Home› Collecting
Shopping at LEGO or Amazon?
Please use our links: LEGO.com • Amazon
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

Star Wars 2014

1…1415171920

Comments

  • Brick_FiendBrick_Fiend Member Posts: 1
    edited March 2014
    plasmodium said:

    Hm. Not sure I like the bigger eyes on the Jawas. It makes the eyes wrap around curve of the head more, meaning they look a little strange from a lot of angles

    Yeah. I've got to say, this is bothering me already. Hopefully it's not as prominent with the fig in hand. But if so, I'll be tempted to just swap the heads out for plain black ones, or just switch the existing head in reverse if that works. I'd rather no eyes than those big ol' yellow ones.

  • monkeyhangermonkeyhanger Member Posts: 3,169
    cavegod said:

    What interests me is the october 1st release date for it

    Makes me wonder whether, like last year, this is actually due for Sept/Oct like the Ewok Village - a large and expensive playset and we've yet to see the real May 4th UCS offering which is (according to rumours for 2014) likely to be Slave I. If so, TLG have done a great job of keeping the UCS set under wraps 'til now.

  • monkeyhangermonkeyhanger Member Posts: 3,169
    mathew said:

    It sort of cracks me up when people complain about studs on Lego. Well it's Lego and studs kind of go with the territory. With that said, if Lego prices the above pictured set at $350 then there damn well should be tiles covering up those unsightly studs.

    That will be a cheap and relatively easy mod. One which I will probably find myself doing. The UCS IS really spoilt us with SNOT, and even then there was the odd few studs that could have been so easily eliminated - maybe to remind us that what we were looking at was actually Lego.

  • cavegodcavegod Member Posts: 811
    Basta said:

    cavegod said:

    What interests me is the october 1st release date for it

    Looks like the top of an "M" (which I assume is for May) in the stats box down the bottom right of the picture?

    Its the top of a 'Y' for year

  • LegoboyLegoboy Member Posts: 8,827
    cavegod said:

    What interests me is the october 1st release date for it

    What interests me is what interests you. The Sandcrawler is set for its general release in May.

  • monkeyhangermonkeyhanger Member Posts: 3,169
    ^ Is that confirmed, or could we be waiting to Sep/Oct for it and getting Slave I first?
  • cavegodcavegod Member Posts: 811
    The visual dictionary is released on may1st so we should see slave1 aswell, brickshop lists the sandcrawler as available october
  • monkeyhangermonkeyhanger Member Posts: 3,169
    edited March 2014
    ^ From all you've said and i've seen on brickshop, I do think we'll get the Slave I first. It would definitely follow last year's release pattern. Got my cash primed and ready for May 4th.

    I do hope we get confirmation either way well before May 1st.
  • cozycozy Member Posts: 157
    my preliminary thoughts on that sand crawler is ugly and a lazy build but time will tell if there is more to it.
  • LegoboyLegoboy Member Posts: 8,827
    @monkeyhanger‌ - You know better than that....it's never confirmed until it's confirmed.

    My money's on Sandcrawler for May.
  • CaptAPJTCaptAPJT Member Posts: 223
    I reckon there's about 50pieces of tread per track, 8 tracks in total accounts for 400pieces on the piece count. You can see someone at least tried with the front portion to reduce the number of studs on the plates, unfortunately they seem to have given up with the rest of the model. It's a shame really, seems like a lot of wasted opportunity.
  • VortexVortex Member Posts: 342
    Yes yes , but those eyes those horrible cheap eyes , it's like someone somewhere forgot to add the windows and then upon being questioned by the board if he'd forgotten ? Goes "no I didn't , here yA Go ! "* places 4 falt tiles and dusts his hands
  • VortexVortex Member Posts: 342
    Yep , if you look very closely at the photo again , the arrow that points out " front viewport " has three " ??? " right in front if it .
  • cozycozy Member Posts: 157
    What CaptAPJT says is an excellent point about the tracks,would they not have been better off having the rubber tracks and bumping up the piece count somewhere to make it more aesthetically pleasing?
  • paul88paul88 Member Posts: 169
    Vortex said:

    Yes yes , but those eyes those horrible cheap eyes , it's like someone somewhere forgot to add the windows and then upon being questioned by the board if he'd forgotten ? Goes "no I didn't , here yA Go ! "* places 4 falt tiles and dusts his hands

    Agreed, this is a horrible way to handle the cockpit windows. What a letdown :(
  • zipsforbananaszipsforbananas Member Posts: 250
    Am I the only one mystified at the reactions to the sides being built with stud-full plates? I can understand people have preferences (and mine are all for avoiding the unsightly shine and blocky effect that a solid wall or tiling over the studs would create on something this size), but this is hardly the first offender in the Star Wars line. Plate-built hulls have been a theme since 2009!
    There's the last AT-AT, the AT-STs in the Endor bunker, the midi Star Destroyer, all the old TIEs (the new one less so), every Snowspeeder ever, Jabba's Sailbarge, the Falcon, the Tantive IV's central section, and that's just the OT sets I've got on my shelves right now! From this year's other sets, the AT-PT, the B-Wing and the new Star Destroyer all carry that theme on.

    Yes, you may prefer not having studs on the sides, but it's such a well established look within the Lego Star Wars universe it seems a bit late to be complaining about it now!
    (And yes, I do think it actually looks really rather good!)
  • y2joshy2josh Member Posts: 1,996
    ^Most of the sets you mentioned either aren't to this scale, or have extensive greebling... not to mention only two of them have a substantial amount of studs visible on the sides, which I think is what the main gripe here is. Either way, barring a nice homestead to complement it, this is another OT set that appears to be significantly worse than the original (at least insofar as the model itself is concerned).
  • SapmiSatanSapmiSatan Member Posts: 106
    I like lots of studs for old, worn out vehicles like this, or the Millennium Falcon.
  • mathewmathew Member Posts: 2,099
    y2josh said:

    ^Most of the sets you mentioned either aren't to this scale, or have extensive greebling... not to mention only two of them have a substantial amount of studs visible on the sides, which I think is what the main gripe here is. Either way, barring a nice homestead to complement it, this is another OT set that appears to be significantly worse than the original (at least insofar as the model itself is concerned).

    Oh my studs. The horror:
    image
  • y2joshy2josh Member Posts: 1,996
    mathew said:

    y2josh said:

    ^Most of the sets you mentioned either aren't to this scale, or have extensive greebling... not to mention only two of them have a substantial amount of studs visible on the sides, which I think is what the main gripe here is. Either way, barring a nice homestead to complement it, this is another OT set that appears to be significantly worse than the original (at least insofar as the model itself is concerned).

    Oh my studs. The horror:
    image
    This is actually a great example of a set with tons of studs visible (some obscured by greebling), but none on the side. Again, I think the main complaint of some is that the exposed studs that comprise the entire exterior look sloppy.

    For me, I just think the model looks worse than the original, though a nice homestead would certainly push me towards buying one.
    rancorbait
  • mathewmathew Member Posts: 2,099
    edited March 2014
    Why does it matter if they are on the side or top? Studs are studs. You notice them either way.
  • rancorbaitrancorbait Member Posts: 1,842
    The Falcon is supposed to look like a rough "hunk of junk" and its full of greebling, awkward angles, and uneven edges, whereas the sandcrawler has smooth sides and a simple boxlike shape. To me all the studs on the side just look slightly odd, but its certainly nothing that would hinder me from buying it.
    Drmnez
  • mathewmathew Member Posts: 2,099
    I think it ultimately depends on what the price is. If it's $150 then there shouldn't be any complaints. Buy some brown tiles. If it's priced above $200 then I would agree that it looks a bit rough.

    But really, we've seen only one single image. This happens every time a sought after new set is released. Lots of initial complaining. Then when the final set is released... more complaining. Then after a few months people start coming around and then it's one of the greatest sets ever released.
  • y2joshy2josh Member Posts: 1,996
    mathew said:

    Why does it matter if they are on the side or top? Studs are studs. You notice them either way.

    It doesn't really matter to me, but LEGO by nature has always had studs on top. The problem with the studs on the side, as I understand it, makes the design feel lazier because they just subbed large plates where bricks would have looked better.

    To your point about the price, the only things I've heard are $299.99 and (more commonly) $349.99. For the pictured model, as you agree, that's a pretty steep price. For the sandcrawler and a substantial homestead... that's a lot easier to stomach.
    Legoboy
  • mathewmathew Member Posts: 2,099
    I don't think it makes the design feel lazier. It's what works best for the model. At $150-200, a 1700 piece model that sacrifices some smoothness is ok with me. If it's going to be $300 for a 2500 piece model then I think it looks a little rough. Based solely on one image. I don't believe the final price is going to be above $200. There are just not enough people willing to spend that much on a Sandcrawler.
  • LegoboyLegoboy Member Posts: 8,827
    mathew said:

    But really, we've seen only one single image.

    Are you expecting the other side to look different?
    FollowsClosely
  • RomanticWarriorRomanticWarrior Member Posts: 248
    I think the Sandcrawler looks okay, but I'll pass. I'm perfectly happy with my 10144. I'd rather save the money and use it elsewhere :)
  • cavegodcavegod Member Posts: 811
    The sandcrawler is just the sandcrawler, plus minifigs owen, jawas et al no homestead etc.
  • rancorbaitrancorbait Member Posts: 1,842
    @cavegod You're kidding right?
  • cavegodcavegod Member Posts: 811
    nope, my contact said just the sandcrawler plus minifigs, more than Owen and Jawas
  • rancorbaitrancorbait Member Posts: 1,842
    edited March 2014
    ^ which ones? presumably more droids?
  • cavegodcavegod Member Posts: 811
    dunno...
  • rancorbaitrancorbait Member Posts: 1,842
    So there is still hope for a Beru minifig, weather it be included in the sandcrawler set or the May the 4th poly :o)
  • DiggydoesDiggydoes Member Posts: 1,079
    cavegod said:

    nope, my contact said just the sandcrawler plus minifigs, more than Owen and Jawas

    Awesome!!!...NOT :(
    I guess it's time to Bricklink one of these 7000+pieces MOC's out there,anybody's got LDD instructions for one of these?
    FollowsClosely
  • vitreolumvitreolum Member Posts: 1,406
    Diggydoes said:

    I guess it's time to Bricklink one of these 7000+pieces MOC's out there,anybody's got LDD instructions for one of these?

    Also interested.
  • cavegodcavegod Member Posts: 811
    I aint doing ldd files for my sandcrawler lol
  • zipsforbananaszipsforbananas Member Posts: 250
    Clearly it's ultimately a matter of taste, but I still think the amount of flack the Sandcrawler's getting isn't fair. The sides are full of greebling, more so than any of the other sets I mentioned in that they're not at all flat, full of non-right-angles, have various colours, etc. And they look quite cleverly done to me, far better than setting walls at angles and trying to make them match up coherently.
    And okay, only the AT-ST, AT-AT and Sailbarge really have similar amounts of side-studs, but they're also the only vehicles that have any real height to them. I maintain, side panels with studs mostly visible is the current established method for a vehicle of this type.
    And I trust that the designers tried panels that have few, like the 4x4 with just 4 studs that is used, and I trust they made a choice based on what they thought looked better.
  • zipsforbananaszipsforbananas Member Posts: 250
    Actually, looking through my fairly complete OT collection (only the Sandcrawler and SSD not represented vehicle-wise) I can't see anywhere at all that walls of bricks are used where there's what could be considered a panel in a vehicle apart from in the exceptional UCS Lambda Shuttle.
    I think perhaps MOC dreams are colouring expectations of TLG releases a little too much, no?
    FollowsClosely
  • rancorbaitrancorbait Member Posts: 1,842
    zipsforbananas said:

    The sides are full of greebling

    Its just a rusty weathered look, not greebling.

    I will, definitely be making a Lars 'igloo' on LDD to go with this!
  • DiggydoesDiggydoes Member Posts: 1,079
    cavegod said:

    I aint doing ldd files for my sandcrawler lol

    C'mon Pete,pleeeeease :)
    FollowsClosely
  • RomanticWarriorRomanticWarrior Member Posts: 248
    rancorbait said:

    ^ which ones? presumably more droids?

    I'm guessing just updated versions of the same ones that were in 10144 *eyeroll*

  • zipsforbananaszipsforbananas Member Posts: 250
    rancorbait said:

    Its just a rusty weathered look, not greebling.

    Fair point, that's still more than just a plain panel though. ;)
  • rancorbaitrancorbait Member Posts: 1,842
    zipsforbananas said:

    rancorbait said:

    Its just a rusty weathered look, not greebling.

    Fair point, that's still more than just a plain panel though. ;)
    Indeed, but there are some things that studs fit right into, (Besides bricks and plates ;o)) like the Falcon, which has lots of greebles and such, like a ship with it's insides on the outside! this sandcrawler looks only a little odd though, the only way I can really explain it is "unfinished" but it still looks great, so I'm not complaining :o)
  • mathewmathew Member Posts: 2,099
    edited March 2014
    Legoboy said:

    mathew said:

    But really, we've seen only one single image.

    Are you expecting the other side to look different?
    Yes. I'm expecting candy cane stripes. Tiled of course.
  • rancorbaitrancorbait Member Posts: 1,842
    Legoboy said:

    mathew said:

    But really, we've seen only one single image.

    Are you expecting the other side to look different?
    I certainly hope the rust spots etc are in different places than this side! :o)
  • LegoboyLegoboy Member Posts: 8,827
    mathew said:

    Legoboy said:

    mathew said:

    But really, we've seen only one single image.

    Are you expecting the other side to look different?
    Yes. I'm expecting candy cane stripes. Tiled of course.
    I think candy stripes are more likely.
  • Pitfall69Pitfall69 Member Posts: 11,454
    Hopefully, there is a Lars Homestead that comes with the Sandcrawler; then I will have use for these ;)
    FollowsCloselyGothamConstructionCo
  • rancorbaitrancorbait Member Posts: 1,842
    ^Geez, Owen sure looks pissed!
  • Pitfall69Pitfall69 Member Posts: 11,454
    You would be too if you and your wife were turned into charcoal ;)
  • rancorbaitrancorbait Member Posts: 1,842
    I don't have a wife :o)
Sign In or Register to comment.

Shopping at LEGO.com or Amazon?

Please use our links: LEGO.com • Amazon

Recent discussions • Categories • Privacy Policy • Brickset.com

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Sign In Register

Categories

Brickset.com is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, the Amazon.com.ca, Inc. Associates Program and the Amazon EU Associates Programme, which are affiliate advertising programs designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.

As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.