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

[jdubbs]

5 minutes ago, Kdapt-Preacher said:

Look at the top posts on this page, though--everyone there is talking about a new rumored cantina set. That's exactly the problem with cryptic hints; people take them to mean more than they say because they don't say anything useful.

Which is no different than what happened when Landino or Ninja or MandR or whomever said outright "the next UCS might be an Imperial Shuttle". It might be, it might not. Being specific about it didn't stop people here from talking about it for dozens and dozens of posts, many of which assumed the rumor — despite being explicitly identified as such — to be fact. 

[ARC2149Nova]

59 minutes ago, jdubbs said:

Which is no different than what happened when Landino or Ninja or MandR or whomever said outright "the next UCS might be an Imperial Shuttle". It might be, it might not. Being specific about it didn't stop people here from talking about it for dozens and dozens of posts, many of which assumed the rumor — despite being explicitly identified as such — to be fact. 

So... are we not getting a UCS Shuttle?

Are we getting a Ponda Baba minifig? Dr. Evazan? He can't seriously be on his own, unless there's a figure with the new Skywalker Saga game. So, what's the deal? I'm starting to get the feeling a lot of us are simply being toyed with. We get rumors and alleged leaks, only to be told a week later that it's not what we (were led to) think.

[Brikkyy13]

41 minutes ago, ARC2149Nova said:

So... are we not getting a UCS Shuttle?

All signs point to the 2HY D2C being a shuttle at this point, I think it was the brothers brick who posted the initial confirmation. 

[THELEGOBATMAN]

3 hours ago, jdubbs said:

Which is no different than what happened when Landino or Ninja or MandR or whomever said outright "the next UCS might be an Imperial Shuttle". It might be, it might not. Being specific about it didn't stop people here from talking about it for dozens and dozens of posts, many of which assumed the rumor — despite being explicitly identified as such — to be fact. 

Well no. It was actually a rumour by brickfanatics, one of the most reliable Lego news websites.

[ginja]

5 hours ago, jdubbs said:

Which is no different than what happened when Landino or Ninja or MandR or whomever said outright "the next UCS might be an Imperial Shuttle". It might be, it might not. Being specific about it didn't stop people here from talking about it for dozens and dozens of posts, many of which assumed the rumor — despite being explicitly identified as such — to be fact. 

Though I totally agree, you dropped a hint about this months ago.

[MKJoshA]

Hey everyone, take a deep breathe and think twice before you post. We're getting heated over little things. Keep a cool head and stay on target.

[jdubbs]

6 hours ago, THELEGOBATMAN said:

Well no. It was actually a rumour by brickfanatics, one of the most reliable Lego news websites.

It's still a rumor, wherever it was first published. Whatever the source (I don't honestly pay much attention to the Instagrammers and YouTubers because half of them are more concerned with being "First!" than with verifying the info they receive and publish), everyone's been wrong before. Myself included. But my point was, even if Renown had been super-precise in sharing the info he had, it would have taken on a life of its own, just as the Imperial Shuttle rumor did.

8 hours ago, ARC2149Nova said:

Are we getting a Ponda Baba minifig? Dr. Evazan? He can't seriously be on his own, unless there's a figure with the new Skywalker Saga game. So, what's the deal? I'm starting to get the feeling a lot of us are simply being toyed with. We get rumors and alleged leaks, only to be told a week later that it's not what we (were led to) think.

That's the nature of rumors. Every year there is more misinformation about what's coming than actual, accurate reports. Certain people get their jollies writing elaborate set lists, set descriptions, "eyewitness" reports, etc. to see how far people will run with it on places like this. Unless you're willing to ignore everything except what LEGO publishes on their website, you're going to spend a lot of time scrutinizing and debunking bogus info. You can be upset that you're not getting all the info you want exactly how you want it and when you want it, or you can accept that sometimes getting to the facts is like peeling an onion. Lots of layers to peel back, maybe a few tears, but eventually you get there. 

Edited July 5, 2020 by jdubbs

[ARC2149Nova]

55 minutes ago, jdubbs said:

That's the nature of rumors. Every year there is more misinformation about what's coming than actual, accurate reports. Certain people get their jollies writing elaborate set lists, set descriptions, "eyewitness" reports, etc. to see how far people will run with it on places like this. Unless you're willing to ignore everything except what LEGO publishes on their website, you're going to spend a lot of time scrutinizing and debunking bogus info. You can be upset that you're not getting all the info you want exactly how you want it and when you want it, or you can accept that sometimes getting to the facts is like peeling an onion. Lots of layers to peel back, maybe a few tears, but eventually you get there. 

Yes, but the bogus is fairly obvious. If it's "Baby's First Lego Leak", then odds are it's gonna be false. But if we're getting information (and a few hints) from tested sources, then the rumors can be held in a higher regard, and can (for the most part) be trusted. Sure, this can lead to the whole "its not confirmed", but come on. A lot of Lego "news" is essentially rumors that come to fruition.

I doubt sources like the Brothers Brick, Landino, Falconfan, and whoever else, can be trolled easily. In summation: I'm going to believe a rumor if it comes from a credible source. Things internally within Lego may change, but that doesn't mean the leaks were wrong. Leaks are, by their very nature, reports that will not be verified by their original source (i.e. LEGO), until said source is ready to release them, or is forced to verify upon release of the leaked information (like in media leaks).

If we get a credible rumor on a UCS Shuttle, I'll believe it. If September hits and it's something else, then sure, I'll be disappointed the rumors were wrong, but going forward take said source's info with a truckton of salt.

[Flieger]

Here is a very interesting interview with the designers of the 501st Battle Pack:

https://brickset.com/article/52341/interview-with-star-wars-designers-75280-501st-legion-clone-troopers

In short, the set is a response to the online campaign (so for much for 'Lego does not listen to afols'), they don't mind the campaign (wether that's true or not is up to debate), and they had early access to TCW when designing the set. Also, BPs are not necessarily always for army building, and we will might see some non-army builders in the future, too.

[Mandalorianknight]

20 minutes ago, ARC2149Nova said:

Yes, but the bogus is fairly obvious. If it's "Baby's First Lego Leak", then odds are it's gonna be false. But if we're getting information (and a few hints) from tested sources, then the rumors can be held in a higher regard, and can (for the most part) be trusted. Sure, this can lead to the whole "its not confirmed", but come on. A lot of Lego "news" is essentially rumors that come to fruition.

I doubt sources like the Brothers Brick, Landino, Falconfan, and whoever else, can be trolled easily. In summation: I'm going to believe a rumor if it comes from a credible source. Things internally within Lego may change, but that doesn't mean the leaks were wrong. Leaks are, by their very nature, reports that will not be verified by their original source (i.e. LEGO), until said source is ready to release them, or is forced to verify upon release of the leaked information (like in media leaks).

If we get a credible rumor on a UCS Shuttle, I'll believe it. If September hits and it's something else, then sure, I'll be disappointed the rumors were wrong, but going forward take said source's info with a truckton of salt.

@Renown has been reliable as far as I remember, so I'd guess something Ponda Baba and Dr evazan related is coming. I can't see one coming without the other either, so I'd guess it's a small set if not the d2c.

6 minutes ago, Flieger said:

Here is a very interesting interview with the designers of the 501st Battle Pack:

https://brickset.com/article/52341/interview-with-star-wars-designers-75280-501st-legion-clone-troopers

In short, the set is a response to the online campaign (so for much for 'Lego does not listen to afols'), they don't mind the campaign (wether that's true or not is up to debate), and they had early access to TCW when designing the set. Also, BPs are not necessarily always for army building, and we will might see some non-army builders in the future, too.

"Are we blind? Deploy the #wewantagonkdroidbattlepacks!" 

In all honesty if they don't mind this sort of thing I think it would be a good idea to let them know what the community might want, though definitely not to the extent of the 501st battle pack.

It's really interesting to me that they say that not all battle packs have to be army builders, I wonder if they're hinting at something. 

[jdubbs]

44 minutes ago, ARC2149Nova said:

Yes, but the bogus is fairly obvious. If it's "Baby's First Lego Leak", then odds are it's gonna be false. But if we're getting information (and a few hints) from tested sources, then the rumors can be held in a higher regard, and can (for the most part) be trusted. Sure, this can lead to the whole "its not confirmed", but come on. A lot of Lego "news" is essentially rumors that come to fruition.

I doubt sources like the Brothers Brick, Landino, Falconfan, and whoever else, can be trolled easily. In summation: I'm going to believe a rumor if it comes from a credible source. Things internally within Lego may change, but that doesn't mean the leaks were wrong. Leaks are, by their very nature, reports that will not be verified by their original source (i.e. LEGO), until said source is ready to release them, or is forced to verify upon release of the leaked information (like in media leaks).

If we get a credible rumor on a UCS Shuttle, I'll believe it. If September hits and it's something else, then sure, I'll be disappointed the rumors were wrong, but going forward take said source's info with a truckton of salt.

We’re all only as reliable as the information we’re fed. And we all get fed bogus info — some of which looks really credible — over and over. You’re right that the more experienced people will scrutinize these reports and verify if possible. But that doesn’t stop bad info from getting passed on by good people .

Case in point: in December there was a set list circulating that sounded entirely plausible and realistic — Sith Star Destroyer, Resistance B-Wing, TIE Whisper, etc. — that made it into IG/ blog posts and YouTube videos from many of the sources you consider to be the most reliable. It was discussed here at length in part because it was reported by these hitherto-trustworthy sources. None of which made it any less bogus.  And then even when the EU Toy Fairs started in January with all the actual sets on (private) display, proving this set list was fake, it still took weeks and weeks to get people here to let go of that fake list, because “it came from so-and-so, who is reliable and put it on IG/a website/YouTube, and so I believe it, regardless of your facts to the contrary”.  

I’m not saying to ignore or disbelieve people who bring you these reports. Just be aware that the vast majority of the people reporting these “leaks” are getting them second- or third-hand, or by data mining retail computer systems, or by scraping info off websites, or via semi-anonymous sources, or by repeating each other in a never-ending game of Telephone.  All of which are subject to mistakes and misinformation and outright misdirection. 

[BigGuy4U]

45 minutes ago, Mandalorianknight said:

@Renown has been reliable as far as I remember, so I'd guess something Ponda Baba and Dr evazan related is coming. I can't see one coming without the other either, so I'd guess it's a small set if not the d2c.

"Are we blind? Deploy the #wewantagonkdroidbattlepacks!" 

In all honesty if they don't mind this sort of thing I think it would be a good idea to let them know what the community might want, though definitely not to the extent of the 501st battle pack.

It's really interesting to me that they say that not all battle packs have to be army builders, I wonder if they're hinting at something. 

I don't think it's really hinting at anything, they've already done that with the Bounty Hunter Battle Pack and to a lesser extent the Jedi and Clone Battle Pack by including Barriss and Ki-Adi Mundi. While there very well could be more of those on the way (which I hope there are, named characters in cheap sets is always a good thing) I doubt it's hinting at something specific since it's already something they've been doing.

[BrickBob Studpants]

There‘s a rumour making the rounds on IG about a new encyclopedia being released in November with an exclusive minifig... I guess that‘s where the recent cantina rumour comes into play? Dr Evazan anyone? 

[BacktoBricks]

EDIT: Hoth Bricks says it's just a foreign version of the current one. ?

 

https://www.dk.com/ca/book/9780744027778-lego-star-wars-enciclopedia-de-personajes-actualizada/

Edited July 5, 2020 by BacktoBricks

[ARC2149Nova]

2 hours ago, Mandalorianknight said:

@Renown has been reliable as far as I remember, so I'd guess something Ponda Baba and Dr evazan related is coming. I can't see one coming without the other either, so I'd guess it's a small set if not the d2c.

Like I said before, I'm certain the UCS is the Shuttle, and we're either getting (a) another surprise set, or (b) possibly Brickheadz.

1 hour ago, jdubbs said:

We’re all only as reliable as the information we’re fed. And we all get fed bogus info — some of which looks really credible — over and over. You’re right that the more experienced people will scrutinize these reports and verify if possible. But that doesn’t stop bad info from getting passed on by good people ...

...I’m not saying to ignore or disbelieve people who bring you these reports. Just be aware that the vast majority of the people reporting these “leaks” are getting them second- or third-hand, or by data mining retail computer systems, or by scraping info off websites, or via semi-anonymous sources, or by repeating each other in a never-ending game of Telephone.  All of which are subject to mistakes and misinformation and outright misdirection. 

That's understandable, but being dismissive of such reports simply because they may be false can be detrimental. I suppose a little salt should be taken with every leak or rumor, though.

2 hours ago, Flieger said:

Here is a very interesting interview with the designers of the 501st Battle Pack:

https://brickset.com/article/52341/interview-with-star-wars-designers-75280-501st-legion-clone-troopers

In short, the set is a response to the online campaign (so for much for 'Lego does not listen to afols'), they don't mind the campaign (wether that's true or not is up to debate), and they had early access to TCW when designing the set. Also, BPs are not necessarily always for army building, and we will might see some non-army builders in the future, too.

I read that interview, very interesting, but the Jet Trooper design is from Season 5 of the Clone Wars (which predates EA's Battlefront II).

I liked the Bounty Hunters BP and the Jedi and Clones BP (actually bought 3 of the latter), so I don't mind the occasional non-army-builder battle pack, just hope they don't overdo it.

[BrickBob Studpants]

11 minutes ago, BacktoBricks said:

EDIT: Hoth Bricks says it's just a foreign version of the current one. ?

Yeah, looks like it  False alarm then 

[MGS6735]

3 minutes ago, ARC2149Nova said:

I don't mind the occasional non-army-builder battle pack, just hope they don't overdo it.

I only mind if they mix army builder and non-army builder figures in a battle pack like in the Jedi and Clone Troopers Battle Pack. Because the figures are split between army building and non-army building, the set fails to serve either purpose effectively.

[ARC2149Nova]

18 minutes ago, MGS6735 said:

I only mind if they mix army builder and non-army builder figures in a battle pack like in the Jedi and Clone Troopers Battle Pack. Because the figures are split between army building and non-army building, the set fails to serve either purpose effectively.

True, but both Barriss and Ki-Adi  at least had useful parts (the dress, Mundi's robes) so I didn't mind them as much. I know some take figures as they are, but some of us (like myself) appreciate useful parts for customs and figbarfs. I wouldn't want them to necessarily repeat that though, but I didn't mind that set too much.

But in all honesty, I'd love for them to do more "unique" character packs, like Yavin Pilots and such.

[Mandalorianknight]

 

1 hour ago, ARC2149Nova said:

True, but both Barriss and Ki-Adi  at least had useful parts (the dress, Mundi's robes) so I didn't mind them as much. I know some take figures as they are, but some of us (like myself) appreciate useful parts for customs and figbarfs. I wouldn't want them to necessarily repeat that though, but I didn't mind that set too much.

But in all honesty, I'd love for them to do more "unique" character packs, like Yavin Pilots and such.

I'd like that too, but seeing as we're down to two packs a year, I'd prefer it in addition to two army builder ones rather than a replacement.

Also I did a similar thing with that set! Bought two, and then parted out the jedi figures for some civilian parts, jedi parts, and mirialan/cereans for my rebels.

[Flieger]

Actually, rather few Battle Packs are true army builders.

Some are supplemental in nature. The Imperial Patrol BP from the Solo Line works best combined with the two speeders to recreate the chase scene. It is not like you need hundreds of Patrol Troopers or Emigration Officers... And how many Praetorian Guards or Imperial Red Guards do you need? Sure, a few more to complete (supplement) the scene, but not dozens or hundreds of them.

Some BPs are character driven like the Bounty Hunter set that was mentioned or the Inferno Squad or even the Mandalorians.

Some BPs are true army builders, of course. Army building however is largely an afol thing (as a kid I just imagined having 100s of them...), so it makes sense that Lego listens to the afols in that regard.

 

I for one like all of those types and hope all of them are continued. Still, even though I am not an army builder myself I think it is strange that Lego does not go for the simple 4x (movie) Stormtrooper BP. That would sell like crazy. But who am I telling this?

[Clone OPatra]

Wow most of the answers in that interview seem so rubbish.

"It is not necessarily the sort of set we would typically design but the demand was very clear." - They wouldn't typically design a set with minifigures of a particular specific faction? What about sets as recent as... the Inferno Squad battle pack, a faction with a likely very limited fanbase? Or the Sith Trooper battle pack?

 Why'd they make it bigger than a battle pack? $$$

Also a shame that they had access to Clone Wars Season 7 material in advance and all we got is a 501st BP (which isn't even S7 specific really) and Ahsoka and one Ahsoka-helmet clone.

[Kaijumeister]

1 hour ago, Clone OPatra said:

Also a shame that they had access to Clone Wars Season 7 material in advance and all we got is a 501st BP (which isn't even S7 specific really) and Ahsoka and one Ahsoka-helmet clone.

That stood out to me as well, however it’s just as likely that Lego are saving more S7 content for next year. Although, I suspect this will be drip-fed at best. I imagine the concept material made available to Lego were character designs moreso than anything else, hence the tenuous relationship between this summer’s two Clone Wars sets and the actual content of Season 7, which would have made for a solid selection of sets.

On a slightly different note, I find myself drawn more and more to the DSII Final Duel rehash. As an owner of the original 2015 iteration, the new updates to the set itself in addition to Vader’s arm printing are neat. Whilst it’s not the “prettiest” set, it’s one of the most substantial location-based Star Wars sets I can think of. I’d love to see more location sets with this approach and less like Battle on Takodana / Battle on Scarif / Encounter on Jakku (lower price points aside and the fact that these sets had their own merits). 

Edited July 5, 2020 by Kaijumeister

[Mandalorianknight]

5 hours ago, Clone OPatra said:

Why'd they make it bigger than a battle pack? $$$

Of course, but they can't say that outright in an interview. A designer saying "Yeah, we just wanted to squeeze more money out of the fans" would definitely get him at least reprimanded by lego.

3 hours ago, Kaijumeister said:

That stood out to me as well, however it’s just as likely that Lego are saving more S7 content for next year. Although, I suspect this will be drip-fed at best. I imagine the concept material made available to Lego were character designs moreso than anything else, hence the tenuous relationship between this summer’s two Clone Wars sets and the actual content of Season 7, which would have made for a solid selection of sets.

I can't help but agree, I'm thinking that there's more S7 content on the way.

5 hours ago, Flieger said:

Some BPs are character driven like the Bounty Hunter set that was mentioned or the Inferno Squad or even the Mandalorians.

Some BPs are true army builders, of course. Army building however is largely an afol thing (as a kid I just imagined having 100s of them...), so it makes sense that Lego listens to the afols in that regard.

I'd say most are army builders of some sort, like there were lots of patrol troopers, imperial officers, etc, even if we didn't see hundreds in that scene. heck, we only see a few scout troopers, but a scout trooper pack would be an army builder. The mandalorian one too, it's just generic mandalorians to mix and match.

That said, I agree there are some like the inferno squad and bounty hunter packs that are just for named characters. (even if they made Seyn a guy in the infearno one)

[Clone OPatra]

11 minutes ago, Mandalorianknight said:

Of course, but they can't say that outright in an interview. A designer saying "Yeah, we just wanted to squeeze more money out of the fans" would definitely get him at least reprimanded by lego.

Yes of course. I'm just pointing out that sometimes reading such non-answers is worse or more frustrating than having no answers at all. Silence is better than BS.

Doing bigger and more detailed vehicles is a fair enough reason though, even if they weren't strictly necessary.

[BacktoBricks]

13 hours ago, Clone OPatra said:

"It is not necessarily the sort of set we would typically design but the demand was very clear." - They wouldn't typically design a set with minifigures of a particular specific faction? What about sets as recent as... the Inferno Squad battle pack, a faction with a likely very limited fanbase? Or the Sith Trooper battle pack?

 Why'd they make it bigger than a battle pack? $$$

I agree that it is a really weird statement considering that Lego clearly does make battle packs of obscure factions, and that clone factions have been the basis of many battle packs - Geonosis Troopers, Utapau Troopers, Kashyyyk Troopers to name a minority. This one is essentially a 501st rehash of 8014 Clone Walker Battle Pack and 7913 Clone Trooper Battle Pack. It's almost like they're trying to hype themselves up to those who only casually know Lego Star Wars by making it seem like they really went out of their way to make this set, because for us more hardcore fans that statement certainly is a head scratcher. Very odd. ?

Like I said, they've merged two battle packs into one with the builds, but included two less figures. It's almost as though they're saying 'Here you can have your damn battle pack, but it's gonna cost you.' ?