reach the motors and the IR Receiver) 1x Lights 8870 (why not, you have the battery anyway and the landing lights on the floor are easily accessible) 1x IR Receiver 8884 + 1x IR Remote control 8885 1x Rechargeable battery 8878 + 1x Transformer 8887 (the normal battery box loses power too fast) And don't forget you'll need a few white bricks, you will have to change the structure of the model a bit during the motorization. Now get to work and have fun with squeezing all the things into the shuttle. Here are some final advices: Try to plan things ahead and implement the power functions along with the progress of building, once the shuttle is finished, it's almost impossible to break it down or disassemble. Place both motors in the back and attach them to the gearing directly, without adding any more gears than there are. This operation requires pretty heavy interference into the infrastructure of the model, but is necessary in order to maintain the stunning look of the shuttle. Good luck with that! Control the motors separately, if you try to connect them with an axle, they will get stuck - each of them moves with different speed. Mind the space where landing gear should be attached, do not block it! Place the IR Receiver from below the model, it will work fine there and will not be seen easily. He's a good clip on YouTube of it in operation which also shows off some additional nifty features in integrating the mechanism with the original build. Impressive stuff!

I think some German crept into that description! It should read 'Medical Droid 221 Baker Street' home of a particularly good and investigative Doctor and his heroin injecting sidekick!

Every now and again a MOC appears on this LEGO site which is truly jaw dropping! Thank goodness I didn't have to say that aloud else it would have sounded somewhat like '...eggy ow an hagin a OC ahears on es EGO high ich ish wholy aw opping!'

Agreed. Also agreed! Super-duper agreed! (What an agreeable day we're having). Agre.. Whoa! Wait there! Back up and smell the market-driven economics my friend! The 'invisible hand' doesn't work that way (when it 'works' at all- thanks GFC) and Adam Smith would turn over in his dank Scottish grave (asking for more than just a wee nip of whiskey in compensation) if he thought a shoe factory would manufacture only left boots because of a non-market driven whim! (Think of all those cold, exposed muddy right feet for pete's sake)! So although a 'seller' has no 'obligation' as such to listen to its 'buyers' any business which chooses to ignore them will fast-track its way into oblivion. It's 'rational' for the seller to listen which is why TLC conducts its own market research and 'tweaks' its products accordingly. Forums such as these provide customers an opportunity to express desires, complaints etc. and StoutFiles clearly expressed his concerns and a compromise solution which Lego could reasonably incorporate as a 'tweak' in future UCS releases- one that preserves the integrity of the brand and broadens its appeal. Whether this solution is in line with TLC market research is yet to be revealed. I for one thought it was a good one. Remember, StoutFiles' last post was prompted by a somewhat off-hand remark from Strand... ...and I think he brought up an interesting point (not the 'bitching' bit of course but he's a fellow Aussie and as a mob we can be a bit blunt ). Which leaves us with the idea of 'entitlement'. Lego has done a good job building up brand loyalty with the UCS range and so it seems only reasonable that a sense of entitlement is created from the consumers point of view. That's what brand loyalty is all about. It establishes a relationship between buyers and sellers which manipulates consumers into continuing to desire a manufacturers products. This is especially necessary when the product is a non-essential one aimed at the high end of the market. Afterall why pay for another BMW when public transport could suffice? The UCS range is another example of such marketing logic and Lego celebrated this 'relationship' only recently with its May 4th poster- 10 years and counting! If Lego is 'tweaking' the UCS brand by essentially making them system sets (which is a huge tweak) then the AFOL who appreciated the range to date will have to reassess their loyalty to it. Now if that AFOL enjoys being part of this community then why be quiet about their concerns? Considering there's 10 years of history behind it all then a bit of a well considered and expressed grumble seems fair enough. I say we need more right boots!

That would work for me also. Preserve the exterior and allow the customer to choose how the set is to be used regarding an interior. This would easily bridge a wider demographic of AFOL, maintaining the 'established traditions' of the UCS label and broadening it enough to attract minifig system set fans as well. It becomes both 'display and play' appealing to individual collectors and families- something Lego can only win from financially. Sure it will cost more for the dedicated UCS collector and they'll have some spare pieces for the MOC pile but they didn't get into this aspect of the hobby because it was cheap.... or for that matter because of an interest in compromised design.

Bring on those 1x1 plates with clips! Its a UCS! Since when was cost a factor Ceroknight? Its a big set aimed at keen collectors with the big bucks. Its meant to make kids drool and adults wish they could justify endangering mortgage repayments! Save up a few more bucks and take the unjustifiable plunge!

Hey you gotta love Liberal Democratic societies! Keeps us minorities happy! And yes you're right. Quite reasonably many AFOL (and the clandestine under aged ones) wouldn't care. Probably only a few on this site actually own every single UCS dating back to 2000. Its a pretty specific Lego brand to enjoy owning and a financially challenging one to commit to, but just like the Landmark and Architecture ranges a UCS does offer a little something more than a kids toy normally delivers. Its fun that it lasted this long but perhaps the party is finally over (cue dramatic music and exit stage left).

Remember a UCS is a Lego 'model' as opposed to a Lego system set toy and so holds some pretension to accuracy rather than play features. For a UCS to have an interior and to remain a UCS it would need to be scaled in proportion to the model and hold some sort of reality when compared to the actual deck plans of the vehicle in question (not likely with a 17 odd kilometer long Super Star Destroyer recreated in a 1.2 meter Lego model). Maybe the UCS Falcon could have been designed with a 'UCS standard' interior or even the UCS Shuttle (although it isn't documented on film as the Falcon's is) but to throw one into the SSD and call it a UCS is disappointing for people who have loved this range over the years. Now the inclusion of minifigs really has nothing to do with the problem some of us have with with 10221 (apart from the necessary price increase associated with the little guys). In themselves they can add to the uniqueness of any set's collectability. The heart of the problem with this set for a UCS collector is this... Up until now a system set was clearly a system set and a UCS was simply in an impressive league of its own when compared. Assuming the bottom of the SSD is 'disneyfied' by the inclusion of an interior then why have a UCS sticker on 10221 at all? Get rid of that and hey presto! What you have is just a very expensive system set....

you just got my vote!!!

Wow! I've never seen a system set so comprehensively considered before. That was pretty darn balanced and entertaining. You managed to wear a lot of different 'hats' for this one which makes me wonder... Have you ever considered a career in political science?

This is awesome stuff Legostein. I was wondering if someone would try and use the new ISD Midi scale like this! Its a really well executed fleet and the Venator is a particular beauty. Your work reminds me of the project Brick Commander set for himself using the old UCS ISD scale a few years back. The two of you also have a similar generosity of spirit when it comes to sharing instructions and inspiration!

'Cause its an 'ugly'!!! And it is in the best possible way! Its wonderfully absurd and must be incredibly unlucky for pilots to fly especially if they walk under that ladder! I think this is a bit of a winner Bayou. I agree, the exposed engine is a great touch and as for the wing attachment, I get it.

What? A 'murder' of SSDs?

Bloody tease! Sorry Anio you're right. I shouldn't roll over and play dead so easily (I just woke up after all). These are 'Ultimate Star Wars Sets' which include UCS sets among them. TLC my head hurts. Time for breakfast...

Yeah! the poster gives the impression it will be revealed tomorrow!!

I wait anxiously for photos of its underside then. Already the profile looks too high but then it is 120 centimeters long and needs to be stable. I guess if I can't get my UCS fix this year then I'll need to jump on a plane and check out your display in Bradford or Leicester! Holy crap! Now we officially know what a UCS is! Took'em long enough! Engage egg on face mode.

With an electro-static Lego cleaning duster! I think my earlier post answers your question about why some AFOL have concerns about the minifigs. I hope a re-read makes it clearer. Naturally kids do love the mini figs which suggests 10221 as a UCS may not be aimed at the old AFOL target market. As for the 'label' concerns, well that one could only really be one for the UCS collector to be surprised by! But its real and out there. Assuming you're referring to the ubiquitous UCS collector currently online then I'm afraid I couldn't agree with all your generalizations- apart from adults liking to buy sets which appeal to them. I purchase a UCS for a whole bunch of specific reasons which have already been explained. I too quite like the Executor on what little visual information we have. I hope if it has an interior then this does not detract from the enjoyment I ordinarily have when constructing a model like this. After all there are lots and lots and lots of system sets out there....

Very sad indeed? Now that can't be the way to make friends around here. This is a Lego site is it not? And you inadvertently dismissed my quite reasonable question... i.e. Why make a UCS playset at all? Why not just release it like 10188 or 10198 as an exclusive or funky limited edition piece i.e. a big, spectacular playset without the UCS badge. It would sell just as well and keep the UCS line consistent even if we never see another UCS vehicle or sculpture again....

I guess we'd best all donate our Lego collections to a childrens charity then. Lets start with yours shall we! Come on my friend, 7000 posts and you have to dismiss a considered post so lightly? And here's me thinking we should 'all brick together as one large respectful community!' As for play features, if this UCS doesn't come with bar snacks for my minifigs then I'm writing a letter of complaint in triplicate.