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

[BrickPrick]

Not saying this is justified at all, but the old price for the prior Super Battle Pack was never gonna last long. At least in Europe, now it's like getting two BP's in one for their standard price. But still, ditching some pieces, let alone cutting two B1s, which are probably the cheapest figures for Lego to produce, is super scummy. So yeah, this will take an unusual long time for me to get. 

Edited July 1 by BrickPrick

[natsuiro_shiroi]

Can someone explain me the reason behind this?

New Clone Turbotank vs Old Clone Turbo Tank

New Trade Federation MTT vs Older one vs Even older one

As you can see in the new clone turbo tank image, it is 100 pieces smaller, much less detailed, without an smaller extra vehicle and 30 euros more expensive than the older version.

And the new trade federation MTT is 300+ pieces smaller than the 2007 MTT, it has the same amount of pieces than the 2014 MTT, with less minifigures than in both cases and 50 euros more expensive than both of them.

In my opinion we are being totally scammed. Look at the Clone Turbo Tank, what are those turrets? What are those "wheels"? Oh come on! And look to the MTT, it lacks from interior space everywhere where you can put your minifigures and it does not even bring the smaller transport vehicle its predecessor brought.

I don't know what you think about these new sets guys, let me know your opinions!

[CF Mitch]

Okay, better leaked pics of the 327th BP are coming in, and apparently it will be released August after all  
That bright yellow walker is rather ostentatious and I'm not a fan of another spider droid, but I'll still get it.
The in-hand picture of Bly looks... not too bad? I like that he has some of the brown on his helmet and torso after all, that's good. 
The same with Commander Bacara, though I feel the black shoulder thingy could've been a bit bigger and the flaps on the helmet look somewhat off, but I suppose that's a hard thing to accomplish right...

Regards,
Mitch

 

[Yperio_Bricks]

16 minutes ago, natsuiro_shiroi said:

Can someone explain me the reason behind this?

No matter how much people will complain online about the sets at forums, insta, reddit, youtube et al., at the end they all, who complained, will buy the sets! So why should Lego care to change anything? Lego can just go on and cut more pieces and upp the price even more for the next interation of an vehicle.

[BrickBob Studpants]

Krennic‘s gonna be in the DS after all?!  Hopefully, this means Galen Erso finally has a chance too! If so, of course they’re gonna paywall the first Mads Mikkelsen minifig behind the first $1000 set

[ArrowBricks]

17 hours ago, starlego98 said:

The jango ship on clone wars box art

Just why?

Is a strange one, but other than that the box-art is sensational. 

17 hours ago, Mandalorianknight said:

All the official images do is make me think the Turbo Tank and MTT look even worse than the leaked images, and cement my belief that the new slave one is the 2021 one colorswapped and with a $15 Lama Su Tax.

The turbo tank boggles my mind, it honestly just looks bad and simplified. Lego's been getting more and more detailed and this just looks so plain and underdetailed.

 

In fairness, the sets are more detailed, but are worse in nearly every aspect. Enough is enough, surely. The era of downscales has to end. 

16 hours ago, Coryo said:

When the earlier image leaks of the Slave I released I was worried that it would be too small to hold both Fetts in the cockpit, I'm glad they were able to manage it. I believe this is the first version with room for two minifigs since AOTC was in theatres, I quite like it overall. Although, it's a shame about the lack of arm printing for Jango, considering Din Djarin gets it in far cheaper sets. 

 

 

Agreed, it’s actually a decent set given it’s a downscale. Just imagine how good it could be if it was the 2019 version. 

[ArrowBricks]

Price aside, the 327th Bp is pretty good. 

[CallumPears]

9 minutes ago, ArrowBricks said:

Price aside, the 327th Bp is pretty good. 

Curious what happened to the terrain build. Maybe it's still there and just not in the photo we got? 

I'm never a fan of the oversized AT-RTs, and this one especially since it's a made-up design (the 327th didn't colour their vehicles) so at that point why not just make it something else entirely? 

Spider droid I'm indifferent on. Doesn't look perfect, but neither did the old ones. 

The figures themselves aside from my usual complaints with the 2020 style, helmet holes, and kamas actually look decent. A couple of minor flaws (2 vs 3 pouches, helmet line should have a gap over the visor) but nothing too egregious like Bly's stripe. (Yeah you know things are bad when that's pretty high praise for modern LEGO Clones lol.) 

[Meaf]

I know practically everyone has commented on them, but the prices for the MTT and CTT are just unbelievably bad. The CTT doesn't look amazing but I think it'd be fine if it was in the ballpark of $100 to $120. MTT is similar although I am definitely more into the build there. I just don't get how Lego expects these to sell well, even with the supposed group of clone bros who'll buy anything. The other sets are all pretty overpriced too but I feel like they'll at least not feel too bad even with just a relatively minor discount. The bigger ones would need to be at least 30% off and that's pretty rare to find for LSW, at least around where I live. 

[Lego Nostalgia]

I don't see that terrain side build that was in the preliminary images

[ArrowBricks]

1 hour ago, CallumPears said:

Curious what happened to the terrain build. Maybe it's still there and just not in the photo we got? 

I'm never a fan of the oversized AT-RTs, and this one especially since it's a made-up design (the 327th didn't colour their vehicles) so at that point why not just make it something else entirely? 

Spider droid I'm indifferent on. Doesn't look perfect, but neither did the old ones. 

The figures themselves aside from my usual complaints with the 2020 style, helmet holes, and kamas actually look decent. A couple of minor flaws (2 vs 3 pouches, helmet line should have a gap over the visor) but nothing too egregious like Bly's stripe. (Yeah you know things are bad when that's pretty high praise for modern LEGO Clones lol.) 

Good point re. terrain! Glad they removed it, it’s a waste. I’d have preferred a Crab Droid, but atleast they’ve adapted the Spider Droid design. I get the AT-RT criticism, for whatever reason the design doesn’t annoy me too much. 

1 hour ago, Meaf said:

I know practically everyone has commented on them, but the prices for the MTT and CTT are just unbelievably bad. The CTT doesn't look amazing but I think it'd be fine if it was in the ballpark of $100 to $120. MTT is similar although I am definitely more into the build there. I just don't get how Lego expects these to sell well, even with the supposed group of clone bros who'll buy anything. The other sets are all pretty overpriced too but I feel like they'll at least not feel too bad even with just a relatively minor discount. The bigger ones would need to be at least 30% off and that's pretty rare to find for LSW, at least around where I live. 

In my opinion, the MTT seems to have more value than the Turbo Tank. Not sure why, or what other than more pieces, it just looks better. 

[BrickPrick]

26 minutes ago, ArrowBricks said:

In my opinion, the MTT seems to have more value than the Turbo Tank. Not sure why, or what other than more pieces, it just looks better. 

Despite also being downsized and overpriced, the MTT build feels a little less compromised and more accomplished than the CTT. And thus, making it the better deal of the two.

 

Based on the lifestyle pictures of the Republic Juggernaut, it's good to see Lego come to the realization again... yes, you can indeed remove backpacks from figures and then seat them in the actual set. It doesn't actually get in the way of playing. Now they only need to realize this for cloth waist capes. Even though removing them in order for figures to have a seat ain't even required in the first place. 

Also amusing that they put Bly's binoculars upside down. It's almost as if the kids advertised to building the sets... are actually building these sets. So many of these errors happening nowadays. 

Edited July 1 by BrickPrick

[Lordhelmet]

After the Death Star this year, I am only a B-wing, N1 starfighter (yellow), and Endor At-st (not UCS prefer minifigure scale) sets away from having one of every ship and vehicle from the OT movies.  After that I’m only looking for ships they haven’t released yet, minifigures, or dioramas from the OT movies (and some other ones I may like)

I bring this up in light of the downsizing discussion.  I appreciate some downsized sets (as long as they are done well).  I bought the U wing. I also bought the Lukes x wing from a few years ago because it is closest to minifigure scale and looks good.  However I skipped the tie fighter at the time because it was downsized.  I might buy new ships if they are closer to minifigure scale with more detail but not looking for something off scale.

so while I do appreciate downsized sets as long as they are done well.  I also probably won’t buy many downsized sets to replace the ones in my collection.  Some sets need downsizing (still don’t have a small enough snowspeeder) but overall most sets would be better trying to (where reasonable) hit minifigure scale.

i am curious how this impacts others collection decisions.  Would you buy the MTT at the current size?  Or try to find a bigger version?  Is the decision based on what you have or don’t have, or details?  For me downsized sets only work for very specific things, otherwise I probably won’t buy many to replace other sets in my collection.

[Darth_Bane13]

18 hours ago, CallumPears said:

Yep. Not just Clones either, e.g. Thrawn's missing code cylinders. Really would like to know how that happens considering how much they love to brag in all the behind-the-scenes stuff in reference books about how closely they check designs and cross-reference all the little details. Was that just a bald-faced lie? Maybe they staged the design area to have all the cross referencing for the couple of photos in the reference books, then for every other figure they make it's just done from memory after a pint of beer. 

 

I swear if they sent me these designs I could've fixed them all in about 2 minutes with MS Paint, so why can't the person they're literally paying to make their "only the best is good enough" designs manage it? 

10 hours ago, BrickPrick said:

What's crazy to me is the discrepancy between creating whole new characters with unique molds and executing the printing for many troopers and other known minifigures. Like modern Lego group excels at big new elements, but fails and stumbles upon the finer details. 

 

I think Lego knows people will buy the sets for the minifigures regardless of inaccuracies. Thrawn for example was going for $100+ on bricklink, they know he's in high demand so they don't have to pay attention to the finer details. Lego's motto really should be "good enough" because it's clear they don't care about making the best product anymore. It's the same deal with all the other high in demand figures, they have no incentive to make it accurate beyond mere resemblance.

[Brickadeer]

I'm not a fan of the CTT since, as already mentioned, it is slightly too small in comparison to the AT-TE. Plus, the wheels seem too small compared to the rest of the body.

What I appreciate, though, is that Lego seems to build the wave around the common theme "Felucia" as pictured in TCW S2E1, at least the design of the CTT, Plo Koon, young Ahsoka, and the V-19 all make an appearance in the arc.

[Meaf]

2 hours ago, ArrowBricks said:

In my opinion, the MTT seems to have more value than the Turbo Tank. Not sure why, or what other than more pieces, it just looks better. 

Oh yeah I completely agree. For me at least, I think the CTT just feels like it loses a lot by being so much smaller than the older versions. It's supposed to be a behemoth of a vehicle, so it being so (relatively) small feels very off to me. The MTT feels too small as well but I think the general shape is still good, and the selection of minifigures is kind of better? The CTT having the Galactic Marines is awesome of course, but Ki Adi Mundi is not too exciting and three droids aren't worth much if you already have a million of them. Aayla Secura isn't the most exciting, but getting Bly and new commando droids is awesome, and I think the regular B1s are a lot more exciting in the context of a MTT. But idk the main factor is probably just the size thing I mentioned before. 

[natsuiro_shiroi]

I see the level of these new sets so low (except the minifigures) that THIS is the next set I expect from Lego Star Wars.

[CallumPears]

3 hours ago, ArrowBricks said:

Good point re. terrain! Glad they removed it, it’s a waste

Really? I'm not! 

Yeah it wasn't great, but now we get even *less* stuff for the same ridiculous price

1 hour ago, natsuiro_shiroi said:

I see the level of these new sets so low (except the minifigures) that THIS is the next set I expect from Lego Star Wars.

Except for the minifigures? Nah, half of the minifigures in this wave so far have pretty significant flaws. 

[Kaijumeister]

So they’re actually not going to reveal the rest of the summer wave today it seems, shame!

[ArrowBricks]

Lego do not need to make sizeable playscale sets, they don’t need to produce the most accurate minifigures in these sets, and they don’t need to make these sets so they are in any way close to an 18+ set.

Back in the day, Lego had UCS sets and UCS sets only for adults fans of Lego. Hence, whilst playscale sets were advertised for 7-14 year olds, Lego made sure they would satisfy most (if not all) the needs of adults fans in these sets. It’s why the quality was so high; if it wasn’t, what would adults buy? The creation of the 18+ line in all its facets (helmets, diorama’s, Buildable characters, mid-scale ships) has destroyed this high quality ceiling of playscale sets we were so used to because they are not catering to the adult fan of Lego anywhere near as much, simply because they feel they don’t need to. Effectively, playscale actually are for the ages on the box. 

It’s almost as if Lego tried to do it the other way around in the last 4-5 years of the 2010’s with those action figures, gimmick action battle sets etc. It didn’t work, so the best business decision was to go the other way: action figures for adults in the form of buildable characters and droids, gimmick sets for adults focused on display and collectibility such as the helmets, diorama’s and mid-scale ships.

I strongly suspect that when these 18+ lines reach their natural conclusion and new lines do not take their place (I can’t think of a novel 18+ line that would replace helmets, dioramas, buildable characters) it will coincidentally tie in to the end of the downscale era (I.e there’s no more downscale left to do!). Eventually, Lego will run out of downscale options, and downscale remakes won’t suffice. But that won’t happen for a few years, minimum. After all, they’re even adding vehicles to the buildable characters! The worrying thing though is if new media is plagued with downscales - the last thing the line needs is a bunch of completely new ships, vehicles, locations that are clearly in scale with the downscales. Granted, the Disney era of Star Wars lack the originality described here, and Lego often won’t release anything too radical from the status quo, but there will be sets that do fit this context. 

Hopefully we return to larger playscale sets, or as I have suggested on this forum, the creation of a middle ground between the play scale sets right now and the ever-increasing in size, piece count, and cost of the current UCS sets. 

Edited July 1 by ArrowBricks

[Mandalorianknight]

18 hours ago, Shiva said:

How little they updated it? https://www.lego.com/en-us/service/buildinginstructions/10174 vs https://brickset.com/article/122758/four-new-lego-star-wars-sets-revealed!

Is it 54% more, really?

2006 vs 2025

1068 vs 1513 pieces.

US$79.99 vs US$199.99

 

Yes. Accounting for inflation, that's about $130. They're charging 54% more for one that, if the leaks were correct, is SMALLER than the previous one.

17 hours ago, CloneCommando99 said:

Hopefully they don’t release M&G sets in the January wave. Rather wait until May to directly Tie in with the movie.

I'd assume March, usually they like to get them out a couple months early, right?

9 hours ago, Lordhelmet said:

The first torso, does this equate to learning that Krennic is tied to Ghorman?  The energy project isn't real?  I am excited to see who else we get if we are getting Krennic, my thought is that it will cover all the different era's of the Death Star (similar to the old ones).  Would like to see some new characters we haven't had yet.  

KALKITE.

8 hours ago, Llewop said:

The battle pack pic is out, they’ve ditched the terrain from the prelim but for that price a side build or another speeder or something is needed. It’s good if it was at last years price of £25 but I don’t see the extra £10 in this yet

I love that lego's answer to this problem was "let's remove value from the set"

7 hours ago, Yperio_Bricks said:

No matter how much people will complain online about the sets at forums, insta, reddit, youtube et al., at the end they all, who complained, will buy the sets! So why should Lego care to change anything? Lego can just go on and cut more pieces and upp the price even more for the next interation of an vehicle.

I certainly won't. If a set is too overpriced, I don't buy it, even if it's something like the X-jet that I would really have wanted at a lower price. I hope most of the people here won't buy these either.

4 hours ago, ArrowBricks said:

Good point re. terrain! Glad they removed it, it’s a waste.

I'm not being snarky, I genuinely do not understand how one would view them removing a side build as anything other than objectively bad unless it corresponds to a price decrease. It's not like those pieces went somewhere else- they've just removed value from the set.

1 hour ago, natsuiro_shiroi said:

I see the level of these new sets so low (except the minifigures) that THIS is the next set I expect from Lego Star Wars.

Welcome to eurobricks, excellent second post.

[ArrowBricks]

7 minutes ago, Mandalorianknight said:

I'm not being snarky, I genuinely do not understand how one would view them removing a side build as anything other than objectively bad unless it corresponds to a price decrease. It's not like those pieces went somewhere else- they've just removed value from the set.

I can appreciate your point, fair enough. However, the terrain would be pointless even if you bought multiples of it surely…there was nothing to it. Plus, the rumoured price was a rumour, the actual price may be a result of removing the terrain…who knows! Plus the Spider Droid may have been improved given the parts loss of the terrain. 

Edited July 1 by ArrowBricks

[BrickPrick]

3 hours ago, Darth_Bane13 said:

I think Lego knows people will buy the sets for the minifigures regardless of inaccuracies. Thrawn for example was going for $100+ on bricklink, they know he's in high demand so they don't have to pay attention to the finer details. Lego's motto really should be "good enough" because it's clear they don't care about making the best product anymore. It's the same deal with all the other high in demand figures, they have no incentive to make it accurate beyond mere resemblance.

Of course, it will always be about supply and demand. If enough people still want and support specific sets, Lego keeps making flawed premium products and still selling them for premium prices. Many unaware kids won't care about some minor inaccuracies. Heck, even i don't know about some of these shortcomings or just don't mind them as much as some purists or hardcore fans out there. On the other hand, as far as cutting corners is concerned, i find it fascinating in a sense that there still seem to be some limits for Lego. Take Lama Su as the most recent example. They could have just reused Taun We's head mould and called it a day. Kids wouldn't care, because they may want to have that cool Mando looking character the most. This would have saved Lego a fortune and the profit margins could have been even higher for this set. But they didn't. Maybe how much effort is put into it heavily depends on who the designer (plus their budget constraints/deadlines) for any given set is. Like i said, sometimes the gap between great brand new characters and same old cookie cutter figures is just insane to me. 

53 minutes ago, CallumPears said:

Really? I'm not! 

Yeah it wasn't great, but now we get even *less* stuff for the same ridiculous price.

I agree. The value might have been almost non-existent, so it's not a terrible loss or anything. But why keep on removing stuff and still increase the price, anyways? In principle, getting less for more always just sucks megablocks for the consumers. 

35 minutes ago, ArrowBricks said:

Lego do not need to make sizeable playscale sets, they don’t need to produce the most accurate minifigures in these sets, and they don’t need to make these sets so they are in any way close to an 18+ set.

Back in the day, Lego had UCS sets and UCS sets only for adults fans of Lego. Hence, whilst playscale sets were advertised for 7-14 year olds, Lego made sure they would satisfy most (if not all) the needs of adults fans in these sets. It’s why the quality was so high; if it wasn’t, what would adults buy? The creation of the 18+ line in all its facets (helmets, diorama’s, Buildable characters, mid-scale ships) has destroyed this high quality ceiling of playscale sets we were so used to because they are not catering to the adult fan of Lego anywhere near as much, simply because they feel they don’t need to. Effectively, playscale actually are for the ages on the box.

It’s almost as if Lego tried to do it the other way around in the last 4-5 years of the 2010’s with those action figures, gimmick action battle sets etc. It didn’t work, so the best business decision was to go the other way: action figures for adults in the form of buildable characters and droids, gimmick sets for adults focused on display and collectibility such as the helmets, diorama’s and mid-scale ships.

I strongly suspect that when these 18+ lines reach their natural conclusion and new lines do not take their place (I can’t think of a novel 18+ line that would replace helmets, dioramas, buildable characters) it will coincidentally tie in to the end of the downscale era (I.e there’s no more downscale left to do!). Eventually, Lego will run out of downscale options, and downscale remakes won’t suffice. Hopefully we return to larger playscale sets, or as I have suggested on this forum, the creation of a middle ground between the play scale sets right now and the ever-increasing in size, pieces, and cost of the current UCS sets. 

This makes a ton of sense to me. 

18 minutes ago, Mandalorianknight said:

Yes. Accounting for inflation, that's about $130. They're charging 54% more for one that, if the leaks were correct, is SMALLER than the previous one.

What i didn't know until yesterday... Untypically for UCS sets, the AT-ST is actually supposed to be widely available. So even if it will obviously vary by region, it should get greater discounts than what Lego will offer. 

@ArrowBricks So you are saying... With the tiny bit of terrain being included, this COULD have been, like, a ~$50 Battle Pack? If so, that's wild... And dare i say absolutely absurd, even for current Lego Star Wars standards. 

Edited July 1 by BrickPrick

[JohnTPT17]

2 hours ago, Kaijumeister said:

So they’re actually not going to reveal the rest of the summer wave today it seems, shame!

Official photos of the V-19 and 327th Battle Pack are out now!

[Darth_Bane13]

2 hours ago, Kaijumeister said:

So they’re actually not going to reveal the rest of the summer wave today it seems, shame!

Aged like milk 

 

Anyways the V-19 in pretty small, I think the 2008 one is better.