Bandai release schedule

Although, on the flip side I painted the pilot of my Bandai Tie/IN right down to the belt buckle and once fastened up you can't even really see him! even with lighting AND the no glass option! UGH! lol

The TIEs are a great example. I put no effort into the interior of those because you'd need a colonoscopy camera just to see anything! That being said, part of the fun of modeling is the madness of making something perfect even if it never gets seen.
 
The TIEs are a great example. I put no effort into the interior of those because you'd need a colonoscopy camera just to see anything! That being said, part of the fun of modeling is the madness of making something perfect even if it never gets seen.


They're quite pricy

Screen Shot 2017-03-27 at 21.46.22.png

....but I agree with you

J
 
The TIEs are a great example. I put no effort into the interior of those because you'd need a colonoscopy camera just to see anything! That being said, part of the fun of modeling is the madness of making something perfect even if it never gets seen.
I didn't even bother with the interior to the ATST

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk
 
Hoo, boy... I just marathoned that whole thread in a couple weeks. I honestly hadn't realized Bandai had the license now. I had been worried when I didn't see anything new coming from FineMolds and HLJ stocks running low -- or out. A question for folks who might know... The scale differences between Bandai and FM -- are they perhaps using a different metric? I'm one who subscribes to the "measured from the eyeline" method rather than to the top of the head, given how hats, helmets, and crests can make the latter a bit fuzzy. If one used one and one used the other, could that account for the "Y-Wing in the dryer" syndrome? Or I could be completely wrong and the two companies just went with different reference points from each other -- a la the whole Falcon debate (I'm a 5-footer man, myself, although I do like the additional gearwells for ESB). I'm fine with the size of their A-Wing, given the discussion about the differences in the models built for production. Now, on to prefs...

There are three scales I'm remotely interested in here. 1:72 for all my starfighters and such, to go with my aircraft, Star Trek shuttles, etc. I like the visual comparison that allows; 1:48 for ground-effect vehicles and a few setpiece ships (TIEs of more than the Fighter variety would be nice -- even just offering Interceptor wings as a conversion kit) to go with the Imperial Assault game figures (the AT-ST that comes with the core game is visibly underscaled, no matter what metric one uses -- I'm working on converting mine into an AT-DP); and 1:24/1:25 to go with the typical automobile scale (speeder bikes, the Rogue One cargo hauler, the Rebels Imperial troop transport...), again to have a good visual comparison to familiar object like a Firebird or a DeLorean. So those of you who love the 1:144 stuff? Sorry, no support from me, there. :p While I don't want all the ships and vehicles in 1:48, enough to make good objectives and obstacles for a spirited skirmish game would be nice.

As far as specifics...

Count me in the "please for the luvvagawd give us a 1:72 5-footer-proportioned Falcon, with many, many optional parts to make a 5-footer version of the ship from all the movies" camp. And just as FM gave us a 1:72 Falcon, they also gave us a 1:72 Slave I, so we know both are do-able. And I would knock down cripples to get a more-accurate 1:72 Slave I.

Moving on from "the stuff we had before so we should have it again dammit" category to the "stuff we're still waiting for dammit" one...

• All five Naboo ships (the Marie Celeste, the flying wing, Padmé's two personal ships, and an N-1 fighter)
• Maul's Sith Infiltrator
• Jedi Starfighter hyperspace ring (with parts to make it mountable to any of the specific fighters) -- this way you don't have to pay for a hyperspace ring you're not intending to use
• All three versions of Jedi Starfighter -- AOTC with offset astromech head, Clone Wars with centerline astromech and optional parts for things like Anakin's hot rod, and the ROTS one
• All the GAR craft -- V-19 Torrent, Y-Wing, Z-95, ARC-170, Republic Attack Shuttle, LAAT/i and LAAT/c gunships
• Many Rebels ships -- the Ghost and Phantom, early A-Wings, Mandalorian fighters
• B-Wing, with optional parts to make the prototype from Rebels
• V-Wing fighter with correctly rotating wings
• Supersize those TIEs! Bomber (with parts to build it as the Shuttle or Boarding Craft), Defender, Reaper...
Lambda shuttle
• Kylo's shuttle
• U-WIng

I'd also love some old EU ships in that scale, but that ain't gonna happen from a licensed vendor. The bigger scales, I'd be fine with just about anything. Not too picky. The smaller scales I'm likely not going to bother with, except maybe a 1:350 Falcon to display next to my 1:350 Enterprise to show the size difference.

I give not one damn about the figure kits, but I am quite annoyed at the kits' figures (if you see what I did there). I'd rather have high-detailed multipart pilot/crew/droid/bonus figures than one-piece or silhouette fillers. I love options. I'll convert and modify and alter as needed. I'll scrounge from various outside sources and use all my accumulated skill with tools and Green Stuff to get exactly the figure(s) I want, but I wish I didn't have to work so hard at it. Like, my ideal Y-Wing kit would come with a 2-legged and 3-legged astromech body, heads for each variant we've had so far, and let us play around. An R5 head on the molded-in astromech in the ship, an R2 head on the 3-legged body, an R0 head on the 2-legged one... Or for the X-Wing, give us pieces to make different pilots, so we can have Luke in the cockpit and Biggs standing on the ground, or Porkins or Wedge. Or the straight jumpsuit versus the cold-weather jacket version. As others have pointed out, getting a likeness at that scale is far from impossible. I really am not understanding the whole thing about "no figures that aren't part of the model" in the US -- especially if Bandai were to do them as mini-models themselves. That would easily get them out of Hasbro's Micro Machines sandbox, I would think.

--Jonah
 
The scale differences between Bandai and FM -- are they perhaps using a different metric?

This is the jist of what I have gathered over the past few years...

Not too long before Bandai entered the frey, FFG had come out with their X-wing games minis which adjusted the previously "official" ship sizes to ones that they thought were more appropriate (I think part of this was going under the assumption that all of the studio scale models were built to 1/24 scale)

They made a big deal out of all of the ships finally being truly in scale with each other (of course they broke that standard with the scaled down larger ships they later released like the Blockade Runner, Rebel Transport etc..)

https://www.fantasyflightgames.com/en/news/2012/7/16/the-making-of-x-wing-tm/

"A Surprising TwistDuring the production process, we were surprised to discover that the official dimensions for some of the ships did not match our pre-existing expectations of their relative sizes. Nowhere is our devotion to scale more evident than in our TIE fighter. Through intensive research and close correspondence with Lucasfilm Ltd., we confirmed with no degree of uncertainty the true scales of this iconic Imperial fighter as it appears in the films, even going so far as to study the proportions of the original film models."

Some of those previously "official" numbers came from various sources over the years. Some were basically no more than fan fiction made up for the West ends RPG game, some based on pre-production notes, some probably just guessed at

This resulted in a much larger tie fighter in relation to the X-wing than we had previously seen and which also leads to a larger A-wing.
In some cases Fine Molds seems like they may have also used different sources for their models (like in the case of the X-wing, using the larger one built later rather than the studio models used in a new hope)

At any rate, I believe FFG was one of the first companies to actively establish updated "official" numbers. Bandai seems to have followed in FFGs path as they also went with the larger tie etc...

So while you may have multiple kits of the same subject listed as 1/72, you won't necessarily have them be the same size.

It all depends on what source material they were using at the time.

Other things that could muddy stuff up is when you say a real world object is x length. Does that length include on the fuselage, or does it include the gun barrels etc...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Anyone have a side-by-side of the FM and Bandai TIE Interceptors? I have one of the former, but not one of the latter yet. I'd like to see how they compare.

--Jonah
 
Just found another flaw in the mini TIE (and TIE Advanced) whilst priming over the weekend. On the Sherman bogie at the rear top of each ball, there is an additional flange for want of a better word sticking out on the left side. Tried to take some photos, but it's really small...

DSC_9711.jpg

DSC_9716.jpg

It looks like it's supposed to be there - i.e. it's not just a random blob, but I've never seen this on any other TIE
 
That's the best kind of kit mistake though. :) Something missing that you have to build up is a hassle. Something that shouldn't be there that you can leave on the sprue or slice off = awesome.
 
Don't be too quick to cut that piece off! Look at your references again, that piece is part of the Sherman bogie and was on the studio TIEs.
 
I'm curious. Perhaps the prequels don't have the same stigma in Japan as they do over here

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk
I don't see the same Stigma of the prequels internationally like in the US. Although the OT is still more popular.

Case in point, I know adults in Russia and Japan who LOVE Jar-Jar....they aren't nearly turned off by him like most Americans are. I think it's a cultural thing.
 

Your message may be considered spam for the following reasons:

If you wish to reply despite these issues, check the box below before replying.
Be aware that malicious compliance may result in more severe penalties.
Back
Top