Official LEGO statement regarding Master Builder Series

[Cwetqo]

This was just released by TLG (Kim Thomsen):

Quote

The Master Builder Series models are large playsets and beside being complex builds they are characterized by having many play features and functions, interior details as well as a range of minifigures. Ultimate Collectors series will remain highly detailed display models providing complex builds with a focus on authenticity and both Ultimate Collectors Series and Master Builder Series will continue as a way to highlight the unique characteristic of each style of model.

LEGO Star Wars Team

 

[Mylenium]

Sounds a bit shady... Like they got caught in the act (of messing with UCS) and then simply "fixed" it by relabelling the sets with a new fancy marketing term.

Mylenium

[LegoFjotten]

I like it! If we are lucky it will cut down on AFOL-whining (ok, realistically maybe just by a tiny bit) and the meaningless real-UCS-or-not discussions! 

 

[supertruper1988]

19 minutes ago, Mylenium said:

Sounds a bit shady... Like they got caught in the act (of messing with UCS) and then simply "fixed" it by relabelling the sets with a new fancy marketing term.

Mylenium

That is literally the point of marketing haha! If you dont like it, dont give them your money...

[The_Chosen_1]

That distinction is exactly what I thought it would be. I hope the pattern moving forward continues to be one UCS and one MBS released each year.

[Eaglefan344]

49 minutes ago, The_Chosen_1 said:

That distinction is exactly what I thought it would be. I hope the pattern moving forward continues to be one UCS and one MBS released each year.

I hope it's like that too, for the sole fact of saving me some money as I only collect UCS. I find it hard to believe they can support releasing a $350+ MBS set each year though. I suppose they could do some smaller builds ($200ish range).

[Kristof]

Besides the fact that I think labeling big playsets a 'Master Builder ...' is wasting a very special name on something not so special, I am ok with it. At least they won't put UCS label on sets that doesn't seem to match the line. All I hope for is that they will focus on crafting these big pricey sets well. I feel like they have gone worse with the last releases (Hoth Insult and CC), whereas the previous were ranging from pretty good to excellent (Dollhouse Star, Ewok village, Sandcrawler). So if I take into account these good ones, I am supportive of this MBS line.

[Raskolnikov]

4 hours ago, LegoFjotten said:

I like it! If we are lucky it will cut down on AFOL-whining (ok, realistically maybe just by a tiny bit) and the meaningless real-UCS-or-not discussions! 

 

Agreed. I never understood why the label's important--but evidently it is to a lot of collectors. I'm hoping this will help manage expectations and keep the community positive.

[Kristof]

^ For me personally, it was never about the importance of protecting the label (gosh I don't even have any UCS set myself ), but rather about the not so great feeling that Lego is trying to artificially improve the appearance of some set by labeling it UCS, which historically mostly suited the afol oriented display sets.

And as much as I agree that label shouldn't be the important thing about the set, I appreciate that collecting is a thing and I can imagine that people who like collecting UCS sets might scratch their head over these big playsets.

[RODDY]

I'm a big playsets/locations guy myself (Ewok Village is my favorite set of all time, Cloud City could eclipse it) so this is great news getting a whole line to them! Imagine Theed Palace or Geonosis Arena or Jedi Temple as a set? Or maybe Jabba's Palace or Mos Eisley (Space Port, Cantina, Homestead) or Yavin 4? Or even Canto Bight or Ahch-To?  Possibilities are endless. 

Edited August 31, 2018 by RODDY

[KevinYoung]

More into the display sets and ships but i  welcome this, Sets like Ewok village was a  master piece.

[Bartybum]

@Mylenium How is rebranding it shady?

[Cwetqo]

So, new classification would be:

Ultimate Collectors Series:

Ships:

75192 Millenium Falcon

10179 Millenium Falcon

10240 Red Five X-wing

7191 X-wing

75181 Y-wing

10134 Y-wing

10227 B-wing

75144 Snowspeeder

10215 Obi-Wan's Jedi Starfighter

10026 Naboo Starfighter

10129 Rebel Snowspeeder

10019 Rebel Blockade Runner

10143 Death Star II

10221 Super Star Destroyer

10030 Imperial Star Destroyer

10212 Imperial Shuttle

75095 TIE Fighter

7181 TIE Interceptor

10175 Vader's TIE Advanced

10174 AT-ST

75060 Slave 1

Sculptures:

10018 Darth Maul

10225 R2-D2

10186 General Grievous

7194 Yoda

Master Builder Series:

75159 Death Star

10188 Death Star

75098 Assault on Hoth

10236 Ewok Village

75059 Sandcrawler

 

[nikhkin]

16 hours ago, LegoFjotten said:

I like it! If we are lucky it will cut down on AFOL-whining (ok, realistically maybe just by a tiny bit) and the meaningless real-UCS-or-not discussions! 

 

Of course it won't.

The moaning will just change to "there used to be 2 UCS sets every year, but now they're wasting a slot on MBS".

I'm glad to see the assumption we all made is correct. It's nice to have the playsets in a slightly different category, if only to appease the people who always moan about what defines a UCS set. 

[Robianco]

As someone who has bought around 10 of the so-called UCS sets, the designation has never been of any interest to me. The last 'UCS' Slave 1 fit perfectly with the last 'system scale' X-Wing because they're in scale to each other. As is the 'UCS' Millennium Falcon. I've also passed on things like the B-Wing, TIE Fighter and Y-Wing because I didn't really like the scale. I'm an adult but prefer the system scale TIE to the UCS TIE due to how they all fit together.

I know some people only collect 'UCS' sets. But surely it's about what you want to buy/own/build/display/hoard? It's always amused me... The busts are some of the worst Lego sets I've ever witnessed, in my opinion, but some people love them and there is a compulsion to own them for people who collect UCS sets. The Death Star, Ewok Village and even Assault on Hoth are better display pieces than that Maul head but there's a desire to categorise things. Just buy what you like... even if it's a Battlepack, or something like Yoda's Hut.

[Cylo]

I just hope TLG releases more sets along the UCS line rather than MBS

[Eaglefan344]

1 hour ago, JarJarBonks said:

I just hope TLG releases more sets along the UCS line rather than MBS

I have no actual info, but if I had to guess I would say a UCS in May and a MBS in October each year. Or alternate October release between UCS and MBS. I would imagine they would have to make smaller MBS sets to release one each year though. 

[Mylenium]

11 hours ago, Bartybum said:

@Mylenium How is rebranding it shady?

Well, straight to the point: LEGO's marketing department comes across as totally clueless, especially since they didn't communicate this from day one. This feels like an afterthought they cooked up in a midnight emergency meeting, not a planned marketing move. They just should have let it be and merely said that it isn't an UCS set. And it#s not that LEGO needs more product lines to confuse the casual consumer even further. In fact this could be seen as yet another sign how weak those products actually are - good products sell themselves and don't need concocted marketing terms thrown on.

Mylenium

17 hours ago, krisandkris12 said:

I think labeling big playsets a 'Master Builder ...' is wasting a very special name on something not so special

My feelings exactly. It's a total misnomer, even if you disregard all other criticisms I have.

Mylenium

[Forresto]

9 minutes ago, Mylenium said:

Well, straight to the point: LEGO's marketing department comes across as totally clueless, especially since they didn't communicate this from day one. This feels like an afterthought they cooked up in a midnight emergency meeting, not a planned marketing move. They just should have let it be and merely said that it isn't an UCS set. And it#s not that LEGO needs more product lines to confuse the casual consumer even further. In fact this could be seen as yet another sign how weak those products actually are - good products sell themselves and don't need concocted marketing terms thrown on.

Mylenium

My feelings exactly. It's a total misnomer, even if you disregard all other criticisms I have.

Mylenium

When were they supposed to announce it?

The reason it exists is the widespread backlash they received from Assault on Hoth being labeled as a UCS.

However it's also three hundred plus dollars US so it deserves to have a special designation. 

This is TLG actually listening to the community and responding with a solution.

Your comments confuse me. This has been something discussed for years now.

[Mylenium]

9 minutes ago, Forresto said:

When were they supposed to announce it?

When they released the press materials, not several days after?! The rest is of course up to personal point of view. It just seems to me that this artificial distinction isn't helping matters at all. It's like boxes in boxes with ever tinier boxes inside them. From my observations the "normal" user simply doesn't care and in particular under the umbrella "Star Wars" label this shouldn't be necessary - if only the products would be attractive enough. It always comes back to that. And don't even get me started about the ridiculous price and this supposedly being a "play set"...

Mylenium

[nikhkin]

1 minute ago, Mylenium said:

When they released the press materials, not several days after?! The rest is of course up to personal point of view. It just seems to me that this artificial distinction isn't helping matters at all. It's like boxes in boxes with ever tinier boxes inside them. From my observations the "normal" user simply doesn't care and in particular under the umbrella "Star Wars" label this shouldn't be necessary - if only the products would be attractive enough. It always comes back to that. And don't even get me started about the ridiculous price and this supposedly being a "play set"...

Mylenium

So are you suggesting that Lego made up this new designation, but didn't bother to come up with the definition for it for a couple of weeks?

A marketing department wouldn't come up with a term like that, include it in a new press release and then take a little while to decide what they were talking about.

I'm also still confused about what you mean by "shady". Typically I would take that to mean that they're being dishonest in some way, but I don't see how that can be the case. 

[Mylenium]

Well, then call it dubious, fishy or whatever seems more adequate, but my feeling remains the same. This comes across as one lousy marketing SNAFU.

Mylenium

[shotgunmcos]

Not to add fuel to the fire but why is MBS not branded on the Cloud City set? Surely the decision about MBS was made long before the release so a new box design with MBS on it would have avoided most of the complaints about it and drummed up excitement instead. Seems like LEGO missed a beat here either way

I have the Sandcrawler, Deathstar, MF and Slave 1. So 50/50 UCS and MBS. Display vs play is a good description and I think its a good move by LEGO, albeit odd how it came out

Edited August 31, 2018 by shotgunmcos
Typo

[Forresto]

7 minutes ago, Mylenium said:

When they released the press materials, not several days after?! The rest is of course up to personal point of view. It just seems to me that this artificial distinction isn't helping matters at all. It's like boxes in boxes with ever tinier boxes inside them. From my observations the "normal" user simply doesn't care and in particular under the umbrella "Star Wars" label this shouldn't be necessary - if only the products would be attractive enough. It always comes back to that. And don't even get me started about the ridiculous price and this supposedly being a "play set"...

Mylenium

Wasnt the set was announced as a master builder set with the original press release? 

People were talking about that the day it was announced. 

I imagine this announcement by Lego is just clarifying what the new title implies.

I do get were you're coming from.

I agree I don't think your regular buyer cares what it's called. I don't particularly care. Lego didn't either when they released Assault on Hoth, but that lack of distinction stirred up a lot of negative feelings amongst a vocal group of fans.

I also have qualms with pricing and such as well.

However if they had called this a UCS people would've been upset. Its also not a system scale set. 

They had to create a distinctive title to appease everyone.

[Mylenium]

5 minutes ago, Forresto said:

Wasnt the set was announced as a master builder set with the original press release? 

Nope, it wasn't, at least here in Germany. And that's the point: If official LEGO Ambassadors have to inquire on their private backroom forum and do not get an answer for days (!), then something is afoul. And yes, I agree with @shotgunmcos - if it was really planned, why isn't there even a quick & dirty sticker on the package? This reeks of a last-minute scramble no matter how you spin it.

Mylenium