LEGO Star Wars 2020 Set Discussion - READ FIRST POST!!!

[ArrowBricks]

6 minutes ago, Guyon2002 said:

Well to drive things back to topic: while I (and some others) personally really don't like the new design for the AAT I've also seen people who love it. So I'm legitimately curious why you guys love it so much 

I hated it when I saw it. On closer inspection and particularly when comparing it to the cartoon it isn’t as bad as I thought. I think it just looks different to both the 2015 and 2009 version so perhaps it’s partly because of that, more so because of the 2009 version. Sometimes it takes time to accustom yourself to differences, well atleast in this case for me. 

Getting it because of those figures can’t lie. Gosh I love Clone Wars sets, there’s just something about them. 

Edited June 2, 2020 by ArrowBricks

[ToaDraco]

Geeze, I feel like half the time I jump into this thread it's a dumpster fire...

Despite my issues with the ST, the Night Buzzard is the set I'm most looking forward to this fall. It's a fresh new design and I love the design of the vehicle and the Knights of Ren overall. I've been obsessively pooring over the few pics we have of it and based on what we have it appears there's only a small bit of space in the midsection to fit 1 or maybe 2 minifigs with a small hatch on the top. While I didn't expect it to be able to fit all 6 Knights plus Kylo Ren for $70, I'm a little disappointed it doesn't seem to have more space inside. Hopefully there's some space in the back section too.

I've seen a lot of hate for the AAT but I really like it, especially when you look at the smaller picture of it with the top closed. The overall shape is really good. I will say the skirt section of it is a bit stubby and doesn't look so great in the front and overall it lacks finer detail but on the other hand that means it's not covered in stickers. It appears there might only be 2, one on each side for the sepratist emblems.

Edited June 2, 2020 by ToaDraco

[Mandalorianknight]

18 minutes ago, Guyon2002 said:

Well to drive things back to topic: while I (and some others) personally really don't like the new design for the AAT I've also seen people who love it. So I'm legitimately curious why you guys love it so much 

Ninja'd by @ArrowBricks while typing, but I agree with him, It looks to me like one of those things where it's more accurate, but different to the previous model people are used to. The 2009 AAT was bigger, so even though it's less accurate people remember the bigger AAT and think it's better.

I'll be getting one, maybe two if that ahsoka figure is expensive enough on bricklink for me to sell one to partially offset the cost. 

My wallet hurts just thinking about this wave. AT-AT, Razor Crest, Interesting-looking resistance transport, and of course I'll need millions of 501st battle packs .
 

Adding another on-topic question, some people have had some serious criticism of the new clone designs. I personally think they look more detailed, but alot of people prefer the 2014 versions. So what do you guys see in the 2014 designs?

Edited June 2, 2020 by Mandalorianknight

[ARC2149Nova]

6 minutes ago, Mandalorianknight said:

Adding another on-topic question, some people have had some serious criticism of the new clone designs. I personally think they look more detailed, but alot of people prefer the 2014 versions. So what do you guys see in the 2014 designs?

I personally prefer contrast in figure designs, as long as they aren't too busy. Colored arms and black hips, while not accurate are way more visually appealing than plain arms and hips. Given how minifigs are designed, certain details can not be translated perfectly, and that's fine. That said, I do like the new designs, even if they're vastly different from previous clones.

[2maxwell]

31 minutes ago, Guyon2002 said:

Well to drive things back to topic: while I (and some others) personally really don't like the new design for the AAT I've also seen people who love it. So I'm legitimately curious why you guys love it so much 

For me it's mostly a question of size. I think the 2009 model was *far* too large, and this works well in comparison to the 2017 fighter tank, which I think is easily the best scaled version of that vehicle.

I also think that the main gun turret is better shaped than the 2015 version. While I prefer the front shaping of the 2015's to this version, I have to admit it's more accurate to what we actually see in the show, which is a less complex shaping and without the forward blasters. It's certainly not perfect and I'm not really a fan of how bulbous the front "skirt" thing is, I do think it's one of the best versions we've gotten overall. It doesn't hurt that I need an Ahsoka an I'm not willing to get a CW face version.

As for the clone redesign, I agree that it's all about contrast, or lack thereof. All white is too bland.

Edited June 2, 2020 by 2maxwell

[Evergreen]

25 minutes ago, Mandalorianknight said:

Ninja'd by @ArrowBricks while typing, but I agree with him, It looks to me like one of those things where it's more accurate, but different to the previous model people are used to. The 2009 AAT was bigger, so even though it's less accurate people remember the bigger AAT and think it's better.

I'll be getting one, maybe two if that ahsoka figure is expensive enough on bricklink for me to sell one to partially offset the cost. 

My wallet hurts just thinking about this wave. AT-AT, Razor Crest, Interesting-looking resistance transport, and of course I'll need millions of 501st battle packs .
 

Adding another on-topic question, some people have had some serious criticism of the new clone designs. I personally think they look more detailed, but alot of people prefer the 2014 versions. So what do you guys see in the 2014 designs?

On the same boat with you about my wallet haha. I honestly don't mind the new clone design, but I think it'll become annoying if LEGO decides to change the design any time soon like how they did for the stormtroopers. 

[Kit Figsto]

7 hours ago, Guyon2002 said:

But the set with Kit Fisto was a lot larger and came with the hyperdrive ring, can't really compare the 2

It also only came with two figures, the astromech droid was just a head attached to the wing.  A better comparable is probably the green Jedi Starfighter we got maybe 5-6 years ago that was $40 but came with like five figures (Anakin, Obi-Wan, Nute Gunray, R2-D2 and a battle droid if I remember correctly) and a little dueling platform.  I would've probably been more inclined to buy it if they jacked the price up to $35-40 and included a side build plus Rex, but I can understand that this is probably a set to appeal mostly to kids who want Anakin's starfighter, they don't care as much about side builds or price/piece value, although I still do think it's incredibly strange that you can literally get a yellow Jedi starfighter containing the same figures right now.  How many parents are gong to say "You already have that one!" if their daughter/son points out the one coming this August?

[2maxwell]

2 minutes ago, Kit Figsto said:

It also only came with two figures, the astromech droid was just a head attached to the wing.  A better comparable is probably the green Jedi Starfighter we got maybe 5-6 years ago that was $40 but came with like five figures (Anakin, Obi-Wan, Nute Gunray, R2-D2 and a battle droid if I remember correctly) and a little dueling platform.  I would've probably been more inclined to buy it if they jacked the price up to $35-40 and included a side build plus Rex, but I can understand that this is probably a set to appeal mostly to kids who want Anakin's starfighter, they don't care as much about side builds or price/piece value, although I still do think it's incredibly strange that you can literally get a yellow Jedi starfighter containing the same figures right now.  How many parents are gong to say "You already have that one!" if their daughter/son points out the one coming this August?

An even better comparison is probably Saesee Tiin's starfighter from 2012 that came with Saesee Tiin, Even Piell, and an astromech for $30. Given the 8 year difference, I can see why a similar set might cost $35 today. If you take the extra fig as being ~$5 worth, the $30 price point for this new Eta-2 is fair. I'd obviously like to see it lower, but it's not crazy.

[Kit Figsto]

3 minutes ago, 2maxwell said:

An even better comparison is probably Saesee Tiin's starfighter from 2012 that came with Saesee Tiin, Even Piell, and an astromech for $30. Given the 8 year difference, I can see why a similar set might cost $35 today. If you take the extra fig as being ~$5 worth, the $30 price point for this new Eta-2 is fair. I'd obviously like to see it lower, but it's not crazy.

Yeah, that one is interesting because I believe Plo Koon's starfighter was released either the same year or a year before and was basically the exact same set re-colored but only came with Plo Koon and his astromech, but was $25.  So they basically charged $5 more for one figure.  Mace Windu's Starfighter was released around the same era if I remember right (I want to say it was a Walmart exclusive, but that may have been Ahsoka's...) and was around $40 but came with a STAP or something and a bunch of droids.  

Anyway, point being, I don't love the $30 price point for the Eta-2 fighter, but given that the most recently released ones in 2014 were both $25 and only two figures, I can see why it's $30.  Will I buy it?  Nah, mostly because I already have the Delta-class fighter and don't have a ton of physical room for repeat-ish sets in my collection, but there have been worse-priced sets.

[TeddytheSpoon]

1 hour ago, Guyon2002 said:

Well to drive things back to topic: while I (and some others) personally really don't like the new design for the AAT I've also seen people who love it. So I'm legitimately curious why you guys love it so much 

Aside from the fact I don't have any of the others, this one seems to me to hit the right compromises at the right sort of scale. Looking at the source material making those slopes on the bottom the right shape is tricky with the pieces on offer, and I think that's what affects the look of it the most. Either they use the existing ones which are too round, or the UFO pieces which have too shallow a slope, and in both cases you have to scale it to match. I think upsizing it from the 2015 (?) one was the right call as the curved pieces make it look less like a chibi build and give it roughly the 'right' scale.

1 hour ago, Mandalorianknight said:

Adding another on-topic question, some people have had some serious criticism of the new clone designs. I personally think they look more detailed, but alot of people prefer the 2014 versions. So what do you guys see in the 2014 designs?

What exactly is the gripe with the designs, that there's too much detail? I haven't looked at the new clones in great detail, and apart from the arms being white (I agree with @ARC2149Nova on that point, and tbh I might just swap them out) I can't see anything that ruins the designs for me.

Edited June 2, 2020 by TeddytheSpoon

[MGS6735]

56 minutes ago, Mandalorianknight said:

Adding another on-topic question, some people have had some serious criticism of the new clone designs. I personally think they look more detailed, but alot of people prefer the 2014 versions. So what do you guys see in the 2014 designs?

I think most of the issue is the lack of contrast on the figures like @ARC2149Nova mentioned. I'm sure that there are also some people who are criticizing it because they are changing up the designs, making it so that the new and old figures don't mesh together as well for use in armies/MOCs/etc. I don't mind it because I know that they switch up the designs every once and a while. It isn't ideal, but that's how Lego operates.

3 minutes ago, Kit Figsto said:

Mace Windu's Starfighter was released around the same era if I remember right (I want to say it was a Walmart exclusive, but that may have been Ahsoka's...) and was around $40 but came with a STAP or something and a bunch of droids.  

It also came with the only Tactical Droid we've ever received. And yes, it was a $40 Walmart exclusive in the US.

[2maxwell]

8 minutes ago, Kit Figsto said:

Yeah, that one is interesting because I believe Plo Koon's starfighter was released either the same year or a year before and was basically the exact same set re-colored but only came with Plo Koon and his astromech, but was $25.  So they basically charged $5 more for one figure.  Mace Windu's Starfighter was released around the same era if I remember right (I want to say it was a Walmart exclusive, but that may have been Ahsoka's...) and was around $40 but came with a STAP or something and a bunch of droids.  

Anyway, point being, I don't love the $30 price point for the Eta-2 fighter, but given that the most recently released ones in 2014 were both $25 and only two figures, I can see why it's $30.  Will I buy it?  Nah, mostly because I already have the Delta-class fighter and don't have a ton of physical room for repeat-ish sets in my collection, but there have been worse-priced sets.

Not that I disagree with your overall point, but the Mace Windu and Plo Koon starfighters actually have an older build that, imo, is much worse than the current ones. I bring this up because I love Plo Koon and I have that set and I'm always sad it doesn't use the new starfighter build style over the old one lol. Some day I'll rebuild it from the ground up to match the newer style.

6 minutes ago, MGS6735 said:

I'm sure that there are also some people who are criticizing it because they are changing up the designs, making it so that the new and old figures don't mesh together as well for use in armies/MOCs/etc. I don't mind it because I know that they switch up the designs every once and a while. It isn't ideal, but that's how Lego operates.

This is me. I can swap out arms and hips to make the contrast I like, but I can't really do that with the designs. Depending on what it looks like irl, I'll decide whether I'm going to try reselling clones that don't fit the rest of my small army.

[Mandalorianknight]

1 hour ago, ARC2149Nova said:

I personally prefer contrast in figure designs, as long as they aren't too busy. Colored arms and black hips, while not accurate are way more visually appealing than plain arms and hips. Given how minifigs are designed, certain details can not be translated perfectly, and that's fine. That said, I do like the new designs, even if they're vastly different from previous clones.

I get that, the white hip parts are a bit jarring to me too. Like the AAT, it's technically more accurate, but feels a bit off.

51 minutes ago, Evergreen said:

On the same boat with you about my wallet haha. I honestly don't mind the new clone design, but I think it'll become annoying if LEGO decides to change the design any time soon like how they did for the stormtroopers. 

That's the other one I agree with. Not so much against the designs themselves, but that if they keep changing them there won't be a consistent army.

36 minutes ago, Kit Figsto said:

How many parents are gong to say "You already have that one!" if their daughter/son points out the one coming this August?

Some random 7 y/o: "but mooooooom, that was Anakin's Delta-7 starfighter! This is his Eta-2!" . 

20 minutes ago, TeddytheSpoon said:

What exactly is the gripe with the designs, that there's too much detail? I haven't looked at the new clones in great detail, and apart from the arms being white (I agree with @ARC2149Nova on that point, and tbh I might just swap them out) I can't see anything that ruins the designs for me.

From what I've seen, it's like you said, a lack of color contrast, and then also the worry that lego's going to keep changing the design and we won't get a consistant design across legions.

Edited June 2, 2020 by Mandalorianknight

[Graupensuppe]

3 minutes ago, TeddytheSpoon said:

What exactly is the gripe with the designs, that there's too much detail? I haven't looked at the new clones in great detail, and apart from the arms being white (I agree with @ARC2149Nova on that point, and tbh I might just swap them out) I can't see anything that ruins the designs for me. 

The breast and stomach plates and the helmet are less movie accurate than the 2014-2019 style. They're clearly based on the way the armor looks in the animated show (again). I think making separate designs for TCW clones has always been nonsensical, since the armor they wear is supposed to be the same type as in the movies - it's just that everything looks a bit distorted in the animated show. But to make matters worse, it appears that they're even using this type of minifigure in movie-based sets now.

[Kit Figsto]

6 minutes ago, Mandalorianknight said:

From what I've seen, it's like you said, a lack of color contrast, and then also the worry that lego's going to keep changing the design and we won't get a consistant design across legions.

That's honestly my main gripe with changing the designs of Stormtroopers/Clones.  With Vader or Boba Fett or whoever, it doesn't matter when they change the helmet design to be more accurate, since you can just replace the old one with the new one, but if you're trying to army build and they keep changing the design every four years, it's really hard to accumulate a lot of a figure just from buying sets.  Honestly, my issue is mostly with stormtrooper helmets.  I don't care if they slightly re-print the torsos/legs to make them more accurate, but I wish they would keep a consistent helmet mold so that they don't look so different.  With droids, I get that the ones we've had for 21 (B1) and 18 (B2) years aren't the most accurate, but it's way easier to make a huge droid force when every set ever has the same design of battle droid figure.

[TeddytheSpoon]

3 minutes ago, Graupensuppe said:

The breast and stomach plates and the helmet are less movie accurate than the 2014-2019 style. They're clearly based on the way the armor looks in the animated show (again). I think making separate designs for TCW clones has always been nonsensical, since the armor they wear is supposed to be the same type as in the movies - it's just that everything looks a bit distorted in the animated show. But to make matters worse, it appears that they're even using this type of minifigure in movie-based sets now.

Gotcha. I have gone and had a closer look now with them side by side and I can see what you mean, though for me personally the differences are subtle enough that I wouldn't notice it if I wasn't looking for it, and I'm not really one of these collect-a-massive-army-for-dioramas people. Not yet, anyway.

So long as they don't change the mold drastically like they did with stormies I can see past it.

[Kdapt-Preacher]

The problem with the AAT, fundamentally, is that the vehicle itself just looks really weird. It's an odd shape, with odd proportions, and any reasonably accurate model of it is also going to look weird. And the issue is compounded by TCW having stylized it more heavily than most of the other vehicles--they made it significantly shorter and fatter, in particular with a wider cabin, than the movie version is. I think the new set looks awful, but I think it's actually more accurate to the TCW version than the previous one was; it's the tank itself that looks bad, not LEGO's rendition of it. The 2008 version was massively oversized; this one might be a little bit small, but it's closer than they were before. I do think, though, that it needs the blue stripe up the front. The coloring looks completely wrong with just that isolated blue hatch. It's a small change, but it totally changes the look of the vehicle. A+ for the 332nd clone, though!

No strong opinion on Grievous's fighter or the ETA-2. I don't think either of those needed to be remade, since I have both previous versions, but there's nothing wrong with the new sets. They haven't changed much, but they were both in a pretty good place before, so that's fine. I rate those sets as bland but unobjectionable.

I like the Night Buzzard. I think that's pretty much what everybody was expecting it to be, which is a competent take on a new vehicle. Good that they included both the other Knights of Ren; there would've been an outcry if they hadn't. Have to see what the interior looks like, but it's a solid set.

Final Duel is very disappointing. It's exactly what they did with the UCS Death Star playset a few years ago--technically not the same set, but for all intents and purposes a rerelease, with slightly updated figures. This was a bad choice for it, since the previous Final Duel was one of the worst-received sets of the last few years, if I recall, as it was terribly overpriced and entirely uninteresting. This doesn't look any better. All I can hope for is that they've at least updated some of the other figures--if Palpatine is literally the only new one this set will truly have nothing to recommend it.

I love the ITS. I have no idea why they chose to make it, and I agree with some other people here that it wouldn't have been my first choice for a new ship, but I'm absolutely never going to complain about LEGO releasing a good-looking model of a vehicle they've never made before, especially with completely new figures. The recent counterpart to this is Vader's Castle, for a set based on an obscure property that came completely out of left field, and I loved that one too. Let's see more of these!

[2maxwell]

Just now, Kdapt-Preacher said:

The problem with the AAT, fundamentally, is that the vehicle itself just looks really weird. It's an odd shape, with odd proportions, and any reasonably accurate model of it is also going to look weird. And the issue is compounded by TCW having stylized it more heavily than most of the other vehicles--they made it significantly shorter and fatter, in particular with a wider cabin, than the movie version is. I think the new set looks awful, but I think it's actually more accurate to the TCW version than the previous one was; it's the tank itself that looks bad, not LEGO's rendition of it. The 2008 version was massively oversized; this one might be a little bit small, but it's closer than they were before. I do think, though, that it needs the blue stripe up the front. The coloring looks completely wrong with just that isolated blue hatch. It's a small change, but it totally changes the look of the vehicle. A+ for the 332nd clone, though!

This is a very good point. Let's take a look at this blueprint. This thing just won't stay up on it's own if it were made accurately. The portion overhanging is longer than the entire portion that's actually on the ground, and most of what actually is on the ground is leaning back. There's very little front-loaded weight that would be able to counterbalance the rear. I think they could definitely do a better job with the skirt and maybe add a print for those missile tubes, but the overall build for the tank will always be a bit wonky.

[Graupensuppe]

1 minute ago, Kdapt-Preacher said:

The 2008 version was massively oversized; this one might be a little bit small, but it's closer than they were before.

If I calculated this correctly, the old one was a bit too wide and too high, but still not long enough. The new one seems too small to me.

                   Movie                        1:42 scale      2009            2020
Length:        9.75 m                      23.4 cm         19.2 cm        approx. 14.4 cm
Width:         approx. 7.25 m          17.4 cm         19.2 cm        14.4 cm
Height:        approx. 4.40 m          10.6 cm         11.5 cm        approx. 9.3 cm

[2maxwell]

17 minutes ago, Graupensuppe said:

If I calculated this correctly, the old one was a bit too wide and too high, but still not long enough. The new one seems too small to me.

                   Movie                        1:42 scale      2009            2020
Length:        9.75 m                      23.4 cm         19.2 cm        approx. 14.4 cm
Width:         approx. 7.25 m          17.4 cm         19.2 cm        14.4 cm
Height:        approx. 4.40 m          10.6 cm         11.5 cm        approx. 9.3 cm

Out of curiosity, where are you getting the movie and 2020 model dimensions from? I've never seen any source listing the width and height of the AAT outside the blueprint I posted above.

Edited June 2, 2020 by 2maxwell

[Kdapt-Preacher]

For context, here's the degree of size and shape variation in previous AATs (2000, 2008, 2015): https://imgur.com/a/rCrzTaM You can compare those to the blueprint 2maxwell posted above. Sources for the proper dimensions of the vehicle are harder to come by, since a) they're almost all based on the movie version, which is very differently proportioned from TCW and b) the official length has changed with the switch to the new canon; it used to be 9.75 m but now it's only 9.19 m. The 2008 AAT is the largest, but also by far the shortest, so it isn't any longer than the 2000 version even though its width and height are so much greater that the set is almost twice as heavy. The 2014 version is just small. As best as I can tell from the new one, it looks like a reasonable compromise. Which isn't to say that it's good, because again this is just a bizarre vehicle to start with, but it's definitely not worse than we've had before.

[MGS6735]

1 hour ago, Kit Figsto said:

With droids, I get that the ones we've had for 21 (B1) and 18 (B2) years aren't the most accurate, but it's way easier to make a huge droid force when every set ever has the same design of battle droid figure.

We haven't seen B2s in a set since 2015. I don't know if there is a reason for it, but it strikes me as odd that we haven't seen any more recently, especially with new CW sets coming out that they could have returned in.

17 minutes ago, 2maxwell said:

This thing just won't stay up on it's own if it were made accurately. The portion overhanging is longer than the entire portion that's actually on the ground, and most of what actually is on the ground is leaning back. There's very little front-loaded weight that would be able to counterbalance the rear. I think they could definitely do a better job with the skirt and maybe add a print for those missile tubes, but the overall build for the tank will always be a bit wonky.



Good points @Kdapt-Preacher and @2maxwell. I agree that the proportions of the AAT make it challenging to construct with accurate dimensions for a Lego set and that they can certainly do better than what is coming out in August. In my opinion, changing the 2015 version's skirt to use the smaller version of the curved slopes on the 2009 version would make the most sense. This would allow for the missile tubes to be stickers on the skirt, which would help make the AAT look less strange (the lack of missile tubes doesn't help the vehicle look any better). I know someone posted a picture of what that would look like a while ago in this thread, but I'm not particularly eager to go find it. That build was pretty on-point for what I am describing.

[Graupensuppe]

8 minutes ago, 2maxwell said:

Out of curiosity, where are you getting the movie and 2020 model dimensions from? I've never seen any source listing the width and height of the AAT outside the blueprint I posted above.

9.75 m is (or used to be) the official length. I measured the width and height using reference pictures of the Episode 1 CG model in the "Chronicles: The Prequels" book, but they're probably not completely accurate since the images might have some perspective distortion. As for the 2020 model, I just tried to count the studs/bricks.

1 minute ago, MGS6735 said:

@Kdapt-Preacher@2maxwellIn my opinion, changing the 2015 version's skirt to use the smaller version of the curved slopes on the 2009 version would make the most sense. This would allow for the missile tubes to be stickers on the skirt, which would help make the AAT look less strange (the lack of missile tubes doesn't help the vehicle look any better). I know someone posted a picture of what that would look like a while ago in this thread, but I'm not particularly eager to go find it. That build was pretty on-point for what I am describing.

This one?

[MGS6735]

Just now, Graupensuppe said:

This one?

Yep. I thought you posted it, but I wasn't sure. Thanks for posting it again; I think it looks pretty solid.

[2maxwell]

That's swanky. I might try that once I get the new one and see what it's like under the hood.