2 hours ago, AFOLguy1970 said:

Another minor thing, certainly not a dealbreaker in any case, but where are the Death Star plans?

Still being 'evacuated' from the hallway with Darth Vader.  

I like this set a lot, but I don't love it, and that fact alone disappoints me.

6 hours ago, hachiroku said:

 

They clearly are.Probably the cone is so big it doesn't affect to the sticker.

Look at this pic from the Hothbricks article:

Oh yea. I see it now... disappointing but whatever.

The set is great but  should have at least 1 or 2 more Rebel Troopers.

We've gotten C3PO and R2 so many times so they least they could do would be more rebels. Wish it had a bit  more room on the interior. Especially to recreate the hallway scene. Whatever.

I couldn’t care less about interior. I’m not going to play with it, I’m going to display it. As long as the exterior is good, it’s a good set to me. The exterior on this is great, not perfect, but definitely great. I still wish it was a massive UCS set but now I guess that’s never likely to happen. Oh well. It’s much better than the previous one and that one was very nice so it’s definitely a day one purchase for me.

Now why do the front cone pieces have stickers instead of printed parts? And the radar dish at the back doesn't look the best with the underside of studs exposed. I'd say a pass for me.

Do you guys thiink it would be cheaper to bricklink the pieces when the piece list is available? Minus the big cones I reckon

1 minute ago, LEGODrongo01 said:

Do you guys thiink it would be cheaper to bricklink the pieces when the piece list is available? Minus the big cones I reckon

Highly doubt it. Price per piece for this set is on the higher side, but my guess is it would be much cheaper to just buy it from TLG instead of bricklinking the pieces.

16 minutes ago, LEGODrongo01 said:

Do you guys thiink it would be cheaper to bricklink the pieces when the piece list is available? Minus the big cones I reckon

Has that ever been the case for a set thats had a normal release? The only times Ive seen bricklinking be cheaper is when its a highly desirable set that either had a very limited release or has been out of production for an extended period of time, and even then its often pretty close (outside of some extreme examples)

Edited April 13, 20195 yr by Magmafrost

Passing on this one. Have to say the oldest version looks the best till now. 

I was hoping for a UCS display set and I don’t think this is it. Think I’ll have to see it before I decide to buy or not as I really wanted a Tantive IV.

It's a lovely Lego set, which I'd be happy to have. Notwithstanding that, the design and marketing seem quixotic. It says 12+ but has stud shooters and flickfires for which the target age would surely be under nine or so? And it costs about €200 Euro which is awfully expensive for a child. Yet the pictures stress the playability.  Also, there's no UCS or MBS naming. But there is that black box. Strange. 

Just now, Retro said:

It's a lovely Lego set, which I'd be happy to have. Notwithstanding that, the design and marketing seem quixotic. It says 12+ but has stud shooters and flickfires for which the target age would surely be under nine or so? And it costs about €200 Euro which is awfully expensive for a child. Yet the pictures stress the playability.  Also, there's no UCS or MBS naming. But there is that black box. Strange. 

I think they are as messed up with naming a we are

7 hours ago, Brickweiser said:

Oh yea. I see it now... disappointing but whatever.

The red stripes seems to be printed tho.

Was hoping for a UCS. I'm leaning more towards buying instructions towards moc builds these days.Lego seems to miss the mark for us adults who want something more.

51 minutes ago, hachiroku said:

The red stripes seems to be printed tho.

They are stickers.

13 hours ago, Eaglefan344 said:

6 minifigs for a $200 non-UCS is pretty pathetic though. Assault on Hoth was $50 more and had 15 minifigs. 

Are there non location sets in SW that have more than 7 minifigures? I Dont think so, although they should change that

Other than having too few minifigs, at least one additional Rebel Trooper should be in and I miss Vader and at least one Storm Trooper, the set is very good to me. Although these things may be easily fixed, it's a shame that Lego doesn't do that itself in a 200€/$ set. That would render the set as a more interesting one. 

Proportions and detail are better than before overall and it has enough playability for a big set. The handle is a plus and it's reasonably hidden.

3 hours ago, Sneakguest said:

Are there non location sets in SW that have more than 7 minifigures? I Dont think so, although they should change that

MTTs and battle droid carriers certainly do. The Republic Dropship and AT-OT and 6210 Jabba’s Sail Barge have 8, and 6211 Imperial Star Destroyer has 9. I’m sure there are more examples.

5 hours ago, KevinYoung said:

Was hoping for a UCS. I'm leaning more towards buying instructions towards moc builds these days.Lego seems to miss the mark for us adults who want something more.

Have to agree with this! I have the 2009 version and display it with other actual UCS sets and MOC's. It looks nice, but when compared to those others, it's way out of place! I was hoping this would have been a UCS set, to replace that old version and be up to the standards of the rest. But a playset! Can't make everyone happy, here's hoping we do get a UCS set of something this year!

I think it looks great in the pictures. The others came out during my dark age, so I don't have a blockade runner. I'm certainly going to get this one. Even though it's not "UCS" with the label and the detailed accuracy, it should still display really well. 

I understand why people are disappointed that it's not a "major upgrade", but like all of the SW sets that are repeats: TLG has to keep in mind that not everybody has collected every set for the last 20 years. There are lots of different customers with different wants and needs. They aren't going to satisfy everybody with every release or re-release.

3 hours ago, autolycus said:

I think it looks great in the pictures. The others came out during my dark age, so I don't have a blockade runner. I'm certainly going to get this one. Even though it's not "UCS" with the label and the detailed accuracy, it should still display really well. 

I understand why people are disappointed that it's not a "major upgrade", but like all of the SW sets that are repeats: TLG has to keep in mind that not everybody has collected every set for the last 20 years. There are lots of different customers with different wants and needs. They aren't going to satisfy everybody with every release or re-release.

I dont think anyone's complaining about it being a repeat, the sentiment Ive seen here leading up to this was that pretty much everyone wanted a new one. But what we wanted was a well-proportioned, nicely detailed UCS, and what we got was a poorly proportioned, sparsely detailed playset that no child could ever afford.

On 4/13/2019 at 8:03 AM, hachiroku said:

Cockpit pieces have stickers...

Well, that's ruined the set for me. What a pity. This year's creator Mustang suggested they'd learnt their lesson about what to print and what not to print, but apparently not. I don't know how many AFOL collectors are going to want to part with UCS-level dollars for a model so completely reliant on stickers that will just go brittle and peel off after a year or two. That's a real shame, as the shaping in general is a big step up from previous versions.

Edited April 13, 20195 yr by BrickMonkeyMOCs

Cockpit is the biggest issue, but someone can find a clever MOD for that I am sure. Just replace that whole section with something in better proportion. Losing the stud shooters and spring shooters is an easy change. The rest of the ship is actually OK. Worth getting in anticipation of the MODs for it. My guess is that a few minor adjustments will make this outstanding. 

But agree that this "it's not a UCS, but its priced like a UCS, but it's a kids play set, but it's too expensive for kids, but its in a UCS style box" shows a real lack of vision at the lego group. The official photos of the kit on the Lego website is a 35 or so year old guy playing with it- but no kids. It's just strange. If it was meant for AFOL's then not doing the full on UCS is a huge miss. 

Anyway I'll buy it- and stand by for one of the MODers here to get it to its full potential. 

 

Overall the Set looks „ok“,but def.what i‘ve expected as a May the Fourth Set! Will def.wait till it hit shelves at other retailers to get it with at least 30% off.

Right now i‘m a bit scared that they will screw up the (rumoured) Star Destroyer too,and won‘t label it UCS like the Tantive :/ 

All i want is a Star Destroyer to put on Display,please no Stud Shooter and stuff!

Edited April 14, 20195 yr by Diggydoes

2 hours ago, Magmafrost said:

I dont think anyone's complaining about it being a repeat, the sentiment Ive seen here leading up to this was that pretty much everyone wanted a new one. But what we wanted was a well-proportioned, nicely detailed UCS, and what we got was a poorly proportioned, sparsely detailed playset that no child could ever afford.

Meh. I think the proportions don't look as bad as y'all are making them out. They're not perfect, but I'll bet they're close enough for the vast majority of the market. A highly-detailed UCS set would have been great, but it also likely would have been ridiculously expensive. And as small as you think the market is for a $200 playset, the market for a $300-400 UCS set is almost certainly smaller. I'm also not sure you're right about how few children can afford it, based on the fact that Lego made it after they had good sales data from the Death Stars, Ewok Village, Assault on Hoth, Cloud City, etc.