Stash2Sixx

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

Recommended Posts

18 minutes ago, Whovastron said:

Am I the only one not noticing gaps? There’s the bit at the front and then the centre line. The centre line is unavoidable, so that can’t really be a complaint. But just looking st the rear and the bridge, the shaping and gap filling is amazing 

The only ones I noticed were on the back, and even then they’re not that bad. Pause the designer video at the start and you’ll see the internal structure peaking out in between the engines and the bridge.

Also, glad this set has shut down those ridiculous “box hint” theories, unless the next UCS is indeed an OI-CT...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh hey is uses grey levers. Hoping those show up on Bricks & Pieces. Though I guess they aren't so special any more since their main appeal was for bricklinking the old UCS Falcon and ISD.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Whovastron said:

Right, so I just got the tape measure out to compare the approximate sizes to my Falcon...

and holy heck, there’s no way it can be this big. It doesn’t look that big in the video, but it’s almost 1.5x the length of the falcon, it’s like double the height, and the width of it is only 20cm shy of the length of the Falcon. I’m honestly shocked I doesn’t have more pieces of that size is correct. I honestly cannot fathom a purchasable Lego Set being that big, regardless of piece count. I can’t wait to see this bad boy in real life

Stonewars have a nice size comparison table...I think it was linked above. It’s dwarfs the footprint of the Falcon and is only 0.9 kg less in weight.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Magmafrost said:

Oh hey is uses grey levers. Hoping those show up on Bricks & Pieces. Though I guess they aren't so special any more since their main appeal was for bricklinking the old UCS Falcon and ISD.

The Death Star II uses a couple of them as well. I wonder if LEGO has that one on their list of potential rereleases because I've been considering bricklinking it.

Edited by Brikkyy13

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Brikkyy13 said:

Also, glad this set has shut down those ridiculous “box hint” theories, unless the next UCS is indeed an OI-CT...

I’m still convinced the MF silhouette on the DS box and the ISD silhouette on the MF box were hints. I think they were way too obvious to be anything but hints. You may disagree. That’s fine. I think they had these sets planned all the way back then and now they don’t have anything to this scale on the slate so there isn’t anything to hint at with this one. Either way, I can’t wait for this set, it’s really a masterpiece

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Other than double VIP points on the weekend of release of the The Devastator are there going to be any gifts with purchase? The Endor set would be nice but that looks to be a Triple Force Friday exclusive. Possibly that elusive 20th anniversary Obi-Wan polybag? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Whovastron said:

Right, so I just got the tape measure out to compare the approximate sizes to my Falcon...

and holy heck, there’s no way it can be this big. It doesn’t look that big in the video, but it’s almost 1.5x the length of the falcon, it’s like double the height, and the width of it is only 20cm shy of the length of the Falcon. I’m honestly shocked I doesn’t have more pieces of that size is correct. I honestly cannot fathom a purchasable Lego Set being that big, regardless of piece count. I can’t wait to see this bad boy in real life

The case for the defence rests.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Balrogofmorgoth said:

I truly don’t understand how people can justify comparing this to a 12,000-15,000 piece MOC. It’s just not realistic. This is an amazing lego set, comparing it to those MOCs and then saying it sucks is just naive.

The comparisons against a MOC maybe unfair, but certainly we can expect an evolution in building techniques can't we? It is after all £650. Not sure where the naivety is to be honest. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It would be naive to just judge a moc with absolutely no piece count limitation, complexity of build, production, price structuring, quality control, deadlines and many other restrictions imposed on the designer to a set that is to become a retail Lego set. 

There's no comparison. At least three times the parts. Double to three times the cost and no packaging (with all the design and attention to detail that comes with it). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, that constant whining starts to aggravate me.

No play-features -> it's a display model, stop whining!

Not enough minifigs -> it's a display model without play-features, stop whining!

Too many studs -> it's LEGO, LEGO has studs, stop whining or buy a MOC!

It's too expensive for the number of parts -> lots and lots of large parts, the money-to-weight-ratio actually is good, stop whining!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, m4st3rt3ch said:

Yeah, that constant whining starts to aggravate me.

No play-features -> it's a display model, stop whining!

Not enough minifigs -> it's a display model without play-features, stop whining!

Too many studs -> it's LEGO, LEGO has studs, stop whining or buy a MOC!

It's too expensive for the number of parts -> lots and lots of large parts, the money-to-weight-ratio actually is good, stop whining!

People are entitled to an opinion. It’s a ‘discussion’ forum and not everyone has to share the same view. For some reason there seems to be more hostility here than in any other forum. I think the problem is that TLG set the bar very high for large UCS models with the 2017 Falcon. But that’s just my $0.02. I personally can’t wait to get The Devastator. I do have the (not-so-small) issue of trying to figure out where the hell to put it. 

Edited by Markalus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, Markalus said:

It’s a ‘discussion’ forum and not everyone has to share the same view. For some reason there seems to be more hostility here than in any other forum. 

If you get that feeling because of this thread I won't judge you, but don't generalise the entire forum to be like that

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Guyon2002 said:

If you get that feeling because of this thread I won't judge you, but don't generalise the entire forum to be like that

Yes, specifically this thread. The other set discussion 'threads' in other forums such as Harry Potter just seem like a friendlier place is all. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think in general the rumours threads both here and in licensed suffer from the hype issue that tends to hit, especially with marquee sets.

A lot of this can be down to figure count (not something that any other part of the forum worries too much about) and then the matter of display v playability.

People in the HP thread are generally still happy the theme has returned. Just wait until it's been round for 20 continual years. There'll be plenty of people arguing why the Durmstrang Ship isn't the right scale or the fact they still haven't given us an accurate Aberforth figure. :)

Edited by Robianco

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, m4st3rt3ch said:

It's too expensive for the number of parts -> lots and lots of large parts, the money-to-weight-ratio actually is good, stop whining!

How about it's too expensive period? A 1.1m long ISD is flat out stupid. I can guarantee that people would've been happier with an 80cm long model that cost half as much. At least that'd be borderline affordable.

I could forgive the Falcon being so insanely huge, since the set was a cult classic in the community, but not the ISD.

Edited by Bartybum

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, ginja said:

What cashback schemes? And I thought this new VIP system means you had to apply to use your points prior to a purchase and not during it...

I personally use Quidco, currently they are offering 6% cashback at Lego and hopefully that will hold out until the 18th which should result in £25-30 back.

As for the points I was referring to using them on a future purchase, always planned to get the Yoda set in October so the double points from this should fully cover that.

Edited by Andyperkins

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Markalus said:

People are entitled to an opinion. It’s a ‘discussion’ forum and not everyone has to share the same view. For some reason there seems to be more hostility here than in any other forum. I think the problem is that TLG set the bar very high for large UCS models with the 2017 Falcon. But that’s just my $0.02. I personally can’t wait to get The Devastator. I do have the (not-so-small) issue of trying to figure out where the hell to put it. 

Opinions are good, but this is getting ridiculous. People expect absolutely unrealistic things or are just too §$%&/ to acknowledge, that a huge plate is more expensive than 10 1-stud-parts and start complaining. It's like leaving the house in the middle of the night and being pissed the sun isn't shining.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Bartybum said:

A 1.1m long ISD is flat out stupid. I can guarantee that people would've been happier with an 80cm long model that cost half as much. 

I’m sorry but no. When it comes to display models, bigger = better. Especially when the model in question is of a ship that’s known for setting a new standard in spectacle. I never saw the original run of Star Wars in cinemas, I grew up watching the OT on DVD. I was always told there was nothing like seeing that Star Destroyer in the opening scene on the big screen for the first time. I was lucky enough to catch a rerelease a couple of years back, and even though I knew it was coming it was still a sight to behold. People always say the Falcon is a more iconic ship, but nobody ever rambles on about how awesome it was to see it escape a star destroyer by drifting slightly to the left. My honest opinion is that 1.1m isn’t enough to do the ISD justice.

Both the snowspeeder and y-wing rereleases were smaller than their predecessors, and I hated that fact. They only gain the edge over the old models because they are 1000 times more accurate to their on screen counterparts. If TLG decided to do an 80cm UCS ISD I would’ve just bought the old one. I would even go as far as saying an 80cm long ISD as a UCS set would’ve been insulting to collectors, considering the last one was 1m long and the playsets have all been around 60cm long.

Edited by Brikkyy13

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Brikkyy13 said:

I’m sorry but no. When it comes to display models, bigger = better. Especially when the model in question is of a ship that’s known for setting a new standard in spectacle. I never saw the original run of Star Wars in cinemas, I grew up watching the OT on DVD. I was always told there was nothing like seeing that Star Destroyer in the opening scene on the big screen for the first time. I was lucky enough to catch a rerelease a couple of years back, and even though I knew it was coming it was still a sight to behold. People always say the Falcon is a more iconic ship, but nobody ever rambles on about how awesome it was to see it escape a star destroyer by drifting slightly to the left. My honest opinion is that 1.1m isn’t enough to do the ISD justice.

Both the snowspeeder and y-wing rereleases were smaller than their predecessors, and I hated that fact. They only gain the edge over the old models because they are 1000 times more accurate to their on screen counterparts. If TLG decided to do an 80cm UCS ISD I would’ve just bought the old one. I would even go as far as saying an 80cm long ISD as a UCS set would’ve been insulting to collectors, considering the last one was 1m long and the playsets have all been around 60cm long.

I agree 100% with everything you just said. When it comes to system scale models, which I love, size isn’t as big of a deal. But with these UCS sets, particularly these massive scale ones, size is everything. I’ll make the space, I don’t care, I’m a problem solver. Sets like this need to be huge and I think this set nails it. I did not think it would be as big as the last one but I think it’s bigger. And again, it’s ridiculous to compare it to MOCs made with 12,000 or more pieces. As far as a retail lego set goes, this is an absolute masterpiece and must have for collectors and Star Wars fans

Just now, Robianco said:

Just imagine the fume if they'd made it 80cm instead of 110cm. 

I would not be happy, and I know I’m not the only one. That would have been a massive let down

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Eaglefan344 said:

Can we stop complaining about the price? If it's too expensive then just don't buy it. It's really that simple.

I admit to having a fascination with all the drama that accompanies a controversial Lego set release.  

I don't have a problem with the price.  While I consider $700 very expensive, I also realize that these UCS sets are aimed at a very narrow audience: people who are all three of these: (1) highly enthusiastic Star Wars fans/collectors, (2) highly enthusiastic Lego fans/collectors, and (3) have plenty of discretionary spending power. 

This new Star Destroyer isn't generally meant for kids or casual hobbyists like myself.  I am definitely not about high levels of detail, and I generally don't buy sets with retail higher than $60.  What actually interests me most about Lego, is how set designers (both Lego employees and MOC builders) can convey ideas and functionality with bricks in clever ways.  Smaller models that capture the essence of something with a relatively low number of bricks are more valuable to me than huge models with thousands of bricks and tons of detail. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Eaglefan344 said:

Can we stop complaining about the price? If it's too expensive then just don't buy it. It's really that simple.

Can we stop complaining about people complaining? If you don’t want to see positive and negative opinions then just don’t read them. It’s really that simple.

 

sarcasm aside, it’s just criticism, and it part of discussion. There’s always likely to be something negative about every release. If you don’t wanna see both sides, maybe a forum isn’t for you. For me the price is disappointing because I really, really want such a gorgeous-looking Set 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Whovastron said:

Can we stop complaining about people complaining? If you don’t want to see positive and negative opinions then just don’t read them. It’s really that simple.

 

sarcasm aside, it’s just criticism, and it part of discussion. There’s always likely to be something negative about every release. If you don’t wanna see both sides, maybe a forum isn’t for you. For me the price is disappointing because I really, really want such a gorgeous-looking Set 

I agree, the price is horrifying, but still totally worth it for me

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Balrogofmorgoth said:

I agree, the price is horrifying, but still totally worth it for me

The size is swaying me.

i just discovered another collectible item I have is currently selling for between £300-£500, so I think I might sell that to fund the Star Destroyer, I can look at it more of a “trade” and some cash, rather than just paying the full £650.

that £65 worth of vip points is helping too, takes the price down to 595, with is only £100 over what I’m happy to pay for the set

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.