LEGO Star Wars 2019 Set Discussion - READ FIRST POST!!!

[Kdapt-Preacher]

26 minutes ago, autolycus said:

Meh. I think the proportions don't look as bad as y'all are making them out. They're not perfect, but I'll bet they're close enough for the vast majority of the market. A highly-detailed UCS set would have been great, but it also likely would have been ridiculously expensive. And as small as you think the market is for a $200 playset, the market for a $300-400 UCS set is almost certainly smaller. I'm also not sure you're right about how few children can afford it, based on the fact that Lego made it after they had good sales data from the Death Stars, Ewok Village, Assault on Hoth, Cloud City, etc.

The Death Stars, Ewok Village, Assault on Hoth, and Cloud City had 24, 27, 17, 15, and 21 minifigs, respectively, which is what people wanted here. The market for a good-looking $400 set is better than that for a crappy-looking $200 set given that you've already lost most of the kids either way. I don't have either of the older Tantive IVs, so I'll definitely be getting this, and I'll forgive them a lot for having included Bail, but this definitely isn't the level of quality that, for better or for worse, we've come to expect. It can certainly be argued that this isn't substantially worse than the 2009 Tantive IV, and it's not; it's very close to being the same set. But that was ten years ago. It shouldn't be the same set; it isn't at all unreasonable to expect a second generation, special anniversary edition of a large expensive set to show marked improvement rather than only being arguably not worse.

[Sucram]

So bricklinking isn't an option. 330 AUD is a very large amount of money to spend on 1 set though

[Cylo]

3 minutes ago, LEGODrongo01 said:

So bricklinking isn't an option. 330 AUD is a very large amount of money to spend on 1 set though

Well it could still be if you dont want the minifigures, but the stickered cockpit will be a problem. I agree that 330 on a set is too much, should be more like 260. But then having darth vaders's castle at 200 AUD I really didn't expect this one to be any cheaper.

[Markalus]

6 minutes ago, Reaper said:

Well it could still be if you dont want the minifigures, but the stickered cockpit will be a problem. I agree that 330 on a set is too much, should be more like 260. But then having darth vaders's castle at 200 AUD I really didn't expect this one to be any cheaper.

There is no way brickling the new Tantive IV would be economical, even without the specialised pieces and minifigs. Shipping from multiple stores adds up quickly, especially if you’re not located in continental US. As for Darth Vader’s castle it does have a lot of large pieces and, after building it, I don’t regret paying $200 for it. Naturally, I would have preferred to get it cheaper.

[benderisgreat]

So, with Triple Force Friday in October we are going to be getting more than just Ep 9 sets. Mandalotran sets are a given at this point, but what about Jedi Fallen Order? Hopefully we'll get at least 1 set with Kal and new Inquisitor. I mean it won't be first time Lego made videogame based sets right?

 

 

[m4st3rt3ch]

AUD330 is about €210. €10 more than in Europe. Everything is more expensive in prison. Blame your criminal ancestors for getting sent there. 

[THELEGOBATMAN]

57 minutes ago, benderisgreat said:

So, with Triple Force Friday in October we are going to be getting more than just Ep 9 sets. Mandalotran sets are a given at this point, but what about Jedi Fallen Order? Hopefully we'll get at least 1 set with Kal and new Inquisitor. I mean it won't be first time Lego made videogame based sets right?

On TTF, we are getting 7 Rise of Skywalker sets - 75248 A-Wing ($30), 75249 Y-Wing ($70), 75250 Speeder ($40), 75254 AT-ST ($50), 75255 Yoda ($100), 75256 Kylo Ren's Command Shuttle ($130) and 75257 Millennium Falcon ($160). Yes, they are all confirmed to be TRS sets according to multiple retailers.

There were no Mandalorian or Jedi: Fallen Order rumours, but that doesn't mean we aren't getting sets based on those properties:

Option 1: In autumn, there are many sets coming - TRS, UCS, Boost Pack and Advent Calendar. These all fit and make sense, but there's also 75246, a $20 playset. I heard it's coming in October, so it would make sense for it to be MD or JFO set.

Option 2: Retailer exclusives. Set numbers 75231, 75232 or 75260 could work, or those beyond 75262.

Option 3: We are not getting any Mandalorian or Jedi: Fallen Order sets (but that would be extremely dissappointing).

[Bartybum]

12 minutes ago, m4st3rt3ch said:

AUD330 is about €210. €10 more than in Europe. Everything is more expensive in prison. Blame your criminal ancestors for getting sent there. 

Dunno how it is in Europe, but Aus prices include GST.

[m4st3rt3ch]

Just now, Bartybum said:

Dunno how it is in Europe, but Aus prices include GST.

19% VAT included in Germany.

[Magmafrost]

1 hour ago, benderisgreat said:

So, with Triple Force Friday in October we are going to be getting more than just Ep 9 sets. Mandalotran sets are a given at this point, but what about Jedi Fallen Order? Hopefully we'll get at least 1 set with Kal and new Inquisitor. I mean it won't be first time Lego made videogame based sets right?

 

 

The inquisitor isn't actually new, she made a brief appearance in the 2017 Vader comic

[Darth Malgus]

2 hours ago, m4st3rt3ch said:

AUD330 is about €210. €10 more than in Europe. Everything is more expensive in prison. Blame your criminal ancestors for getting sent there. 

Price is a bit rough for a do-over.

 

At least we didn't get lumped with a Brexit that ain't going to happen ? 

 

Not everyone is convict descendants either ?.

[benderisgreat]

1 hour ago, Magmafrost said:

The inquisitor isn't actually new, she made a brief appearance in the 2017 Vader comic

I meant new as we've never gotten her in minifigure form.

[eliminator]

The new Tantive IV is alright, but not great enough for me to run out on May the Fourth and pay full price. It's just too bad TLG didn't go a little further and make it UCS...less a system-scale play-set. Perhaps the result of a "focus-group" recommendation....in order to maximize profit. 

Is the UCS line dead? Maybe they had originally planned to make this a UCS set but decided against it due to cost? Or they just needed "something" for 4 May? Given that it isn't labeled UCS, it would have been nice for them to make this part of the 20th Anniversary line and included a very special anniversary minifig like the others.

Nevertheless, I will buy this set. I've sold off a significant chunk of my SW collection (including many UCS sets) and only keeping the ones I favor most and now very picky about what sets I buy.

 

Edited April 14, 2019 by eliminator

[Procrastinathan]

1 hour ago, eliminator said:

The new Tantive IV is alright, but not great enough for me to run out on May the Fourth and pay full price. It's just too bad TLG didn't go a little further and make it UCS...less a system-scale play-set. Perhaps the result of a "focus-group" recommendation....in order to maximize profit. 

Is the UCS line dead? Maybe they had originally planned to make this a UCS set but decided against it due to cost? Or they just needed "something" for 4 May? Given that it isn't labeled UCS, it would have been nice for them to make this part of the 20th Anniversary line and included a very special anniversary minifig like the others.

Nevertheless, I will buy this set. I've sold off a significant chunk of my SW collection (including many UCS sets) and only keeping the ones I favor most and now very picky about what sets I buy.

 

It's far too early to pronounce the UCS line 'dead'. The 10th anniversary Tantive wasn't UCS either, and took the UCS 'slot' for 2009, with no others being produced that year. We could still get a UCS set later in the year, as we have had 2 in a single year before.

[AfolFree]

4 minutes ago, Procrastinathan said:

It's far too early to pronounce the UCS line 'dead'. The 10th anniversary Tantive wasn't UCS either, and took the UCS 'slot' for 2009, with no others being produced that year. We could still get a UCS set later in the year, as we have had 2 in a single year before.

People are so impatient, the last UCS has been released just one year ago, and we already hear everyone saying UCS is dead.
And then, when Lego releases a UCS that is not "UCSy" enough, everybody yells too...

I'm glad Cloud city wasn't labelled UCS and I'm glad this Tantive isn't. If we get one good, real UCS a year, fine by me.

[Procrastinathan]

Just now, AfolFree said:

People are so impatient, the last UCS has been released just one year ago, and we already hear everyone saying UCS is dead.
And then, when Lego releases a UCS that is not "UCSy" enough, everybody yells too...

I'm glad Cloud city wasn't labelled UCS and I'm glad this Tantive isn't. If we get one good, real UCS a year, fine by me.

None of this is helped by LEGO's inconsistency with UCS sets - some years they release one, some two, and some none at all. Consistency is nice and helps keep expectations in check. Personally, I'd love if they kept to two per year as it increases the chances of them making a UCS version of a vehicle I'd actually want to buy, and makes the inevitable re-releases easier to swallow as you don't then have to wait a year for the next one to come out.

[Mandalorianknight]

11 hours ago, Kdapt-Preacher said:

The Death Stars, Ewok Village, Assault on Hoth, and Cloud City had 24, 27, 17, 15, and 21 minifigs, respectively, which is what people wanted here. The market for a good-looking $400 set is better than that for a crappy-looking $200 set given that you've already lost most of the kids either way. I don't have either of the older Tantive IVs, so I'll definitely be getting this, and I'll forgive them a lot for having included Bail, but this definitely isn't the level of quality that, for better or for worse, we've come to expect. It can certainly be argued that this isn't substantially worse than the 2009 Tantive IV, and it's not; it's very close to being the same set. But that was ten years ago. It shouldn't be the same set; it isn't at all unreasonable to expect a second generation, special anniversary edition of a large expensive set to show marked improvement rather than only being arguably not worse.

I think the point here is that this is a ship that kids can just barely get as, like, their only birthday present from all their relatives or something they save up for for a while. But either way, I think the set looks good, and this isn't supposed to be a MBS type set, its supposed to be a vehicle set along the lines of the y-wing from may 2018 and the snowspeeder from may 2017. See a pattern?

Edit: this is a UCS in all but name.

7 hours ago, benderisgreat said:

So, with Triple Force Friday in October we are going to be getting more than just Ep 9 sets. Mandalotran sets are a given at this point, but what about Jedi Fallen Order? Hopefully we'll get at least 1 set with Kal and new Inquisitor. I mean it won't be first time Lego made videogame based sets right?

Yes, they made sets for both of the recent battlefronts, although the second one took a while.

I could see a small set with kal and either 2nd sister or the guy with the magnaguard staff, maybe his droid and a trooper too. 

For the mandalorian I have no doubt we'll see something, maybe even 2-4 sets. And zuckess will be in the smallest one, no doubt. 

 

Now that i saw the trailer, I not only have renewed hope in the franchise, but cannot wait for the sets. The new hero costumes, a new falcon with lando, something from that fallen death star,

Spoiler

hopefully with palpatine

, and those skiffs.

Edited April 14, 2019 by Mandalorianknight

[m4st3rt3ch]

On 4/13/2019 at 12:55 PM, Anio said:

They are stickers.

No, they are not. The cockpit/window-section is a sticker. The stripes definitely are a print.

https://www.stonewars.de/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/lego-75244-tantive-iv-5.jpg

[Joel1234]

12 minutes ago, m4st3rt3ch said:

No, they are not. The cockpit/window-section is a sticker. The stripes definitely are a print.

https://www.stonewars.de/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/lego-75244-tantive-iv-5.jpg

Well, nope. They are stickers unfortunate. See 

 

[m4st3rt3ch]

2 minutes ago, Joel1234 said:

Well, nope. They are stickers unfortunate. See 

Then i have to correct myself. The picture looked absolutely convincing, because the was no visible outline. Thanks for the video!

[TheNerdyOne_]

I really do not understand all of the negativity surrounding this set.

The proportions are better than LEGO has ever gotten them, by a good margin.  The previous two sets are really short and fat compared to the actual ship, this model fixes that.  Sure the cockpit is a bit large, but given the alternative I absolutely agree with their choice and it really isn't a big deal.

The set shows a huge improvement over the last one if you compare them.

I think everyone's being a bit blinded by nostalgia, there is absolutely no doubt that this new set is leagues better than the last one from an objective standpoint.  So much more detailed, way better proportions, and overall a much more accurate set.  I think the only real complaint there is to be had about this set is that, if you're a stickler for accuracy, the cockpit wasn't brick-built.

Personally, I really like that it has an interior.  We don't get enough capital ship sets, especially not for the rebels.  And given the level of detail and accuracy I have absolutely no problem displaying this alongside UCS sets.

[Joel1234]

I think it's definitely a good ship. Sure, I would have rather seen an upgrade of the 10019, but this one is great too. It's just so much better than the 10198. Just compare the cockpit with the 10198 white printed one, jikes. It could have gone trough as a UCS if it wasn't for the stud shooters and missiles. In my opinion it has just the same level of displayability as the UCS Y-wing and Snowspeeder.  

[AfolFree]

I completely agree. I'm not even sure I will get the set because I was in the process of bricklinking mortesv version, which still looks better, but damn it is by far the best official Tanive IV we ever had from Lego. Yes the price is high, but it's not ridiculous either.

[Joel1234]

12 minutes ago, TheNerdyOne_ said:

I really do not understand all of the negativity surrounding this set.

The proportions are better than LEGO has ever gotten them, by a good margin.  The previous two sets are really short and fat compared to the actual ship, this model fixes that.  Sure the cockpit is a bit large, but given the alternative I absolutely agree with their choice and it really isn't a big deal.

The set shows a huge improvement over the last one if you compare them.

I think everyone's being a bit blinded by nostalgia, there is absolutely no doubt that this new set is leagues better than the last one from an objective standpoint.  So much more detailed, way better proportions, and overall a much more accurate set.  I think the only real complaint there is to be had about this set is that, if you're a stickler for accuracy, the cockpit wasn't brick-built.

Personally, I really like that it has an interior.  We don't get enough capital ship sets, especially not for the rebels.  And given the level of detail and accuracy I have absolutely no problem displaying this alongside UCS sets.

Amen. The 2009 version just looks like a normal system scale playset (which it was) while the new one looks like a UCS style model with a few play features. Just look at the detail on the 75244 engines, and compare it to the 10198 ones. 

[TheNerdyOne_]

Just now, AfolFree said:

I completely agree. I'm not even sure I will get the set because I was in the process of bricklinking mortesv version, which still looks better, but damn it is by far the best official Tanive IV we ever had from Lego. Yes the price is high, but it's not ridiculous either.

Ya the price is a little high, but for whatever reason the Tantive IV models have always been like that.  The original 10019 was the same price for almost exactly the same number of pieces.  Adjusted for inflation it would be about $290, in comparison this is a much better deal.  It's only a little bit shorter too, though that's mostly because the updated proportions make it longer than the other two have been compared to their widths.

Perhaps all the large parts contribute to the higher prices?