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

[ARC2149Nova]

1 hour ago, 24nolf said:

It’s been 10 years since the last one. Ideally you probably want to cycle a set in about every 7 years to catch people who are new to the hobby. 

Star Wars collectors don’t realize how fortunate they are that sets get reintroduced after a while. You could be a fan of train, monorail, Castle, etc and have to deal exclusively with insane secondary market prices for outdated designs. 

That goes out the window with all the stuff (rehash or trash) we've gotten in the last five years. Remakes are nice, but certainly there are more pressing ones? TIE Interceptor's been mentioned, and that's been way longer, even for a System version. UCS sets are also spread out in their releases, so while a new X-Wing or B-Wing might be preferable to some, at the expense of new sets, OT/PT, without a UCS variant? I don't think so.

 

[Kit Figsto]

9 minutes ago, ARC2149Nova said:

That goes out the window with all the stuff (rehash or trash) we've gotten in the last five years. Remakes are nice, but certainly there are more pressing ones? TIE Interceptor's been mentioned, and that's been way longer, even for a System version. UCS sets are also spread out in their releases, so while a new X-Wing or B-Wing might be preferable to some, at the expense of new sets, OT/PT, without a UCS variant? I don't think so.

I can see both sides of it.  The Imperial Shuttle is pretty highly regarded when it comes to UCS stuff in that a lot of collectors really like it, but it's been long enough (it feels like it's only been about five years, I was really surprised that it's been ten!) that a lot of people who weren't into LEGO and/or LEGO Star Wars at the time (which is probably a sizeable number) don't have it due to the secondary prices being so high.  Plus, you'll have a good number of people who will buy it anyway as completionists. 

On the other hand, new stuff is always nice, but we are starting to get more into the obscure territory.  I mean, Jabba's Sail Barge would be freakin' awesome as a minifigure scale UCS model, but anything that would be totally new, besides that, is either from the prequels (which, as most people are guessing, the gunship will be sort of a test run for how prequel UCS stuff works) or getting into the territory of very very minor background ships/vehicles.  

Also, part of the reason that I think we're getting a shuttle is that, based on jdubbs' previous comment, he seemed to be hinting that it'll be $350, and there isn't a whole lot that could be remade at that price point.  The second-half D2C generally seems to hold a higher price point than the first, so a TIE variant would have to be almost comically large to fit that price point).  

I'd love to see some new stuff too, but I can see the justification for this specific remake.

[Sneakguest]

28 minutes ago, Mandalorianknight said:

Congratulations on the kid!

I get the annoyance at remakes, but 10 years between the sets seems like enough time to me, even if we only get a few UCS a year. At least it's not a snowspeeder.

Yeah but there have not been a non-remake since like Assault on Hoth, and they have actually repeated more of the UCS then they have unique ones. I just think it's getting silly the lack of innovation

and thanx bro!

Edited June 15, 2020 by Sneakguest

[jdubbs]

Is it worth pointing out that we just got an all-new UCS set only a month ago? You can't expect everything, all of the time. 

[Sneakguest]

H

Edited June 15, 2020 by Sneakguest

[ARC2149Nova]

15 minutes ago, Kit Figsto said:

On the other hand, new stuff is always nice, but we are starting to get more into the obscure territory.  I mean, Jabba's Sail Barge would be freakin' awesome as a minifigure scale UCS model, but anything that would be totally new, besides that, is either from the prequels (which, as most people are guessing, the gunship will be sort of a test run for how prequel UCS stuff works) or getting into the territory of very very minor background ships/vehicles.  

You make good points, but I will contend this one specifically:

The Khetanna may be the last truly new OT set for a UCS variant, however, and I'm trying to word this tactfully, we need to stop acting like the Gunship will be our first PT UCS set. It is our first in a nice long while, and will more than likely be better than its predecessors. But, even still, I think it's putting unfair pressure on the LAAT to carry the future of PT UCS vehicles. I can see vehicles like the ARC-170, Vulture/Tri Droids, and yes, even remakes like the N1 Starfighter doing well. Even so, I understand where you're coming from, even though it still feels cheap by Lego.

I'm not exactly opposed to the Imperial Shuttle, but it does seem like an odd choice for a remake.

10 minutes ago, jdubbs said:

Is it worth pointing out that we just got an all-new UCS set only a month ago? You can't expect everything, all of the time. 

That doesn't necessarily mean we couldn't have gotten another new UCS.  It didn't happen, sure, but that's not to say the concern isn't valid.

Like I said before, UCS sets are much more spaced out in their release, so remakes are a bit more delicate. But, I'm sure they'll have done a nice enough job with it.

[jdubbs]

1 minute ago, ARC2149Nova said:

That doesn't necessarily mean we couldn't have gotten another new UCS.  It didn't happen, sure, but that's not to say the concern isn't valid.

An A-Wing this year, Cloud City in 2018 (and for the love of God, no debates about UCS labels, pleeeeeease), the gunship in 2021-22, and in all likelihood, a new playset before it, and one or both of the Medical Frigate and TIE Bomber after it. A cadence of 1 new design for every 2ish reissues isn't any worse than what is being passed off in the system sets lately. That's just the state of LEGO Star Wars these days.

The fact is, there are not that many ships left that a) are iconic enough to warrant UCS treatment, b) haven't been done before, and c) would actually sell in quantity at s $200-800 price point. LEGO is going to space those out over the next 5-10 years, that's how it goes.

[ARC2149Nova]

5 minutes ago, jdubbs said:

An A-Wing this year, Cloud City in 2018 (and for the love of God, no debates about UCS labels, pleeeeeease), the gunship in 2021-22, and in all likelihood, a new playset before it, and one or both of the Medical Frigate and TIE Bomber after it. A cadence of 1 new design for every 2ish reissues isn't any worse than what is being passed off in the system sets lately. That's just the state of LEGO Star Wars these days.

The fact is, there are not that many ships left that a) are iconic enough to warrant UCS treatment, b) haven't been done before, and c) would actually sell in quantity at s $200-800 price point. LEGO is going to space those out over the next 5-10 years, that's how it goes.

Fair point, but I have to contend that being-iconic can be debated depending on the vessel. And as I mentioned, I don't necessarily think that the Gunship is an example of Lego finally "caving" to prequel fans, as it were, but being willing to try again. I do think they've got a lot of new UCS candidates up their sleeve.

Also, Cloud City is technically a re-make , just a larger scale one, but I understand what you mean.

[legolandia]

1 hour ago, Kit Figsto said:

The Imperial Shuttle is pretty highly regarded when it comes to UCS stuff in that a lot of collectors really like it

I dont understand why. It's the uggliest ship in the SW universe

21 minutes ago, jdubbs said:

The fact is, there are not that many ships left that a) are iconic enough to warrant UCS treatment, b) haven't been done before, and c) would actually sell in quantity at s $200-800 price point. LEGO is going to space those out over the next 5-10 years, that's how it goes.

Venator for one. And there are plenty of Trade federation ships which havent ever been releassed.

I am hoping that eventually Disney will see sense and move on from the current timeline of the movies and releasse new movies 1000 before or after the latest trilogy. That would open up an opportunity to design plenty of new ships and merchandise would boom. Considering Disney's appetite for money I am surprised they havent figured this out yet.

[jdubbs]

55 minutes ago, legolandia said:

Venator for one. And there are plenty of Trade federation ships which havent ever been releassed.

From what I've heard (purely anecdotal, take it for what it's worth), the UCS ISD was not selling all that well, pre-COVID. Which, if true, does not bode well for a Venator UCS set. And even if they wanted to do the Venator, LEGO would likely wait a few years after the ISD retires, given how similar the two ships are. 

My guess (emphasis on guess) is that you won't see a prequel-era UCS set before the Gunship, given that LEGO was surprised that it won the fan poll. And even then, they'd probably wait to see how it sells before putting another prequel UCS set in the pipeline... so you could be looking at 3+ years from now before another one hits shelves. (Assuming all the people who voted online for the gunship actually vote with their wallets as well.)

I'm not trying to rain on anyone's parade. There are clearly several unique/new UCS sets possible from each of the trilogies (yes, even the sequels). I am just saying it's unrealistic to expect LEGO to put them out back-to-back-to-back. Reissues are a fact of life, in both the UCS and System scales. 

[Mandalorianknight]

2 hours ago, ARC2149Nova said:

The Khetanna may be the last truly new OT set for a UCS variant, however, and I'm trying to word this tactfully, we need to stop acting like the Gunship will be our first PT UCS set. It is our first in a nice long while, and will more than likely be better than its predecessors. But, even still, I think it's putting unfair pressure on the LAAT to carry the future of PT UCS vehicles. I can see vehicles like the ARC-170, Vulture/Tri Droids, and yes, even remakes like the N1 Starfighter doing well. Even so, I understand where you're coming from, even though it still feels cheap by Lego.

 

For more OT stuff I'd add an AT-AT, Luke's Landspeeder, and a TIE bomber, but I agree there's not too much left, even with that list, as the TIE bomber isn't exactly iconic (though not really less than a b-wing or a-wing).

Technically, yes there was the UCS delta-7, but I can't imagine that sold well. @jdubbs does a good job explaining this, but I'll try to add to it. We only have had one real UCS prequel set (I'm not counting the system-scale n-1 with chrome bricks), because most people who were late teens or adults when the prequels came out hated them, and I assume the delta consequently sold poorly. Now the people who saw the prequels as kids are older, so there's potentially more demand for prequel stuff. The fan poll and gunship is lego testing the waters, so it's not like we'd see prequels before then. It depends on the gunship gang actually buying the gunship. If it fails, lego might not many more prequel UCS. So it unfortunately does depend on the gunship to carry the future of UCS vehicles.

1 hour ago, legolandia said:

Venator for one. And there are plenty of Trade federation ships which havent ever been releassed.

I am hoping that eventually Disney will see sense and move on from the current timeline of the movies and releasse new movies 1000 before or after the latest trilogy. That would open up an opportunity to design plenty of new ships and merchandise would boom. Considering Disney's appetite for money I am surprised they havent figured this out yet.

see @jdubbs's comment about the venator, but I have to say I don't think any trade federation ships besides maybe the lucrehulk would sell well as UCS sets. I don't want to get to far off topic, but first off, I doubt we'll see stuff "1000 after" the sequels anytime soon, but while the high republic is only 200 years before the prequels there have been rumors of old republic films, so those might be the 2022, 2024, and 2026 films. (One last side not, of course disney has an appetite for money, it's a company, that's how they pay their workers and make profit for shareholders). But that's all somewhat irrelevant, as no matter whether or not that stuff's coming, it won't come in 2020.

Edited June 16, 2020 by Mandalorianknight

[ARC2149Nova]

15 minutes ago, jdubbs said:

From what I've heard (purely anecdotal, take it for what it's worth), the UCS ISD was not selling all that well, pre-COVID. Which, if true, does not bode well for a Venator UCS set. And even if they wanted to do the Venator, LEGO would likely wait a few years after the ISD retires, given how similar the two ships are. 

My guess (emphasis on guess) is that you won't see a prequel-era UCS set before the Gunship, given that LEGO was surprised that it won the fan poll. And even then, they'd probably wait to see how it sells before putting another prequel UCS set in the pipeline... so you could be looking at 3+ years from now before another one hits shelves. (Assuming all the people who voted online for the gunship actually vote with their wallets as well.)

I'm not trying to rain on anyone's parade. There are clearly several unique/new UCS sets possible from each of the trilogies (yes, even the sequels). I am just saying it's unrealistic to expect LEGO to put them out back-to-back-to-back. Reissues are a fact of life, in both the UCS and System scales. 

I remember people complaining that the ISD was and is just a stack of grey bricks (what they were expecting I dunno ), but a Venator is at least a bit more colorful than your standard imperial ship. I'd say prequel designs by and large are very iconic, from the Vulture Droid and Landing Craft to the ARC-170 and Jedi Temple. I don't think Lego was surprised by the fact the Gunship won, Lego (and Disney first and foremost) have been shafting the prequels since the Lucasfilm buyout. It's a miracle we got Season 7 of the Clone Wars, and they clearly don't want to really market it. The Gunship affirms that people want PT UCS sets, and I think it would be foolish to not incorporate the market further in future products. Of course, Lego could always self-sabotage and then imply the Gunship didn't sell because "nobody likes the prequels" , but let's try to keep some hope alive.

As for unique sequel UCS candidates: "Lies! Deception!"  (Aside from maybe the Flying Fortress)

Just now, Mandalorianknight said:

Technically, yes there was the UCS delta-7, but I can't imagine that sold well. @jdubbs does a good job explaining this, but I'll try to add to it. We only have had one real UCS prequel set (I'm not counting the system-scale n-1 with chrome bricks), because most people who were late teens or adults when the prequels came out hated them, and I assume the delta consequently sold poorly. Now the people who saw the prequels as kids are older, so there's potentially more demand for prequel stuff. The fan poll and gunship isn't a test for lego, so it's not like we'd see prequels before then. It depends on the gunship gang actually buying the gunship. If it fails, lego might not many more prequel UCS. So it unfortunately does depend on the gunship to carry the future of UCS vehicles.

See my above points. If it isn't a test, like you said, then it shouldn't matter. UCS sets in general have tanked before, but we still get them. Plenty of Lego sets sell poorly, but we still end up getting rehashes and variations. If Lego and Disney want to continue ignoring the prequel market, they can always tip the scales in favor of that agenda. It's not just about the buyers, it's about Lego too. I'm not saying Lego is dishonest, but they certainly make questionable decisions, decisions that affect their product output.

[2maxwell]

I've mentioned this before but I'm certain that a big consideration for these sets is the age of the consumer.

People who grew up with the PT like me are now starting to hit their 30s, where they could reasonably blow a couple hundred dollars on a large display piece. Stuff that gained its prominence during the Clone Wars era though still appeals to an audience with a much lower average age than what I would assume works well for selling UCS sets. I can't see a Venator selling well until the kids who grew up watching the Clone Wars tv show are also comfortably past their college years and no longer living in one bedroom apartments.

Edited June 16, 2020 by 2maxwell

[jdubbs]

8 minutes ago, ARC2149Nova said:

I don't think Lego was surprised by the fact the Gunship won, Lego (and Disney first and foremost) have been shafting the prequels since the Lucasfilm buyout.

The designer assigned to the Gunship straight-up said they were surprised.

And the prequels got plenty of nods in both the ST, RO, and Solo, not to mention almost an entire wave of LEGO sets this year. Yes, everyone has been preoccupied by the sequels, but I think the idea that there is some nefarious plot to bury the prequels is just... silly. 

[ARC2149Nova]

4 minutes ago, 2maxwell said:

I've mentioned this before but I'm certain that a big consideration for these sets is the age of the consumer.

People who grew up with the PT like me are now starting to hit their 30s, where they could reasonably blow a couple hundred dollars on a large display piece. Stuff that gained its prominence during the Clone Wars era though still appeals to an audience with a much lower average age than what I would assume works well for selling UCS sets. I can't see a Venator selling well until the kids who grew up watching the Clone Wars tv show are also comfortably past their college years and no longer living in one bedroom apartments.

A lot of 20-30 year-olds like The Clone Wars though. Just because one group of fans grew up with the show doesn't mean those are its only fans. I for one would definitely do whatever was in my power to purchase a Venator at any scale at this point.

Just now, jdubbs said:

The designer assigned to the Gunship straight-up said they were surprised.

And the prequels got plenty of nods in both the ST, RO, and Solo, not to mention almost an entire wave of LEGO sets this year. Yes, everyone has been preoccupied by the sequels, but I think the idea that there is some nefarious plot to bury the prequels is just... silly. 

Right, because a few bones is clearly acknowledgement. Considering how little pre-Empire content Disney has sanctioned, it's not silly, it is well-founded. It's not about small nods and Easter eggs, but dedicated content. This isn't the forum for that conversation though.

And I wish we would stop saying that just because we get Grievous Fighter (which nobody likes due to the price), Anakin's Fighter (which few people are going to get due to sheer laziness of rerelease), a good 501st pack, and a mixed-reception AAT means that Lego clearly loves its prequel fanbase. Those are bones, and looking at how the Soulless One's setting up for failure, I rest my case.

Lego is smart. Overprice here, go light on the figures there, and voila a prequel set nobody really wants. Then when it inevitably sells poorly, they'll say, "it's because nobody likes the prequels". All the pieces are in place.

[2maxwell]

1 minute ago, ARC2149Nova said:

A lot of 20-30 year-olds like The Clone Wars though. Just because one group of fans grew up with the show doesn't mean those are its only fans. I for one would definitely do whatever was in my power to purchase a Venator at any scale at this point.

The point isn't whether older fans of TCW exist, but whether enough of them exist to make whatever TCW UCS set they make into a success. There's also a big difference between someone working an entry level job while living in a studio apartment at 24 vs someone who's a homeowner and has been in their career for a half decade at the age of 30. Many more people can find the money and the space in their home to shell out for a large lego display piece at the second age than the first. Lego probably knows that they can maximize the sales of TCW UCS sets by waiting a few years as the average would-be consumer for that product grows up and gets to a place where they can comfortably blow a few hundred dollars like that.

[Mandalorianknight]

24 minutes ago, ARC2149Nova said:

I remember people complaining that the ISD was and is just a stack of grey bricks (what they were expecting I dunno ), but a Venator is at least a bit more colorful than your standard imperial ship. I'd say prequel designs by and large are very iconic, from the Vulture Droid and Landing Craft to the ARC-170 and Jedi Temple. I don't think Lego was surprised by the fact the Gunship won, Lego (and Disney first and foremost) have been shafting the prequels since the Lucasfilm buyout. It's a miracle we got Season 7 of the Clone Wars, and they clearly don't want to really market it. The Gunship affirms that people want PT UCS sets, and I think it would be foolish to not incorporate the market further in future products. Of course, Lego could always self-sabotage and then imply the Gunship didn't sell because "nobody likes the prequels" , but let's try to keep some hope alive.

As for unique sequel UCS candidates: "Lies! Deception!"  (Aside from maybe the Flying Fortress)

See my above points. If it isn't a test, like you said, then it shouldn't matter. UCS sets in general have tanked before, but we still get them. Plenty of Lego sets sell poorly, but we still end up getting rehashes and variations. If Lego and Disney want to continue ignoring the prequel market, they can always tip the scales in favor of that agenda. It's not just about the buyers, it's about Lego too. I'm not saying Lego is dishonest, but they certainly make questionable decisions, decisions that affect their product output.

You seem to have this theory that lego and disney are conspiring against the prequels, which I don't think is true. Everything else aside, lego and disney are companies, with the sole express goal of making money, because that's how companies can pay their employees and shareholders. So why would they purposely lose profit by ignoring a portion of the fanbase? 

Also I'm not sure where you were looking, but I got a ton of ads for clone wars season 7. Every youtube ad for WEEKS was the "witness the end" tv spot. (not that I'm complaining!)

8 minutes ago, jdubbs said:

And the prequels got plenty of nods in both the ST, RO, and Solo, not to mention almost an entire wave of LEGO sets this year. Yes, everyone has been preoccupied by the sequels, but I think the idea that there is some nefarious plot to bury the prequels is just... silly. 

Yeah, it's somewhat strange. 

3 minutes ago, 2maxwell said:

The point isn't whether older fans of TCW exist, but whether enough of them exist to make whatever TCW UCS set they make into a success. There's also a big difference between someone working an entry level job while living in a studio apartment at 24 vs someone who's a homeowner and has been in their career for a half decade at the age of 30. Many more people can find the money and the space in their home to shell out for a large lego display piece at the second age than the first. Lego probably knows that they can maximize the sales of TCW UCS sets by waiting a few years as the average would-be consumer for that product grows up and gets to a place where they can comfortably blow a few hundred dollars like that.

Exactly. I LOVE the clone wars and ROTS, but I'm not going to spend $400 on a gunship or $700 on a venator.

[ARC2149Nova]

5 minutes ago, 2maxwell said:

The point isn't whether older fans of TCW exist, but whether enough of them exist to make whatever TCW UCS set they make into a success. There's also a big difference between someone working an entry level job while living in a studio apartment at 24 vs someone who's a homeowner and has been in their career for a half decade at the age of 30. Many more people can find the money and the space in their home to shell out for a large lego display piece at the second age than the first. Lego probably knows that they can maximize the sales of TCW UCS sets by waiting a few years as the average would-be consumer for that product grows up and gets to a place where they can comfortably blow a few hundred dollars like that.

Fair points. I will still point out that many prequel fans that are also fans of Lego could fit that category. But age isn't even the only parameter, but I do agree that disposable income is important.

Just now, Mandalorianknight said:

You seem to have this theory that lego and disney are conspiring against the prequels, which I don't think is true. Everything else aside, lego and disney are companies, with the sole express goal of making money, because that's how companies can pay their employees and shareholders. So why would they purposely lose profit by ignoring a portion of the fanbase? 

Also I'm not sure where you were looking, but I got a ton of ads for clone wars season 7. Every youtube ad for WEEKS was the "witness the end" tv spot. (not that I'm complaining!)

Not just me, many people have long suspected this at least on Disney's part. And I'm not talking strictly video marketing (such as YouTube ads for the tv show) but physical merchandise like T-shirts, action figures, and yes, even Lego. And Lego and Disney are companies, but Disney's really not been on the larger fandom's good side for years.

2 minutes ago, Mandalorianknight said:

Exactly. I LOVE the clone wars and ROTS, but I'm not going to spend $400 on a gunship or $700 on a venator.

But is that simply those vehicles or in general? Because I'd imagine anyone not willing to drop $400 on a Lego set won't do so, regardless of what it is.

Regardless, if we're getting the Shuttle, we're getting the Shuttle. No sense in prolonging hypotheticals.

[Balrogofmorgoth]

I would spend $400 on a Gunship and $700 on a Venator...just saying. I’m not a wealthy person but I would make it happen

[2maxwell]

8 minutes ago, ARC2149Nova said:

Fair points. I will still point out that many prequel fans that are also fans of Lego could fit that category. But age isn't even the only parameter, but I do agree that disposable income is important.

You're not wrong that there's a strong overlap between people who grew up with the PT and those interested in the Clone Wars. The problem is that many more people who fit that are interested in the Clone Wars era and not necessarily the TV show.

My friends and I were obsessed with the Republic and clone troopers and the Jedi order growing up and we'd stage huge lego battles with them. Of all of us, I'm the only one who ended up watching the new Clone Wars show. The thing is that many of us at my specific age remember (and actually prefer) the old canon and the old Clone Wars cartoon by Genndy Tartakovsky. I won't speak for everyone, but I think for many of us in my age group, the Republic Gunship (which featured prominently in the most famous episodes of the original Clone Wars cartoon) sticks out in our memories much more than the Venator. If I went to my old buddies and told them a UCS Gunship is in production, I'm sure each and every one of them would be stoked. Not that they'd run out and buy it right away, but they'd def be interested. But the Venator? That's just something that was largely in the background before the new Clone Wars show made it a centerpiece for Anakin and Ahsokas intragalactic adventures.

[ARC2149Nova]

Just now, 2maxwell said:

You're not wrong that there's a strong overlap between people who grew up with the PT and those interested in the Clone Wars. The problem is that many more people who fit that are interested in the Clone Wars era and not necessarily the TV show.

My friends and I were obsessed with the Republic and clone troopers and the Jedi order growing up and we'd stage huge lego battles with them. Of all of us, I'm the only one who ended up watching the new Clone Wars show. The thing is that many of us at my specific age remember (and actually prefer) the old canon and the old Clone Wars cartoon by Genndy Tartakovsky. I won't speak for everyone, but I think for many of us in my age group, the Republic Gunship (which featured prominently in the most famous episodes of the original Clone Wars cartoon) sticks out in our memories much more than the Venator. If I went to my old buddies and told them a UCS Gunship is in production, I'm sure each and every one of them would be stoked. Not that they'd run out and buy it right away, but they'd def be interested. But the Venator? That's just something that was largely in the background before the new Clone Wars show made it a centerpiece for Anakin and Ahsokas intragalactic adventures.

That's a very good point. I've seen a lot of UCS Venator MOCs, so I would imagine there's some demand, but ultimately would be outpaced by other CW-era vehicles.

 

4 minutes ago, Balrogofmorgoth said:

I would spend $400 on a Gunship and $700 on a Venator...just saying. I’m not a wealthy person but I would make it happen

You and me both.

[jpipes7261]

2 hours ago, legolandia said:

I dont understand why. It's the uggliest ship in the SW universe

Venator for one. And there are plenty of Trade federation ships which havent ever been releassed.

I am hoping that eventually Disney will see sense and move on from the current timeline of the movies and releasse new movies 1000 before or after the latest trilogy. That would open up an opportunity to design plenty of new ships and merchandise would boom. Considering Disney's appetite for money I am surprised they havent figured this out yet.

The Inviable hand by LDiEgo was the first set I ever voted for on Lego Ideas. That set got 10K votes back in 2014 and lego still hasn't made a separatist flagship despite seeing actual demand for one.

[2maxwell]

1 minute ago, jpipes7261 said:

The Inviable hand by LDiEgo was the first set I ever voted for on Lego Ideas. That set got 10K votes back in 2014 and lego still hasn't made a separatist flagship despite seeing actual demand for one.

They did actually make the Malevolence, which was Grievous's flagship for a while on the Clone Wars cartoon. That one was available until 2014.

[jpipes7261]

9 minutes ago, 2maxwell said:

They did actually make the Malevolence, which was Grievous's flagship for a while on the Clone Wars cartoon. That one was available until 2014.

But the Malevolence was in development before that. Having that set reach 10K in 2014 shows that there was still demand for more separatist frigates.

[Kdapt-Preacher]

1 hour ago, ARC2149Nova said:

Lego is smart. Overprice here, go light on the figures there, and voila a prequel set nobody really wants. Then when it inevitably sells poorly, they'll say, "it's because nobody likes the prequels". All the pieces are in place.

I promise LEGO is not intentionally sabotaging the sales of its own products.