AT-AT

**humsup** · 02-17-2003

Just saw the pictures posted by Sirsteve on the AT-AT.. gotta pick up my jaw from the flow below. But I observed that the its a little small and off scale but am not complaining cos its overall a very freakingly good looking set. And the Snowtroopers, how can I say No? It'll be complete if a General Veers fig is included.

**Sweden** · 02-18-2003

The pictures that Sir Steve took of the AT-AT set at Toy Fair 2003 that’s coming this summer are great but I’m not that impressed with the set as it’s way out of scale and way too small but sure I’ll buy it anyway as I do collect everything officially released for the official market.

I’ve said it before and I say it once again that the LEGO Star Wars line is being made for and aimed at children and younger teenagers so I know that’s why we see the AT-AT released the way it’s released but there’s also adult builders and collectors of this rather excellent line.

The major reason to why I feel the way I do was because of The LEGO Group that spoiled me with the “Ultimate Collector Series/Sculptures” line of the X-Wing Fighter, T.I.E. Interceptor, Darth Maul Bust, Rebel Blockade Runner and the totally impressive Imperial Star Destroyer.

After seeing the release of all the above sets and all the awesome custom models that people around the world have made and when seeing what could be done with these famous bricks I can’t help myself asking for more and better sets in the mini figure scale that we all know of.

The way I see it and I guess that The LEGO Group and their designers see it that way too is that vehicles and spaceships in the size of and that are larger then the Millennium Falcon, Slave 1, AT-AT and Jawa Sandcrawler is a bit of a problem to create in mini figure scale.

If you make them in scale with the smaller vehicles and spaceships in the Star Wars universe they’ll be so huge and so very expensive that the majority of the consumers that are children and younger teenagers simply couldn’t afford them at all and sales would then be really poor.

Sure, it could be released as a “Ultimate Collector Series” scale model but then it’d be so very expensive as well and strictly a collectors item for the ones who could afford it and the ones who can’t would be truly disappointed so there’s a problem either way you decide to do it.

So the only thing left to do for The LEGO Group at this stage especially if the builders and collectors of this line has been asking for a AT-AT set for years is to juniorize the vehicle or spaceship in question as much as possible and then release it as a set that most could afford.

Being a former model kit builder and collector being way too fanatic about the issue of scale and accuracy I feel that vehicles and spaceships in the size of the Millennium Falcon and the AT-AT etc don’t tend to do well being juniorized and done in a small scale in LEGO form.

Sure, I know it’s a toy made with bricks and that it’s made for children but when knowing what can be done with them bricks the 7190 Millennium Falcon set for example looks plain funny and truly makes me think of these Japanese so called super deformed model kits.

All in all the Imperial AT-AT set is quite nice even if it’s way out of scale and way to small but I believe it’ll prove to be a very popular set but my hopes lays in that The LEGO Group will release a “Ultimate Collector Series” scale model of the AT-AT for the adult audience.

Kindest regards,

Lars ”Sweden” Olsson in Sundsvall, Sweden.

**JediTricks** · 02-18-2003

I am an adult collector and I wouldn't have space for this thing if it was any bigger than it is, nor any cash since any more and it's over the "reasonable price point" range for me. I think the look of this thing is incredible, they didn't sacrifice the look of the head or the legs for a juniorized scale like they did with the Imperial Shuttle or the Falcon. If they hadn't opened this thing up, I could have believed this being a $150 UCS set.

BTW, I think you could easily buy 2 of this set and slap together a full-scale version (or as close as you can get, the mini-figure body doesn't make for an easy scale

) without changing too much, the legs, body and head look really good so just keep building up from those concepts. I think compared to the Falcon, which is a great set but is very limited to its size by the UFO body plates, this set has way more potential to be built up without using a ton of building talent or imagination.

**Sweden** · 02-18-2003

JediTricks, I find this hard to believe and I quote:

“I could have believed this being a $150 UCS set.”

First: I don’t want to rain on your parade but you need stronger glasses…

Second: A $150.00 AT-AT set = four more Luke Skywalker mini figures and not UCS…

Third: An “Ultimate Collector Series” AT-AT would probably be more $300.00 to $500.00.

Just kidding with you. Well… Almost. Ahhh… You know what I mean.

Kindest regards,

Lars ”Sweden” Olsson in Sundsvall, Sweden.

**JediTricks** · 02-18-2003

1) I have 20/15 vision, better than standard vision.

2) I don't get that "four Luke" comment.

3) Lego can make a UCS at any pricepoint they want, see the $39.99 Naboo Fighter for that. Or how about the massive UCS Rebel Blockade Runner which is waaaaaay out of scale with the UCS ISD?

**Sweden** · 02-19-2003

Dear JediTricks,

1) I’ve got glasses and/or contacts. Now, where did I put them?

2) You weren’t supposed to. He, he, he.

3) I had noooooo idea about that. Is it true?

Kindest regards,

Lars ”Sweden” Olsson in Sundsvall, Sweden.

**humsup** · 02-20-2003

I think we should not take it too serious for LEGO to make large sets to its scale. Its practically unpractical haha. If you watch ROTJ, remember the scene where the AT-AT foot pad alone is about the size of the snowspeeder when it crushed Luke's crashed speeder.
Now look at LEGO snowspeeder displayed somewhere in your room.
Now imagine how big the AT-AT would be if its in full correct scale.

I judge the set based on the kind of detail that was present. And by the pict, it sure convince me to part with my money

**JediTricks** · 02-21-2003

Sweden's a funny, funny boy.

humsup, the Lego Snowspeeder is offensively over scale to its mini-figures, but I'd say the footpad would be about half the size it'd need to be to stomp Dak's corpse into oatmeal.

**Sweden** · 02-23-2003

Humsup, you’re right in the sense of if we bare in mind that these toys? are being made for and aimed at children and younger teenagers and that these sets has to have a price tag that they can afford but I can’t help having feelings for the adult audience like me, myself and I.

Yes, when it comes to the LEGO Star Wars line it’s practically unpractical as you say to make large vehicles and spaceships like the Millennium Falcon and the AT-AT in scale with the smaller ones as they would be quite huge and very expensive sets that most couldn’t afford.

But it’s not practically impossible to make a “mini figure scale” B-Wing Fighter set in scale with a “mini figure scale” X-Wing Fighter set and a “mini figure scale” AT-AT set in scale with those two except for the reason of whom the product “mainly” is aimed at and made for.

The only reason to why we won’t see true “mini figure scale” versions of the Sith Infiltrator, Imperial Shuttle, Trade Federation MTT, Millennium Falcon and the AT-AT is because of the reason that The LEGO Group make their big bucks from over all sales and not the collectors.

Anyway, the coming AT-AT set is a rather okay one and delivers what can be expected for a set with a $100.00 price tag of such a huge vehicle and hopefully the ones who want it can afford it but I truly hope that The LEGO Group will release a “UCS” set for the collectors.

However, when seeing large vehicles and spaceships like the Trade Federation MTT and the Sith Infiltrator in the size of a X-Wing Fighter I laugh a bit as they make me think of these so called Japanese “Super Deformed” caricature model kits of figures, vehicles and spaceships.

In my very own opinion the same thing goes for the LEGO Star Wars line as with model kits as large vehicles and spaceships in the size of the Millennium Falcon and the AT-AT simply aren’t suitable to be made in small scale as the cost of it will be incorrect shape and details.

And no… I don’t take this whole scale issue way too seriously at all.

I’m looking at my 7130 Snowspeeder set in my bookshelf and I’m imagining an AT-AT set in scale with it and what a glorious sight that would be…

JediTricks, turning 35 years old, or is it young, I don’t really feel like a boy…

You’re a funny dude. Hey dude! Where’s my car? Dude! Where’s your car? Etc. Ah!

By the way… When it comes to the LEGO Star Wars line and to the really huge and gigantic vehicles like the AT-AT, Jawa Sandcrawler, Rebel Transport, Rebel Blockade Runner and the Super Star Destroyer I don’t care if they’re in scale with each other as long as they’re huge.

Since I’m a realistic kind of guy I do know and realize that the above five mentioned vehicles and spaceships simply couldn’t be made in scale with each other as it for sure would be totally impossible but that’s not the case with a X-Wing Fighter and the Millennium Falcon etc, etc.

Kindest regards,

Lars ”Sweden” Olsson in Sundsvall, Sweden.

**JediTricks** · 02-23-2003

Originally posted by Sweden
But it’s not practically impossible to make a “mini figure scale” B-Wing Fighter set in scale with a “mini figure scale” X-Wing Fighter set and a “mini figure scale” AT-AT set in scale with those two except for the reason of whom the product “mainly” is aimed at and made for.

Well, a lot of collectors really wouldn't care for a $50 B-wing or a $90 Imperial Shuttle, so Lego has to risk pushing what the market will bear or end up with way too many excess sets (like the poor unsellable Sith Infiltrator). Of course I would have liked the AT-ST to be a $30 set instead of some dopey $10 piece, but would even half as many AT-STs have sold at that higher price? I still haven't been able to afford the TIE Bomber yet, though I wouldn't be able to put up with a $10 version there.

That's the ultimate problem, Lego has to maintain balance in such things or risk not selling these sets at all. These are the problems with capitalism.

Originally posted by Sweden
JediTricks, turning 35 years old, or is it young, I don’t really feel like a boy…

So should we call you "grampa" or "madame"?