Clone OPatra

I can't say I recall your breakdowns specifically, but the thing is, a minifig-scale Gunship wouldn't be much different in size from the ones they've already done. Therefore boosting the price up to $200 for added detail or functions would also seem a bit sour when a $120-150 price point and level of detail would be perfectly good for the same thing. All of the $200 UCS sets are significantly larger and more detailed than their play-scale counterparts, as is the Gunship that LEGO is releasing. All-in-all, the Gunship is uncharted territory for a lot of reasons, including: mid-sized ship scaled up, amongst the higher priced UCS sets (though not the mega expensive level), but also the result of a fan vote.

Oh I agree, I don't think the statistic is necessarily relevant at all, while being true. I was just backing up that it's true. However, part of it does perhaps correlate to what I wrote about previously - previous UCS ships were either small ships like starfighters scaled up, huge ships scaled down but still large, or semi-big ships done at Minifigure scale. We haven't seen a mid-sized ship scaled up before, and perhaps for good reason, since this one at least didn't really need to be scaled up to capture its detail. I'd love to see more UCS Prequel designs, though I don't buy UCS sets so it would be purely seeing them for me. A Droid Control Ship would be fabulous and easier to capture its curves in a UCS set, or certainly UCS Venator or Invisible Hand. Though the last time they tried a Prequel starfighter flopped, it's been a long time and a UCS Eta or ARC-170 could sell well today.

No, reread the post and I think @Pedilego is right. The starships which are larger than minfigure scale have been $200 USD. The UCS sets which are above $200USD are either minfigure scale (Falcon, Shuttle) or smaller than minifigure scale (Star Destroyers).

Oh yes, that part of my post was not aimed at the EB discussion. People here have had realistic and proper expectations for what a UCS Gunship would be, which the set itself has matched. While a pilot would be good, any minfigure with an exclusive mould would leave a sour taste - until it's hopefully reused in another more attainable set. Personally I think the current trend of perhaps slightly better done or highly detailed variants of figures is a great way to go for UCS sets.

Personally this set is exactly what I expected: a good looking Gunship for sure, though the parts of the top nacelles front of the wings look a bit funky, but also just a bad choice for a UCS. Why a bad choice? Because the Gunship isn't a small enough ship that scaling it up adds much detail to it (like Starfighters), while it also isn't a big enough ship that doing it at a larger than playset scale allows more justice to be done to it (like Star Destroyers). As a troop transport the Gunship is inherently a vehicle that you WANT to pose a lot of figures in/around, and a very well-engineered $150 version with Minifigures would completely do that justice. You don't need a Minifigure in an X-Wing cockpit to appreciate a big X-Wing, but a Gunship without pilots and gunners and troops on board looks like it's sitting in the hanger waiting to be used - i.e. not very exciting, like something is missing. All in all, LEGO did perfectly what was voted for, but the people pushing for that vote are now complaining that they got exactly what they voted for (minus some figures, which is just a ridiculous complaint given that it's a UCS set and the recent Minifigure trends with this range).

It's definitely interesting with China, that though it had a typical good lifespan and output of sets, it's still wound up as derided and perhaps even seen as a failure amongst the fan community. Personally I think a lot of it had to do with the minifigures. For one thing, there were way too many tribes and named characters straight away. Look at most of LEGO's other in house themes and there are perhaps five or six recurring main characters who remain the main characters throughout the theme's duration. Chima started out with HEAPS of named characters and kept adding more, making it hard for consumers to focus. Another main issue with the figures was their incompatibility with other figures/themes. They all have the masks, most of which look weird over other minifigure prints since Chima eyes are farther apart than standard Minifigure eyes, so that's out. Then the heads underneath were hit or miss - I personally like using the cat prints on other figures, but some like the Ravens and eagles and Rhinos were pretty atrocious. Finally, the bodies of many of them, being semi-bare or covered in fur, don't mix and match well with other minifigure parts. Again some of the cats and characters in armor were ok on that count. Finally, too many of the characters were just too darn ugly. Yes, villains can be a bit rugged and ugly, but kids and people in general like things that are a bit cute or aesthetically pleasing, which many of the Chima characters very much were not. From snarly faces to minifigs covered in scratches and the like, too many Chima minifigs were just a turn off.

Well that looks fantastic. Whether or not the hair looks slightly weird on this particular figure, it's awesome to get it as a new piece.

This got more response over in Historic, so I think I'll lock this topic and the discussion can continue over there.

Given it was just one person really spoiling this time, and the other relevant Marvel news coming out (What If, CMF leaks etc), we've decided to reopen this thread now. In the coming days we'll be restating the policies around new releases and spoilers. As always, discussion about plot details that are completely irrelevant to LEGO sets NEVER have a place here. We understand people want to talk about the LEGO sets in light of seeing the films they relate to, but you can usually do so without spoiling things for others. You can easily discuss whether or not the helicopter appeared in Black Widow without talking about character motivations and plot twists, for example. Not everyone can run out and see a film or watch a Disney+ episode straight away, so be considerate. But we will be putting some measures in place going forward.

The best of both worlds would be a baby croc with a pinhole or the like for a separate diadem. It'd mean three new moulds for the one CMF bag, but that's not out of the realm of possibility.

I'm using a bare chest torso, Ulysses Klaue face, and Cole's hair from Ninjago. Not trying to match any character in particular, but looks rough and rugged for me.

People, it's not a spoiler. It's a TINY Easter egg. If the fact that it's not a spoiler is a spoiler, well.... I don't know. Like we've said, please refrain from talking about things in the show for at least a few days, and when it has nothing to do with LEGO, don't discuss it here whatsoever. At the same time, let's not blow things out of proportion.

Wow, large scale stack-block figures! Haven't seen that before! Love it.

Personally I'm a much bigger Friends fan than Seinfeld (never seen a full Seinfeld episode, in fact), but I like the looks of this set much better than the Friends Apartments. The Friends Apartments looked far too big with much too many empty studs, and not the detail-packed look of the sets in the show (the girls' apartment especially). This Seinfeld one looks far more finished and more compact like the Central Perk. The minifigures all look recognisable to me except maybe Seinfeld himself, whose faces are a bit odd.

Welcome! We have a topic for this already. Please share your thoughts there! https://www.eurobricks.com/forum/index.php?/forums/topic/113545-dc-super-heroes-wishlists/ EDIT: I was Ninja'd.

My mind wanted to tell me this too, but I think it's going to wind up being an aspect of the blurriness. If she had something on her shoulders, she would've had it in the crystal-clear minifigures image that leaked ages ago. Looks like a fun set, good for what it is. Kind of astonishing it got made at all, but it's more memorable and important than the likes of Unkar Plutt's shop, so I'm certainly not complaining. One thing kind of odd with this set and the Slave I is how they fly in the face of LEGO's old "a conflict in every box" ethos. They easily could've included bad guys in either of these sets, but didn't. Just buddying around at the Forge and Mando and Boba going on a cheerful holiday with the Slave I and display stand cart.

If all of what you say is really true, why did LEGO spend over a decade making primarily non-film-based DC Superheroes sets, including three DC CMF series (yes I'd count the two TLBM series as DC series)? Were kids really not liking all of those sets for years, and LEGO was pouring money down the drain? Besides for BvS and Justice League and not counting the D2Cs, LEGO has made a maximum of one set per any other DC live action film. Even for the mega successful Aquaman film, they made one set, and after the movie was out they released a set with Ocean Master, but a comics Ocean Master and a Batsub. Maybe something has changed in a decade, and kids don't recognise DC characters as much as they used to. Perhaps we'll see a real shift, and more sets directly based on the films. Given the way LEGO has handled the DC line in the past, that's far from a sure thing.

Search for parts on Brickset and punch in the numbers to see if it's available. There's no way to search for types of parts on B&P. The only ways to find things are exactly what shows up on B&P: by set number or by element/design number. Which heads do you mean? Lots of yellow heads are routinely available, and occasional fleshies - like all of the Stranger Things ones for some reason.

Does Steve have a new head? If so, that'd be a welcome change. The New Asgard set looks fun, though still not worth its price, but I'm actually disappointed in Thor's leg print. For the character, the belly overhang is nice, but for reusability it's not.

The hourglass is there! 72 cents US!

Indeed, but since I believe it's rumoured to come with a figure who would also have a new hairpiece, that'd be three new moulds in one bag. Here's an article that contains an image: https://www.inverse.com/entertainment/loki-episode-4s-post-credits-scene-may-confirm-a-wild-thor-4-leak

It could still potentially be a regular baby croc with a link hole to connect the Loki horns, but one single piece with the horns attached does seem a bit more likely because it'd be just one new piece instead of two.

The new adult elephant parts are still listed as 0.00. Or in your theory, is that why people have to use alternative numbers to actually order those, because the numbers listed online are tied to 0.00?

You can use the Report button on it.

Oh yeah - and I just recently unpacked an order with a couple of those! Well the protective bag theory is thoroughly debunked. I think B&P works in mysterious ways because that's just how it is, with no good or logical underlying reason.