2017 Lego Star Wars UCS set vote

[Tracytron]

First off THIS IS NOT AN *OFFICIAL* VOTING FORUM

 

but anywho out of these 3 things what would you like next years Lego UCS model to be?

 

 

1: a motorised minifig scale MTT with a bay for a or multiple staps like the 2014 version and also space for some droideka's plus a super battle droid rack that you can swap out for the regular one plus a cockpit that can fit 2 pilot battle droids and with fully ball jointed guns at the front plus of course being on transparent wheels which are also motorised along side the actual droid rack and being released both in its trade federation colours and it's separatist colours (this is what I'd like)

 

2: a motorised minifig scale AT-AT with space for troops inside the main body, an actual tunnel in the neck back to the central body, and a folding down ladder and opening door on the side for minifigs to go down

 

3: a venator class republic cruiser with a small amount of space inside the bridge(s) for minifigs, folding down landing gear (yeah I know it'd be hard but I'm sure it's possible) and of course fully articulated turrets (including the 2 on the sides just in front of the middle of the ship)

[kibosh]

Ugh.  No more prequel stuff.  Ever.

[Raskolnikov]

There's a somewhat lengthy topic about this already, here: 

Looks like most people expect something classic from Ep. IV, like a Falcon, ISD, or Tantive IV.  I'd vote for a MF or AT-AT myself.

[Robianco]

I'd always go for an OT set as a UCS. A minifig scale AT-AT would have a frightening price... Far above the £179-£219 price range of the current sets.

If I was to wishlist one then it would be a Falcon. That's it. I like large sets but I'd go for something minifig scale over a large X-Wing or TIE (even though I own the X-Wing). a Falcon would be pretty much the pinnacle of a minifig scale UCS set for me as it's the most iconic vessel in the SW Universe and the price of 10179 is testament to that.

[ChiefPie]

For next year id take a ISD with interior. But from your list I would want the venator.

Edited October 7, 2016 by ChiefPie

[Robianco]

If they go for something Episode IV due to the 40th Anniversary then I can only see it being Tantine IV, Star Destroyer or the Falcon. I can't think of anything else iconic that they would consider a set for especially when they've released two location based sets this year.

Unless they manage to tie the Ideas nomination for Luke's Speeder into a UCS set for next year.

[Flandy]

7 minutes ago, Robianco said:

If they go for something Episode IV due to the 40th Anniversary then I can only see it being Tantine IV, Star Destroyer or the Falcon. I can't think of anything else iconic that they would consider a set for especially when they've released two location based sets this year.

Unless they manage to tie the Ideas nomination for Luke's Speeder into a UCS set for next year.

Agree on all points, Those are THE ships that are most iconic and 40 years old (not counting the x-wing and tie that we've had recently)

I cannot imagine they'd go for any prequel sets when they're currently riding high on the new films, and the original movies are so iconic and beloved.

[Robianco]

43 minutes ago, Flandy said:

Agree on all points, Those are THE ships that are most iconic and 40 years old (not counting the x-wing and tie that we've had recently)

I cannot imagine they'd go for any prequel sets when they're currently riding high on the new films, and the original movies are so iconic and beloved.

Yeah. The Cantina and Yavin Base are something that most AFOLs would love and outside of The Death Star are the most iconic locations toward with. Cantina has been done (to a point but they could always surprise us by including Wuher, PB and Dr Evazan along with various other customers) but aside from the extra figures that scene can be replicated with the smaller set. Yavin IV had no battle so it wouldn't make sense to have any Imperials included and they don't tend to make sets that are just bases. Even Batcaves are attacked by one villain or another. We've had a Sandcrawler, X-Wings, TIE and B-Wing recently so aside from Vader's TIE Advanced or Y-Wing I can't look outside the three I mentioned originally. 

[nymmerod]

Definitely number 2, but ditch the motorization. Just go for accuracy, stability and interior features over motorization.

[xboxtravis7992]

I would love that MTT idea, but it doesn't sound much different than set 7662 from 2007, which honestly is big enough I am sure it could be motorized in some way, albeit sacrificing some of the other play features. Not to mention getting 20+ copies of the same battle droid figure we have had since 1999 would be boring, I already have more of those things than I ever wanted...

EDIT: Somebody already has motorized the 7662, a bit slow on the gearing but it works: 

Venator would be a good choice, I think it has a wide appeal, due to the fact it is sort of a mini version of the classic Star Destroyer. The fact the hangar bay could open to show additional detailed areas would be a bonus. 

True mini-figure scale AT-AT, and motorized? Probably not. I don't want to sell a kidney to buy it. The engineering challenges to build it would be more suited for an AFOL MOCcer, since I doubt Lego could make a model that huge with motors and have it be easy enough a child could build it (I know UCS sets are aimed at adults, but for the most part Lego still makes them easy enough for even a 12 year old child to build if they have experience with previous Lego sets.)

My ideas of models I would want to see given the UCS treatment:

-Millennium Falcon

-Y-Wing

-Naboo Royal Cruiser

-Podracers

-AT-ST

-Cloud City UCS Playset

-Starkiller Base

Edited October 7, 2016 by xboxtravis7992
Added video

[Lord Sith Lego]

I'm willing to pay Lego up to $500 USD for a UCS AT-AT if minifig scale. I don't need it to be motorized as I mostly will use it for display anyway. Hoping there be a interior design too that is decent.

[Forresto]

4 hours ago, Lord Sith Lego said:

I'm willing to pay Lego up to $500 USD for a UCS AT-AT if minifig scale. I don't need it to be motorized as I mostly will use it for display anyway. Hoping there be a interior design too that is decent.

Same here I would never buy the death star for that much but I would pay good money for a mini figure scale AT-AT. I have a few friends that would too. The fact they haven't bothers me greatly. The AT-AT is arguably one of the most iconic vehicles in SW as well as the Battle of the Hoth so why haven't they? 

[joeyl19]

Imperial Star Destroyer. All I want. Would look great with my Super Star Destroyer. 

[atlas]

5 hours ago, Forresto said:

Same here I would never buy the death star for that much but I would pay good money for a mini figure scale AT-AT. I have a few friends that would too. The fact they haven't bothers me greatly. The AT-AT is arguably one of the most iconic vehicles in SW as well as the Battle of the Hoth so why haven't they? 

Probably because 10179 did not do well apparently and also that it would be hard to reconcile an accurate representation with a build that matches their modern requirements and also profitable.

17 hours ago, kibosh said:

Ugh.  No more prequel stuff.  Ever.

Why not? In my opinion it matches the original trilogy visually and that's all that matters in a Lego set.

[Flandy]

2 hours ago, atlas said:

Why not? In my opinion it matches the original trilogy visually and that's all that matters in a Lego set.

Because there are no truly iconic ships in the prequels. Ask a none Star Wars fan to name a ship from the original films and they'll say Tie fighter, X-wing, Millennium Falcon etc, but do the same for the prequels and they struggle to decribe one, let alone name one. Hell I'm a fan and I've seen the prequels and I struggle to remember what the ships are called, there seemed to be alot more and they were rarely in the same one for more than half a movie.

[The lego fan]

Most certainly an AT-AT would be my favourite.

[KevinYoung]

Venator!!

[gotoAndLego]

5 hours ago, Flandy said:

Because there are no truly iconic ships in the prequels. Ask a none Star Wars fan to name a ship from the original films and they'll say Tie fighter, X-wing, Millennium Falcon etc, but do the same for the prequels and they struggle to decribe one, let alone name one. Hell I'm a fan and I've seen the prequels and I struggle to remember what the ships are called, there seemed to be alot more and they were rarely in the same one for more than half a movie.

This is true if you ask a Star Wars fan who was a child during the OT. Ask a fan who was a child during the PT and they will say Venetor, ARC170, Gunship, etc. in addition to the usual OT stuff.

A non-SW fan isn't going to spend $500 on a SW Lego set so its mostly irrelevant what they think about expensive Star Wars sets.

Edited October 8, 2016 by gotoAndLego

[Forresto]

10 hours ago, Flandy said:

Because there are no truly iconic ships in the prequels. Ask a none Star Wars fan to name a ship from the original films and they'll say Tie fighter, X-wing, Millennium Falcon etc, but do the same for the prequels and they struggle to decribe one, let alone name one. Hell I'm a fan and I've seen the prequels and I struggle to remember what the ships are called, there seemed to be alot more and they were rarely in the same one for more than half a movie.

Strongly disagree. The prequel art designs are very distinct and the honestly the best part of those movies. Ask a kid who group in the prequel era and played the video games like Battlefront and rhey can tell you the names of many of those designs as easily as any of the main OT ships.

Considering we have a bajillion Naboo Starfighters and vulture droids clearly TLG gets this. Its like the 2008 (around that) version of the MTT is universally reknown as being ine of the best SW sets ever made. An amazing srt is an amazing set.

That logic also applies to the OT as well. Yes most people know about Tie Fighters and X Wings but what about the Medical Frigats's class or name? Or any big ship bssides a Star Destoryer for rhat matter.

[Flandy]

I'm talking beyond Star wars fandom, there are no ships from the prequels, no matter how well designed and rendered in the movies, that people can name easily. The OT main ships have expanded beyond the Star wars franchise, and into the general populations conciousness, in much the same way as the Enterprise has. There are bottle openers and mugs and T-shirts and well, you name it (Lucas cashed in big time!) but if there is any for the prequel vessels, it's to a massively reduced level.

[LegoFjotten]

5 hours ago, gotoAndLego said:

(snip)... in addition to the usual OT stuff.

39 minutes ago, Forresto said:

(snip)... as easily as any of the main OT ships.

That is why I think it makes more sense for TLG to do something from the OT. Many OT fans would not touch anything PT, while there are plenty of PT fans who enjoy stuff from both the PT and OT.

And I do agree with Flandy, none of the PT ships/vehicles qualify as iconic in my book. I will be disappointed if get something from the PT (or anything motorized for that matter).

[gotoAndLego]

I disagree. I think the Venetor, ATTE, Gunship, and ARC170 are iconic in my book.

[wesker]

The Republic Gunship, AT-TE, Naboo Fighter, Queen Amidala's Royal Starship, Jedi Starfighter, AAT, MTT and Podracers are all iconic enough - at least on the level that the Sailbarge, Snowspeeder, Sandcrawler, Tantive IV, Imperial Shuttle and Slave I are.

Certainly more the A-Wing or B-Wing are thats for sure.

[Cjd223]

I would like to see simply a UCS Star Destroyer or Millennium Falcon. I don't care what kind of Star Destroyer whether it be the Finalizer or Imperial. We're getting the Snowspeeder so I think a huge piece count UCS set would go along good with an averaged priced one. 

[Tracytron]

On 07/10/2016 at 11:50 PM, Robianco said:

I'd always go for an OT set as a UCS. A minifig scale AT-AT would have a frightening price... Far above the £179-£219 price range of the current sets.

If I was to wishlist one then it would be a Falcon. That's it. I like large sets but I'd go for something minifig scale over a large X-Wing or TIE (even though I own the X-Wing). a Falcon would be pretty much the pinnacle of a minifig scale UCS set for me as it's the most iconic vessel in the SW Universe and the price of 10179 is testament to that.

I guess yeah but I mean not PERFECT minifig scale I just mean like the head being around 14 studs wide at the very edge excluding the side mounted cannons and I can DEFINITELY agree with wanting something minifig scale and not just big but to me personally the most iconic ship in Star Wars for me is the republic LAAT gunship. Idk what it is about it's design but it's always just appealed to me to the point of it being the most iconic ship for me.

 

but i do still have requirements for features on all my sets and I don't mind if it just makes JUST A TINY bit of the model a bit eh but just as long as it doesn't make it actually look bad then BABY LOAD UP THOSE SPRINGSHOOTERS :P but firing weapons definitely isn't one of my necessary features which include an interior and being able to do all the basic functions that the in universe thing can do and something that'd definitely be nice and some people would honestly EXPECT from a UCS MF is for an actual interior (including the cockpit but come on that's kinda the necessity) and an actual corridor from the cockpit to the ship and also for it to have RETRACTABLE landing gear and personally I don't really give a flying fudge how detailed they are just as long as they actually fold up but of course I do have my standards especially for a UCS set and hopefully they copy what the new TFA MF did with the missiles in the front and you pushing your finger through the maintenance access port to fire them I just really liked how they incorporated that and something great about the two most recent MF's is that they can be easily modded so the landing gear can actually fold up and also I personally think that it shouldn't actually be as big as the previous UCS one just because in my personal opinion anyway the MF is just too big and for it to hopefully not to be mr holes for glass like that one LOL

 

 

although what's a "OT" set? Oh lol I just figured it out before I even finished typing that it's original trilogy duh Tracy :P

On 08/10/2016 at 10:17 AM, Forresto said:

Same here I would never buy the death star for that much but I would pay good money for a mini figure scale AT-AT. I have a few friends that would too. The fact they haven't bothers me greatly. The AT-AT is arguably one of the most iconic vehicles in SW as well as the Battle of the Hoth so why haven't they? 

Eh it doesn't bother me that much (especially since I found

) but I can definitely see why you're annoyed

11 hours ago, Forresto said:

Strongly disagree. The prequel art designs are very distinct and the honestly the best part of those movies. Ask a kid who group in the prequel era and played the video games like Battlefront and rhey can tell you the names of many of those designs as easily as any of the main OT ships.

Considering we have a bajillion Naboo Starfighters and vulture droids clearly TLG gets this. Its like the 2008 (around that) version of the MTT is universally reknown as being ine of the best SW sets ever made. An amazing srt is an amazing set.

That logic also applies to the OT as well. Yes most people know about Tie Fighters and X Wings but what about the Medical Frigats's class or name? Or any big ship bssides a Star Destoryer for rhat matter.

Super star destroyer? :P