LEGO Star Wars 2021 Set Discussion - READ FIRST POST!!!

[jdubbs]

1 hour ago, Pedilego said:

From 2017, 4 years ago - so an even better illustration:

• 75189 First Order Heavy Assault Walker $149.99
• 75190 First Order Star Destroyer $159.99

This still doesn't really support your argument. Yes, the 2014 AT-AT versus the TLJ walker jumped $40, but it also added 250 more pieces and a lot of bulk. The Star Destroyer jumped $30 and added about 100 pieces. If we extrapolate those to the last gunship — which was already pretty darn close to minifig scale, perhaps 15% under? — it might very well sell for $150 today, but it would also be a few hundred more pieces at that price... this is generally how LEGO has justified price inflation over the years.

So if LEGO wanted to put out a deluxified, reasonably-close-to-minifig-scale gunship, they wouldn't need to do it under the UCS umbrella, or hold a poll to do it... they'd just do another mainline $150ish set with 6-7 figs, like they do every summer. At that price it would already be a noticeable upgrade from the last gunship, bringing it even closer to minifig scale, or upping the level of detail, or both.

"Advanced building techniques" — I'm not even sure what that means, or how one would quantify it — would not then get you to $200... this ship, at minifig scale, and at that price point would require a substantial secondary build and waaaaaay more figs than LEGO has ever included in a ≤$200 Star Wars set (if we're putting so much emphasis on precedence here)... at which point you're just as likely to tick off the people who wanted a minifig-scale gunship, since they now have to pay 33% more for the privilege of having it. 

Are there people who expected a $200 minifig-scale gunship with dozens of clones? Certainly. Where they justified in expecting that, or feeling entitled to it? I would say, no. We all knew that an overscaled version with 2 dinky figs was just as likely (or moreso), given the scale of most of the other UCS sets, the advent of the MBS moniker, etc. Minifig-scale UCS is the exception, not the rule, and it seems to happen only when the stars (scale of source material, parts availability, price point, marketability, etc.) align just so. You can be disappointed this didn't work out the way you wanted, but no one should be surprised. 

Edited February 25, 2021 by jdubbs

[Pedilego]

6 minutes ago, Mandalorianknight said:

Height/length: The 2013 set is roughly 47 studs long. The LAAT/i is roughly 60 ft long (and, fun fact, cost 85,000 credits). The average clone trooper is exactly 6ft tall, and the basic clone trooper figure (without a helmet) is 5 studs tall. So with 1 stud=5/6ft, meaning a minifig scale gunship should be 72 studs long. That means the vehicle needs to be 1.5x longer for 1.3x the cost, assuming lego keeps the same value. This is within the realm of possibility, I guess, but not all that likely.

Wait, I want to be clear:

To summarize my initial argument: TLG hasn't exceeded $199.99 USD to go above minifigure scale. That's why the counter arguments so far have opined that it's not possible to reach $200 for a minifigure-scale Gunship.

Are you saying minifigure scale would have to be more than $200 because it needs to be 1.5x longer? Because that'd bolster the case against TLG for going beyond "minifigure scale".

 

6 minutes ago, Mandalorianknight said:

Yeah, a disturbing amount of people expected this to have something like a full complement of troopers and passengers.

(I mean, momentarily indulge me here: If it were to be minifigure scale, I don't see why they wouldn't have included 7+ minifigures: 2 pilots, 2 gunners, 2+ passengers, 1 fan vote. After all, previous "minifigure scale" ships have come with a full crew: Slave I, Falcon [2 crews], Imperial Shuttle; this one just happens to have a larger crew.)

[jdubbs]

19 minutes ago, Mandalorianknight said:

Height/length: The 2013 set is roughly 47 studs long. The LAAT/i is roughly 60 ft long (and, fun fact, cost 85,000 credits). The average clone trooper is exactly 6ft tall, and the basic clone trooper figure (without a helmet) is 5 studs tall. So with 1 stud=5/6ft, meaning a minifig scale gunship should be 72 studs long. That means the vehicle needs to be 1.5x longer for 1.3x the cost, assuming lego keeps the same value. This is within the realm of possibility, I guess, but not all that likely.

I think doing this kind of math is a losing battle. After all, mInifigs do not scale to human proportions at all (unless we're talking cavemen, perhaps) and LEGO frequently cheats the proportions of sets in one dimension but not others, as I think was the case with the gunship.

When I look at the last LEGO gunship, it seems like the overall height and wingspan are closer to the source material than the length, for instance... so you might only need to elongate LEGO's version to get it closer to scale-accuracy... this wouldn't require 1.5x the total number of parts in the set, or anything close to it. (The same could be said of the First Order Troop Transport, which lots of people modded to be longer, keeping the rest of the build consistent with LEGO's.)

[Graupensuppe]

55 minutes ago, jdubbs said:

Minifig-scale UCS is the exception

Not for ships of that size.

It makes sense for the UCS versions of small starfighters to be larger than minifigure scale.
Huge ships and vehicles (starting at the 40 m Sandcrawler up to the 160 km Death Star) obviously can't be built at minifigure scale either.

But the 35 m Millennium Falcon, the 20 m Imperial Shuttle, and the 20 m Slave I were released as minifigure scale UCS models, and the length of the Gunship (17.4 m) is pretty similar.

Edited February 25, 2021 by Graupensuppe

[MAVERICK26]

2 hours ago, Pedilego said:

Turbo Tank: The PT UCS we could all agree on; there's no exceeding minifigure scale on one of those lol.

 

 

Don't blame the fans if this doesn't sell well; blame Lego. The precedence is not "everything gets upscaled":

• ZERO UCS sets have exceeded minifigure scale while also costing more than $200. The UCS Gunship is the 1st.

Here are the ones to exceed $200:

• STILL not MF-scale: Star Destroyer (x2), DSII, SSD, 10188 (and 2nd version), Sandcrawler
• MF scale: Falcon (x2), Imperial Shuttle, Ewok Village & Assault on Hoth

Everything that's been upscaled was done so in order to reach a target price-point, which has been $199.99 USD since the 2012 B-Wing, no doubt a price analysts have determined to be a "sweet spot" for upscale adult-targeted Lego sets. Given that precedence, a minifigure-scale Gunship was a perfectly reasonable expectation:

• 2013 Republic Gunship: $119.99
• 2014 AT-AT: $109.99
• 2014 Star Destroyer: $129.99
• 2020 AT-AT: $159.99
• 2021 Rumored Arquitens: $159.99
• Theoretical 2021 Playscale Gunship: $159.99
• Theoretical 2021 UCS Gunship with advanced building techniques and/or addl. minifigures: $199.99

TLG has never asked fans to spend more than $200 on an upscaled OT set. PT fans, who we all know love Clone minifigures, who we all know haven't gotten a UCS set in a decade, who have never received a minifigure-compatible UCS set, will be justified in being upset; TLG knew these things and is breaking precedence anyways.

 

 

 

For the record, I voted on the UCS Gunship without even considering minifigure scale, one way or another. While I'd prefer minifigure scale, given my gyrosphere-bubble-turret theory, I've been expecting an upscaled version. But the constant fan blaming on here is a bit much..

I completely agree.

 

1 hour ago, Brickroll said:

For the record, I think a UCS turbo tank would be great, and you make some very interesting points and bring a great new perspective to the table. That said, I think there are a few things that make this different.

I got into following leaks a couple weeks after the vote finished. I probably would have voted for the Nebulon B since it had never been made, and could never have a system scale set, and I wanted a system scale gunship. I was really hoping it would be around $200 and brickvault scaled, but on reflection, that was probably naive of me. 

First— a minifig scale UCS gunship is almost impossible by legos standards.  At the size it would have to be done, they would either sacrifice detail, space, or stability. It would have to be huge to achieve the detail of UCS sets.

Second—The expectations for this set were largely unreasonable. You seemed very fair and prudent in your vote, so I can respect that, but many wanted it to have Rex, Cody, Fives, 5 p1 troops, and 5 p2, plus pilots and Bob. These fans were setting themselves up for disappointment.

Third—We did not know the price until recently, and a $200 dollar or more minifig scale Gunship cannot really be done. Perhaps LEGO miscalculated how many people wanted a minifig scale Gunship, but the vote was for a UCS set, and the gunship just doesn’t lend itself well to a minifig scale and well detailed gunship.

I also agree that a Turbo Tank would be amazing. I'd buy that in a flash, especially if it had

a

Phase

2

Cody

with arm and side leg printing

[Pedilego]

47 minutes ago, jdubbs said:

I think doing this kind of math is a losing battle. After all, mInifigs do not scale to human proportions at all (unless we're talking cavemen, perhaps) and LEGO frequently cheats the proportions of sets in one dimension but not others, as I think was the case with the gunship.

Yep, that's why I started saying "minifigure scale" with quotes. That said, the UCS A-Wing had fewer than 1,700 parts and 1 minifigure for $199.99. Any incremental increase goes a long way in bridging the meager 500-piece gap from the nearly 1,200 pieces the 2013 Gunship had. Between even a small increase in size, a display stand, modern building techniques, UCS-level detailing, and a handful of figures - that's more than manageable.

 

1 hour ago, jdubbs said:

 This still doesn't really support your argument. Yes, the 2014 AT-AT versus the TLJ walker jumped $40, but it also added 250 more pieces and a lot of bulk. The Star Destroyer jumped $30 and added about 100 pieces. If we extrapolate those to the last gunship — which was already pretty darn close to minifig scale, perhaps 15% under? — it might very well sell for $150 today, but it would also be a few hundred more pieces at that price... this is generally how LEGO has justified price inflation over the years.

So if LEGO wanted to put out a deluxified, minifig-scale gunship, they wouldn't need to do it under the UCS umbrella, or hold a poll to do it... they'd just do another mainline $150ish set with 6-7 figs, like they do every summer. At that price it would already be a noticeable upgrade from the last gunship, bringing it even closer to minifig scale, or upping the level of detail, or both.

 "Advanced building techniques" — I'm not even sure what that means, or how one would quantify it — would not then get you to $200... this ship, at minifig scale, and at that price point would require a substantial secondary build and waaaaaay more figs than LEGO has ever included in a ≤$200 Star Wars set (if we're putting so much emphasis on precedence here)... at which point you're just as likely to tick off the people who wanted a minifig-scale gunship, since they now have to pay 33% more for the privilege of having it. 

Right, newer sets have more pieces. They have more detail therefore they cost more; that's just a more in-depth explanation of my examples.

But yeah, let's compare; let's take that 2020 AT-AT: It's $159.99 USD (versus $109.99 in 2014 for +70 pieces). It's an upgrade, to be sure. However, could they have made it better? Absolutely! There's lots of details and smoothing that could've been added. They didn't do it, though, because they didn't want to exceed that price-point for a non-UCS or MBS set. Better yet, I'm sure they could've tried completely different techniques if they had the luxury of a greater part/weight count. That's what I mean.

 

1 hour ago, jdubbs said:

 Are there people who expected a $200 minifig-scale gunship with dozens of clones? Certainly. Where they justified in expecting that, or feeling entitled to it? I would say, no. We all knew that an overscaled version with 2 dinky figs was just as likely (or moreso), given the scale of most of the other UCS sets, the advent of the MBS moniker, etc. Minifig-scale UCS is the exception, not the rule, and it seems to happen only when the stars (scale of source material, parts availability, price point, marketability, etc.) align just so. You can be disappointed this didn't work out the way you wanted, but no one should be surprised. 

Generally, yes, agreed. However, that's sort of a strawman. We're conflating a few groups: (1) a vocal minority of unreasonable fans irrationally upset over a toy company's decision, (2) measured vocalization of rational displeasure, and (3) sales from the cumulative community opinion, including the silent majority.

I made a point to say that it's TLG's fault if sales aren't good because, frankly, I don't care about that first group as I don't like the habit, especially in media, where both sides cherry-pick the unreasonable minority and say "see? be angry/afraid/annoyed!". This conflation keeps being made in this thread, though, and it serves as a disservice to the counter-views to a whopping $350, arguably needlessly oversized Gunship.

Edited February 25, 2021 by Pedilego

[jdubbs]

6 minutes ago, Pedilego said:

I made a point to say that it's TLG's fault if sales aren't good

I think if LEGO made a mistake here, it was in not being clearer up-front about what the they meant by the three choices being put to a vote. It would not have hurt to specify a general price range and set size for each option... e.g., "the Nebulon B, roughly in scale with this Star Destroyer, at around $500", "the TIE Bomber, roughly in scale with the UCS TIE Fighter, at $350", and "the Republic Gunship, roughly in scale with the UCS X-Wing, at $350". Or whatever. There was clearly a lot of speculation and confusion about what they meant by the Gunship in particular during the vote, which LEGO easily could have clarified at the time.

[Mandalorianknight]

1 hour ago, Pedilego said:

Wait, I want to be clear:

To summarize my initial argument: TLG hasn't exceeded $199.99 USD to go above minifigure scale. That's why the counter arguments so far have opined that it's not possible to reach $200 for a minifigure-scale Gunship.

Are you saying minifigure scale would have to be more than $200 because it needs to be 1.5x longer? Because that'd bolster the case against TLG for going beyond "minifigure scale".

 

(I mean, momentarily indulge me here: If it were to be minifigure scale, I don't see why they wouldn't have included 7+ minifigures: 2 pilots, 2 gunners, 2+ passengers, 1 fan vote. After all, previous "minifigure scale" ships have come with a full crew: Slave I, Falcon [2 crews], Imperial Shuttle; this one just happens to have a larger crew.)

I think we may have the same overall point. My argument was meant to show that a $200 gunship wouldn't be "minifigure scale", and if you really wanted to get it at that size, it'd have to be $250-300. (The $350 price point means it's most likely still upscaled a bit).  I thought you were saying it was lego's fault that they didn't produce a $200, minifig-scale gunship with a large amount of figures, not the fan's fault for expecting it, and I was trying to show why that wasn't really possible for lego to do because of both the size constraints and the inherent flaw in "minifig-scale".

As for it including 7+ figures, I came to a different conclusion based on your examples. Slave one really just has a crew of one and some other figures along with it. The falcon is a bit trickier given the difference between crew and passengers being blurred, and I think being $800 may have had something to do with the figure count, but even if we count it as coming with a full crew+ extra figures and disregard the price, it's still in the minority. The shuttle doesn't actually have any crew, technically speaking. It's supposed to be piloted by a black-suited imperial pilot and co-pilot, but instead came with a grey-suited officer, vader, luke, and a stormtrooper. The gunship, like you said, would have a larger crew, 4-6, plus whatever other figures they wanted to include. And most UCS vehicles in the past 6-7 years only have a couple figures, usually the pilot of the craft (or as close as you can get to a pilot in the case of a star destroyer) and a related character if applicable, such as an astromech for the y-wing, officer for the star destroyer, or gunner for the snowspeeder. It seemed pretty likely to me at least that a UCS gunship would be a large build with a few figures, though if that rumored list is true I was wrong on what figures (I expected a gunner and pilot plus a fan vote figure either being jedi bob or some clone variant; the list claims it'll be a captain and mace).

1 hour ago, jdubbs said:

I think doing this kind of math is a losing battle. After all, mInifigs do not scale to human proportions at all (unless we're talking cavemen, perhaps) and LEGO frequently cheats the proportions of sets in one dimension but not others, as I think was the case with the gunship.

That was my point, sorry if it wasn't clear. I calculated "minifig scale" mathematically and then showed how based on the amount of troops it holds in-universe, such a thing is impossible.

Edited February 25, 2021 by Mandalorianknight

[Gontron]

Regardless of if it was minifigure scale or not Lego isn't adding in more than 2-3 Clone Troopers, especially since it presents the opportunity to sell even more 501st BPs. 

[Kit Figsto]

1 hour ago, jdubbs said:

When I look at the last LEGO gunship, it seems like the overall height and wingspan are closer to the source material than the length, for instance... so you might only need to elongate LEGO's version to get it closer to scale-accuracy... this wouldn't require 1.5x the total number of parts in the set, or anything close to it. (The same could be said of the First Order Troop Transport, which lots of people modded to be longer, keeping the rest of the build consistent with LEGO's.)

Agree.  The problem is that a $150 playscale gunship is already relatively close to the scale of the source material.  They can't really make it any taller without being absolutely ridiculous in height, the width is decent, and scaling up the length, okay, that's maybe going to get you to a little more expensive, but not a UCS-size set. 

Minifigure proportions are weird to where you're never going to get anything exactly right.  Any sort of wheeled vehicle (City, Speed Champions) are perfect examples.  The 6-stud wide City vehicles tend to be too small and very minimal in terms of space and detail, but when you scale up to 8-studs wide in Speed Champions, they look more detailed on the outside and can more comfortably fit a minifigure, but they look way too wide or way too long.  The playscale version of the Gunship is as close as you're going to reasonably get to minifigure scale, so there was no real justification to make a UCS version that's the same size, since the price would be basically the same.  

[hondohnaka]

1 hour ago, MAVERICK26 said:

I completely agree.

 

I also agree that a Turbo Tank would be amazing. I'd buy that in a flash, especially if it had

a

Phase

2

Cody

with arm and side leg printing

Honestly I think P2 Cody not being a thing by this point is Lego meming on us because they can. Or if he gets made he'll be in a VIP promo for purchases of over a thousand dollars or something. 

[Ringwraith]

On a different topic than the gunship, could someone give their opinion on how likely the rumoured Gideon’s light cruiser set actually is on a scale of 1-10 and when we will know the remaining Summer Wave set names, (or at least I think it’s the summer wave). 

[MAVERICK26]

2 minutes ago, hondohnaka said:

Honestly I think P2 Cody not being a thing by this point is Lego meming on us because they can. Or if he gets made he'll be in a VIP promo for purchases of over a thousand dollars or something. 

I agree

But it's still legal to dream, no? And they have to do it at some point.

12 minutes ago, Ringwraith said:

On a different topic than the gunship, could someone give their opinion on how likely the rumoured Gideon’s light cruiser set actually is on a scale of 1-10 and when we will know the remaining Summer Wave set names, (or at least I think it’s the summer wave). 

I think that with the rumored Vault set, the Kom'rk Class Fighter, and the Trouble on Tatooine set, it's pretty likely. They'd probably have to replace the rumored Cara Dune with a Dark Trooper, Koska Reeves, or Luke.

[hondohnaka]

14 minutes ago, MAVERICK26 said:

I agree

But it's still legal to dream, no? And they have to do it at some point.

Lego be like "we see your dream, so we're only ever making a Cody microfigure to make it a NIGHTMARE!" somethingsomethingMephistosomethingsomething

16 minutes ago, Ringwraith said:

On a different topic than the gunship, could someone give their opinion on how likely the rumoured Gideon’s light cruiser set actually is on a scale of 1-10 and when we will know the remaining Summer Wave set names, (or at least I think it’s the summer wave). 

I think there's only two sets we don't know the names of, a $30 Target exclusive and one of the helmets? That rumor re: Gideon's cruiser sounds great but idk how they'd do something that big at a $160 price point without sacrificing literally all the interior. Like I'm worried that it would be UCS ISD-style and that was barely fine because it was a UCS. Gideon's cruiser would hopefully be a playset. 

Edited February 25, 2021 by hondohnaka

[Stuartn]

32 minutes ago, hondohnaka said:

I think there's only two sets we don't know the names of, a $30 Target exclusive and one of the helmets? That rumor re: Gideon's cruiser sounds great but idk how they'd do something that big at a $160 price point without sacrificing literally all the interior. Like I'm worried that it would be UCS ISD-style and that was barely fine because it was a UCS. Gideon's cruiser would hopefully be a playset. 

I think there is no third helmet, going off teh lists of set numbers and confirmed rumours. The cruiser should be a playset, probably like the 2014 SD and FO Star Destroyer

[Kim-Kwang-Seok]

35 minutes ago, Stuartn said:

I think there is no third helmet, going off teh lists of set numbers and confirmed rumours. The cruiser should be a playset, probably like the 2014 SD and FO Star Destroyer

there's some great MOC's out there which acomplish playability, realistic size and good looks. But I wouldnt be dissapointed if the ship is either way too thick in its proportions or if it has just 2 small interior rooms. Interior would be much smaller than in the ISD's anyway.

Some builds are always in disadvantage due to proportions. Compare the Ghost (like 5 disconnected seats) and the Millenium Falcon (like an apartement).

[AIex]

4 hours ago, Pedilego said:

(I mean, momentarily indulge me here: If it were to be minifigure scale, I don't see why they wouldn't have included 7+ minifigures: 2 pilots, 2 gunners, 2+ passengers, 1 fan vote. After all, previous "minifigure scale" ships have come with a full crew: Slave I, Falcon [2 crews], Imperial Shuttle; this one just happens to have a larger crew.)

Slave 1 and the Imperial Shuttle both came with 4 minifigs, and the Millennium Falcon is $800 (and, you know, the MILLENNIUM FALCON). 

[Kdapt-Preacher]

5 hours ago, jdubbs said:

e.g., "the Nebulon B, roughly in scale with this Star Destroyer, at around $500"

I think you're on the right track here. Part of the problem is that the three options would make for such vastly different sets--if we were just talking about a UCS TIE Bomber, everybody would understand that it would be much larger than minifig scale and might include a pilot, like the other fighters, but nothing else; and if we were just talking about a UCS Nebulon-B, everybody would understand that it would be much smaller than minifig scale, like the ISD or SSD, and might include a couple of figures but clearly wouldn't be a playset; but that left room in the middle for the Gunship to be anywhere from slightly-smaller-than-minifig-scale but with tons of figures (like the Sandcrawler) to significantly-but-not-absurdly-larger-than-minifig-scale with no or very few figures, and there was a lot of scope for people to make their own assumptions, however improbable.
Incidentally, if you want a Nebulon-B roughly in scale with the Star Destroyer, the one they just released is good enough for government work. It's too large, but not so much so that you'd notice without actually measuring it; the Falcon included with it is pretty much perfectly to scale with the ISD.

[Kit Figsto]

4 hours ago, Ringwraith said:

On a different topic than the gunship, could someone give their opinion on how likely the rumoured Gideon’s light cruiser set actually is on a scale of 1-10 and when we will know the remaining Summer Wave set names, (or at least I think it’s the summer wave). 

It's coming, and like someone already said, the only summer set we don't know about is a $30 set that's apparently a Target exclusive in the US, will likely be exclusive to a different retailer in Europe (plus LEGO stores/online shopping).  There's always a chance of other sets that may pop up, like last year the IT-S ship was a surprise, but given the size of this wave, it's probably less likely?

Anyway, what we know we're getting:

Ahsoka vs. Maul duel from S7 of Clone Wars

Unknown $30 set

Imperial Troop Transport from Mando episode 12

Slave I, apparently based on ESB

Mandalorian Starfighter, apparently based on Clone Wars

Bad Batch Shuttle

Gideon's Light Cruiser

Vader's Meditation Chamber 18+ set, no one's really sure exactly what that is

UCS R2-D2 in May

UCS Gunship at some point

UCS AT-AT in the fall

I think that's it?

[Mandalorianknight]

6 hours ago, hondohnaka said:

Honestly I think P2 Cody not being a thing by this point is Lego meming on us because they can. Or if he gets made he'll be in a VIP promo for purchases of over a thousand dollars or something. 

No, no. It'll be a VIP promo if you buy, in consecutive orders:

Microfighter landspeeder ($9.99), Luke's landspeeder ($34.99), Constraction Luke's landspeeder ($89.99): UCS Luke's Landspeeder ($399.99). Life-sized Luke's Landspeeder ($999,999.99)

6 hours ago, Ringwraith said:

On a different topic than the gunship, could someone give their opinion on how likely the rumoured Gideon’s light cruiser set actually is on a scale of 1-10 and when we will know the remaining Summer Wave set names, (or at least I think it’s the summer wave). 

like a 95% likelihood, it's been confirmed by reliable leakers.

[hondohnaka]

1 hour ago, Mandalorianknight said:

No, no. It'll be a VIP promo if you buy, in consecutive orders:

Microfighter landspeeder ($9.99), Luke's landspeeder ($34.99), Constraction Luke's landspeeder ($89.99): UCS Luke's Landspeeder ($399.99). Life-sized Luke's Landspeeder ($999,999.99)

like a 95% likelihood, it's been confirmed by reliable leakers.

It has to be in that order or else you have to start from the beginning. 

[mirkwoodspiders]

Shifting a little bit to the rumored May the 4th R2 D2, how does everyone decide whether or not to purchase re-releases of models they already own? I have the older R2 UCS model and am really happy with it, but I'm also really curious to see what the newer one looks like. I'm not sure I can justify owning two R2-D2's at that scale, but if the appearance and functions of the new one blow the previous model out of the water, it'll be really tempting to pick it up.

[Lfm55]

57 minutes ago, mirkwoodspiders said:

Shifting a little bit to the rumored May the 4th R2 D2, how does everyone decide whether or not to purchase re-releases of models they already own? I have the older R2 UCS model and am really happy with it, but I'm also really curious to see what the newer one looks like. I'm not sure I can justify owning two R2-D2's at that scale, but if the appearance and functions of the new one blow the previous model out of the water, it'll be really tempting to pick it up.

Just wait to look at the new one and you’ll eventually know.

You can also mod your old one to look like the new, it only depends of parts availability of the new set and similarity in the build..

Given all the new parts available now, i would resell the old one but the new one could be a downgrade too.. (like the new wave)

[Frizzlefry25]

3 hours ago, mirkwoodspiders said:

Shifting a little bit to the rumored May the 4th R2 D2, how does everyone decide whether or not to purchase re-releases of models they already own? I have the older R2 UCS model and am really happy with it, but I'm also really curious to see what the newer one looks like. I'm not sure I can justify owning two R2-D2's at that scale, but if the appearance and functions of the new one blow the previous model out of the water, it'll be really tempting to pick it up.

R2, will be the first re-release of a UCS for me as well. I was very happy to get the Falcon, Y-Wing, SD, and Snow Speeder, because I missed out on those before, and because the newer models looked to be superior. My hope is it won't be that much of an improvement, as I don't think I would ever double dip.

If it is amazing...... Trying not to think about it! 

[Brikkyy13]

For me to get the new R2 the model will need to be a significant improvement, I’m talking a retractable telescope in his head, concealable rockets in his leg, the whole nine yards. Even if they make these changes I’m not sure if I’ll want to “replace” one of my favourite sets. I certainly wouldn’t sell the old one for sentimental reasons. Even if I do like the look of it I probably won’t buy it until next year after the 2HY UCS (please be the AT-AT ). But if LEGO decides to throw Beru into the homestead GWP that plan may change. 

I’m glad they’re giving this one another breath of life, it’s a great set that everyone deserves a chance to get. Hopefully they do it justice.

Still holding out for a UCS Lambda rerelease next.