lego the hutt

Eurobricks Citizen
  • Content Count

    132
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by lego the hutt


  1. 2 minutes ago, jdubbs said:

    The sales volume of a $350 set is probably a fraction of what a $15 set will sell... so, no, this doesn't make sense as a motivation for including it in the accessory pack. If they made enough of that mining to use in both the UCS Gunship and the clone accessory pack, then they did so deliberately, knowing upfront that he would be included in both. And as BrickBob said, this accessory pack was designed and put into production before the Gunship was even on shelves.

    Ah, good point, so it would have been the other way around...the fig was included in the gunship because they already had plans for it in the pack.  That makes sense.   (I guess we don't know how far in advance of the fan vote those sets were planned out though...it was mentioned they had a Nebulon B model designed well before the vote).   The other thing people keep bringing up in regards to that discussion about including the same trooper is that the UCS GS has been readily available.
    Regardless of sales history, this pack can't be good for future gunship sales


  2. 1 minute ago, jdubbs said:

    That seems kind of a stretch. The clone being exclusive to the UCS set made it more attractive to potential buyers. if it were selling poorly, LEGO wouldn't want to neuter part of its appeal.

    You don't think they had thousands of those troopers already made and that drove the decision?  


  3. 52 minutes ago, PreVizsla said:

    The thing is we don't know what you counted as a set. Is Bespin Duel a set to you? Or 20th anniversary Obi wan polybag? It ends up being impartial no matter what we count/ don't count. Lot of sets are also in the gray area like this years R2-D2, some people won't even accept darth vader's helmet as OT cause it's techically in the ST and for few seconds in the PT.

    I was using your list so you are the only one that knows lol...but I was counting system scale sets.  The things you listed under PT/TCW and OT exclusively to simplify it.


  4. 2 minutes ago, jdubbs said:

    I dunno... I think more people would object to calling the CW Venator (with its creepy CW-eyed Palpatine fig) a PT set, than would object to calling the RO AT-ST an OT set. Especially since several of the RO and Solo sets were recognizable OT vehicles, just with RO/Solo characters...  Also, a lot of the CW's unique designs were pretty "out there"... farther out there than the RO/Solo/Rebels designs went... if anything I think people would say CW should stay its own thing.

     I feel you on the big eyed TCW figures.  I was never a fan of the big eyes and actually replaced some of those heads (but the ones with the face printing hidden behind a helmet were good).  But again now we are bringing opinions into it.  I seems like breaking it down the way I did was the most impartial imo.


  5. 9 minutes ago, jdubbs said:

    If you're going to include CW with PT then I think it's only fair to include Solo, RO, Rebels, and Mando with the OT. Yes, Solo is midway between the PT and OT, but the aesthetic is definitely OT, and it is Empire, which is how a lot of people define OT. Mando likewise could be OT or ST but being closer chronologically to the OT and using the same Stormtroopers, TIEs, etc., it seems much more OT than ST.

    That gets you to 158 OT sets, on par with the PT.

     Rebels could be questionable as well...though personally I feel like we also got some good clonetroopers in the rebels sets that tied in with my PT displays but you have to draw a line somewhere.  I'm not sure disney era movie sets should be considered with standard OT sets?   But it is an opinion. 

    I thought it was a lot less watered down to simply included standard/system scale OT vs PT/TCW and leave all the extra...opinion based...sets out of it. 
    That seems to be the best way to represent what is being talked about to me. (Though like I mentioned I'm curious about what that would look like for the last 10 years specifically).


  6. 31 minutes ago, PreVizsla said:

    Idk about chart which is problematic imo because we don't know what type of sets did chart maker count, but i have a full list of sets.
    Episode I : 34 sets (17 of them for the phantom menace release 1999-2002)
    Episode II: 18 sets (9 of them for the attack of the clones release 2002-2003)
    Episode III: 43 sets (16 of them for the revenge of the sith release 2003-2006)
    The clone wars: 60 sets
    Episode IV: 46 sets (no reason)
    Episode V: 37 sets (no reason)
    Episode VI: 36 sets (no reason)
     

    Of course I'm not verifying the numbers but, basing it on the above list the spread is way less than I thought. 

    We all know there have been more OT UCS sets than PT sets.  It's probably because more older fans tend to be able to afford larger sets?  Whatever the reason, it is a given there are way more more OT UCS sets.  Hopefully as more PT fans get into their 30's and have more money we will see more PT UCS sets over the next decade or so? So the question then comes down to normal size/price point, system scale type sets.
     
    As a fan I tend to consider TCW sets and Prequel sets similarly because they are from the same time frame and contain a lot of the same features (clone troopers/vehicles etc).
    The question I asked in the previous post was:
    "What would the chart look like with TCW and PT combined?"  Here is the answer using the above numbers:  
    OT:119
    PT/CW: 155
    I'm surprised by that given how vocal some people are about it being the other way.   Though there is the point that the PT/TCW sets came out mostly a long time ago when those shows/movies were current. That's where the chart on the previous page is helpful because it broke it down by year. 

    I wonder what it would look like if we combined PT/TCW sets but only included the last 10 years so we got a much more recent perspective?  It's hard to estimate just looking at that chart.


  7. 22 hours ago, Kdapt-Preacher said:

    I'm just going to post the same analysis that I did the last time we had this discussion (which was more than two months ago, which I think is actually a longer gap than usual).

    Z3AiGNX.png

     

    Great post.  A couple questions. 
    Where do Rogue One, Solo and Mandalorian sets factor into this?
    Also, TCW takes place during the Prequel Trilogy.  As far as content it expands on those films (Clonetroopers, similar vehicles etc).   As a fan, I'm happy to get sets from either of them.   What would the chart look like with TCW and PT combined?


  8. 11 hours ago, TeddytheSpoon said:

    Was Home One a fan vote? I love that set.

    Yes, it was the same format where fans voted for 1 of 3 sets.

     

    The 2009 Fan's Choice Set is a set where people voted on three alternatives for a 2009 Star Wars LEGO set. Voting was from May 10 to 18, 2008. The three alternatives were:

    • The Arrest of Palpatine
    • Slave I and Cloud City Landing Platform
    • Mon Calamari Cruiser Set

    It was later found that the winner of the contest was the Mon Calamari Cruiser Set, and became the 7754 Home One Mon Calamari Star Cruiser.


  9. I had similar issues with the older Hogwarts sets from a few years back ...not the new Hogwarts.  They have almost 0 clutch power on some of the roof pieces.  They just sit there very loose.

    I can only assume that the parts were exposed to extreme fluctuations in humidity that caused them to expand and shrink a tiny amount before I received them.

    Fluctuations in humidity tends to be the cause of many problems with abs plastic.  Loss of clutch power being minor to brittle cracking and breaking being much more if an issue.


  10. 15 minutes ago, ARC2149Nova said:

    I got into Lego in 2009, when I was nine years old. My first set was the Stone Chopper from Power Miners. So I wasn't collecting "10-15 years ago". Like I and others have said, clone wars sets sold like their counterparts. If they didn't sell where you lived, well too bad. But that also doesn't disqualify the fact that the clone walker battle pack is arguably the best selling battle pack Lego ever made. Just look at how many of the clone wars troopers are floating around the web in various collections. The 2008 LAAT was another best seller, until the 2013 version took its place.

    Anime eyes be damned, many who grew up at the time (including myself) loved TCW show and if they could, bought the sets. I actually liked the eye style (blasphemy! :laugh:).

    End of the day, those sets were largely the best thing that happened to Lego Star Wars. If they were such a failure, they wouldn't have carried the theme for 4 years. Sure, other sets did their part too, but you're discrediting some of the best sets of the 2008-2011 era.

    You dont see the issue with your point?  You werent collecting back then...you were 9 in 2009 so you are still a kid now.  You have no basis to have any kind of valid opinion but you still try to give one.  This forum is ridiculous. Just dont respond to me...


  11. 4 hours ago, ARC2149Nova said:

    Debatable. I know for a fact that the first clone wars battle pack (clone walker) sold like hotcakes. And most of the TCW sub-theme did just as well as their wavemates in any given year up to about 2012, when merch for the show as a whole plateaued. 

     

    I question your involvement in the hobby 10 or 15 years ago if you think it's debatable.  Clone wars sets were constant shelf warmers and would hit deep clearance and still not get purchased.  There was a general consensus within the afol community of disliking the large, anime style eye printing that didnt match other type of figures.

    The point is, there seems to have been a shift lately.  People seem to be clamouring for clone Wars and PT sets. 

    We dont need to get to off topic and go into why that ^ is (we can have that conversation in pms if you want).

    I'm interested to see if waves that are a majority PT/CW continue to be produced in the future.  There is definitely untapped potential there for sets.


  12. 1 hour ago, DarkLordSauron said:

    Haha yeah, actually, that's exactly my age group. I have no hate for OT or even the Sequels, but I'm just not invested in spending that kind of money on them.

    I hope you aren't in a vocal minority.  For a long time many people have focused on the OT at the expense of the PT.  

    TCW sets already failed once.  PT sets have historically not sold as well as OT sets over the last couple decades but there seems to have been a shift lately.

    Hopefully, for Legos sake, there are a few hundred thousand of you who will put their money where their mouth is.


  13. 20 hours ago, jdubbs said:

    Minifigs from the Tantive leaked well in advance of the set’s announcement. It was pretty much known at that point. 

    If you’re looking for “officially confirmed”, you might as well limit yourself to Lego’s website, rather than asking on a forum like this. 

    I think you and others missed the point. 

    You are using the word confirmed very loosely and inaccurately.

     You could at least say : confirmed by X (so people will understand it wasn't official.)  Or word it so the statement is about the leak since nothing has actually been confirmed by anyone who works for TLG.

    I'm not some under 30 year old kid who is new to following Lego leaks (I've been following them long before there was an Instagram lol) 

    Anyone who has been in the hobby for at least a decade or 2 has seen leaks of figures/sets that never come to fruition.

    It should be understood that projects have been scrapped just prior to production multiple times.

    Words matter.  Calling something confirmed that isn't is foolish.  

    I'm sure the ucs will most likely be an A wing...that has been talked about for at least 6 months.  Calling it confirmed when it isn't is just spreading bad information from people who haven't been around long enough to know better.


  14. 3 hours ago, HutchProDucktions said:

    Exactly, all but confirmed. It appears to be following the Tantive IV pattern like last year, which means an official confirmation isn't likely to happen until day of release so May the 4th or whenever it is supposed to be released.

    Apparently you weren't at celebration ;)

    "You keep using that word.  I do not think it means what you think it means"


  15. I'm concerned it was a very loud, vocal minority who wanted this set and it won't end up selling well in the eyes of TLG.  I hope everyone on these forums who was vocal about wanting this buys 20 or 30 of these to army build.

    I don't see the appeal.  I was an adult when the prequels came out so this isnt targeted at me.  It's time for all the kids to put their money where their mouth is.  

     


  16. On 10/22/2019 at 2:45 PM, Sneakguest said:

    I know it's not the right forum for this, but I just think it's a mistake to bring Palpatine back, exactly as it was to bring Maul back in the Clone Wars Series, if someone dies nicely, just let them rest in pieces

    The maul thing with him eating trash to survive after getting cut in half and falling down a shaft was horribly stupid, I agree. 

    All I can say is "not my canon."  That is a Dave storyline that he got George to approve, not the other way around.