LEGO Star Wars 2024 Set Discussion - READ FIRST POST!!!

[1340cc]

5 hours ago, SketchBrick said:

Hot take but I'd almost prefer they stop including minifigs in UCS sets in general. So much of the online discourse gets tied up in arguments about minifig quality/exclusivity for massive sets that often aren't even minifig scale/compatible.

Agreed for the most part, but UCS sets that are minifig scale should always have some relevant minifigs. Especially now that Lego's designers are going to the effort of including full interiors.

[SketchBrick]

2 hours ago, 1340cc said:

Agreed for the most part, but UCS sets that are minifig scale should always have some relevant minifigs. Especially now that Lego's designers are going to the effort of including full interiors.

I can concede here; at least with minifig-scale (or close to) sets, the minifigs can interact with the build itself (like the AT-AT). With sets where the fig(s) are just be standing on a black plate to the side, it seems kind of unnecessary.

[PreVizsla]

8 hours ago, SketchBrick said:

Hot take but I'd almost prefer they stop including minifigs in UCS sets in general. So much of the online discourse gets tied up in arguments about minifig quality/exclusivity for massive sets that often aren't even minifig scale/compatible.

A couple of $5 minifigs aren't really a huge value add to a $300-800 display model at the end of the day, and it would likely quell some of the community outrage (e.g. Gunship/Venator) to present these sets for what they are: display models that are mostly outside of the minifig "world".

The midi-scale ships are an example of this already, and - prices aside - they don't actually need figs included. What we do need are more opportunities for good figures, meaning either a Star Wars CMF, or more fig-focused playsets with better overall quality.

Don't you think it's a little excessive to eliminate things cause they spark debate?

If I am being realistic figures are adding an insane value to UCS sets so I am struggling to understand where you got the $5 value from. We also know the exclusive tie pilot from the 75095: Tie fighter is currently at $50 which is 1/4th of it's $200 price point. Would it be the craziest thing in the world for both people that only care about the display set and people that only care about figures to want one more figure inside to either recoup the cost even more or to have one more cool figure in their collection?

If I just do a surface level research I can see that:
2018 Y-Wing was $200 and now you can sell just 2 figures from it for $120. You got the UCS set build, double VIP points, buildable BB-8 polybag and maybe even cash back on your credit card for only $80.
2017 Snowspeeder came out for $200, now figures are also at $130. People that got it also got a buildable R2-D2 polybag, double VIP points etc for $70 purely cause of the minifigure value.
2015 Slave 1 was $200 and Boba Fett from it is now at what $120 plus you got a Yularen polybag GWP that's now $70. 

Both midi-scaled ships and helmets don't need figures inside, but how many people would actually go for those sets if they had a figure inside? And how many years before this subtheme of sets get cancelled because of it? They can hit nostalgia with midi-scale Falcon, Venator or Star Destroyer and have profits from them protect other 2 sets they can try to push in that same wave, but after that they are done with an entire wave that won't sell. 

[Unknown Jedi Master]

Saw the new keychain of pilot Luke on lego's website, and it's the printed arms and dual-molded legs version.

If they are making such exclusive parts for a simple keychain, I wish that could become the standard for all rebel pilots. 

[Llewop]

23 hours ago, Rwbricks said:

I just noticed that the eyes for the buildable droideka are reversed lipstick pieces. That’s really smart, great part usage by the designer. 

I love when Lego can find like other uses for pieces like this. Like the Rivendell set for LOTR uses ice lolly mold for chairs and the Vikings set uses gold coloured hot dogs 

[SketchBrick]

3 hours ago, PreVizsla said:

If I am being realistic figures are adding an insane value to UCS sets so I am struggling to understand where you got the $5 value from. We also know the exclusive tie pilot from the 75095: Tie fighter is currently at $50 which is 1/4th of it's $200 price point. Would it be the craziest thing in the world for both people that only care about the display set and people that only care about figures to want one more figure inside to either recoup the cost even more or to have one more cool figure in their collection?

I think I understand what you're saying, and it's a valid argument. When I say $5 however, I'm talking about the actual retail value of including a minifig (from Lego's perspective); they can sell these small pieces of printed plastic in blind bags for $5 and make profit.

The reason some of these figures sell on the aftermarket for such high prices is precisely because they're exclusive to expensive sets and collectors are willing to pay big money to have them without needing to obtain the full build. Lego knows this, and they're happy to play along by including figures (that they could release elsewhere if they chose) that inflate the "value" of the set to collectors or resellers while costing Lego very little to physically produce.

If Lego didn't include 1-2 minifigs in a set like the USC Landspeeder or X-Wing, and let's imagine that was normal and expected by fans, would the sets be priced very differently? Maybe they'd be $10 cheaper, but would collectors then complain about the horrible value because there was no "$50" figure they could resell to recoup costs? Either it's "yes" to both, and we have to then admit how obscenely overpriced all UCS sets are just to include a figure or two, OR it's "no" to both, and the builds are what matter and we can all agree losing the minifigs wouldn't really affect the value of the sets much.

[Robi-wan]

They finally added Saw to the 25th lineup on LEGO. Loving that fig!!

[Old Master]

8 hours ago, Unknown Jedi Master said:

Saw the new keychain of pilot Luke on lego's website, and it's the printed arms and dual-molded legs version.

If they are making such exclusive parts for a simple keychain, I wish that could become the standard for all rebel pilots. 

This is awesome news. If they can make it a keychain, I certainly think the rumored Luke mech will feature this figure too.

[lomis]

4 hours ago, Old Master said:

This is awesome news. If they can make it a keychain, I certainly think the rumored Luke mech will feature this figure too.

And/or also from the 75393: X-Wing vs. TIE Fighter set?

[Yperio_Bricks]

4 hours ago, Old Master said:

This is awesome news. If they can make it a keychain, I certainly think the rumored Luke mech will feature this figure too.

Hmmm, now that i think about it, i could need more of these rebel pilute flight suites. Now the mech becomes interesting.

[PreVizsla]

18 hours ago, SketchBrick said:

I think I understand what you're saying, and it's a valid argument. When I say $5 however, I'm talking about the actual retail value of including a minifig (from Lego's perspective); they can sell these small pieces of printed plastic in blind bags for $5 and make profit.

The reason some of these figures sell on the aftermarket for such high prices is precisely because they're exclusive to expensive sets and collectors are willing to pay big money to have them without needing to obtain the full build. Lego knows this, and they're happy to play along by including figures (that they could release elsewhere if they chose) that inflate the "value" of the set to collectors or resellers while costing Lego very little to physically produce.

If Lego didn't include 1-2 minifigs in a set like the USC Landspeeder or X-Wing, and let's imagine that was normal and expected by fans, would the sets be priced very differently? Maybe they'd be $10 cheaper, but would collectors then complain about the horrible value because there was no "$50" figure they could resell to recoup costs? Either it's "yes" to both, and we have to then admit how obscenely overpriced all UCS sets are just to include a figure or two, OR it's "no" to both, and the builds are what matter and we can all agree losing the minifigs wouldn't really affect the value of the sets much.

That makes more sense.

This is correct, but do you really want LEGO not putting an exclusive Boba Fett in the UCS Slave 1 set and just lowering the overall price of the set for $5? Isn't that a huge downgrade? How exactly will consumers be able to justify these insane UCS set prices if they don't have anything cool or exclusive inside? What's stopping consumers from never buying UCS sets ever again and just going on rebrickable and picking up much better display sets for much cheaper without even having to wait for LEGO to make builds they want?

[icm]

You justify the UCS set price the same way you justify the price of any other set. 

What's stopping people from going on Rebrickable instead? It's a lot more effort than buying a set and is actually more expensive when you account for shipping. 

You act like the only reason to buy a UCS set is the exclusive minifigs. It's not.

[QuiggoldsPegLeg]

3 hours ago, PreVizsla said:

That makes more sense.

This is correct, but do you really want LEGO not putting an exclusive Boba Fett in the UCS Slave 1 set and just lowering the overall price of the set for $5? Isn't that a huge downgrade? How exactly will consumers be able to justify these insane UCS set prices if they don't have anything cool or exclusive inside? What's stopping consumers from never buying UCS sets ever again and just going on rebrickable and picking up much better display sets for much cheaper without even having to wait for LEGO to make builds they want?

Can you please point me to where you’re finding these better display sets for cheaper than Lego sets? Because between the cost of shipping on bricklink, and the fact that the better looking models are more intricate with more pieces, driving up the price for the build’s imprint, I find it hard to believe you’re getting a better looking set at a comparable size for cheaper. 
 

Also, for this scenario we’ll act like your assumption is true and say that it is slightly cheaper to buy the parts for a model off of bricklink. I can’t imagine it would make a dent in the market whatsoever. The amount of people who buy UCS sets solely for the minifigs or the people who would rather build a MOC have to be a negligible amount of the target market for UCS sets. For 95% of people, it’s much easier to do and they’re more likely to spend money on buying a Lego set that comes in a box from a store rather than ordering the parts from a bunch of bricklink stores for a MOC they found online.

[PreVizsla]

5 hours ago, icm said:

You justify the UCS set price the same way you justify the price of any other set. 

What's stopping people from going on Rebrickable instead? It's a lot more effort than buying a set and is actually more expensive when you account for shipping. 

You act like the only reason to buy a UCS set is the exclusive minifigs. It's not.

No, I do not, you misunderstood my point. I was merely talking about sales of UCS sets in case LEGO decides to remove minifigures from UCS sets specifically.

Obviously no one in their right mind would go to rebrickable for a regular set that comes with figures and molded animals and printed pieces and deal with shipping and other things.

They are not, but sometimes they are the deciding factor. Idk if you were in the community in 2010, but everyone complained about Obi-Wans starfighter not having a figure inside and despite costing only $100 it sold so badly that we didn't get a prequel UCS set till we voted it in 11 years later. 

3 hours ago, QuiggoldsPegLeg said:

Can you please point me to where you’re finding these better display sets for cheaper than Lego sets? Because between the cost of shipping on bricklink, and the fact that the better looking models are more intricate with more pieces, driving up the price for the build’s imprint, I find it hard to believe you’re getting a better looking set at a comparable size for cheaper. 
 

Also, for this scenario we’ll act like your assumption is true and say that it is slightly cheaper to buy the parts for a model off of bricklink. I can’t imagine it would make a dent in the market whatsoever. The amount of people who buy UCS sets solely for the minifigs or the people who would rather build a MOC have to be a negligible amount of the target market for UCS sets. For 95% of people, it’s much easier to do and they’re more likely to spend money on buying a Lego set that comes in a box from a store rather than ordering the parts from a bunch of bricklink stores for a MOC they found online.

In a world where Venator has no minifigures and set drops from $650 to $640 I can get TanBrickz's rebrickable set for $400 and hassle with bricklink sellers or I can pick 1 out of 2 models from any custom set seller like Republic Bricks (first person I found when I googled custom sets) where he would ship me the parts as well for $430 or $500 depending on the model that also has a full interior. (I would not actually do that, just an example)(I also do not condone his behavior). Another point I also made is about not waiting. How many people wanted UCS AT-AT since 1999? They could have gotten the Raskolnikov version for $250-$300 or the Brick Vault version (never had it so idk the price). How many people would go for that set if they knew LEGO might make it, but it also wouldn't include minifigures or anything special inside?

That's a fair point and you are most likely right because sets like UCS tie fighter are in the top 5 best sold UCS sets ever and it only included 1 figure. 

[QuiggoldsPegLeg]

3 hours ago, PreVizsla said:

In a world where Venator has no minifigures and set drops from $650 to $640 I can get TanBrickz's rebrickable set for $400 and hassle with bricklink sellers or I can pick 1 out of 2 models from any custom set seller like Republic Bricks (first person I found when I googled custom sets) where he would ship me the parts as well for $430 or $500 depending on the model that also has a full interior. (I would not actually do that, just an example)(I also do not condone his behavior). Another point I also made is about not waiting. How many people wanted UCS AT-AT since 1999? They could have gotten the Raskolnikov version for $250-$300 or the Brick Vault version (never had it so idk the price). How many people would go for that set if they knew LEGO might make it, but it also wouldn't include minifigures or anything special inside?

That's a fair point and you are most likely right because sets like UCS tie fighter are in the top 5 best sold UCS sets ever and it only included 1 figure. 

For stuff like the TanBrickz/Republic Bricks Venator or the Raskolnikov AT-AT, yeah they are cheaper, but they’re also considerably smaller compared to their Lego counterparts, and are more expensive what you get. If you truly don’t care about the size of your UCS set whatsoever* then you can get these, but if you’re that kind of person is Lego really going to get you to spend $400 more for an exclusive snowtrooper commando torso? I’d argue in this very niche case, the minifigs don’t matter either way. 
 

Brickvault’s AT-AT has 600 fewer pieces than the Lego model, and the estimated cost of the parts included on their website is $1,500 USD. Which likely doesn’t include shipping, and is a testament to how in almost every scenario, MOCs and parting out sets on bricklink are going to be much more expensive for what you’re getting compared to a normal Lego set. 

 

*I’d argue the size, along with the accuracy, is the main draw of UCS sets. The UCS AT-AT doesn’t sell well because of how accurate it is, it’s because it’s minifigure scale and because of how massive it is. And if you wanted an AT-AT that large, it is considerably cheaper to buy it from Lego than bricklink. 

[Kit Figsto]

Again, there's a difference between UCS sets that are minifigure compatible and UCS sets that aren't.

The AT-AT was more or less minifigure scale, and thus made sense to include a plethora of figures.  For the first 10 years of the UCS line, the only stuff that came with minifigures were the 2008 Death Star (which was more of a giant playset) and the Lambda (minifigure scale).  The first non-minifig scale set to come with figures was the 2011 SSD.  When Obi-Wan's fighter came out, it wasn't the norm for UCS stuff to come with minifigures (I went back to check and couldn't find EB comments where people had issue with the lack of figure, but admittedly didn't dig for that long).

The way I see it, minifigures in a display-scale UCS set are a nice bonus, but I feel as if there is way too much emphasis placed on them.  Anyone is free to spend their money how they wish, but in my personal opinion, I feel like it'd be a huge waste if I was hinging my decision to buy a $250 set based on whether or not it comes with one minifigure or two.

Edited April 13 by Kit Figsto

[MKJoshA]

This is an interesting discussion, but it doesn't exactly belong here. Either wrap it up or start a new topic to finish the discussion on UCS sets.

[CloneCommando99]

Just for fun… and I know it’s a bit early but…

What are your current predictions for the 2025 winter wave. Will we get another $30 battle-pack? Another $20 battlepack? Will we get a larger January wave than this year? Will March pretty much have the same release format?

I would really like to know your thoughts. After all, the Winter sets of a year quite often have relation to the sets of the previous summer wave. (For example: 2023 CG gunship and the shock trooper that was in the Clone Vs droid battlepack)

[Llewop]

3 hours ago, CloneCommando99 said:

Just for fun… and I know it’s a bit early but…

What are your current predictions for the 2025 winter wave. Will we get another $30 battle-pack? Another $20 battlepack? Will we get a larger January wave than this year? Will March pretty much have the same release format?

I would really like to know your thoughts. After all, the Winter sets of a year quite often have relation to the sets of the previous summer wave. (For example: 2023 CG gunship and the shock trooper that was in the Clone Vs droid battlepack)

If I’m being optimistic an MTT. 

Realistically Januarys wave will be a battle pack and maybe another small set. 

There’s a chance of getting another Ahsoka set and maybe a follow up set for skeleton crew or the acolyte. 

there’s still so much of 2024 to come not even thinking about 2025 yet

[Pedilego]

On 4/13/2024 at 10:36 AM, CloneCommando99 said:

Just for fun… and I know it’s a bit early but…

What are your current predictions for the 2025 winter wave. Will we get another $30 battle-pack? Another $20 battlepack? Will we get a larger January wave than this year? Will March pretty much have the same release format?

I would really like to know your thoughts. After all, the Winter sets of a year quite often have relation to the sets of the previous summer wave. (For example: 2023 CG gunship and the shock trooper that was in the Clone Vs droid battlepack)

One last “hurrah” for Clones would be great IF they could do Bly & Star Corps effectively. (I’m setting aside my Phase 1 & Clone Wars desires for the ROTS anniversary.) Unfortunately I'm expecting a Zombie Stormtrooper Battle Pack so I doubt this happens for numerous reasons. Besides, if that mobile game is any indication, we're more likely to get Gree & the 41st yet again.

I’m curious if non-Lego anniversaries are going to become more front-loaded in order to be part of the May the 4th & Celebration festivities, like how all the Pahtnom Menace sets were this year. In any case, I expect TLG will give us a smattering of ROTS sets like with TPM. Mostly adult stuff (e.g. ARC-170 poly, midi-scale ship [Venator?], a diorama [but nothing as grand as we'd hope e.g. Anakin instead of Kit, Tiin, & Kolar]*, and a May the 4th ROTS UCS [Jedi Interceptor(s), perhaps]). It's been enough time since the micro-scale Hogwarts that I think they could've pipelined a Temple and circled the ROTS anniversary for the synergy. If they continue the scaled buildable characters (e.g. Chewy, R2, 3PO), Yoda seems like a natural choice (history of buildable Yoda and, again, ROTS anniversary synergy). And then, unfortunately, just 1-2 system scale sets (imo Obi & Boga vs. Crab Droid & Cody would hit a lot of boxes).

And of course a roughly equal smattering of OT sets (been a while since Vader's Tie, for example) plus 1-2 for the various shows (maybe that Bad Batch V-Wing).

Overall, yeah, I'd expect a similar release format.

 

* an Ani v. Obi falling pillar tensegrity build could be great but it seems far fetched.

 

***Revised to focus more on why I'm expecting certain things to more-so answer the CloneCommando99's Q and come off less wish-listy.***

Edited April 14 by Pedilego

[Kaijumeister]

I’m starting to think ‘anniversaries’ in general are getting way overcrowded at the moment for this theme. Starting from next year onwards we’ll be getting a barrage of ‘10th Anniversaries’ for all the post-Disney crop of films and media.

I definitely think we’ll see a heavier emphasis on RotS sets next year than we saw for TPM this year, simply because there are a ton of vehicles like the ARC-170 and Turbo Tank that have been widely desired for ages. Similarly could see a couple of sets from the Force Awakens being done too, but I think Lucasfilm and subsequently Lego may start dropping anniversary branding unless it’s for big ones like 20 years or whatever just to ensure they don’t feel diluted, but still release a set or two from those films just without making a big deal of it.

Getting back on track for 2024, has anyone tried mounting the small 2022 BD-1 figure on a minifigure’s back with a neck bracket and some other pieces so his head sticks over the minifigure’s shoulder? I haven’t got around to trying it out but interested to see how good it could look with Cal coming this summer. We’ve seen that they’re willing to produce new moulds for the anniversary figures so we could get a new ‘backpack’ piece of BD-1 perched on Cal’s shoulder, but that doesn’t seem likely. He’s probably my most anticipated anniversary figure.

Edited April 14 by Kaijumeister

[MKJoshA]

Guessing what sets we'll see next is too close to wish-listing. That's keep that in the appropriate thread please.

[Llewop]

6 hours ago, Kaijumeister said:

I’m starting to think ‘anniversaries’ in general are getting way overcrowded at the moment for this theme. Starting from next year onwards we’ll be getting a barrage of ‘10th Anniversaries’ for all the post-Disney crop of films and media.

I definitely think we’ll see a heavier emphasis on RotS sets next year than we saw for TPM this year, simply because there are a ton of vehicles like the ARC-170 and Turbo Tank that have been widely desired for ages. Similarly could see a couple of sets from the Force Awakens being done too, but I think Lucasfilm and subsequently Lego may start dropping anniversary branding unless it’s for big ones like 20 years or whatever just to ensure they don’t feel diluted, but still release a set or two from those films just without making a big deal of it.

Getting back on track for 2024, has anyone tried mounting the small 2022 BD-1 figure on a minifigure’s back with a neck bracket and some other pieces so his head sticks over the minifigure’s shoulder? I haven’t got around to trying it out but interested to see how good it could look with Cal coming this summer. We’ve seen that they’re willing to produce new moulds for the anniversary figures so we could get a new ‘backpack’ piece of BD-1 perched on Cal’s shoulder, but that doesn’t seem likely. He’s probably my most anticipated anniversary figure.

Anniversaries used to mean something but with so much content it is true how far do you go with them? I think honestly they should stick to the anniversaries for LSW maybe just do a special gwp for the films 

[CloneCommando99]

Ok on another note…. 
 

If the Young Leia set is indeed a creature build that has not been recognised by the leakers, could it possibly be a Legends based set? There’s a 99% chance it isn’t but it’s always a possibility.

Also, if he does come with one, which Poncho do you guys hope Cal Kestis will have. I would hope he comes with two: the Default Poncho and the Pink Poncho.

[Mandalorianknight]

2 minutes ago, CloneCommando99 said:

If the Young Leia set is indeed a creature build that has not been recognised by the leakers, could it possibly be a Legends based set? There’s a 99% chance it isn’t but it’s always a possibility.

Also, if he does come with one, which Poncho do you guys hope Cal Kestis will have. I would hope he comes with two: the Default Poncho and the Pink Poncho.

If it is a creature, I'm 90% sure it'll be Wicket.

I hope cal comes with the bracca poncho, especially given how good Malak, Fives, and Saw look, but it's definitely possible they skip out. No way we get the Sumi poncho, though- I can't see lego throwing in an extra cloth part when they don't have to. (Though it is canon that A: Cal does collect the ponchos in-universe and B: The rest of the mantis crew hate it)