LEGO Star Wars 2025 Set Discussion - READ FIRST POST!!!

[AD_Bricks]

21 minutes ago, Samppu said:

Ninjago and other in-house themes then make me just jealous and maybe even a bit sad, because they show the potential which will probably never materialize in Star Wars.

Ya like, this January, Ninjago released a new generic villain minifig in a few sets that is never going to appear again after this year, and they gave it FOUR completely new pieces, on top of the new dual-moulded Ninja mask/hood produced in 7 different colour combinations, 2 new hat pieces, and massive dragon wings in two different colours.

[ForgedInLego]

1 minute ago, AD_Bricks said:

Ya like, this January, Ninjago released a new generic villain minifig in a few sets that is never going to appear again after this year, and they gave it FOUR completely new pieces, on top of the new dual-moulded Ninja mask/hood produced in 7 different colour combinations, 2 new hat pieces, and massive dragon wings in two different colours.

The difference between Star Wars and Ninjago is that Star Wars has so many exclusive molds that need to stay in ready-to-produce condition (In terms of cost, 5 years of storage ~= 1 new mold) that Star Wars may have the bigger mold budget... for Ninjago the storage cost isn't as much of an issue because significantly less molds are kept between waves

[AD_Bricks]

14 minutes ago, ForgedInLego said:

The difference between Star Wars and Ninjago is that Star Wars has so many exclusive molds that need to stay in ready-to-produce condition (In terms of cost, 5 years of storage ~= 1 new mold) that Star Wars may have the bigger mold budget... for Ninjago the storage cost isn't as much of an issue because significantly less molds are kept between waves

Ya, that's definitely a factor. Still feels a little unfair though, considering how much more we pay for Star Wars.

[Llewop]

1 hour ago, AD_Bricks said:

Ya, that's definitely a factor. Still feels a little unfair though, considering how much more we pay for Star Wars.

Also ninjago, city and dreamz themes all in house and don’t have to worry about licence fees which can mean more budget for figures, moulds and even cheaper sets. 

[Mandalorianknight]

4 hours ago, Lego Nostalgia said:

To be honest the reason they're on sale lots is because they are overpriced and they are over produced, it was always hard to get the 501st BP online back in 2020 but that was because of Covid

Another thing too is that we kept getting OT sets for years and years and we barely got Clone stuff after 2014, I feel like these past waves is to make up for that and fill the void, I think after January 2026 they should stop with the Clones, I just need Kashyyyk and Wolfpack then that's it, I'm so happy we got the 501st, 212th, Plain P2's and Coruscant Guards and that would have been enough tbh but it's nice to get the 327th IMO, I think that's the last one we should need besides an updated Kashyyyk one

I remember when the only option there was for a plain P2 was in that microfighter and he went for like 20 or more $ on Bricklink, say what you want about too much Clones but I feel it was a good thing in a way, they made them more accessible to people and more choice, the only thing really now is Phase 1 Cody and Rex and plain P1's and if they do that, don't make any more for 10 years

I don't think clone sets specifically are any more overpriced than other lego star wars playsets- I mean sure the UT-AT and the clone wars Ahsoka's Starfighter are some top contenders, but there are plenty of sets from other parts of the franchise that are just as egregious (and all battle packs are $20 now, not just clone ones, not to mention that I might be in the minority here but the $30 one seems pretty good value for 2024/25). Overproduced might be more accurate, I think, I don't know the numbers, but also... is exactly my point, that lego thinks the clones are more popular than I think they actually are. 

I have a few major points of contention with that. The first is that it was never this bad- maybe in 2006 or something but this 2014 "dark age" always had a few prequel/clone sets hanging around. It was bad. I grant you that. But not 2025 bad, and it wasn't like every single set on shelves was imperial related. The second is that I strongly believe the solution to imbalance is not to create the opposite imbalance. A 5 year period where the prequels got the short end of the stick doesn't mean that now, when we've had pretty even ratios, we should suddenly have the clones dominating the theme to the extent of not getting a single OT playset. That doesn't fix anything, it just creates the opposite problem. 

This ties into the "the solution to a problem is not to create the opposite problem" thing- I really do not want them to "not make any more (clones) for 10 years." I would be sad for all the kids who wouldn't be able to buy any clones during that time. Again, the solution is variety, to have a mix of sets from different factions and eras, not "let's do a few years where almost all you can get are clones and then no more clones for a decade". 

1 hour ago, AD_Bricks said:

Ya, that's definitely a factor. Still feels a little unfair though, considering how much more we pay for Star Wars.

I mean a big part of it is paying for the license. Not that it's really tangible or "worth it" in the same way as new molds or what have you, but it is a factor.

8 minutes ago, Llewop said:

Also ninjago, city and dreamz themes all in house and don’t have to worry about licence fees which can mean more budget for figures, moulds and even cheaper sets. 

Ah, you beat me to it. You're exactly right on this- we don't know how much exactly lego pays but for a franchise like star wars I can't assume it's cheap.

[RODDY]

How strong are the TX 130 rumors because it just doesn’t make much sense to me in the slightest to have Galactic Marines with the Fighter Tank when their most well known appearance is with the UT AT. 

[BrickBob Studpants]

I didn’t follow the entire discussion on Discord, but the rumour started with a leaker saying the set had a different name other than “UT-AT”, but I don’t know how that turned into the TX-130 rumour afterwards. My hope is that the set is still a UT-AT, but the name includes the words “hover” and/or “tank” and that’s how the confusion started

Maybe it’s just me huffing copium, but I don’t wanna lose the only non-MF ROTS set this summer  And the only new vehicle too, for that matter!

Edited February 28 by BrickBob Studpants

[Mandalorianknight]

10 hours ago, RODDY said:

How strong are the TX 130 rumors because it just doesn’t make much sense to me in the slightest to have Galactic Marines with the Fighter Tank when their most well known appearance is with the UT AT. 

I just can't understand a $150 TX-130. Lego doesn't upscale their playsets like that- small vehicles like speeders and AT-RTs get upscaled but nothing beyond them that I can think of, certainly nothing to the extent of more than tripling the piece count from a version just a few years prior.

[Samppu]

8 minutes ago, Mandalorianknight said:

I just can't understand a $150 TX-130. Lego doesn't upscale their playsets like that- small vehicles like speeders and AT-RTs get upscaled but nothing beyond them that I can think of, certainly nothing to the extent of more than tripling the piece count from a version just a few years prior.

I personally hope it will be UT-AT for the same arguments as stated previously by others: it would be the most iconic appearance for the Galactic Marines, it would be a genuinely new vehicle, and it would be a Revenge of the Sith set now that it has its anniversary.

Additionally, even if it is a bit obscure, it would be easily perceived and understood as something belonging to the Republic and the clones. I don't think everything has to first be recognizable as itself in order to turn it into a Lego set. The fighter tank itself is an example of the opposite: it was first made into Lego and only then became iconic and recognizable as a vehicle. The kids have Google nowadays, after all. They will look up what this vehicle stands for, if they don't know it, and in this case they will find something epic. The unrecognizable vehicles of the Last Jedi failed, because you could not find them even on Google, as they never appeared in the movie or to my understanding even in the source books (?).

Nevertheless, upscaling of the fighter tank to a 150 bug set seems totally plausible:



The one on the right was like 70 - 80 € or so back in 2007, so perhaps 110 € now? Add the figures and perhaps a speeder and some droids, and you might score 150 €. I hope not and I believe not, but technically it seems totally possible.

[Darth_Bane13]

We just had a fighter tank a few years ago so I really hope it's a UT-AT

[ForgedInLego]

My guess is that the name of the set is something along the lines of "Republic Fighter Tank" just because its a whole lot more marketable than "UT-AT", but it still is a UT-AT, not a TX-130 / IFT-X

[Mandalorianknight]

11 hours ago, Samppu said:

I personally hope it will be UT-AT for the same arguments as stated previously by others: it would be the most iconic appearance for the Galactic Marines, it would be a genuinely new vehicle, and it would be a Revenge of the Sith set now that it has its anniversary.

Additionally, even if it is a bit obscure, it would be easily perceived and understood as something belonging to the Republic and the clones. I don't think everything has to first be recognizable as itself in order to turn it into a Lego set. The fighter tank itself is an example of the opposite: it was first made into Lego and only then became iconic and recognizable as a vehicle. The kids have Google nowadays, after all. They will look up what this vehicle stands for, if they don't know it, and in this case they will find something epic. The unrecognizable vehicles of the Last Jedi failed, because you could not find them even on Google, as they never appeared in the movie or to my understanding even in the source books (?).

Nevertheless, upscaling of the fighter tank to a 150 bug set seems totally plausible:

The one on the right was like 70 - 80 € or so back in 2007, so perhaps 110 € now? Add the figures and perhaps a speeder and some droids, and you might score 150 €. I hope not and I believe not, but technically it seems totally possible.

Agreed with most of this, but not the last bit about a 150 one being plausible. The 2008 version was $50, or about $75 today, half of the price of the probably-UT-AT. Even with the smaller pieces, lego's price increases, etc, I can't see it being $150.

1 hour ago, ForgedInLego said:

My guess is that the name of the set is something along the lines of "Republic Fighter Tank" just because its a whole lot more marketable than "UT-AT", but it still is a UT-AT, not a TX-130 / IFT-X

"Republic Fighter Tank 2"

[joebiwankenobi]

1 hour ago, ForgedInLego said:

My guess is that the name of the set is something along the lines of "Republic Fighter Tank" just because its a whole lot more marketable than "UT-AT", but it still is a UT-AT, not a TX-130 / IFT-X

I could see them call it a "Republic Hover Tank"

[Lego Nostalgia]

I still hope we get the UT-AT cause of the Galactic Marines however if it's a wrong vehicle where did the leakers get the Galactic Marines from ? maybe confused it with someone else as usual, Deathstar playset is actually ISD all over again

I think the leakers need to go to Specsavers

[CloneCommando99]

I’m actually interested in the Death Star’s reveal, not because I have any intention of buying it (I don’t), but I’m currently building my own imperial base so I’d like to see what the most Lego compatible imperial door shape is.

I got tired of waiting for Lego to make one. So I’m using spare parts and pick a brick. Just need to find an efficient way to garrison it. (army trooper or JFO trooper BP pls Lego!)

[joebiwankenobi]

1 hour ago, Lego Nostalgia said:

I still hope we get the UT-AT cause of the Galactic Marines however if it's a wrong vehicle where did the leakers get the Galactic Marines from ? maybe confused it with someone else as usual, Deathstar playset is actually ISD all over again

I think the leakers need to go to Specsavers

This makes me wonder whether they actually saw the Star Destroyer back then or possibly early concepts of the now rumored Death Star...

[Lego Nostalgia]

1 hour ago, CloneCommando99 said:

I’m actually interested in the Death Star’s reveal, not because I have any intention of buying it (I don’t), but I’m currently building my own imperial base so I’d like to see what the most Lego compatible imperial door shape is.

I got tired of waiting for Lego to make one. So I’m using spare parts and pick a brick. Just need to find an efficient way to garrison it. (army trooper or JFO trooper BP pls Lego!)

I hope it has an interior and that there are panels to cover it up, that can only justify the 1000$ price with 40 minifigs supposedly, if I can save 200 euro worth of VIP points I can get it for 800, October is a good thing that it's far away because that'll give us time to save, well it's likely going to retire in like 2030 atleast so we have time, unless it retires in 2027 for some odd reason

I have the 2016 one but that kinda seems outdated to me now, I still love it though

1 hour ago, joebiwankenobi said:

This makes me wonder whether they actually saw the Star Destroyer back then or possibly early concepts of the now rumored Death Star...

No way they could confuse a huge UCS Deathstar to be a playscale version

But there is a big difference between an ISD and a big grey ball so

Maybe Daredevil is a lego leaker

However he could sense if someone is lying or not about a leak by heartbeat

Unless it's online haha

17 hours ago, Mandalorianknight said:

Agreed with most of this, but not the last bit about a 150 one being plausible. The 2008 version was $50, or about $75 today, half of the price of the probably-UT-AT. Even with the smaller pieces, lego's price increases, etc, I can't see it being $150.

"Republic Fighter Tank 2"

Honestly a Republic Fighter Tank the size of the 2008 one at 150$ is possible now, I don't think anyone would have thought  a Sarlacc Pit and Skiff  would be 80$ years ago yet here we are, give it  a matter of time, soon enough a Millennium Falcon will hit 200$

Throw a few Galactic Marines in and people will buy it day one, I'd probably fall victim to that since I don't have patience to wait

My fault

Most outrageous set prices to me have been the Ahsoka's Interceptor, Sarlacc Pit, BTAS Batmobile, Hoopty and X-Jet

And the upcoming Endgame Portals set

I think that was the start of Lego becoming more corporate, yes they have always been about money but never this bad, since 2022 things went downhill, the Porsche 911 was 130$ and after the price increases it was 170, it had nothing to do with inflation, it's greed

Less new prints makes me mad too, lots more effort and care taken into older sets

Must have gotten a new board of directors or something

Lego CMF's are still 4 Euro here in Ireland but how long will that last, I expect it to hit 7 euro in a few years

It'll become the same price as those funko mystery minis lol

[Mandalorianknight]

4 hours ago, Lego Nostalgia said:

I still hope we get the UT-AT cause of the Galactic Marines however if it's a wrong vehicle where did the leakers get the Galactic Marines from ? maybe confused it with someone else as usual, Deathstar playset is actually ISD all over again

I think the assumption was that whether it's a UT-AT or RFT it comes with galactic marines.

2 hours ago, joebiwankenobi said:

This makes me wonder whether they actually saw the Star Destroyer back then or possibly early concepts of the now rumored Death Star...

I always assumed that they saw a picture of the parts list or something- we've seen those leak before, and it would make sense that someone sees some parts for imperial figures alongside a lot of grey bricks and goes "death star playset"

The death star WOULD have been in development back then but based on the fact that Cal was almost always rumored to be part of the "death star playset" and it was initially rumored to be around $200, I can't imagine a prototype for the $1000 death star would have been mistaken for it.

1 hour ago, Lego Nostalgia said:

Honestly a Republic Fighter Tank the size of the 2008 one at 150$ is possible now, I don't think anyone would have thought  a Sarlacc Pit and Skiff  would be 80$ years ago yet here we are, give it  a matter of time, soon enough a Millennium Falcon will hit 200$

I don't think so. While overpriced, the Sarlacc Pit and Skiff isn't double the cost it should be- it just has an unnecessarily large sarlacc pit. The original falcon would be over $180 today adjusted for inflation- it's not like lego just doubled the price for no reason. Even in the 2025 landscape, even with a few more figs, I can't see the RFT being DOUBLE it's inflation-adjusted price.

[AD_Bricks]

Maybe (in the same way that previous Death Star sets have had multiple versions of, say, Luke, but in different outfits, so that you can recreate multiple scenes featuring him at once), this Death Star could include multiple copies of even the same figure, to make it so that you have the most full and complete Death Star experience possible (e.g. a Vader for the throne room final duel, a Vader for the DS2 hangar bay death scene, a Vader for the DS1 duel with Obi-Wan, or like, an Obi-Wan for that same scene, and a second Obi-Wan to go and disable the tractor beam). It would be a bit out of character for LEGO to include multiple copies of a named character in exactly the same outfit in one set, but honestly I don't know how else this thing is going to have forty minifigures since I can't really see them doing more than 6 different officers or whatever.

Edited March 1 by AD_Bricks

[BrickBob Studpants]

Yeah, if the set really is a RFT, something has gone horribly wrong. Galactic Marines have nothing to do with that vehicle and making a $150 set of a vehicle that was $40 the last time we saw it is just unheard of, and goes against the recent trend of downsizing vehicles  

Fingers crossed for an update soon!

[CallumPears]

6 minutes ago, AD_Bricks said:

this Death Star could include multiple copies of even the same [named] figure

That would be the worst possible outcome I think. I would rather just have 30 stormtroopers. 

I guess my wishlist would be the 25 minifigures from 75159, plus:

• Named officers. I believe there are 7 of them (not including Tarkin). We had the unnamed officer in 75159 (what a waste of a figure slot in that set) so if we had all of them and removed him that'd net us 6 additional figures. 

• A couple more Stormtroopers or Navy troopers (say 2 Stormies 1 Navy).

• 2 of the grey-suit crewmembers for the Falcon scanning team.

 

That's already 36, and I'm sure there are a few others I haven't thought of.

[AD_Bricks]

3 minutes ago, CallumPears said:

That's already 36, and I'm sure there are a few others I haven't thought of.

True, perhaps it isn't too far fetched that they could make it 40 without just putting in 3-4 Darth Vaders, hehe. Maybe those last four will end up being a couple more main character variants (in different outfits though, like Luke with the slight difference in his torso print before and after the final duel) and another droid or a random TIE pilot. They can figure it out.

[Lobot]

2 hours ago, Lego Nostalgia said:

I hope it has an interior and that there are panels to cover it up, that can only justify the 1000$ price with 40 minifigs supposedly, if I can save 200 euro worth of VIP points I can get it for 800, October is a good thing that it's far away because that'll give us time to save, well it's likely going to retire in like 2030 atleast so we have time, unless it retires in 2027 for some odd reason

I'd be very surprised if the new Death Star has any interior, apart from possibly the odd token section (e.g. Throne Room).

At the rumoured price point LEGO are clearly aiming it at the adult collector market and so I can't see it being anything other than a display piece; any interior/play sections are likely to require significant compromises and I can't see that happening!  In addition, it's going to require a significant amount of Technic to support it all, and that will take up a lot of the interior, similar to most other UCS models.  

It will need to look absolutely amazing, and the obvious way of achieving that would to be base it on the second version (i.e. a seriously upscaled 10143); I don't see how they'd be able to replicate a near perfect sphere which would be necessary for the original.  I'm expecting it to include a lot of exclusive minifigures to help justify the price and attract buyers, all nicely displayed on a separate stand.

[AD_Bricks]

48 minutes ago, Lobot said:

I'd be very surprised if the new Death Star has any interior, apart from possibly the odd token section (e.g. Throne Room).

At the rumoured price point LEGO are clearly aiming it at the adult collector market and so I can't see it being anything other than a display piece; any interior/play sections are likely to require significant compromises and I can't see that happening!  In addition, it's going to require a significant amount of Technic to support it all, and that will take up a lot of the interior, similar to most other UCS models.  

Honestly, if it has little to no interior (meaning the only thing to distinguish it, as a product, from, say, a beautiful looking $700 UCS Death Star is that it's way bigger), I can't see it selling very well at all. I just feel like "thing... but bigger" isn't enough of a gimmick for people to spend a full $1000. With most UCS sets, bigger and better looking is the main selling point, but what will a $1000 UCS Death Star with no interior be able to do better than a $600-800 one besides taking up space? It definitely needs the interior as well as the exterior to provide enough value for that price. And based on the info that it has 40 minifigures, there surely has to be somewhere to put them all other than a stand. They've never included more than a few in a UCS set that doesn't fit them inside.

I'm definitely not in the target audience for this thing though, so I might be completely wrong. After all, the 10,000 piece Eiffel Tower... um... exists.

Edited March 1 by AD_Bricks

[Mandalorianknight]

2 hours ago, AD_Bricks said:

Maybe (in the same way that previous Death Star sets have had multiple versions of, say, Luke, but in different outfits, so that you can recreate multiple scenes featuring him at once), this Death Star could include multiple copies of even the same figure, to make it so that you have the most full and complete Death Star experience possible (e.g. a Vader for the throne room final duel, a Vader for the DS2 hangar bay death scene, a Vader for the DS1 duel with Obi-Wan, or like, an Obi-Wan for that same scene, and a second Obi-Wan to go and disable the tractor beam). It would be a bit out of character for LEGO to include multiple copies of a named character in exactly the same outfit in one set, but honestly I don't know how else this thing is going to have forty minifigures since I can't really see them doing more than 6 different officers or whatever.

The only time I can think of two of the same minifigure (Representing the same character) in a set was two Captain Americas in the Avengers Tower, but even then there was a lore reason for two identical Caps to be in a scene. 

41 minutes ago, AD_Bricks said:

 And based on the info that it has 40 minifigures, there surely has to be somewhere to put them all other than a stand. They've never included more than a few in a UCS set that doesn't fit them inside.

I always felt like that info sounded a bit unsure.