LEGO Star Wars Set Discussion 2026 - READ FIRST POST!!!

[Darth_Bane13]

7 hours ago, Mandalorianknight said:

 (I also would say in terms of design schemes and wave setup 2014 could be included in the era, but it's not exactly a hard cutoff. Similarly, I hesitate to say whether the modern era started in 2020 or 2021.)

Yeah I feel you could go either way in including 2014. It introduced stud shooters, spring loaded shooters, Microfighters, first Disney sets (rebels). On the flip side it still had TCW faces for figures, many prequel sets similar to years prior, no Disney logo on boxes, and of course no sequel sets. I guess you could call it a transition year for the theme.

 

2021 is when Lego really started downscaling. 2014-2020 had some downscales, but nowhere near what we have today. 2021 also had no sequel sets and really started the Disney+ show era. Printed waist capes started in 2021. On the other hand the 18+ sets started in 2020 and it was the start of a new clone era. 

8 hours ago, Mandalorianknight said:

2024 might be my favorite year for the entire franchise (it's that or 2014).

I'd be interested to hear why. I didn't think it was bad, but not particularly great either.

 

8 hours ago, Mandalorianknight said:

Now, the smart bricks, if they really are replacing our august wave this year, could lead into a dark age, and one with the critical and so far unseen flaw of potentially driving children off the theme. But it's too early to tell- honestly it's too early to tell if this is a new age at all.

It doesn't seem like there's been much innovation to the theme since 2021 except now with the smart bricks.

[Tariq j]

On 2/27/2026 at 9:52 PM, Swordy said:

Very true, although the blame may be shared with inner-national and international economies as much as the LEGO Group attempting to maintain record profits year after year (although I’m speaking more to pricing than builds in this case).
Although, to play (Dare)devil’s advocate, I’d like to draw attention to the fact that sets with the “wow” still happen; the UCS Slave 1 is a great example. Thus is why I hesitate to say if LSW has gotten worse.

Yeah I think we definitely get some good sets every now and again. The Tanitive IV Boarding Party, Cobb Vanth’s speeder and the upcoming X-Wing are all great sets. And I think the UCS sets have maintained a good quality too. 

27 minutes ago, Darth_Bane13 said:

2021 is when Lego really started downscaling. 2014-2020 had some downscales, but nowhere near what we have today. 2021 also had no sequel sets and really started the Disney+ show era. Printed waist capes started in 2021. On the other hand the 18+ sets started in 2020 and it was the start of a new clone era.

The theme also started to have a lot more “non-regular” sets in the 2020s too. You had the mosaics, the helmets, far more buildable figures etc. and to LEGO’s credit, some of them were very good. But it does feel as though they strayed away from what made the theme so great in the first place.

On 2/27/2026 at 8:28 PM, BrickPrick said:

On the topic of the current status of the overall theme, I don't think it's as drastic as to describe it as the dark ages, which is an extreme to me. We are obviously far removed from the golden age as well, which is the other side of the coin. So the truth may once again lie somewhere in the middle.

Yeah I think that’s would be I stand. There is definitly some good stuff but we’ve definitely lost that “wow!” factor as I said earlier. Especially in terms of innovation and design.

8 hours ago, Mandalorianknight said:

I think a lot of criticism of 2015-2019 is because some people have blinders when it comes to the sequels and therefore go "era with lots of sequel stuff? dark age" but I thought the design scheme was excellent, there was a good deal of variety between eras/projects (compared to, say, 2025 not having a single OT system set), etc.

I feel the 2015-2019 era is underrated. I thought all 5 films had excellent tie in waves (with Force Awakens/Rogue One and Solo especially getting some excellent stand out sets). I agree about the variety too. It never felt as though the new film dominated the year, there was still a healthy mix of OT/PT stuff (the Imperial Shuttle, Final Duel, A-Wing, Juggernaught etc.) There was also a really lucrative wave of <£50 sets too. 

[CloneCommando99]

TIE Avengers r 4 ever! (312)

 

I maintain that 2021-24 were pretty damn good years.

4 hours ago, Tariq j said:

I feel the 2015-2019 era is underrated. I thought all 5 films had excellent tie in waves (with Force Awakens/Rogue One and Solo especially getting some excellent stand out sets). I agree about the variety too. It never felt as though the new film dominated the year, there was still a healthy mix of OT/PT stuff (the Imperial Shuttle, Final Duel, A-Wing, Juggernaught etc.) There was also a really lucrative wave of <£50 sets too. 

It wasn’t 75% clone stuff so it was obviously a dark age. /s

 

Jokes aside. I completely agree.

[Darth_Bane13]

4 hours ago, Tariq j said:

I feel the 2015-2019 era is underrated. I thought all 5 films had excellent tie in waves (with Force Awakens/Rogue One and Solo especially getting some excellent stand out sets). I agree about the variety too. It never felt as though the new film dominated the year, there was still a healthy mix of OT/PT stuff (the Imperial Shuttle, Final Duel, A-Wing, Juggernaught etc.) There was also a really lucrative wave of <£50 sets too. 

I think if the sequels were good, this era would be looked on very highly. build quality during this time was top tier and battle packs were still cheap. 

[ArrowBricks]

Hi guys, I did write a very long post but it got deleted when I moved from page 28 to page 29. Sorry, it was a good one - I was quoting and @'ing all over the shop. Urgh. Either way, some great points made here and I now think a lot more differently! I cannot believe I lost over an hours work, grim. Nevermind. 

To conclude, profit margins seem to have put designers in almost impossible positions which is no coincidence with Disney at the helm. Is sustainable practices bloating operating costs? In other words, is what we are seeing the best LSW can do in the current climate? 

Pricing only explains half the issue, because the MTT at $120 makes it a better value proposition, but it does not wow me at all. Jabba's Palace wowed me back in 2012, even with 717 pieces for £120. Anakin's green interceptor is another good example. 

Smart brick sets are another example of good set in principle, bad in practice. These outcomes have dominated the theme during the decade, and the way the theme moves forward is by reducing that gap. There was a time and place for downscales, just like there is for smart brick technology just for downscale it is a few years past its sell by date, whilst smart bricks are 5 years too early. Downscales will very rarely, if ever, provide the required scope for the best version of a set. When I say best version, I mean to date not ever. 

Completely agree with the vast majority of the sentiment here in terms of looking back favourably on 2015-2019 given what has come afterwards and that the scope for innovation has reduced. I still think my idea of Signatures will resolve most of these issues as it will increase scale and provide scope for that development jump we all desire. UCS sets are the only thing that has got better in the past 5-10 years, and no surprises too given they're the cash cows. 18+ sets have made their mark and have characterised the 2020's but I do believe the belief by the LSW that that is what AFOLs and prospective fans wanted was a huge mis-step and has left millions on the table. 

I do encourage everyone to go over to the Future Star Wars sets thread as I would love to se your ideas and principles put to practice, especially when answering @Swordy's question of how the theme can reinvent itself. If we assess and predict where 18+ sets go next, I think the options are limited. 

Edited Tuesday at 11:13 PM by ArrowBricks

[Mandalorianknight]

15 hours ago, Darth_Bane13 said:

Yeah I feel you could go either way in including 2014. It introduced stud shooters, spring loaded shooters, Microfighters, first Disney sets (rebels). On the flip side it still had TCW faces for figures, many prequel sets similar to years prior, no Disney logo on boxes, and of course no sequel sets. I guess you could call it a transition year for the theme.

 

I'd be interested to hear why. I didn't think it was bad, but not particularly great either.

I don't think I've ever heard the TCW face style called a positive before- most people I know find them weird or at the very least disliked how it created two different styles of minifigure between film and TCW figures. What did you like about them?

Also, are Stud and Spring shooters any worse than flick missiles or technic cannons? Are you really going to say whether or not the disney logo is on the box impacts the quality of the set, but don't mention any of the actual sets included in the year?

 

There are a number of places where I think it excelled:

Location Playsets: We get very few of these nowadays but 2024 included two $55 location-based playsets. Boarding the Tantive IV is one of the strongest sets we've ever had at that price point IMO, and an incredible example of how to make a set that can appeal to adults and kids simultaneously. I know Peridea gets a lot of flack, and I would say the price is somewhat high, but it was an accurate diorama with well-built-in play features and knockout figures.

Anniversary treatment/figure selection: We got a number of minifigures that fans had been begging for for literal decades, some of whom lego would never have been able to fit in a standard retail set under normal circumstances. In addition we got 40755- this one is more subjective than the other points, but I think it's an amazing nod to some of lego's iconic original designs and is a remake of two sets of significant sentimental value to me. I will also throw in some of the Rebuild the Galaxy figures that were incredible pulls, such as Jedi Bob and Jedi Vader.

18+ millennium falcon: An engineering design marvel and beautifully built set.

Rex Microfighter: One of the most consumer-friendly moves lego's ever made by putting an extremely desirable figure who was briefly exclusive to a $625 set in the cheapest possible price point for a star wars set at the time. Not only that, but he was a direct 1-1 copy with the same amount of detail- they didn't remove details like they've done in other situations recently.

Super Battle Pack: The coruscant battle pack was very well-priced and gave kids a complete play experience with two different factions and multiple builds for each. A really solid clone wars starter kit for kids, and a perfect set for army building. (Also, I tend to get accusations that I have a bias against the clone era, so I just want to point out- I LOVE this set. I own five copies of this set, more than I've purchased for any battle pack aside from the snowtrooper one.)

Droid Carrier GWP: This is a near-perfect GWP. A set that is a desirable bonus to those buying, but simultaneously something that can be entirely bricklinked on the cheap if you miss out. It's an actual solid product, but also something that fans won't feel as if they need to shell out $160 to get ahold of. In my opinion all the higher-threshold GWPs should be like this- a small army-builder with figures already on shelves. A cool bonus to buyers but not something you can only get by shelling out hundreds in a very small window of time.

Star Destroyer: This might be the last flagship set I've got a positive overall opinion on? I wasn't a huge fan of it at the time, but the more I've seen of it, the more my opinion's improved. It's an excellent design and it was a much-needed set- the star destroyer shouldn't be absent from shelves for a decade. The shaping at the end of the day is superior to the 2014 version and it's actually cheaper adjusting for inflation.

Excellent variety: We had clone wars sets, OT sets, Mando sets, lego-origional sets (though we maybe didn't need the Evil Falcon). We had some statues, a diorama, and some (excellent) midi scale ships, but the vast majority of sets were still playsets. All we were missing were a few sequel sets and maybe something from RO.

Compare it to the immediate following year, where the flagship sets felt massively overpriced, almost every playset revolved around the same guy's DNA, we had I believe a near 50-50 ratio of 18+ to system sets, etc. (I will give 2025 that it's advent calendar not only trounces 2024's, but might be the all-time best.) 2014 is another contender as I liked the solid battle packs, the incredible double-punch of the excellent star destroyer and at-at models (and the Ghost was no slouch either), a solid era variety with heavy-hitters from both major eras at the time as well as a large set for the big new project, etc. (It's also funny that both 2014 and 2024 included an ISD playset and lego-original Jedi Starfighter.)

10 hours ago, CloneCommando99 said:

I maintain that 2021-24 were pretty damn good years.

It wasn’t 75% clone stuff so it was obviously a dark age. /s

There were some excellent parts to them. Though personally I find 2021 somewhat weak just from how little there was- there were some solid sets there, but I remember the quantity being fairly low. I also kind of want to look through 2023 because I remember having some issues with it as well- I'll have to look into it and 2022 further.

No no no, you don't understand. If it's not 75% clone stuff, it's a dark age because lego hates the prequels and won't make sets for them. If it IS 75% clone stuff, it's a dark age because they aren't 1-1 replicas of their childhood minifigures and sets but for inflation-adjusted lower prices, so clearly lego hates the prequels and is intentionally sabotaging the sets for them. The only possible way for lego to win is to just rerelease the 2014 battle packs.

(I'm actively guilty of this as my favorite year includes a remake of two of my favorite sets from my childhood)

Edited Wednesday at 06:49 AM by Mandalorianknight

[Darth_Bane13]

7 hours ago, Mandalorianknight said:

I don't think I've ever heard the TCW face style called a positive before- most people I know find them weird or at the very least disliked how it created two different styles of minifigure between film and TCW figures. What did you like about them?

Also, are Stud and Spring shooters any worse than flick missiles or technic cannons? Are you really going to say whether or not the disney logo is on the box impacts the quality of the set, but don't mention any of the actual sets included in the year?

You misunderstand me, I was merely arguing whether or not 2014 belongs in the 2015-2020 era or the 08-2013 era. You said you couldn't decide where 2014 belonged so I was Steelmanning the case for both sides. I wasn't saying TCW faces were a positive, merely that TCW faces makes them feel more of the 08-2013 era.

 

Same thing with the Stud and Spring shooters, I was saying they make it feel part of the latter era instead of the former. Again with the Disney logo, I was just laying out the case for when each era of LSW should begin and end.

 

7 hours ago, Mandalorianknight said:

There are a number of places where I think it excelled:

Location Playsets: We get very few of these nowadays but 2024 included two $55 location-based playsets. Boarding the Tantive IV is one of the strongest sets we've ever had at that price point IMO, and an incredible example of how to make a set that can appeal to adults and kids simultaneously. I know Peridea gets a lot of flack, and I would say the price is somewhat high, but it was an accurate diorama with well-built-in play features and knockout figures.

Anniversary treatment/figure selection: We got a number of minifigures that fans had been begging for for literal decades, some of whom lego would never have been able to fit in a standard retail set under normal circumstances. In addition we got 40755- this one is more subjective than the other points, but I think it's an amazing nod to some of lego's iconic original designs and is a remake of two sets of significant sentimental value to me. I will also throw in some of the Rebuild the Galaxy figures that were incredible pulls, such as Jedi Bob and Jedi Vader.

18+ millennium falcon: An engineering design marvel and beautifully built set.

Rex Microfighter: One of the most consumer-friendly moves lego's ever made by putting an extremely desirable figure who was briefly exclusive to a $625 set in the cheapest possible price point for a star wars set at the time. Not only that, but he was a direct 1-1 copy with the same amount of detail- they didn't remove details like they've done in other situations recently.

Super Battle Pack: The coruscant battle pack was very well-priced and gave kids a complete play experience with two different factions and multiple builds for each. A really solid clone wars starter kit for kids, and a perfect set for army building. (Also, I tend to get accusations that I have a bias against the clone era, so I just want to point out- I LOVE this set. I own five copies of this set, more than I've purchased for any battle pack aside from the snowtrooper one.)

Droid Carrier GWP: This is a near-perfect GWP. A set that is a desirable bonus to those buying, but simultaneously something that can be entirely bricklinked on the cheap if you miss out. It's an actual solid product, but also something that fans won't feel as if they need to shell out $160 to get ahold of. In my opinion all the higher-threshold GWPs should be like this- a small army-builder with figures already on shelves. A cool bonus to buyers but not something you can only get by shelling out hundreds in a very small window of time.

Star Destroyer: This might be the last flagship set I've got a positive overall opinion on? I wasn't a huge fan of it at the time, but the more I've seen of it, the more my opinion's improved. It's an excellent design and it was a much-needed set- the star destroyer shouldn't be absent from shelves for a decade. The shaping at the end of the day is superior to the 2014 version and it's actually cheaper adjusting for inflation.

Excellent variety: We had clone wars sets, OT sets, Mando sets, lego-origional sets (though we maybe didn't need the Evil Falcon). We had some statues, a diorama, and some (excellent) midi scale ships, but the vast majority of sets were still playsets. All we were missing were a few sequel sets and maybe something from RO.

Compare it to the immediate following year, where the flagship sets felt massively overpriced, almost every playset revolved around the same guy's DNA, we had I believe a near 50-50 ratio of 18+ to system sets, etc. (I will give 2025 that it's advent calendar not only trounces 2024's, but might be the all-time best.) 2014 is another contender as I liked the solid battle packs, the incredible double-punch of the excellent star destroyer and at-at models (and the Ghost was no slouch either), a solid era variety with heavy-hitters from both major eras at the time as well as a large set for the big new project, etc. (It's also funny that both 2014 and 2024 included an ISD playset and lego-original Jedi Starfighter.)

Some thoughts:

-Boarding on Tantive was good but it had the Fives figure which was horrendous. 

-40755 was more expensive and had less figures than the OGs. Anniversary figs were great except, young Leia, Fives, and the pink droid(not bad but just wasted slot).

-Cheap Captain Rex was cool.

-Super Battle Pack was very well priced.

-UCS sets were lackluster, and the Podracer diorama and droid builder sets were pretty bad. 

-I'd argue 2022 was a better year.

 

8 hours ago, Mandalorianknight said:

No no no, you don't understand. If it's not 75% clone stuff, it's a dark age because lego hates the prequels and won't make sets for them. If it IS 75% clone stuff, it's a dark age because they aren't 1-1 replicas of their childhood minifigures and sets but for inflation-adjusted lower prices, so clearly lego hates the prequels and is intentionally sabotaging the sets for them. The only possible way for lego to win is to just rerelease the 2014 battle packs.

Holy Straw Man

 

 

[Lordhelmet]

After watching a bunch of smart brick reviews, I am curious that if the sound functions are stored in the figs/tiles, how hard it would be for someone to create their own tiles that had good sounds.  The brick looks capable of making good sounds, so wouldn’t it just knowing how to program an rfid tile to make an accurate sound out of an 8 bit synthesizer?  It would actually make the smart brick looks capable kinda cool (that and doing mocs to fit it into good looking builds with functionality)

[CloneCommando99]

Another day (#313) of TIE Avengering bites the dust….

15 hours ago, Mandalorianknight said:

There were some excellent parts to them. Though personally I find 2021 somewhat weak just from how little there was- there were some solid sets there, but I remember the quantity being fairly low. I also kind of want to look through 2023 because I remember having some issues with it as well- I'll have to look into it and 2022 further.

Fair enough. 2023 was very much carried by the January and September waves.

2021’s summer wave was fun, as I still had hype for Mando S2. Darth Vader’s meditation chamber is still the best diorama imo. The AT AT is the best UCS set of all time. Though I guess entirely Mando stuff was a bit annoying. (I remember being salty at the time that we couldn’t get anything from TCWS7 except for Mandalore stuff that didn’t even include the clones, and the lack of villain sets for Bad Batch was disappointing.)

Edited Wednesday at 09:52 PM by CloneCommando99

[Mandalorianknight]

12 hours ago, Darth_Bane13 said:

You misunderstand me, I was merely arguing whether or not 2014 belongs in the 2015-2020 era or the 08-2013 era. You said you couldn't decide where 2014 belonged so I was Steelmanning the case for both sides. I wasn't saying TCW faces were a positive, merely that TCW faces makes them feel more of the 08-2013 era.

 

Some thoughts:

-Boarding on Tantive was good but it had the Fives figure which was horrendous. 

-40755 was more expensive and had less figures than the OGs. Anniversary figs were great except, young Leia, Fives, and the pink droid(not bad but just wasted slot).

-Cheap Captain Rex was cool.

-Super Battle Pack was very well priced.

-UCS sets were lackluster, and the Podracer diorama and droid builder sets were pretty bad. 

-I'd argue 2022 was a better year.

 

Holy Straw Man

Ah, I see.

I wouldn't count the Fives figure as horrendous by any stretch of the imagination. Even if it was, I think the set is still excellent just becuase he's very much a bonus- a $55 set of that size with only six figures would still have been good value, and Fives obviously isn't needed to represent the scene depicted- but the only thing you can really pin on fives is that the helmet printing isn't perfect. He has arm printing, a unique cloth pauldron is overall highly detailed, and importantly is a figure we weren't going to get in a standard set that lego gave us due to fan demand. Is he really horrendous because the helmet printing isn't the best possible?

It did have one less figure, but for $10 more adjusting for inflation, you got 235% more pieces than the original sets. And having them right next to each other, that's not just "pieces got smaller". The dropship is not only larger but significantly more built-up than the last one, which as much as I love it, is very rickety and suffers the open-cockpit issue that always bothered me as a kid. The Rebel speeder may be about the same size, but it's also a significantly more built-up design, rather than the 2008 model, which, as much as I love it, was quite literally just two 6x8 plates with a perimeter of sloped bricks and a turret. Would $35 have been better? Of course. But the price isn't anything horrendous, and certainly not anything like many of the set prices we've had either in 2025/26 or in many older years. Young Leia was the proverbial coughing baby alongside the other five hydrogen bombs, but as stated before Fives was both a great choice and a great figure IMO, and QT-KT is an excellent choice in my view, especially for her specific set. 40755 was limited-release and I'm sure we would have had endless complaints had it been the set Malak or Cal came in. QT-KT isn't a fan-favorite, but she does represent a major part of star wars through her importance to the real-life 501st legion.

For real. Especially with the one the following year that was less value for 50% more money. That coruscant pack may be the single best battle pack of the past fifteen years if I exclude the rose-tinted glasses from 40755. (And in either case a point in favor for the year since it gets the best battle pack either way.)

I thought the Interceptor was a solid choice but I'll admit 2014 has 2024 beat out in that regard- the Sandcrawler beats the Khetanna. Podracer Diorama was a slot I think would have better gone to something else but I declined to mention it as people know I am far from a fan of TPM, so I didn't want to let that cloud me. The droid builder was a very strange choice and not a good set in my view, but it isn't enough to stop my placement of 2024 at the top.

I looked at 2022. It isn't one of the theme's rougher years, but I would be interested to see why you think 2024 loses to it. For one thing, I think it suffers the same UCS issue- the Landspeeder was a much derided choice (though one I don't have too much of an issue with) and I think a LOT of people were left disappointed by the crest. There also aren't as many sets as 2024, so weaker sets like the oversized N1 or Grey Baseplate Duel have a larger comparative impact on the year. Same with sets that may not be weak in themselves but are odd choices, like the Justifier as the wave's flagship.

I mean... yeah, it is a joke, and replying off a comment with /s in the post. Not to mention that to the extent that there is some sort of backing to the joke- that of criticism for the new often coming from nostalgia for the old- I actively say I'm guilty of it myself in that same post.

5 hours ago, CloneCommando99 said:

Another day (#313) of TIE Avengering bites the dust….

Fair enough. 2023 was very much carried by the January and September waves.

2021’s summer wave was fun, as I still had hype for Mando S2. Darth Vader’s meditation chamber is still the best diorama imo. The AT AT is the best UCS set of all time. Though I guess entirely Mando stuff was a bit annoying. (I remember being salty at the time that we couldn’t get anything from TCWS7 except for Mandalore stuff that didn’t even include the clones, and the lack of villain sets for Bad Batch was disappointing.)

Going and actually looking at it, I think it was just fine as a year. There's definitely stuff I dislike about it- the 18+ saturation feels heavy and it did introduce the mechs. (Which while I've come to be OK with getting 1 mech per year, launching 3 at once- and what I'd consider the three weakest of the six mechs we've had- does hurt 2023.) But it does have a lot of excellent sets between the bomber, Ahsoka sets, etc.

No, yeah, I've got no issue with the sets we got that year (well, I think the Marauader set could have benefitted from scrapping the speeders to bulk the main craft, but that's just one wobble), it's just that the year didn't have many sets in it. Brickset says it's got the lowest number of sets since 2008, and that's even counting the 12 magazine polys we got that year. We only got 16 sets in 2021- only 11 standard system playsets. That's 2/3rds what 2024 got, and 2024 had a  lot more 18+ stuff in addition to those. But you're 100% right on the AT-AT. That alone should count as three sets.

[Darth_Bane13]

9 hours ago, Mandalorianknight said:

I wouldn't count the Fives figure as horrendous by any stretch of the imagination. Even if it was, I think the set is still excellent just becuase he's very much a bonus- a $55 set of that size with only six figures would still have been good value, and Fives obviously isn't needed to represent the scene depicted- but the only thing you can really pin on fives is that the helmet printing isn't perfect. He has arm printing, a unique cloth pauldron is overall highly detailed, and importantly is a figure we weren't going to get in a standard set that lego gave us due to fan demand. Is he really horrendous because the helmet printing isn't the best possible?

It did have one less figure, but for $10 more adjusting for inflation, you got 235% more pieces than the original sets. And having them right next to each other, that's not just "pieces got smaller". The dropship is not only larger but significantly more built-up than the last one, which as much as I love it, is very rickety and suffers the open-cockpit issue that always bothered me as a kid. The Rebel speeder may be about the same size, but it's also a significantly more built-up design, rather than the 2008 model, which, as much as I love it, was quite literally just two 6x8 plates with a perimeter of sloped bricks and a turret. Would $35 have been better? Of course. But the price isn't anything horrendous, and certainly not anything like many of the set prices we've had either in 2025/26 or in many older years. Young Leia was the proverbial coughing baby alongside the other five hydrogen bombs, but as stated before Fives was both a great choice and a great figure IMO, and QT-KT is an excellent choice in my view, especially for her specific set. 40755 was limited-release and I'm sure we would have had endless complaints had it been the set Malak or Cal came in. QT-KT isn't a fan-favorite, but she does represent a major part of star wars through her importance to the real-life 501st legion.

For real. Especially with the one the following year that was less value for 50% more money. That coruscant pack may be the single best battle pack of the past fifteen years if I exclude the rose-tinted glasses from 40755. (And in either case a point in favor for the year since it gets the best battle pack either way.)

I thought the Interceptor was a solid choice but I'll admit 2014 has 2024 beat out in that regard- the Sandcrawler beats the Khetanna. Podracer Diorama was a slot I think would have better gone to something else but I declined to mention it as people know I am far from a fan of TPM, so I didn't want to let that cloud me. The droid builder was a very strange choice and not a good set in my view, but it isn't enough to stop my placement of 2024 at the top.

I looked at 2022. It isn't one of the theme's rougher years, but I would be interested to see why you think 2024 loses to it. For one thing, I think it suffers the same UCS issue- the Landspeeder was a much derided choice (though one I don't have too much of an issue with) and I think a LOT of people were left disappointed by the crest. There also aren't as many sets as 2024, so weaker sets like the oversized N1 or Grey Baseplate Duel have a larger comparative impact on the year. Same with sets that may not be weak in themselves but are odd choices, like the Justifier as the wave's flagship.

Going and actually looking at it, I think it was just fine as a year. There's definitely stuff I dislike about it- the 18+ saturation feels heavy and it did introduce the mechs. (Which while I've come to be OK with getting 1 mech per year, launching 3 at once- and what I'd consider the three weakest of the six mechs we've had- does hurt 2023.) But it does have a lot of excellent sets between the bomber, Ahsoka sets, etc.

No, yeah, I've got no issue with the sets we got that year (well, I think the Marauader set could have benefitted from scrapping the speeders to bulk the main craft, but that's just one wobble), it's just that the year didn't have many sets in it. Brickset says it's got the lowest number of sets since 2008, and that's even counting the 12 magazine polys we got that year. We only got 16 sets in 2021- only 11 standard system playsets. That's 2/3rds what 2024 got, and 2024 had a  lot more 18+ stuff in addition to those. But you're 100% right on the AT-AT. That alone should count as three sets.

The helmet printing on Fives is just so bad, with the random gaps between the blues. compare it to the source material and you'll see what I'm talking about. The pauldron is also too flat and no cloth kama. I think Lego charges a little more for sets with anniversary figures, so I don't consider them a bonus. Boarding on Tantive is still a good set though.

Two less army buildable figures and notably doesn't have the Shadow trooper. The 08 dropship could fit 4 Stormtroopers on the back which was really fun since you could fill out the back with an extra stormtrooper from your collection. Also the old one didn't have family guy Stormtrooper helmets. New rebel speeder definitely looks better though. I never even heard of QT-KT until the Lego figure, it's a decent figure but a weird choice for an army building set.

My problem with the Interceptor is the stand. Jangbricks review turned me off of the set.

2022 is actually pretty hit or miss for me, I can't defend some of those sets (Jabbas palace, kenobi duel, fighter tank). But we also got an Andor set, Bd1, AT-TE, obi starfighter, dioramas. What was the problem with the UCS Crest? I'm not a fan of the ship but it seemed like a well done, minifig scale set for people who like it. Lukes Landspeeder is such a wack concept for a UCS set, I don't know who would want that. I think it had higher highs and perhaps lower lows than 2024.

I thought 2021 had a bad winter wave, but the rest of the year was quite good.

 

[BrickPrick]

On 3/3/2026 at 2:04 AM, Darth_Bane13 said:

I think it's worth mentioning the dark age might get clearer with time. It's hard to pinpoint a golden age or dark age while you're in it, it's usually not until years after the fact that you can identify it. If Lego Star Wars gets significantly better or worse in say, 2030 it could change our perception of this time period. I do remember a lot of people disliking the 2015-2020 era of sets, but now people sometimes include that as part of the golden age since the builds and figs have gotten much worse.

Sure, people's perception can change all the time. Especially Star Wars as a whole is no stranger to this. Look at how heated it got with the hated 2016 Clone Turbo Tank. But folks sorta came around on it just a couple of year later. And when now compared to the newest Tiny Tank, it looks even more like a sweet spot kinda set. 

Just saying, when it comes to these extremes, I don't need particular long to make up my mind whether we are in the golden or dark ages, whether this is the best or the worst timeline as a LSW fan to experience. Because, like I said, what you get nowadays is more of a middle ground featuring many advantages and disadvantages next to past days. I dunno, no matter how complicated these comparisons can get, it's more on the easy side for me to pinpoint exactly where we're currently at. 

On 3/3/2026 at 4:50 PM, Tariq j said:

Yeah I think that’s would be I stand. There is definitly some good stuff but we’ve definitely lost that “wow!” factor as I said earlier. Especially in terms of innovation and design.

Yep, there is enough good stuff happening to still make you excited and looking forward to things. But at the same time, there is enough bad stuff going on that keeps you from enjoying it too much and lets you have plenty of reservations. Pricing alone will see to that. 

11 hours ago, Mandalorianknight said:

I wouldn't count the Fives figure as horrendous by any stretch of the imagination. Even if it was, I think the set is still excellent just becuase he's very much a bonus- a $55 set of that size with only six figures would still have been good value, and Fives obviously isn't needed to represent the scene depicted- but the only thing you can really pin on fives is that the helmet printing isn't perfect. He has arm printing, a unique cloth pauldron is overall highly detailed, and importantly is a figure we weren't going to get in a standard set that lego gave us due to fan demand. Is he really horrendous because the helmet printing isn't the best possible?

See, that's exactly the kind of extreme thinking that I just can't get behind nowadays. You clearly have a flawed figure that still has plenty of good looking details. But for some reason the former is always enough to call it "horrendous". If one particular part is the problem, say the helmet, then it's exactly that... a bad looking helmet. I mean, it's a minifigure, not a mini-helmet. How does that alone make it an awful minifigure? It doesn't. Because pros can outweight the cons and vice versa.  Sure, the torso and legs have some flaws as well. The ammo packs are too big and it obviously lacks the cloth carma. But again, the rest of both parts look good. The arm printing is solid and a welcome addition. His unique face print is very good even. So what...? All in all, it's a decent figure that could or should have been much better. Just missing the nuance in these conversations. The devil's in the details... yeah. But better point out all the details, not just the obvious flaws  you can constructively criticize. 

[Kaijumeister]

On 3/3/2026 at 6:41 AM, Mandalorianknight said:

I think a lot of criticism of 2015-2019 is because some people have blinders when it comes to the sequels and therefore go "era with lots of sequel stuff? dark age" but I thought the design scheme was excellent, there was a good deal of variety between eras/projects (compared to, say, 2025 not having a single OT system set), etc. (I also would say in terms of design schemes and wave setup 2014 could be included in the era, but it's not exactly a hard cutoff. Similarly, I hesitate to say whether the modern era started in 2020 or 2021.)

Agreed. I find it remarkable in retrospect that Lego did such a good job of their initial and follow-up waves for the sequel and spinoff films, AND still sprinkled in sets from legacy content too. That’s why 2018 is always a year I consider as a standout because of the blend of fantastic Solo sets, spoiler sets from TLJ with much needed characters, and stuff from the OT and TCW. Of course back then slots weren’t diversified across buildable characters and 18+ sets.

I would say ‘modern’ Star Wars began with 2021, namely the shift from single and heavy winter and summer waves to spreading sets throughout the year whilst really keeping January quite light. You can tell 2020 was a transitional year for the theme, particularly with the summer wave which felt quite lacklustre and directionless compared to later years IMO.

On 3/3/2026 at 9:41 PM, ArrowBricks said:

To conclude, profit margins seem to have put designers in almost impossible positions which is no coincidence with Disney at the helm. Is sustainable practices bloating operating costs? In other words, is what we are seeing the best LSW can do in the current climate? 

Completely agree with the vast majority of the sentiment here in terms of looking back favourably on 2015-2019 given what has come afterwards and that the scope for innovation has reduced. I still think my idea of Signatures will resolve most of these issues as it will increase scale and provide scope for that development jump we all desire. UCS sets are the only thing that has got better in the past 5-10 years, and no surprises too given they're the cash cows. 18+ sets have made their mark and have characterised the 2020's but I do believe the belief by the LSW that that is what AFOLs and prospective fans wanted was a huge mis-step and has left millions on the table. 

This is my biggest pet peeve with the current system sets, especially the larger non-UCS ones. They’re a victim of ruthless constraints imposed by budgets, and it shows. Price gouging is one thing, but doing that (at a relentless pace) whilst continuing to diminish the complexity, minifigure counts, and overall building experience is what sucks the most. I think of it as both top-down and bottom-up inflation. You pay for more, and you get far less.

I concur. The Lego Star Wars Team’s idea of what constitutes desirable ‘mature’ sets strikes me as quite…pretentious? For lack of a better term. Very geared towards people who they worry will be embarrassed about buying and building Lego. If you disregard UCS sets where this should be expected anyway, no Lego Star Wars set can match the complexity and ingenuity of some of the larger Ninjago sets or heck, even the Marvel ones like the Milano. They don’t even try to push the envelope with playscale, but this can’t be expected anyway given how little the designers have to work with.

On 3/4/2026 at 6:48 AM, Mandalorianknight said:

Location Playsets: We get very few of these nowadays but 2024 included two $55 location-based playsets. Boarding the Tantive IV is one of the strongest sets we've ever had at that price point IMO, and an incredible example of how to make a set that can appeal to adults and kids simultaneously. I know Peridea gets a lot of flack, and I would say the price is somewhat high, but it was an accurate diorama with well-built-in play features and knockout figures.

There were some excellent parts to them. Though personally I find 2021 somewhat weak just from how little there was- there were some solid sets there, but I remember the quantity being fairly low. I also kind of want to look through 2023 because I remember having some issues with it as well- I'll have to look into it and 2022 further.

I will sing the praises of those 2024 location sets until the end of time. The Tantive IV, Gideon / Paz Battle, and Peridea all had fantastic minifigures and good looking builds. It’s sad that within a single year, we got all those great location sets only for subsequent years to forget about them again.

IMO 2023 was mostly a weak year even with the Mandalorian S3 sets, however the initial Ahsoka sets and (IMO) RotJ dioramas did a lot of work to lift up the average quality of the year for me.

20 hours ago, CloneCommando99 said:

2021’s summer wave was fun, as I still had hype for Mando S2. Darth Vader’s meditation chamber is still the best diorama imo. The AT AT is the best UCS set of all time. Though I guess entirely Mando stuff was a bit annoying. (I remember being salty at the time that we couldn’t get anything from TCWS7 except for Mandalore stuff that didn’t even include the clones, and the lack of villain sets for Bad Batch was disappointing.)

I remember absolutely loving the lineup for the 2021 summer wave because Lego finally made things that were new, relevant, and desirable. All the Mando sets, Siege of Mandalore tie-ins, Bad Batch Shuttle etc. felt like the wishlist of the average Star Wars fan clued in to new media at the time.

2 hours ago, BrickPrick said:

Yep, there is enough good stuff happening to still make you excited and looking forward to things. But at the same time, there is enough bad stuff going on that keeps you from enjoying it too much and lets you have plenty of reservations. Pricing alone will see to that. 

See, that's exactly the kind of extreme thinking that I just can't get behind nowadays. You clearly have a flawed figure that still has plenty of good looking details. 

In a way, this is why I derive more enjoyment and excitement from leaks than I do set reveals (more so for Star Wars than the other themes). It’s because I know that no matter how good a Star Wars set sounds, the real product will as always be a victim of endless compromises. From around 2021-2024 I would typically buy most if not all sets in a wave (especially summer ones), but as of late I’ve become extremely selective with Star Wars sets because a lot of them just feel like ‘filler’.

Not a criticism from me towards either side of that particular debate, but it’s interesting how diverse the spectrum of opinion is when it comes to minifigure ‘accuracy’. On a personal level I’m less bothered about small inaccuracies as minifigures are a substantial form of abstraction anyway.

Edited Thursday at 06:41 PM by Kaijumeister

[Darth_Bane13]

3 hours ago, BrickPrick said:

See, that's exactly the kind of extreme thinking that I just can't get behind nowadays. You clearly have a flawed figure that still has plenty of good looking details. But for some reason the former is always enough to call it "horrendous". If one particular part is the problem, say the helmet, then it's exactly that... a bad looking helmet. I mean, it's a minifigure, not a mini-helmet. How does that alone make it an awful minifigure? It doesn't. Because pros can outweight the cons and vice versa.  Sure, the torso and legs have some flaws as well. The ammo packs are too big and it obviously lacks the cloth carma. But again, the rest of both parts look good. The arm printing is solid and a welcome addition. His unique face print is very good even. So what...? All in all, it's a decent figure that could or should have been much better. Just missing the nuance in these conversations. The devil's in the details... yeah. But better point out all the details, not just the obvious flaws  you can constructively criticize. 

The helmet is roughly 1/3 of a minifigure, you could include the head which I guess would make it 1/4. So 1/4 of the minifig is bad which gives it a 75% grade. Also factor in the lack of cloth Kama and the flat pauldron, leaving the figure at a failing grade in my mind. Most figures don't have anywhere near this amount of issues. Are you guys really accepting this quality from a multi billion dollar company who charges as much as they do? I just personally vote with my wallet when it comes to these kind of things.

[CloneCommando99]

For day 314 we’re going to be referencing my favourite KOTOR cinematic.

Guy who came up with Smart Play: ‘You were deceived. And now your theme shall fall.’ /s

 

56 minutes ago, Kaijumeister said:

 

In a way, this is why I derive more enjoyment and excitement from leaks than I do set reveals (more so for Star Wars than the other themes). It’s because I know that no matter how good a Star Wars set sounds, the real product will as always be a victim of endless compromises. From around 2021-2024 I would typically buy most if not all sets in a wave (especially summer ones), but as of late I’ve become extremely selective with Star Wars sets because a lot of them just feel like ‘filler’.

Not a criticism from me towards either side of that particular debate, but it’s interesting how diverse the spectrum of opinion is when it comes to minifigure ‘accuracy’. On a personal level I’m less bothered about small inaccuracies as minifigures are a substantial form of abstraction anyway.

Agreed on both fronts. The 2022 AT TE leak hype was generational.

And on a similar note. I’m not too bothered about minor inaccuracies like helmet holes or stormtrooper helmets. I honestly don’t really see the need for arm printing on most things whilst it is nice. I like my Lego having a blocky charm, rather than trying to be an action figure. Like it gets to a point whether the people complaining about minifig accuracy are just in the wrong toy fandom. In some cases, like dual moulded legs on imperial officers, it’s somewhat justified though.

[Mandalorianknight]

4 hours ago, Darth_Bane13 said:

The helmet printing on Fives is just so bad, with the random gaps between the blues. compare it to the source material and you'll see what I'm talking about. The pauldron is also too flat and no cloth kama. I think Lego charges a little more for sets with anniversary figures, so I don't consider them a bonus. Boarding on Tantive is still a good set though.

Two less army buildable figures and notably doesn't have the Shadow trooper. The 08 dropship could fit 4 Stormtroopers on the back which was really fun since you could fill out the back with an extra stormtrooper from your collection. Also the old one didn't have family guy Stormtrooper helmets. New rebel speeder definitely looks better though. I never even heard of QT-KT until the Lego figure, it's a decent figure but a weird choice for an army building set.

My problem with the Interceptor is the stand. Jangbricks review turned me off of the set.

2022 is actually pretty hit or miss for me, I can't defend some of those sets (Jabbas palace, kenobi duel, fighter tank). But we also got an Andor set, Bd1, AT-TE, obi starfighter, dioramas. What was the problem with the UCS Crest? I'm not a fan of the ship but it seemed like a well done, minifig scale set for people who like it. Lukes Landspeeder is such a wack concept for a UCS set, I don't know who would want that. I think it had higher highs and perhaps lower lows than 2024.

I thought 2021 had a bad winter wave, but the rest of the year was quite good.

As I said it's not perfect but I don't think it's anything particularly jarring, especially given that, at the end of the day, these are lego minifigures and not black series. The Pauldron I think is just fine- as a cloth part they wouldn't be able to get a bend on it without making it curved and oversized like the classic cloth pauldrons. Honestly I think it's closer than most cloth pauldrons we've had. As for whether or not the anniversary figures are extras, it's not exactly what I meant. My point was moreso that at $55,  set that size and number of pieces with that many minifigures was solid value even if Fives hadn't been included at all.

Yes, it's not as "army-buildable" in that respect but it was also a limited release $40 anniversary set, not two retail release battle packs. I would have preferred if the set included a shadow trooper rather than a third stormtrooper, but it doesn't exactly break the set for me. The 08 dropship fitting 4 troopers was nice- though I never liked that it had asymmetrical loading unless you bought another trooper- but as I said before it was also an extremely rickety build that nostalgia aside wouldn't work as a design in the modern era- I think the build for the 20th anniversary dropship proves this. With QT-KT- yeah... she's not army-buildable. Neither are any of the other anniversary figures. This isn't a retail battle pack, it's a $40 anniversary set with a limited release.

I don't own the crest, but from what I've seen and what I remember at the time, there were a lot of complaints. Many about the color (I think it was unrealistic to expect silver personally), but also a lot about the proportions and the figure selection. It also seems like it was by far the worst-selling UCS set in recent memory, I can't think of a single other UCS set that was regularly hitting 40% off. Sales don't always translate to quality but if a set like that is hitting 40% off you have to wonder why.

I don't have problems with the 2021 sets- I think most of them are good and I liked that sets like the X-wing or TIE came back to reasonable prices, nearly halving their 2018 price points- my issue is just that we didn't get many sets in general. As I said, it was the lowest number of sets since 2008ish.

35 minutes ago, Kaijumeister said:

Agreed. I find it remarkable in retrospect that Lego did such a good job of their initial and follow-up waves for the sequel and spinoff films, AND still sprinkled in sets from legacy content too. That’s why 2018 is always a year I consider as a standout because of the blend of fantastic Solo sets, spoiler sets from TLJ with much needed characters, and stuff from the OT and TCW. Of course back then slots weren’t diversified across buildable characters and 18+ sets.

I would say ‘modern’ Star Wars began with 2021, namely the shift from single and heavy winter and summer waves to spreading sets throughout the year whilst really keeping January quite light. You can tell 2020 was a transitional year for the theme, particularly with the summer wave which felt quite lacklustre and directionless compared to later years IMO.

I will sing the praises of those 2024 location sets until the end of time. The Tantive IV, Gideon / Paz Battle, and Peridea all had fantastic minifigures and good looking builds. It’s sad that within a single year, we got all those great location sets only for subsequent years to forget about them again.

IMO 2023 was mostly a weak year even with the Mandalorian S3 sets, however the initial Ahsoka sets and (IMO) RotJ dioramas did a lot of work to lift up the average quality of the year for me.

Oh, man, 2018 was AWESOME. The TIE Fighter and X-wing that year were foundational sets for me, and even though they're larger than I want my collection scale to be, and Lego's done some great work improving the X-wing shaping since then, I can't bring myself to replace them. The only negative I'd give that year was the constraction figure selection, but even then the Range Trooper looked great.

That's an excellent point, you've convinced me. Now the question will be whether or not 2026 represents a similar shift.

I completely forgot the Paz battle was 2024 as well, alright, that may cement it as the best year of the theme for me. Unfortunately, none of these seemed to sell particularly well. (I mean, it was great for me personally, I think I got the Paz battle for $20, but it is unfortunate in general as it lowers our chances of future sets.)

2023 did have some weaker selection aspects, but you're totally right about the first Ahsoka wave. And I'd forgotten the throne room diorama was 2023- that's one of my favorite sets of all time based on the best scene in the franchise.

[BrickBob Studpants]

It‘s quite funny to me how some waves or years get so much praise nowadays, considering their reception back in the day  The 2008 TCW sets for instance got A LOT of flak, and not just for the faceprints. Kinda fitting, since the same thing happened to the PT and TCW too ^^ 

Not saying the same thing will happen again with some of the 2025 or Smart Play sets, but I wouldn’t be surprised if there will be some nostalgia at play in 10 years

[ArrowBricks]

3 hours ago, Kaijumeister said:

In a way, this is why I derive more enjoyment and excitement from leaks than I do set reveals (more so for Star Wars than the other themes). It’s because I know that no matter how good a Star Wars set sounds, the real product will as always be a victim of endless compromises. From around 2021-2024 I would typically buy most if not all sets in a wave (especially summer ones)

Completely agree with this.l, except I would argue 2020-2025 has been dominated by endless compromises. 

In fairness, there’s been some good sets during this period: the Inquisitor Scythe is such a good set. 

[Darth_Bane13]

2 hours ago, Mandalorianknight said:

As I said it's not perfect but I don't think it's anything particularly jarring, especially given that, at the end of the day, these are lego minifigures and not black series. The Pauldron I think is just fine- as a cloth part they wouldn't be able to get a bend on it without making it curved and oversized like the classic cloth pauldrons. Honestly I think it's closer than most cloth pauldrons we've had. As for whether or not the anniversary figures are extras, it's not exactly what I meant. My point was moreso that at $55,  set that size and number of pieces with that many minifigures was solid value even if Fives hadn't been included at all.

Yes, it's not as "army-buildable" in that respect but it was also a limited release $40 anniversary set, not two retail release battle packs. I would have preferred if the set included a shadow trooper rather than a third stormtrooper, but it doesn't exactly break the set for me. The 08 dropship fitting 4 troopers was nice- though I never liked that it had asymmetrical loading unless you bought another trooper- but as I said before it was also an extremely rickety build that nostalgia aside wouldn't work as a design in the modern era- I think the build for the 20th anniversary dropship proves this. With QT-KT- yeah... she's not army-buildable. Neither are any of the other anniversary figures. This isn't a retail battle pack, it's a $40 anniversary set with a limited release.

I don't own the crest, but from what I've seen and what I remember at the time, there were a lot of complaints. Many about the color (I think it was unrealistic to expect silver personally), but also a lot about the proportions and the figure selection. It also seems like it was by far the worst-selling UCS set in recent memory, I can't think of a single other UCS set that was regularly hitting 40% off. Sales don't always translate to quality but if a set like that is hitting 40% off you have to wonder why.

I don't have problems with the 2021 sets- I think most of them are good and I liked that sets like the X-wing or TIE came back to reasonable prices, nearly halving their 2018 price points- my issue is just that we didn't get many sets in general. As I said, it was the lowest number of sets since 2008ish.

I'm not asking Lego to do CAC level detailing, I don't even need arm printing. I just want them to correct basic things they got right 10 years ago. 

The 20th anniversary dropship wasn't rickety and had three seats plus a shadow trooper. I think I would've preferred them just to release the rebel BP portion alone as a $20 set.

I wonder if part of that was timing, and also probably not a popular enough ship for the price point.

Yeah I don't mind the downscaled Tie and X-wing. The Imperial Shuttle on the other hand....

2 hours ago, BrickBob Studpants said:

It‘s quite funny to me how some waves or years get so much praise nowadays, considering their reception back in the day  The 2008 TCW sets for instance got A LOT of flak, and not just for the faceprints. Kinda fitting, since the same thing happened to the PT and TCW too ^^ 

Not saying the same thing will happen again with some of the 2025 or Smart Play sets, but I wouldn’t be surprised if there will be some nostalgia at play in 10 years

This is crazy to me, what didn't people like about the 08 TCW sets?

[BrickBob Studpants]

2 hours ago, Darth_Bane13 said:

This is crazy to me, what didn't people like about the 08 TCW sets?

These are the points of criticism that I remember:

• Some of the sets were criticised as being oversized, like the Magna Guard Starfighter and the V-19. The latter only having one minifig wasn‘t exactly warmly received either. And the Gunship not having any pilots.
• Similar to the 2023 Gunship, people complained about not getting a standard Gunship due to the nose art.
• The AT-TE was called a “skeleton with some plates hanging from the sides“. Larger sets being somewhat hollow was a common complaint around that time.
• People heavily disliked the flick-fire missiles.
• The Twilight was called a flying box and one of the ugliest SW sets ever. And people poked fun at the lack of a windshield
• Besides the faceprints, which were obviously the biggest concern, a lot of people didn‘t like the stylisation of the minifigs, e.g., the CTs’ helmets and torso prints. The rigid kamas also weren‘t a fan-favourite, and neither were some of the new pieces (Plo Koon‘s head or the Magnaguard pieces).
• The grey lightsaber hilts were HATED.
• The lack of OT/PT sets that summer was a point of contention, if I recall correctly. It took TCW some time to find its audience!

I personally didn‘t agree with any of the points, besides the faceprints. Not that I much preferred the OT/PT prints at the time either, since all other themes had pupils by that point and the SW minifigs continued to have black beady eyes until the end of 2009  Still better than the horrendous HP faceprints before 2010, but I‘m so glad everything‘s been consistent since then!

Edited Friday at 01:40 AM by BrickBob Studpants

[Darth_Bane13]

13 hours ago, BrickBob Studpants said:

These are the points of criticism that I remember:

• Some of the sets were criticised as being oversized, like the Magna Guard Starfighter and the V-19. The latter only having one minifig wasn‘t exactly warmly received either. And the Gunship not having any pilots.
• Similar to the 2023 Gunship, people complained about not getting a standard Gunship due to the nose art.
• The AT-TE was called a “skeleton with some plates hanging from the sides“. Larger sets being somewhat hollow was a common complaint around that time.
• People heavily disliked the flick-fire missiles.
• The Twilight was called a flying box and one of the ugliest SW sets ever. And people poked fun at the lack of a windshield
• Besides the faceprints, which were obviously the biggest concern, a lot of people didn‘t like the stylisation of the minifigs, e.g., the CTs’ helmets and torso prints. The rigid kamas also weren‘t a fan-favourite, and neither were some of the new pieces (Plo Koon‘s head or the Magnaguard pieces).
• The grey lightsaber hilts were HATED.
• The lack of OT/PT sets that summer was a point of contention, if I recall correctly. It took TCW some time to find its audience!

I personally didn‘t agree with any of the points, besides the faceprints. Not that I much preferred the OT/PT prints at the time either, since all other themes had pupils by that point and the SW minifigs continued to have black beady eyes until the end of 2009  Still better than the horrendous HP faceprints before 2010, but I‘m so glad everything‘s been consistent since then!

Interesting, I think the Twilight, grey hilts, and TCW face prints were definitely valid complaints which still get criticized to this day. Were there any other sets/waves from this era that people didn't like when they came out?

[BrickBob Studpants]

Looks like the minifig selection of the Imperial Shuttle is slightly different since the torso of a pilot leaked!  

[Swordy]

Is it Day 315 yet? If so, let me propose this headcanon:

Vader loved the TIE Avenger so much, despite it never living up to its full potential, that he named one of the Star Destroyers he commanded to be named Avenger.
So if Darth Vader, a famous celebrity, endorses the TIE Avenger, then so should the LEGO Group.

Long live the TIE Avenger campaign! However long it may take.

On 2/28/2026 at 5:59 AM, CloneCommando99 said:

Throw in Man, Varian Skye and a Black Lantern Fridge and we have a deal. (We also have to accommodate the Nightwing’s asset side build)

Deal. I'm fine with all of those–well, except, can we not accommodate anything regarding assets?

On 2/27/2026 at 6:16 PM, Mandalorianknight said:

I'm legitimately so glad you brought them up, and in another thread no less. We're gonna get them picked up by lego's algorithm sooner or later. (Seriously, this actually made my day to know my half-joke is spreading.)

I will argue that you can make a reasonable amben rifle with existing pieces, but I'd agree boba's 100% deserves a new mold. You can't even approximate it with existing parts, since so much of it's mass and shaping is in the butt of the rifle.

You made me panic-google to make sure "bucks the trend" was a real figure of speech and not something I'd made up.

Glad to hear. :)

I mean, I do have a reasonable-looking EE-3 carbine build, but the trouble is that it's so fiddly that I get frustrated with it a lot of the time. I'm not normally one for custom molds for this weapon and that, but they are iconic blasters that don't get a reasonable approximation in official LEGO sets. For that reason I'd be against custom blasters for Han Solo or stormtroopers, since I do believe both in-universe weapons provided inspiration for the LEGO counterparts.

Lol, I was meaning that I had read "Sandcrawler Bucks," saw "the trend" and my brain made a connection between the two as "Sandcrawler bucks, the new trending SW-branded currency." XD

On 3/2/2026 at 11:06 AM, BrickPrick said:

Ha, that stuff has never affected my personal enjoyment to such an extent I would lose interest to engage on Eurobricks or anything. However, It did make me feel about Lego Star Wars in a really weird way, constantly causing contrasting emotions between laughter and anger. A presence I haven't felt since... well, never honestly. 

Yeah, I get some of that winter blues feeling as well. Though I suppose it's generally less tied to certain seasons and more about the current leak situations. And right now... other personal priorities taking over as well. Also, nevermind... you're so back. 

Fair. For me, I love the community here, but my primary reason for taking part in it is to discuss new LEGO (and maybe the newest Star Wars show so long as the rancor doesn't notice); thus, losing interest in upcoming LEGO does affect my activity. Like you say, there are other things that may take priority, and I guess those help distract me from any dips in my interest in LEGO.
I get what you mean by the contrasting humor and frustration of smart bricks. Seeing Jang test out the smart brick made me crack up, and so long as I don't consider the waste of resources this is for LEGO–resources that could easily be placed into bettering what LEGO fans already like–I don't mind the sets at all. It'll be sad to walk into a store, see all the new sets, and realize again there's nothing for me.

Yeah, leaks have been either rather slow or too early as of late. Plus, seeing TLG trend away from my interests and price range is saddening to me. I try to avoid complaining unless I can tie it into a greater principle about which I feel passionate (hence my overindulgence on railing against the 2025 Clonemania). I strongly dislike being a nuisance and I strongly dislike being apathetic–two things that don't always mix, lol.

That's right, I'm back! I'm back! *falls* WHAAA! Ow, my back–oh, my back!

On 2/28/2026 at 9:11 AM, Darth_Bane13 said:

This is true, objective measures you could use would be price or accuracy. Even then it is subjective whether someone considers accuracy to be important to what makes a good set. I do however think the majority of fans would agree R1 2016 was a better initial wave, I'd be interested to see a poll.

Price and accuracy are good measurements, yes. Variety/coverage might be another, since an initial wave should represent as much of the excitement and hope for the movie as possible. An aspect I especially appreciate about the 2015 TFA wave was that the main character was included in the cheapest set, while the most expensive included the full cast; thus it made accommodations for both economical positions to get the main character and/or cast, while offering plenty of variety inbetween. I struggle to find an exact quality that would represent, but I believe that can be just as instrumental of an aspect as proper pricing per set.
You're undoubtedly right that a majority of fans agree the R1 wave is one of the better release waves, for I've heard that tale for years… I tend to disagree, actually; just off pictures online, I don't see an overwhelming sense of appeal in the models–but with that I will admit that I lack in-hand experience with said builds. If I had anything to contend against the 2016 R1 wave, I might go with the Solo or even Episode II waves, but I honestly haven't done a deep research into the matter.

On 3/5/2026 at 12:37 PM, Kaijumeister said:

The Lego Star Wars Team’s idea of what constitutes desirable ‘mature’ sets strikes me as quite…pretentious? For lack of a better term. Very geared towards people who they worry will be embarrassed about buying and building Lego.

Very much agree. It's why I avoid saying "well, at least TLG is appealing to AFoLs," when I believe true adult fans of LEGO appreciate LEGO as a play-thing as much as a display piece. The 18+ and UCS sets, on the other hand, seem geared toward groups like the SW influencers who want a large Venator behind them in videos or those at the office who want Luke's helmet at their desk. In fact, I think that to the end of appealing to people who display LSW rather than play with it, TLG have prioritized downscaling and fuller detail over what @BrickBob Studpants described as "large but hallow" builds of the 2000s; larger is generally cooler for kids, and hallow implies lighter, thus easier with which to play. (Yes, as well as flimsy, although isn't the point of LEGO destroying and rebuilding anyway?)

 

A thought struck me yesterday. LEGO Ninjago and, dare I say, LEGO Marvel, who are both receiving phenomenal sets as of late, are 15 and 14 years into their lifespan. Line that up with the years many fans consider the "golden era" of LEGO Star Wars: 2013 and 2014. So perhaps the current stage of LSW is simply the natural course of a theme running for over a quarter of a century?
There's also the point to be made that the LSW team seems to be in the middle of transition from one generation to the next. Mandates from the executive level are at play, but the trend toward a particular kind of subject matter and emphasis on "MOCs for sale" aka the 18+ display sets may be attributed to fresh, young vision–for better or worse, of course.

46 minutes ago, BrickBob Studpants said:

Looks like the minifig selection of the Imperial Shuttle is slightly different since the torso of a pilot leaked!  

Interesting. I hope this instead of the pair of stormtroopers rumored, although I honestly fear it'll be in the stead of Pershing.

Edited Friday at 08:41 PM by Swordy

[CloneCommando99]

30 minutes ago, BrickBob Studpants said:

Looks like the minifig selection of the Imperial Shuttle is slightly different since the torso of a pilot leaked!  

I’m assuming that this is instead of Fennec due to the black colour scheme. If so, definitely an upgrade! Easily the best minifig to ever come in an imperial shuttle set. Now if the initial fig list was incorrect, here’s hoping for Elia Kane instead of Mando.

14 minutes ago, Swordy said:

Is it Day 315 yet? If so, let me propose this headcanon:

Vader loved the TIE Avenger so much, despite it never living up to its full potential, that he named one of the Star Destroyers he commanded to be named Avenger.
So if Darth Vader endorses the TIE Avenger, then so should the LEGO Group.

Long live the TIE Avenger campaign! However long it may take.

Deal. I'm fine with all of those–well, except, can we not accommodate anything regarding assets?

Beautiful theory. Day #315 of the campaign.

If Thrawn Alliances is anything to go by, Vader would have absolutely been all over the TIE Avenger if he had test driven one.

 

[BrickBob Studpants]

5 minutes ago, CloneCommando99 said:

I’m assuming that this is instead of Fennec due to the black colour scheme.

As long as Pershing is included, they can shuffle the other minifigs around as much as they like