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

[Sucram]

13 minutes ago, PreVizsla said:

Yeah book had some really good stuff,but i could definitely go without some of the things like Moff Tarkins sexuality,i am excited for new books but i dont want characters retconned for sjw agenda especially not Dooku,Maul or Vizsla.

Thanks for pics,really glad there is a clip for lightsaber.
I dont know why they call him Anakin on the box when by the time of Mustafar scene Sidious already named him Vader.

did you really just use that phrase

[GalacticHippo]

Let's just report the political comments, no need to reply and start debate about basic human rights lol.

Anyway, I'm hoping for Wuher himself to be in the set as well, because I missed the one in the last cantina set. Aunt Beru would also be a cool addition, I know she never appeared at Mos Eisley but it's been so long without her and maybe she could be outside or something (I'm probably being unrealistic but...why haven't they made Beru yet??)

[ARC2149Nova]

3 hours ago, PreVizsla said:

Yeah book had some really good stuff,but i could definitely go without some of the things like Moff Tarkins sexuality,

I spent 30 mins searching for this, and I have to say:

"TK-421, why aren't you at your post?" 

Who knew the old bat had a heart after all? 

[BigGuy4U]

5 hours ago, PreVizsla said:

I dont know why they call him Anakin on the box when by the time of Mustafar scene Sidious already named him Vader.

The way Lego seems to do it is that he's only considered Vader once he's in the suit, which is common (even if incorrect) in general. Even the Darth Vader Transformation set from 2017 called Crispy Vader "Anakin Skywalker" on the box. However, this ship in particular isn't even the one he flies to Mustafar, and even if it was, it appears earlier in the movie anyway, so it's not exclusively a Vader ship.

[Mandalorianknight]

7 hours ago, TeddytheSpoon said:

Hold up, there's an ESB version coming out? How have I missed this?! The original book is one of my favourite Star Wars books.

If we do get them, I'd prefer to see a brick-built dewback and bantha over molded versions but I can see the attraction of both. I do think a bantha would look better being made from bricks given they're a lot less smooth than the dewbacks.

I don't want to get too off-topic, but here's the link to the announcement.

Same, I prefer the brick-built creatures but the molded ones look nice too. The bantha would totally look better with bricks, it shouldn't be too hard for them to scale up the microfighter.

6 hours ago, PreVizsla said:

Moff Tarkins sexuality

Did I miss something in that book? 

10 hours ago, ARC2149Nova said:

I think Garindan is superfluous to a Cantina set, unless of course they give us some extra scenery. In that case, why not make characters like Wioslea?

Of course, he should eventually be made, but maybe as an add-on to the next OT Falcon.

Garindan is just a pretty iconic mos eisley character (and to bring in the book that everyone's now talking about, he technically is in the cantina ), so even if it's not 100% accurate I could see them doing it.

[Anio]

Hey !

75284 is a weird set, for sure : http://www.techlug.fr/Forum/viewtopic.php?f=27&t=12162

 

As for 75288, it is the best AT-AT to date : http://www.techlug.fr/Forum/viewtopic.php?f=27&t=12164

 

More to come tomorrow. If you have some questions, tell me.

[ARC2149Nova]

Another day, another poor excuse:

https://brickset.com/article/52610/interview-with-star-wars-designers-75288-at-at-and-ucs-poll

Those of us who want a TIE Bomber in the System scale, Lego seems to think it's "too niche" and "too expensive" to get a set.

Meanwhile...

Seriously, these interviews kinda peeve me, the designers have the absolute dumbest rationale behind set decisions. On the other hand, it's worth noting that what many of us suspected was true. All 3 poll options had working prototypes at the time of the poll, so Nebulon-B and UCS TIE Bomber still have a shot. But they might be too niche.

For the record, nothing against the shaded sets, but come on guys, we're not stupid. 

3 minutes ago, Anio said:

As for 75288, it is the best AT-AT to date : http://www.techlug.fr/Forum/viewtopic.php?f=27&t=12164

That AT-AT has gotta be a day-one for me. 

[TeddytheSpoon]

36 minutes ago, ARC2149Nova said:

Those of us who want a TIE Bomber in the System scale, Lego seems to think it's "too niche" and "too expensive" to get a set.

Meanwhile...

The way I interpret that is that they felt they could fit more play possibility in the IT-S than a TIE Bomber at the same price point, as a Bomber would probably be around the $100-$110 mark. As far as kids are concerned, I can see why a TIE Bomber - which only really appeared for a few seconds in ESB - wouldn't be top of the list. That said I do think the 'too niche' excuse is at the very least poorly phrased.

I would expect the next TIE to be a bomber or interceptor though.

[ARC2149Nova]

8 minutes ago, TeddytheSpoon said:

As far as kids are concerned, I can see why a TIE Bomber - which only really appeared for a few seconds in ESB - wouldn't be top of the list.

And the IT-S is... 

9 minutes ago, TeddytheSpoon said:

I would expect the next TIE to be a bomber or interceptor though.

Most likely, but at this rate, we might never get another non-standard TIE (yes, this is a deliberate overreaction )

Like I said, I'm all for risky sets, no matter which corner they're from, but this "too niche" excuse is, like you said, poorly phrased at best and outright stupid at worst.

[Per_SW]

51 minutes ago, ARC2149Nova said:

Seriously, these interviews kinda peeve me, the designers have the absolute dumbest rationale behind set decisions. On the other hand, it's worth noting that what many of us suspected was true. All 3 poll options had working prototypes at the time of the poll, so Nebulon-B and UCS TIE Bomber still have a shot. But they might be too niche.

You know, I'm starting to dig these corporate non-answers the designers are giving in these interviews. I can actually feel the cringe of the "You need to purchase everything day one" regarding what in the end is a known expensive toy meant for children first and for us second, way to justify the poor release schedule :D  Also, didn't a similar out of synch release happen before with the last AT-AT and UCS Hoth, to the point where on the blurb for Hoth they specifically wrote the set was to be paired with the "Available AT-AT for a full Hoth scene"? :D
Anyway, your link to the IT-S and the comment about the Quadjumper someone made earlier really sum up my opinion on the niche comment.

[BrickBob Studpants]

The „too niche“ comment isn‘t necessarily wrong though  The TIE Bomber did lose the UCS competition by a long shot, hasn‘t been redone since 2003 (which there has to be reason for, probably sold so badly it scared them off for life) and it does have less screentime than the Night Buzzard. And the I-TS at least has a presence at Galaxy‘s Edge, that‘s more than you can say for the TIE Bomber 

[BacktoBricks]

1 hour ago, ARC2149Nova said:

Seriously, these interviews kinda peeve me, the designers have the absolute dumbest rationale behind set decisions.

They do seem rather pointless and this one was even rather patronising 'The lesson here is always buy everything on day one!' We don't need to be taught a lesson, but if most of us have learnt something it is not to buy everything on day one at full price. I think it's pretty distasteful to turn the argument around onto the consumer just when someone points out their failure to really time set releases to complement each other. Thankfully an AT-AT is iconic enough to sell regardless of whether any other Hoth sets are on the market. The remark is probably just a slip of the tongue, but when they clearly work so hard on avoiding the elephant in the room at times, you think they'd be a bit more tactful when answering.

[Agent Kallus]

2 hours ago, Lego-Freak said:

The „too niche“ comment isn‘t necessarily wrong though  The TIE Bomber did lose the UCS competition by a long shot, hasn‘t been redone since 2003 (which there has to be reason for, probably sold so badly it scared them off for life) and it does have less screentime than the Night Buzzard. And the I-TS at least has a presence at Galaxy‘s Edge, that‘s more than you can say for the TIE Bomber 

Well not to be contrary but the tie Bomber appears in 2 star wars films, 6 episodes of rebels and loads of video games and the like, the Night Buzzard appears in one film, and the Intersystem Transport Ship doesn't show up at all in any of the films or TV shows and IIRC it's first viddeogame appearance will be in the next lego star wars game. I'm not saying anything against the existence of the night buzzard set or the I-TS set just that the tie bomber is far more present in star wars than either of them.

Edited July 18, 2020 by Agent Kallus

[Mandalorianknight]

4 hours ago, ARC2149Nova said:

Another day, another poor excuse: https://brickset.com/article/52610/interview-with-star-wars-designers-75288-at-at-and-ucs-poll Those of us who want a TIE Bomber in the System scale, Lego seems to think it's "too niche" and "too expensive" to get a set. Meanwhile... Seriously, these interviews kinda peeve me, the designers have the absolute dumbest rationale behind set decisions. On the other hand, it's worth noting that what many of us suspected was true. All 3 poll options had working prototypes at the time of the poll, so Nebulon-B and UCS TIE Bomber still have a shot. But they might be too niche. For the record, nothing against the shaded sets, but come on guys, we're not stupid. 

Although the night buzzard isn't that obscure that's just a nitpick, I completely agree with your larger point. The Bomber is well-known enough, and even then, you can have never seen it before but recognize it's a TIE fighter variant. I think stability problems may be possible with the bomber, since it wouldn't have a stand like UCS sets. (I literally thought up a fix while typing this, if a random teen on the internet can in a few seconds I would hope someone who's job is to make these could). I'm starting to get really annoyed with the designers, some of these things they're saying are just plain stupid. (and seriously, "buy all the sets day one"? That's got to be a joke, right?)

I guess my next MOC is a system TIE bomber, since lego gave up on it.  Still holding out hope for an interceptor, as lo

34 minutes ago, Agent Kallus said:

Well not to be contrary but the tie Bomber appears in 2 star wars films, 6 episodes of rebels and loads of video games and the like, the Night Buzzard appears in one film, and the Intersystem Transport Ship doesn't show up at all in any of the films or TV shows and IIRC it's first viddeogame appearance will be in the next lego star wars game. I'm not saying anything against the existence of the night buzzard set or the I-TS set just that the tie bomber is far more present in star wars than either of them.

Or even things like the AT-OT with dropship, Gozanti cruiser (which I own and think is a great set BTW), Vonreg's TIE, Pelta-class frigate, Wookie Gunship, Coruscant police gunship, wookie Cartarman, etc. I agree with what you're saying, nothing against the other sets but you can't say the bomber is "too niche" when you've make sets like the above. Even if not all SW fans know the TIE bomber itself, even a 4 year old can pretty clearly tell it's a TIE fighter variant.

[ARC2149Nova]

20 minutes ago, Mandalorianknight said:

Although the night buzzard isn't that obscure that's just a nitpick, I completely agree with your larger point.

Or even things like the AT-OT with dropship, Gozanti cruiser (which I own and think is a great set BTW), Vonreg's TIE, Pelta-class frigate, Wookie Gunship, Coruscant police gunship, wookie Cartarman, etc. I agree with what you're saying, nothing against the other sets but you can't say the bomber is "too niche" when you've make sets like the above. Even if not all SW fans know the TIE bomber itself, even a 4 year old can pretty clearly tell it's a TIE fighter variant.

In regards to the Night Buzzard, all told it's in like 3 scenes at best. So, comparatively (purely screentime wise) it's like the Slave I (though arguably the Slave I is more iconic). Compared to the TIE Bomber, they may as well be the same. Not going into comic and book appearances as by-and-large most Star Wars fans don't even glance at such media, even though a lot of it is really good. (the main Star Wars and Vader comics for instance).

But in either case, we've got so many out there sets, it kills me to think they're seriously gonna overstep the TIE Bomber. And besides, it's not our fault they keep bumping up the size of sets (and therefore the price). This petty excuse is gonna become the "reason" why we're not going to ever escape the cycle of 5 X-Wings in 5 years. These last couple interviews kinda suck the soul out of the hobby for me, because it's an admission of apathy. They only care about easy money, not about creativity, or at the very bare minimum unique and interesting set designs. Besides, how many fighters in the past 10 years had any playability beyond firing missiles, opening wings, opening the cockpit, and maybe drop a few bombs. It's crazy.

And with things like the AT-OT, Gozanti, and even the Catamaran are great sets! The AT-OT alone is one of the most iconic TCW sets Lego's ever done.

I want them to be interviewed about the IT-S next, because after this bantha fodder, I want to hear the contradictory logic they try to pull on us.

And like I said before, I'm not complaining against these sets, I think most of them are great, but these interviews are killing me.

4 hours ago, Lego-Freak said:

The „too niche“ comment isn‘t necessarily wrong though  The TIE Bomber did lose the UCS competition by a long shot, hasn‘t been redone since 2003 (which there has to be reason for, probably sold so badly it scared them off for life) and it does have less screentime than the Night Buzzard. And the I-TS at least has a presence at Galaxy‘s Edge, that‘s more than you can say for the TIE Bomber 

That is all.

4 hours ago, BacktoBricks said:

They do seem rather pointless and this one was even rather patronising 'The lesson here is always buy everything on day one!' We don't need to be taught a lesson, but if most of us have learnt something it is not to buy everything on day one at full price. I think it's pretty distasteful to turn the argument around onto the consumer just when someone points out their failure to really time set releases to complement each other. Thankfully an AT-AT is iconic enough to sell regardless of whether any other Hoth sets are on the market. The remark is probably just a slip of the tongue, but when they clearly work so hard on avoiding the elephant in the room at times, you think they'd be a bit more tactful when answering.

You'd think. "Buy everything day one" is the most soullessly corporate thing I've ever heard. And maybe they meant it in jest, but it comes off so smug and cocky. Lego used to have heart. I believe it still does to some degree, but these designers just don't seem to care.

[Mandalorianknight]

2 minutes ago, ARC2149Nova said:

In regards to the Night Buzzard, all told it's in like 3 scenes at best. So, comparatively (purely screentime wise) it's like the Slave I (though arguably the Slave I is more iconic). Compared to the TIE Bomber, they may as well be the same. Not going into comic and book appearances as by-and-large most Star Wars fans don't even glance at such media, even though a lot of it is really good. (the main Star Wars and Vader comics for instance).

And with things like the AT-OT, Gozanti, and even the Catamaran are great sets! The AT-OT alone is one of the most iconic TCW sets Lego's ever done.

I want them to be interviewed about the IT-S next, because after this bantha fodder, I want to hear the contradictory logic they try to pull on us.

And like I said before, I'm not complaining against these sets, I think most of them are great, but these interviews are killing me.

You'd think. "Buy everything day one" is the most soullessly corporate thing I've ever heard. And maybe they meant it in jest, but it comes off so smug and cocky. Lego used to have heart. I believe it still does to some degree, but these designers just don't seem to care.

Yeah the night buzzard is too recent to get the iconicity of slave one, I was just saying it does have some screen time. Also, I didn't mean at all that those weren't great sets, just that the designers can't say the bomber is obscure when those much more obscure sets exist. Completely agree about AT-OT and dropship, and that's the point. The AT-OT isn't even IN clone wars, and it's one of the most expensive sets on the secondary market. I just don't get their logic.

I'm hoping "buy everything day one" is a joke. Although even with that aside, the rest of the stuff these guys are saying is so strange. It's like you said, the designers don't seem to care. It doesn't even seem to be some sort of corporate thing, I doubt they're making the designers say this stuff. 

[ARC2149Nova]

9 minutes ago, Mandalorianknight said:

Yeah the night buzzard is too recent to get the iconicity of slave one, I was just saying it does have some screen time. Also, I didn't mean at all that those weren't great sets, just that the designers can't say the bomber is obscure when those much more obscure sets exist. Completely agree about AT-OT and dropship, and that's the point. The AT-OT isn't even IN clone wars, and it's one of the most expensive sets on the secondary market. I just don't get their logic.

I understood you, I was just adding to your point. 

10 minutes ago, Mandalorianknight said:

I'm hoping "buy everything day one" is a joke. Although even with that aside, the rest of the stuff these guys are saying is so strange. It's like you said, the designers don't seem to care. It doesn't even seem to be some sort of corporate thing, I doubt they're making the designers say this stuff. 

If it's not a joke, then it's very obnoxious. It's likely just a poorly made quip, so I'm not too mad at it, but as was mentioned, there's some serious dissonance going on. And considering the designers' freeness of speech, as it were, I doubt Lego had any real handling power over this too. 

[PreVizsla]

6 hours ago, Anio said:

As for 75288, it is the best AT-AT to date : http://www.techlug.fr/Forum/viewtopic.php?f=27&t=12164

At-At looks amazing,i wonder can it hold 20 snowtroopers if moded without chairs,weapon and speeder.

[2maxwell]

What's the likelihood that a new UCS quality version of Greedo tanks the cost of the original Greedo with arm printing? I have the original and I've been considering selling it for a while now.

[Gremer2]

22 minutes ago, 2maxwell said:

What's the likelihood that a new UCS quality version of Greedo tanks the cost of the original Greedo with arm printing? I have the original and I've been considering selling it for a while now.

I would check and see if the UCS figures of Boba Fett, Lando, Leia and the like have decreased in price with the new versions. I would guess you should be fine, there's always demand for originals.

[Kit Figsto]

4 hours ago, Mandalorianknight said:

Or even things like the AT-OT with dropship, Gozanti cruiser (which I own and think is a great set BTW), Vonreg's TIE, Pelta-class frigate, Wookie Gunship, Coruscant police gunship, wookie Cartarman, etc. I agree with what you're saying, nothing against the other sets but you can't say the bomber is "too niche" when you've make sets like the above. Even if not all SW fans know the TIE bomber itself, even a 4 year old can pretty clearly tell it's a TIE fighter variant.

Things like the Police Gunship or AT-OT I'll give them since they had some role in TCW (the police gunship specifically at the end of Season 5 was in quite a few of the episodes) or are recognizable enough (the Dropship's basically a gunship, AT-OT basically an AT-TE), but yeah, the Wookiee Catamaran/gunship were literally in ROTS for like five seconds.  With the Bomber, you could argue that it only has the one scene in ESB, but like you guys were pointing out, it's clearly a TIE Fighter and that alone makes it more recognizable than something like the Wookiee Gunship even if the actual screen time is similar.

2 hours ago, Gremer2 said:

I would check and see if the UCS figures of Boba Fett, Lando, Leia and the like have decreased in price with the new versions. I would guess you should be fine, there's always demand for originals.

The old Cloud City figures are still as rare as ever.  The cheapest Boba on Bricklink is $400, Luke with correct legs and torso is at like $200, Lando is another $30-40, etc.  The figures from the new one also still have some value, not as much but the four or five most desirable figures are like $120 total if you were to buy them.  Boba Fett from 2018 is lightyears more accurate than the 2003 version, but is hundreds of dollars cheaper, so even if we get a new cantina with a new and more accurate Greedo, the old one won't be affected in my opinion.

3 hours ago, ARC2149Nova said:

Besides, how many fighters in the past 10 years had any playability beyond firing missiles, opening wings, opening the cockpit, and maybe drop a few bombs. It's crazy.

I tend to defend most of LEGO's decisions, but do agree with this point here.  The "lack of playability" argument didn't really make much sense.  What's different between the playability of an X-Wing and a TIE Fighter?  Heck, a regular TIE absolutely has less playability than the Bomber but we get one of those every other year.  I mean, I get it with the re-releases, they're at a point where almost all of the iconic ships and locations have been done, there's less and less new stuff that they can feasibly do every year that will be guaranteed sellers.  I'd like to see more new stuff too, but you also have to remember that we have gotten quite a bit more of that this year than usual.  Duel on Mustafar, Obi-Wan's Hut, the Razor Crest, Night Buzzard, IT-S, and possibly now a Cantina is some major, major stuff that people have been asking for, some of it for 5-10+ years now.  But at the same time, it's sort of baffling that they don't seem to say "Okay, instead of the X-Wing or Slave I at the $90 price point this year, we can rotate it out for one release cycle and do a TIE Bomber instead, we'll bring back the X-Wing next year."  

Edited July 18, 2020 by Kit Figsto

[Kim-Kwang-Seok]

10 hours ago, Per_SW said:

You know, I'm starting to dig these corporate non-answers the designers are giving in these interviews. I can actually feel the cringe of the "You need to purchase everything day one" regarding what in the end is a known expensive toy meant for children first and for us second, way to justify the poor release schedule :D  Also, didn't a similar out of synch release happen before with the last AT-AT and UCS Hoth, to the point where on the blurb for Hoth they specifically wrote the set was to be paired with the "Available AT-AT for a full Hoth scene"? :D
Anyway, your link to the IT-S and the comment about the Quadjumper someone made earlier really sum up my opinion on the niche comment.

Im not defending a capitalistic-child toy company
But the interpretations here are waaay off. With weird sets like the Quadjumper or this huge transport ship from the Solo movie - they try to get sooooomething out of the new movies, as well as the new market comming with it. It's horrible sets still. The twin-pod car or the Wookie-Catamaran were released only with their specific movies and never again - cause it probably was the same situation.

And I never read out in no interview out that the designers are super nerds. They research a bit, mostly concept art, they know the movies. But I doubt they know all the shows and video games, where a product is popular. And do we know if the video game players are similarly strong basis of purchasing Lego sets, as kids are, who just saw movies? I would like numbers for that.

The problem is how sets are built today: SW has a 15-35 % tax, sets are with way more parts, many times oversized - the last Tie was 70? So A Defender would probably be 90-100? The Tie Bomber has two cockpits, which are both larger than the standard Tie one's - 110-120?.

The last Vader's Tie Fighter was actually undersized (solar panels to short, back of the undersides half built and undersized). It used the same basic cockpit structure as the Tie-Prototype. After this they changed the Tie design weirdly enough. Now it looks less round, less accurate and contains much more parts. So the problem is how and why they build sets this way now. I think they could also do a chibi-Tie Bomber, like the they did with Vader's Tie's for the castle and Death Star sets. But then again when they release a cheaper, chibi-like set as with the droid-tanks - people here riot. So I already see it comming: if th

[Sucram]

Looking at Anio's review of the new AT AT, it seems it's built quite a bit differently from the 2014 version that I have. also i very much like the design of the E-web gun

[Bantha Fodder]

37 minutes ago, Kim-Kwang-Seok said:

Im not defending a capitalistic-child toy company
But the interpretations here are waaay off. With weird sets like the Quadjumper or this huge transport ship from the Solo movie - they try to get sooooomething out of the new movies, as well as the new market comming with it. It's horrible sets still. The twin-pod car or the Wookie-Catamaran were released only with their specific movies and never again - cause it probably was the same situation.

These are no good arguments. 

TLG have released many system-scale sets of ships that are way less «iconic», and that has way less screen-time than the TIE-bomber or the TIE-interceptor.

For example the 75221 Imperial landing craft - a ship from the OT with almost no screen-time, and in the same (high) price-range that a doable TIE-bomber could (and should) be made.

The comments from TLG employee in the interview regarding the TIE-Bomber is just utter nonsense. The Bomber is a very iconic craft, with lots of appearances in both the canon and the EU.

Sadly, at this point, I think our best chance for a TIE-bomber would be if it appears in some new film or series. I’ll cross my fingers for an appearance in Mandalorian season 2.

[Clone OPatra]

48 minutes ago, Kim-Kwang-Seok said:

Now it looks less round, less accurate and contains much more parts. So the problem is how and why they build sets this way now. 

This is exactly what I was going to say about the Tie Bomber comment ("excuse") in the interview. It's not that the Tie Bomber isn't do-able, it's that LEGO themselves have backed themselves into a corner with their outlandishly large/complex/overpriced TIE designs to the point that they can no longer do a bomber to match at a reasonable price point. 

It's a case where the team really needs to look at itself and say, ok, we need to do a standard TIE to hit a $50 USD price point, and a Bomber could be 65-70. But when they're releasing a Grevious Starfighter worth $50 at most for a bollocks $80 USD, we know it's not going to happen. LEGO has now designed and priced itself out of doing desirable models apparently.

Once again that interview I feel makes things worse than having no interview at all.