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

[MKJoshA]

Take a chill pill. Now. Debate is fine and good. Yelling at each other is not.

[Utinni Utinni]

1 hour ago, Clone OPatra said:

Who is hating? People need to stop thinking that having a detailed back and forth on a subject constitutes some massive argument. Some of us enjoy debating this sort of subject as part of the hobby.

Personally I waded into the catalogue discussion because, at the end of the day, adults were disappointed that nothing "new" for Star Wars was revealed at LEGO Con when in fact it was a mistake that led us to see what they revealed in advance. If somebody else wants to think it wasn't a mistake, fine, but I'm going to debate that opinion because talking about this sort of thing is part of the hobby. A forum is for discussion, which includes debate, not just one person saying an opinion after another and everyone else nodding.

It was a general comment that I stand behind. I said nothing of debate. 

Also, the marauder looks much better than I thought it would. None of the post-R2 sets are day 1 purchases for me though. But I'll probably pick them all up when they get discounted eventually.

[Mandalorianknight]

2 hours ago, hondohnaka said:

fun fact none of us know jack shiitake mushrooms about what goes on with lego's marketing department they're absolutely insane as proven by the way they didn't reacted to the marvel leaks. 

so has it been confirmed that the Armory is coming out Sep 1? also  the fact that they didn't reveal the gunship makes me wonder if it's set for Sep 15 rather then what we previously thought with August 1. 

I'm starting to wonder if the UCS AT-AT even exists, as it this point it's starting to seem like the gunship is just the 2hy d2c. I was assuming that since it was a fan vote set, it would be an additional set and release sometime between the 1hy d2c (r2) and 2hy d2c (rumored at-at), but as jdubbs and thelegobatman have made very clear to eachother, you know what happens when you assume 

[TeddytheSpoon]

8 minutes ago, Mandalorianknight said:

 as jdubbs and thelegobatman have made very clear to eachother, you know what happens when you assume 

As my uni tutor used to say, to assume makes an... er... donkey out of 'u' and 'me'!

Having just read the Trexler review I'm impressed with how much they've managed to pack into such a little set, especially since there's space inside for all the minifigures that come with the set which is not always a given! I'm still not crazy about the patchwork colour scheme but this might be my day-one buy.

[hondohnaka]

34 minutes ago, Mandalorianknight said:

I'm starting to wonder if the UCS AT-AT even exists, as it this point it's starting to seem like the gunship is just the 2hy d2c. I was assuming that since it was a fan vote set, it would be an additional set and release sometime between the 1hy d2c (r2) and 2hy d2c (rumored at-at), but as jdubbs and thelegobatman have made very clear to eachother, you know what happens when you assume 

To be honest, I'm not sure how much fun a UCS AT AT would even be to build. That's a LOT of grey panels . I will say we haven't heard much about the gunship either and it's coming out between now and September at the latest so I wouldn't give up on it just yet. 

[mirkwoodspiders]

2 hours ago, TeddytheSpoon said:

*nods in ironic agreement*

For the gunship I had always assumed it was a September release rather than August since UCS sets always seem to release out of phase with the main waves. The question then becomes when the AT-AT (?) will be released, and I would guess sometime in November in time for the holiday season.

Yeah, I am guessing at this point the Gunship will be September, with the AT-AT in late November, maybe around Black Friday.

[THELEGOBATMAN]

1 minute ago, hondohnaka said:

To be honest, I'm not sure how much fun a UCS AT AT would even be to build. That's a LOT of grey panels . I will say we haven't heard much about the gunship either and it's coming out between now and September at the latest so I wouldn't give up on it just yet. 

Well I suppose same can be said about the UCS Star Destroyer. 

[Kit Figsto]

36 minutes ago, Mandalorianknight said:

I'm starting to wonder if the UCS AT-AT even exists, as it this point it's starting to seem like the gunship is just the 2hy d2c. I was assuming that since it was a fan vote set, it would be an additional set and release sometime between the 1hy d2c (r2) and 2hy d2c (rumored at-at), but as jdubbs and thelegobatman have made very clear to eachother, you know what happens when you assume 

I was thinking about this and did have a similar query, the one thing I'm not sure about is that there was an $800 price point set on several leak lists going back to...January(?), I think.  I know those price points aren't always totally accurate, and I know in the past there's been ones where the "leaked" price point for a set number is $500 and it ends up being $350 or whatever, but I feel like it'd be really difficult to just gloss over an $800 price point, even if the set was actually $600 or something.  I mean, by my count, we've had two sets come in at a price that expensive - the Falcon and Super Star Destroyer, the only other one even close was the Death Star.  

Assuming there was any credence whatsoever to that rumored price point, I feel like it'd be really unusual that a set of that scale could just disappear.  

[hondohnaka]

1 minute ago, THELEGOBATMAN said:

Well I suppose same can be said about the UCS Star Destroyer. 

fair and I also don't find the SD appealing for that exact reason  The Falcon tho...if I had 800 bucks...man I want that monstrosity. 

[McMurder_them_softly]

$800 Gunship FTW!!

Jk, I hope there are still 2 more UCS sets coming this year, one being the gunship with an August VIP release, wide release on 9/1, and the other an AT-AT on Black Friday. 

Concerning LEGO Con, while expected Mando sets (look good, some not so good - Trexler has my attention now), I hope they do it next year and take the community feedback. Given the challenges they faced, pandemic, first time...this was fine in my opinion. 

I wish we did see the gunship, because I fear for the future that others will not tune in next year. First year knock it out of the park and ride that hype through year 2. If year 2 flops, there will still be excitement for year 3. Going soft on year 1...we will see what they chose to do. I like the concept but needs refinement. 

Sorry for the ramble. 

[Mandalorianknight]

1 hour ago, TeddytheSpoon said:

As my uni tutor used to say, to assume makes an... er... donkey out of 'u' and 'me'!

Having just read the Trexler review I'm impressed with how much they've managed to pack into such a little set, especially since there's space inside for all the minifigures that come with the set which is not always a given! I'm still not crazy about the patchwork colour scheme but this might be my day-one buy.

My 8th grade geometry teacher told us assuming makes a angle-side-side out of you and me, if anyone's fluent in geometric proofs (or acronyms). 

Yeah, the patchwork color scheme is what stops me from getting it. It looks more like something the pirates would have then the actual imperial vehicle (doesn't the mythrol call it "mint condition" or something in the episode?)

43 minutes ago, hondohnaka said:

To be honest, I'm not sure how much fun a UCS AT AT would even be to build. That's a LOT of grey panels . I will say we haven't heard much about the gunship either and it's coming out between now and September at the latest so I wouldn't give up on it just yet. 

It'd be interesting shapes for the legs, at least. Though that's another major point, I don't believe any at-ats at a scale that big have been made without the pieces requiring glue.

40 minutes ago, Kit Figsto said:

I was thinking about this and did have a similar query, the one thing I'm not sure about is that there was an $800 price point set on several leak lists going back to...January(?), I think.  I know those price points aren't always totally accurate, and I know in the past there's been ones where the "leaked" price point for a set number is $500 and it ends up being $350 or whatever, but I feel like it'd be really difficult to just gloss over an $800 price point, even if the set was actually $600 or something.  I mean, by my count, we've had two sets come in at a price that expensive - the Falcon and Super Star Destroyer, the only other one even close was the Death Star.  

Assuming there was any credence whatsoever to that rumored price point, I feel like it'd be really unusual that a set of that scale could just disappear.  

True, most likely if the set was rumored at that size by reputable leakers it'll still exist in some form. It's not a huge issue to cancel a microfighter or something, but it's definately a big loss for them financially to cancel something that big. The only way I could see that happening is if they couldn't get it to work structurally, but I can't imagine they'd even greenlight such a set if the designers hadn't found a way to get it to work.

[hondohnaka]

25 minutes ago, Mandalorianknight said:

My 8th grade geometry teacher told us assuming makes a angle-side-side out of you and me, if anyone's fluent in geometric proofs (or acronyms). 

Yeah, the patchwork color scheme is what stops me from getting it. It looks more like something the pirates would have then the actual imperial vehicle (doesn't the mythrol call it "mint condition" or something in the episode?)

It'd be interesting shapes for the legs, at least. Though that's another major point, I don't believe any at-ats at a scale that big have been made without the pieces requiring glue.

True, most likely if the set was rumored at that size by reputable leakers it'll still exist in some form. It's not a huge issue to cancel a microfighter or something, but it's definately a big loss for them financially to cancel something that big. The only way I could see that happening is if they couldn't get it to work structurally, but I can't imagine they'd even greenlight such a set if the designers hadn't found a way to get it to work.

To that last point, I counter with the Osprey set. It wasn’t functional. The official reason they gave was that it was too military but the set itself from the reviews I’ve seen just did not work the way it was meant to. It’s happened before that a set gets through to approval and a flaw is discovered afterwards. That being said, I want to say at least non-poseable ATAT MOCs have been done without glue. They do involve a base but it’s been done.  

[Brikkyy13]

Just finished watching Solid Brix's reviews of the new sets and reading the ones published on brickset. Yeah, this wave is shaping up to be awesome. I've done a 180 on the Marauder, short of having the set in hand I'm ready to call it as best set of the wave. Amazing functionality packed in everywhere - love the boxes from the cantina, plenty of space inside, accurate to the source material and a great selection of figures even if I hate the new stormy helmets with a passion. Really keen to get that one and the mando fighter in hand. Gideon's cruiser looks expensive but nowhere near as bad as the Slave I or the duel. Decided I'm gonna put money down on that Boba being an exclusive variant so I'll be getting the Slave I day one, not taking a chance on that set disappearing from Aussie shelves. I like Boba Fett so screw it another Slave I for the collection, that'll be number 5 for me what about you guys? I swear LEGO is more addictive than any drug. The forge is coming out August 1 as well, right? Assuming $45 aud for that.... yeah, August is gonna be expensive.

As for the upcoming UCS... my guess is Gunship on August 1 with the new wave. Pretty sure a leaker has said it's already started production in the factories but could be wrong about that. We'll probably get a press release in July, but honestly I could see them revealing it on August 1 already for sale with no warning at all . Wouldn't be the first time LEGO has done something like that and it's going to kill me to have to choose between the new wave or the UCS if they do. AT-AT in November, already decided that I'll hold off on that one since the giant flagship sets are the only ones that seem to not go anywhere, and after getting the Falcon and ISD day 1 my wallet is begging me to wait for a discount on the next one. Should be a fun build, the interior frame is what I'm keen to see the most. I doubt the legs will be fully articulated but hopefully they have some motion, if they're static then I'll be reconsidering buying the set. In a perfect world it would be motorized but I'm not holding my breath. Keen to see how they approach the head, I've tried designing my own before and it is not easy to replicate well.

Edited June 28, 2021 by Brikkyy13

[hondohnaka]

49 minutes ago, Brikkyy13 said:

Just finished watching Solid Brix's reviews of the new sets and reading the ones published on brickset. Yeah, this wave is shaping up to be awesome. I've done a 180 on the Marauder, short of having the set in hand I'm ready to call it as best set of the wave. Amazing functionality packed in everywhere - love the boxes from the cantina, plenty of space inside, accurate to the source material and a great selection of figures even if I hate the new stormy helmets with a passion. Really keen to get that one and the mando fighter in hand. Gideon's cruiser looks expensive but nowhere near as bad as the Slave I or the duel. Decided I'm gonna put money down on that Boba being an exclusive variant so I'll be getting the Slave I day one, not taking a chance on that set disappearing from Aussie shelves. I like Boba Fett so screw it another Slave I for the collection, that'll be number 5 for me what about you guys? I swear LEGO is more addictive than any drug. The forge is coming out August 1 as well, right? Assuming $45 aud for that.... yeah, August is gonna be expensive.

As for the upcoming UCS... my guess is Gunship on August 1 with the new wave. Pretty sure a leaker has said it's already started production in the factories but could be wrong about that. We'll probably get a press release in July, but honestly I could see them revealing it on August 1 already for sale with no warning at all . Wouldn't be the first time LEGO has done something like that and it's going to kill me to have to choose between the new wave or the UCS if they do. AT-AT in November, already decided that I'll hold off on that one since the giant flagship sets are the only ones that seem to not go anywhere, and after getting the Falcon and ISD day 1 my wallet is begging me to wait for a discount on the next one. Should be a fun build, the interior frame is what I'm keen to see the most. I doubt the legs will be fully articulated but hopefully they have some motion, if they're static then I'll be reconsidering buying the set. In a perfect world it would be motorized but I'm not holding my breath. Keen to see how they approach the head, I've tried designing my own before and it is not easy to replicate well.

Honestly it being motorized would make the 800 dollars for somewhere around 6000 pieces make perfect sense. Doubt it’ll happen tho. If it does it has the possibility to be the greatest Lego set ever IMO

[Brikkyy13]

28 minutes ago, hondohnaka said:

Honestly it being motorized would make the 800 dollars for somewhere around 6000 pieces make perfect sense. Doubt it’ll happen tho. If it does it has the possibility to be the greatest Lego set ever IMO

If it’s motorised then it wouldn’t really be a contest, giant robot camels are awesome. I have 10178 and to this day it’s still one of my favourite sets even if it isn’t the most accurate in shape. I agree though, I doubt they’ll motorise it. I’m expecting something akin to Cavegod’s MOC since that has a similar piece count, is minifigure scale and can support itself without a stand. If they were to motorise it then I expect it would be smaller than that, but still bigger than the system sets. 

[McMurder_them_softly]

I'm not sure how they could unless a winch for troops and the head / main chin cannons. The legs would be probably be too bulky to motorize with LEGO motors. 

[Kdapt-Preacher]

20 minutes ago, McMurder_them_softly said:

I'm not sure how they could unless a winch for troops and the head / main chin cannons. The legs would be probably be too bulky to motorize with LEGO motors. 

The motors they use for the LEGO Robotics line have a fair bit of torque to them, and more importantly have connections for five pins in a + shape on the rotating part, so they can take a lot more weight than the ones like they used in 10178 that just have an axle hole. But don't take that as an endorsement of the idea of it being motorized; that doesn't strike me as being very likely.

[Brikkyy13]

29 minutes ago, McMurder_them_softly said:

I'm not sure how they could unless a winch for troops and the head / main chin cannons. The legs would be probably be too bulky to motorize with LEGO motors. 

LEGO motors are surprisingly strong once you gear them up. No need to motorise head and cannons, just the legs. It won’t be long before someone makes a motorised MOC using the set as a base.

Now that I think about it, if LEGO did a motorised set these days it would probably use a Bluetooth app to control it and I wouldn’t want that at all. One of the reasons I love 10178 so much is that it still works after all these years.

Edited June 28, 2021 by Brikkyy13

[Mandalorianknight]

2 hours ago, hondohnaka said:

To that last point, I counter with the Osprey set. It wasn’t functional. The official reason they gave was that it was too military but the set itself from the reviews I’ve seen just did not work the way it was meant to. It’s happened before that a set gets through to approval and a flaw is discovered afterwards. That being said, I want to say at least non-poseable ATAT MOCs have been done without glue. They do involve a base but it’s been done.  

Yeah, that's what I meant, they'd only cancel an $800 set if there was some sort of structural problem. 

And I can't see lego doing a non-posable AT-AT set with a base.

13 minutes ago, Kdapt-Preacher said:

The motors they use for the LEGO Robotics line have a fair bit of torque to them, and more importantly have connections for five pins in a + shape on the rotating part, so they can take a lot more weight than the ones like they used in 10178 that just have an axle hole. But don't take that as an endorsement of the idea of it being motorized; that doesn't strike me as being very likely.

With something the size of an $800 AT-AT, I think the stress on those 5 pins would be above what lego allows in their sets.

[Utinni Utinni]

What if the $800 AT-AT was made to only pose like the downed AT-AT? Now that would solve the structural problems! 😀

I'm sure nobody would be upset with that 

[Brikkyy13]

3 minutes ago, Utinni Utinni said:

What if the $800 AT-AT was made to only pose like the downed AT-AT?

Only if there’s not 1 but 2 identical snowspeeders flying above it. Nothing new, same old barely updated design from 1999 of course. 

28 minutes ago, Mandalorianknight said:

With something the size of an $800 AT-AT, I think the stress on those 5 pins would be above what lego allows in their sets.

If the force could be distributed throughout the system then it wouldn’t be an issue, but that’s another challenge entirely. 10178 worked because it was fairly lightweight and had a low centre of gravity, a UCS AT-AT couldn’t avoid those problems. 

[ARC2149Nova]

I think a motorized AT-AT would be absolutely amazing, but since most UCS models are primarily for display, I'd settle with the usual poseability.

But for $800, motorized walking action would be amazingly absurd!

[Mandalorianknight]

1 hour ago, Brikkyy13 said:

If the force could be distributed throughout the system then it wouldn’t be an issue, but that’s another challenge entirely. 10178 worked because it was fairly lightweight and had a low centre of gravity, a UCS AT-AT couldn’t avoid those problems. 

Exactly. Even if the motor power or connection points increase, 

1 hour ago, Utinni Utinni said:

What if the $800 AT-AT was made to only pose like the downed AT-AT? Now that would solve the structural problems! 😀

I'm sure nobody would be upset with that 

This only works if the figures are a mangled snowtrooper corpse and barely breathing general veers. (Fun fact: canonically his life is saved by a trooper who's designation is based off a Veers superfan)

[MaceWindu]

I think those waiting for AT-AT release should be prepared for static legs. With accurate design it seems plausible.

2 hours ago, Brikkyy13 said:

If the force could be distributed throughout the system 

At first reading this sentence I thought about something else… Sounds like a SW-related quote! 😅

Edited June 28, 2021 by MaceWindu

[Brikkyy13]

54 minutes ago, MaceWindu said:

 

I think those waiting for AT-AT release should be prepared for static legs. With accurate design it seems plausible.

 

Only plausible? It’s absolutely possible. Agreed that expectations should be kept low, nobody should be surprised when it turns out that the whole model is static and all 4 legs go straight up with no moment whatsoever. I think knee joints might be asking for too much on a model this size but surely they can put in the same sort of movement that cavegod was able to achieve. If the legs must be rigid then I hope they’ve gone with a more dynamic pose, building legs in four different positions would be so much more fun than building two identical sets of straight legs.

I want this set to be like cavegod’s MOC so much I should just build that instead. 

 

EDIT: looking at more photos of that MOC and it appears I was mistaken and there is no movement in the legs, they’re just attached on a dynamic angle to give the illusion of movement. I’m now almost 100% certain the set will have static legs.

Edited June 29, 2021 by Brikkyy13