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

[AD_Bricks]

1 hour ago, Virginia_Bricks said:

For another $10 with an extra figure and a new cloth accessory, you are getting maybe 50 extra pieces which wouldn't add any noticeable extra volume. So that is not viable.

It might not be viable if they were to keep it at the same subpar value for money, but considering the amount of net profit they make yearly, and the difficulties of the current economic climate, you'd think they might be willing to sacrifice a teensy bit of that profit to keep their bestselling theme at a somewhat high quality rather than pushing all of the monetary hits onto their consumers. 

(Please excuse my lack of knowledge of proper money terminology)

[Kaijumeister]

2 hours ago, Llewop said:

I do hope we get some more info soon. We must be days away from some good leaks. Want to see how much of a pounding my wallet is going to take over the next few months/year 

By this point last year and years prior, I could swear we had some firm details around the summer sets. At least fairly detailed textual descriptions. Right now outside of the (admittedly fun) sketches the and occasional ‘the CTT will have at least one wheel’ sort of leak, it’s been incredibly dry.

14 hours ago, ArrowBricks said:

Interesting point about the AT-ST. I can’t comment fully as I have not seen it, but it does sounds like it’s a displayable piece, no figures etc. Is it an 18+ set? Either way,  not sure we really needed this set…

There is space, $170-$230 is a huge window. Just because a UCS set fits in that window too doesnt mean what I am suggesting can’t either. The UCS TIE interceptor is $230, X-Wing $240, FireSpray $300. 

Lego got the Dark Falcon right last year, that’s the sort of set the Turbo Tank and the MTT should be. The Star Destroyer last year should have been just that little bit bigger. Figure wise there’s a little left on the table and I don’t think anyone of us would complain if it’s was $170 if it was bigger, Cal had the Poncho and an extra Stromtrooper. The Ghost at $160 is near enough perfect, minus the figures. Again, that’s the standard. 

In my world, the 2013 UCS Ewok Village would become what I am talking about now. It’s not a UCS set, but it’s a playset, with amazing figures and detail. Unusually overpriced at the time vs £. 

I agree with all these points, but just to highlight a few:

- The AT-ST seems like a waste of a slot not being minifigure-scaled, but with the May UCS being a minifigure-scaled ship I guess Lego wanted to scratch their oversized vehicle build itch given that’s what the May UCS sets have been for a while. This would have been an awesome set to do an Endor Bunker build around too. Guess it’s frustrating because we’re already getting an abundance of non-minifigure sets this year as it is.

- The $170 - $230 window is indeed a significant one and personally, I would much rather this be used for ships that are too large for standard system sets but not quite large enough to merit an autumn / winter UCS slot. Plenty of Star Wars ships (e.g. the U-Wing) would make for perfect sets if they could use this sort of price point. Again pointing to how well a price point and piece count like the Milano / Benatar would work for Star Wars.

- I’m curious as to why we aren’t getting any substantial builds like the Dark Falcon and ISD this year. The CTT and MTT are sounding like extreme downgrades in terms of what we can usually expect from summer flagship models.

Edited Sunday at 11:24 PM by Kaijumeister

[Virginia_Bricks]

1 hour ago, AD_Bricks said:

It might not be viable if they were to keep it at the same subpar value for money, but considering the amount of net profit they make yearly, and the difficulties of the current economic climate, you'd think they might be willing to sacrifice a teensy bit of that profit to keep their bestselling theme at a somewhat high quality rather than pushing all of the monetary hits onto their consumers. 

(Please excuse my lack of knowledge of proper money terminology)

Lego’s profit margins (the percentage of profit over revenue) have actually been declining. So as you asked, Lego is eating some of the increased costs to retain customers. The US tariffs are another good example of Lego not passing on the full cost on increase in production costs.

That is why I hate the Lego is purely greedy and decreasing quality for costs sake thought process. Because the evidence says otherwise.

[CallumPears]

2 hours ago, Kaijumeister said:

occasional ‘the CTT will have at least one wheel’ sort of leak

We didn't even know that part for sure until a couple of weeks ago with all the confusion going around lol

[AD_Bricks]

1 hour ago, Virginia_Bricks said:

Lego’s profit margins (the percentage of profit over revenue) have actually been declining. So as you asked, Lego is eating some of the increased costs to retain customers. The US tariffs are another good example of Lego not passing on the full cost on increase in production costs.

That is why I hate the Lego is purely greedy and decreasing quality for costs sake thought process. Because the evidence says otherwise.

Makes sense I guess, mb for making assumptions lol

For the tariffs though, I heard that the price increases on some of the sets were higher than the tariff percentages, so in those cases aren't they passing on some amount of the cost to consumers? (I may be wrong about this, not sure where I heard it)

[Mandalorianknight]

18 hours ago, ArrowBricks said:

Well they definitely aren’t $180. 

Interesting point about the AT-ST. I can’t comment fully as I have not seen it, but it does sounds like it’s a displayable piece, no figures etc. Is it an 18+ set? Either way,  not sure we really needed this set…

There is space, $170-$230 is a huge window. Just because a UCS set fits in that window too doesnt mean what I am suggesting can’t either. The UCS TIE interceptor is $230, X-Wing $240, FireSpray $300. 

Lego got the Dark Falcon right last year, that’s the sort of set the Turbo Tank and the MTT should be. The Star Destroyer last year should have been just that little bit bigger. Figure wise there’s a little left on the table and I don’t think anyone of us would complain if it’s was $170 if it was bigger, Cal had the Poncho and an extra Stromtrooper. The Ghost at $160 is near enough perfect, minus the figures. Again, that’s the standard. 

In my world, the 2013 UCS Ewok Village would become what I am talking about now. It’s not a UCS set, but it’s a playset, with amazing figures and detail. Unusually overpriced at the time vs £. 

Yeah, I think I'm not understanding what you're trying to say-

It is an 18+ set- I'm not sure if it has the label or not but for all intents and purposes it sounds like a UCS AT-ST- an AT-ST that, like what you've been asking for, is larger and more detailed than the system models. 

I was initially confused because I thought you were saying that you wanted the turbo tank and MTT to be significantly larger and more detailed without increasing the price, but now you are saying you'd be fine with the price increasing into the UCS window. Where I'm coming from is just at that point, if the price is in the UCS window, and it's larger and more detailed than system sets, is it not basically just a UCS set?

As for the star destroyer, no. I'd prefer it was cheaper, not larger and more expensive. 

38 minutes ago, AD_Bricks said:

For the tariffs though, I heard that the price increases on some of the sets were higher than the tariff percentages, so in those cases aren't they passing on some amount of the cost to consumers? (I may be wrong about this, not sure where I heard it)

This is correct- the Battle Droid went up 40% from the original price. Even assuming no deals are made between now and July 1st, if those parts are primarily coming from Vietnam and Mexico, we don't have 40% tariffs on those countries. Now, there are some sets that had increases lower than 25%, but ultimately I think especially with 18+ stuff like the droid, lego's viewing this as a situation where they can further increase their profits while pointing the blame somewhere else. If deals are made, we all know lego's not going to put the prices back down, so they make 40% more profit on that set than they planned to. If not, they still make ~15% more profit. (And one of the side benefits of lego's increased 18+/collector focus is that they get more and more people who'll buy overpriced stuff anyway...)

[Nobricksleft]

57 minutes ago, Mandalorianknight said:

This is correct- the Battle Droid went up 40% from the original price. Even assuming no deals are made between now and July 1st, if those parts are primarily coming from Vietnam and Mexico, we don't have 40% tariffs on those countries. Now, there are some sets that had increases lower than 25%, but ultimately I think especially with 18+ stuff like the droid, lego's viewing this as a situation where they can further increase their profits while pointing the blame somewhere else.

This deal is getting worse all the time, and it changes every 90 days. So Lego prices conservatively because they have no say in the negociations.

Tariffs are working as intended, and Lego will soon provide manufacturing jobs to US workers to produce sets with no cost markups specific to North America. No blame, just the wheels set in motion by the new administration.

Edited Monday at 04:04 AM by Nobricksleft

[BrickBob Studpants]

2 hours ago, Nobricksleft said:

Tariffs are working as intended, and Lego will soon provide manufacturing jobs to US workers to produce sets with no cost markups specific to North America.

Nope, because that factory has been planned for a while now and so has nothing to do with any tariffs.

[CloneCommando99]

Tie Avenger. Where art thou Tie Avenger? (Day #26)

How many sets do ya’ll realistically think we’ll get next year? More because a movie is releasing, or the same because Lego’s a cheapskate?

[TheScaryDoor]

27 minutes ago, CloneCommando99 said:

How many sets do ya’ll realistically think we’ll get next year? More because a movie is releasing, or the same because Lego’s a cheapskate?

I think only the Maul Series and Mando Movie are scheduled for next year. And Mando had already alot of sets from the series and Maul is not a new character. Therefore I believe we won't get more sets than usual.  

[BrickBob Studpants]

53 minutes ago, CloneCommando99 said:

How many sets do ya’ll realistically think we’ll get next year? More because a movie is releasing, or the same because Lego’s a cheapskate?

I may be wrong, but I don’t think years with new movies have had significantly more sets than years without them. At least not since 2015. After 2019, we got plenty of show sets, albeit with fewer sets for each subtheme compared to the movie waves.

So I expect the number of sets to roughly stay the same. What’s gonna be interesting is how large the M&G wave will be  The ST and RO first waves consisted of 6-7 sets each, whereas it was only 5 for Solo (which was quickly followed by another wave of 3).

Since M&G gets released in May just like Solo, I think two waves (March/June) is a pretty realistic idea, especially with the proven popularity of Mando.

[Agent Kallus]

On 5/18/2025 at 12:23 PM, icm said:

Lucasfilm wanted the Zeta but Hans Burkhard Schlomer persuaded them to accept a set of the Krennic shuttle instead, because he felt like he could do justice to the Krennic shuttle at the price point but he couldn't do justice to the Zeta.

 

Bricklist notes

Lucasfilm thought we should rather make the "hero" 4-winged transport ship, but we convinced them to do Krennic's shuttle instead with a sketch model I made.

I can see why they went with Krennic's shuttle and it's a great set but a shame they haven't gotten round to the Zeta as well.

17 hours ago, CloneCommando99 said:

After the Turbo Tank and 327th BP’s outcome, I don’t have too much faith in the MTT being good either.

The way you phrased this made me think for a second that pictures were out. I'm still gonna hold out a little hope that they'll be better than suggested, until we see them.

You know it'd be nice if once when the leakers get something wrong about a set that the truth ends up better than they said initially..(rather than the exact opposite like has happened with the Batman and robin Batmobile, the star destroyer, and so on)

[BrickBob Studpants]

1 hour ago, Agent Kallus said:

You know it'd be nice if once when the leakers get something wrong about a set that the truth ends up better than they said initially..

There have been examples where the final set was better than what the leaks suggested (like Gothmog being in Barad-dûr or some of the minifigs in last year’s Great Hall and Durmstrang Ship sets having been misidentified). I can’t think of a SW example right now, but I’m sure there are some!

[Virginia_Bricks]

8 hours ago, Mandalorianknight said:

This is correct- the Battle Droid went up 40% from the original price. Even assuming no deals are made between now and July 1st, if those parts are primarily coming from Vietnam and Mexico, we don't have 40% tariffs on those countries. Now, there are some sets that had increases lower than 25%, but ultimately I think especially with 18+ stuff like the droid, lego's viewing this as a situation where they can further increase their profits while pointing the blame somewhere else. If deals are made, we all know lego's not going to put the prices back down, so they make 40% more profit on that set than they planned to. If not, they still make ~15% more profit. (And one of the side benefits of lego's increased 18+/collector focus is that they get more and more people who'll buy overpriced stuff anyway...)

Wasn't that the only set with an increase over ~10%? Rumored price points are not always correct like the first rumored price on the Shire was $200 but it ended up $260. So I'd take more weight that the Battle Droid price rumored was incorrect than they increased it 40% because of tariffs.

[icm]

50 minutes ago, BrickBob Studpants said:

There have been examples where the final set was better than what the leaks suggested (like Gothmog being in Barad-dûr or some of the minifigs in last year’s Great Hall and Durmstrang Ship sets having been misidentified). I can’t think of a SW example right now, but I’m sure there are some!

From my point of view the ISD was much better than a building representing part of the Death Star 

[BrickPrick]

7 hours ago, CloneCommando99 said:

Tie Avenger. Where art thou Tie Avenger? (Day #26)

How many sets do ya’ll realistically think we’ll get next year? More because a movie is releasing, or the same because Lego’s a cheapskate?

Day #14 of asking Lego not to humiliate the upcoming Clone Turbo Tank.

The overall breakdown of sub-themes for 2026 sets will be pretty interesting indeed. The last Star Wars movie will have happened seven years ago at this point. Curious to see wether TMAG will get the past movie treatment, like two full waves and that's it. Or if it's more considerate like the shows, so up to three sets spread across a couple of waves and maybe a few follow-up sets the year after. I don't know why, but i have a feeling it will be more like the latter. Although, given the source material being Mandalorian and Grogu, the ongoing support might again be more substantial than everything else. 

[CloneCommando99]

I bet Lego’s glad that 501st BP MkII is still on shelves.

 

Take a look at this. (2 days ago, it’s about 650 higher now)

The Andor and ROTS effect is crazy. And it keeps climbing.

And now that plastic pauldrons are likely a thing, Lego very much has the ability now more than ever before to do the Imperial and FO BF2 classes.

 

There’s also a 501st BP style BF3 movement happening right now as well.

9 hours ago, BrickBob Studpants said:

Since M&G gets released in May just like Solo, I think two waves (March/June) is a pretty realistic idea, especially with the proven popularity of Mando.

Good point. It’s just we’ve missed out on so much stuff this year, I just hope that M&G doesn’t cannibalise the possibility of more Andor sets (unlikely as they are already)

Edited Monday at 07:10 PM by CloneCommando99

[BrickBob Studpants]

10 minutes ago, CloneCommando99 said:

I just hope that M&G doesn’t cannibalise the possibility of more Andor sets (unlikely as they are already)

I doubt they’re having such a discussion, but if there really was a situation where an Andor and a M&G set idea were directly pit against each other, the chances for Andor coming out on top are right in the refresher

That said, I fail to see how a TIE Avenger released in January would threaten M&G sets coming out in March or April, even if there was another TIE in the line-up

[Llewop]

2 hours ago, CloneCommando99 said:

I bet Lego’s glad that 501st BP MkII is still on shelves.

 

Take a look at this. (2 days ago, it’s about 650 higher now)

The Andor and ROTS effect is crazy. And it keeps climbing.

And now that plastic pauldrons are likely a thing, Lego very much has the ability now more than ever before to do the Imperial and FO BF2 classes.

 

There’s also a 501st BP style BF3 movement happening right now as well.

Good point. It’s just we’ve missed out on so much stuff this year, I just hope that M&G doesn’t cannibalise the possibility of more Andor sets (unlikely as they are already)

We’ve already had a BF2 set! Can’t believe how long ago it was already. Plastic pauldrons hope that doesn’t mean it’s the start of more clone BPs in 2026 like they did when they started putting helmet holes in. The only scenario where I’d be down for - 4th 501st bp is if it was another specialist even if isn’t cannon like airborne troopers or arc troopers, pilot or something else along those lines. 

It sucks when they suddenly decide that Jedi fallen order/survivor would be the perfect time to stop making sets based on video games. 

[SnoopBobbyBob]

Do we already have any updates on which minifigs will be included in the $1000 Death Star? And if it will be the Death Star I or Death Star II?

[BrickPrick]

2 hours ago, Llewop said:

We’ve already had a BF2 set! Can’t believe how long ago it was already. Plastic pauldrons hope that doesn’t mean it’s the start of more clone BPs in 2026 like they did when they started putting helmet holes in. The only scenario where I’d be down for - 4th 501st bp is if it was another specialist even if isn’t cannon like airborne troopers or arc troopers, pilot or something else along those lines. 

It sucks when they suddenly decide that Jedi fallen order/survivor would be the perfect time to stop making sets based on video games. 

You know Lego wants to get as much mileage out of new pieces as possible. So the next batches of Clone based BPs is very likely. 

Jokes aside, this doesn’t have to impact the immediate future. And even then, some Imperials can obviously wear those pauldrons as well. 

Yep, this has been indeed such terrible timing to kiss videogame based sets goodbye. Hopefully Lego will course correct their decision for Jedi 3.

1 hour ago, SnoopBobbyBob said:

Do we already have any updates on which minifigs will be included in the $1000 Death Star? And if it will be the Death Star I or Death Star II?

Nothing new on minifigures. As far as i know it will be based on both Death Stars. 

 

Day #15 of asking Lego not to eradicate the upcoming Clone Turbo Tank. 

[Mandalorianknight]

16 hours ago, CloneCommando99 said:

How many sets do ya’ll realistically think we’ll get next year? More because a movie is releasing, or the same because Lego’s a cheapskate?

Normal amount- any big increase would be in 1HY for the Mando Movie, and while IIRC we only have a partial list for the HY, I do feel like we'd know by now if there was a big mando wave in march or something.

43 minutes ago, BrickPrick said:

Nothing new on minifigures. As far as i know it will be based on both Death Stars. 

It has to be- it's the flagship of the theme, as weird as it is to have an exterior that's going to depict one version of the DS with some interior scenes from another, I just can't see them removing half the figures/scenes the $500 version depicted.

[icm]

I wonder if the playscale Jango ship will use the windscreen from last year's big Milano. It's larger than the starfighter windscreen used on the 2021 Boba ship but smaller than the big windscreen used on the big ships in 2002, 2006, and 2010, and smaller than the windscreen on the 2019 ship. It might be useful for a Slave I that is larger than the 2021 model, but still downscaled compared to the models before that.

[BrickPrick]

9 hours ago, Mandalorianknight said:

It has to be- it's the flagship of the theme, as weird as it is to have an exterior that's going to depict one version of the DS with some interior scenes from another, I just can't see them removing half the figures/scenes the $500 version depicted.

Oh definitely. I initially imagined some sort of modular approach for the UCS Death Star. You would build a basic structure that works well enough for both. And then you can slide different diorama scenes based on Episode IV or VI in and out how you please. Additionally, you can fully or partially enclose the whole thing with some extra panels for either ANH or ROTJ look. I mean, you have so many pieces at your disposal... (it's over 9000!), there has to be something special going on. I doubt it's just a very giant grey ball, or that the majority will be made up of tiny parts. Either way, i am very much looking forward to all the leaks and reveals from the outside... and then the corresponding reactions from the inside. It could be one for the ages. 

Edited 18 hours ago by BrickPrick

[Nobricksleft]

No solid leaks for the Death Star so far, looks like the LSB is doing a great job. 

Until we steal the plans, I was thinking they could make a half sphere exterior structure that would revolve around the interior, that way you could easily slide it around to view all the rooms and slide it back for display. The whole interior could also spin around the base. Let's send a U-Wing to Billund.