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

[CallumPears]

Had a quick look at the 360 spins now that the sets are all up on the LEGO site... not a single one of the 3 new astromechs has a back print 

It really ought to be a basic standard by now. 

[Flawless Cowboy]

1 hour ago, Lego Nostalgia said:

They are still displayable

Absolutely anything that fits in one’s house is “displayable”, including the dookie in my toilet. Not every is “made for display”. 
 

1 hour ago, ForgedInLego said:

I agree in regards to the Gunship, but I'd argue the new ARC-170 is much more fun as a toy than the previous versions. Each one has three major play features, swooshing, shooting, and s-foils, and the new one is (potentially) the best in all three. Significantly sturdier (looking) build, although it doesn't take much to beat 7259. Spring loaded shooters > flick fire missiles > dropping 1x1 cylinders. Pushing a liftarm >>>> 30 seconds of turning a gear

Plus keep in mind that 8088's retail price would be $87 in today's money (Bureau of Labor Statistics), 7259 would be $65

Still though, it is very expensive. And I will need to mod it.

To me, spring loaded shooters don’t beat anything. It’s the same mechanism every time, it’s boring, visually and functionally. The turning dials and bomb chutes seem revolutionary by today’s standards where slapping a stud shooter or spring shooter haphazardly onto a set counts as a play feature. 

Edited December 3, 2024 by Flawless Cowboy

[Mandalorianknight]

3 hours ago, CallumPears said:

Had a quick look at the 360 spins now that the sets are all up on the LEGO site... not a single one of the 3 new astromechs has a back print 

It really ought to be a basic standard by now. 

Honestly at this point, I'd either like a new set of astromech molds at a more accurate size, or for lego to stop pretending they cost as much to produce as a minifigure. Its four basic parts, only two of which are printed.

2 hours ago, Flawless Cowboy said:

To me, spring loaded shooters don’t beat anything. It’s the same mechanism every time, it’s boring, visually and functionally. The turning dials and bomb chutes seem revolutionary by today’s standards where slapping a stud shooter or spring shooter haphazardly onto a set counts as a play feature. 

I don't necessarily agree with your wider point on the theme or the way you're phrasing it, but I agree that I'd like to see more bomb chutes and other more unique attacking play features in lego sets. The stud shooters and spring shooters are great add-ons to increase playability on a model to small to integrate other play features or lacking those features in canon, but every non-microfighter Y-wing should have some form of bomb drop feature, for example.

[CallumPears]

6 hours ago, Mandalorianknight said:

Honestly at this point, I'd either like a new set of astromech molds at a more accurate size, or for lego to stop pretending they cost as much to produce as a minifigure. Its four basic parts, only two of which are printed.

I'd like a new mould for the "torso" with a single stud on top in the centre rather than the 2x2 arrangement so that the head can spin. 

Also make back print the standard. 

And yeah there's really no difference between an astromech and a couple of regular printed bricks. Same goes for battle droids, and those aren't even printed.

Also if they can afford to put dual-moulded legs on PaB for like 40p and in BaM towers for £2 per figure then they can afford to put them on the pilots in such an expensive set as the ARC-170. 

[ARC2149Nova]

11 hours ago, Mandalorianknight said:

but it'd be like if they did a $70 X-wing with all the characters being background rebel pilots with the same face.

And I'd unironically love that.

I like the thought process of only including figures that can be stored within the vessel, what sucks is that said vessel should be bigger for the price.

[CloneCommando99]

With the knowledge of the death trooper helmet coming back into production, I’m sure Lego will want to capitalise on it.

Therefore I feel that Death Troopers will show up in one of the Andor Season 2 sets. I am eagerly praying for a Tie Reaper. But a Tie Avenger would be great as well.

[BrickBob Studpants]

14 minutes ago, CloneCommando99 said:

I am eagerly praying for a Tie Reaper. But a Tie Avenger would be great as well.

Since the leakers seem to be rather confident about the set not being the Fondor, both of these are really good candidates!  

[MKJoshA]

Just a reminder of our spoiler policy since Skeleton Crew just dropped the first 2 episodes. Please wait 1 week after an episode drops before talking about anything spoilery from that episode. If you feel you must say something, use the spoiler tags to hide it.

[THELEGOBATMAN]

Now that you mention it, this series is surprisingly enjoyable. I feel like it targets a demographic that Star Wars hasn't tackled before—it's just pure childlike fun. Not particularly innovative, but it doesn't need to be.

The set does a great job of covering the series, although I wish SM-33 would've been included. Nevertheless, the ship looks awesome and the minifigures are great.

We'll probably never get any more sets though.

3 hours ago, BrickBob Studpants said:

Since the leakers seem to be rather confident about the set not being the Fondor, both of these are really good candidates!  

Ahhh, I am so excited to hear more details on this set! I hope it's an Imperial starship, just to go along with the U-Wing. Really hoping the minifigures are exciting, and it's not just one named character and two pilots.

Same for the minifigures in the U-Wing—Cassian and K-2SO are a given, but then I've no idea (perhaps... Dedra? )

[BrickBob Studpants]

9 minutes ago, THELEGOBATMAN said:

The set does a great job of covering the series, although I wish SM-33 would've been included. Nevertheless, the ship looks awesome and the minifigures are great.

Omitting SM-33 was a mistake, especially since additional sets are very unlikely!  If they do end up releasing another set, they should definitely focus on the pirates!

[Samppu]

20 hours ago, Flawless Cowboy said:

To me, spring loaded shooters don’t beat anything. It’s the same mechanism every time, it’s boring, visually and functionally. The turning dials and bomb chutes seem revolutionary by today’s standards where slapping a stud shooter or spring shooter haphazardly onto a set counts as a play feature. 

I actually see the spring loaded shooter as the best part Lego Star Wars has ever received, as I believe the 2014 Anakin's Jedi Starfighter was the first one to get them.
It makes it possible to build fun, screen accurate (in the sense that the actual missiles look like lasers blasts in Star Wars style) laser cannons in very cramped space in ways that simply were not possible before.
I agree that many sets just clumsily add them on top of whatever, but from the perspective of a moccer, the possibilities are truly limitless, and they are anyway very easy to conceal in general, as even done in a few sets. Indeed, it is dull to disdain them being childlike, because they can be perfectly concealed in almost every case, and their launching mechanism can be made more clever than simple finger pressing. E.g. I have a couple of ones, where you can launch them by pulling the joystick in the cockpit, or I have seen some examples how they are used to gear machine gun -like fire in gunships, which are launched by pressing a hidden button.

For the same reason I enjoy even the stud shooters, especially the newer version with more powerful blast. They are a bit clumsy as blasters but they make extremely convenient pieces for actually functioning mortars, bazookas, grenade launchers (like in AT-ST or AT-PT) and certain big blasters in dwarf spider droids and other such machines.

This is not a counter-argument against the technic shooters or other mechanisms like bombs, though. The more the merrier, as this aspect sets Lego building apart from ordinary model building (Revell and other stuff I mean).

[ToaDraco]

22 hours ago, CallumPears said:

Had a quick look at the 360 spins now that the sets are all up on the LEGO site... not a single one of the 3 new astromechs has a back print 

It really ought to be a basic standard by now. 

 

12 hours ago, CallumPears said:

I'd like a new mould for the "torso" with a single stud on top in the centre rather than the 2x2 arrangement so that the head can spin. 

Also make back print the standard. 

I couldn't agree more on all points. It's absurd that astromechs aren't getting back printing as a standard and a new body piece as you described would be perfect. To add further, it's utterly insane that not ONE astromech figure in the 25 years of LEGO Star Wars has had it's third leg. It's so easy to do, especially with modern pieces. Just include a cheese slope and the superhero action piece and there you have it. I seem to recall the designers were interviewed and gave some really terrible excuse for not including them.

[CallumPears]

12 minutes ago, ToaDraco said:

I seem to recall the designers were interviewed and gave some really terrible excuse

In other news: grass is green and the sky is blue

[Ringwraith]

Just thought I'd mention that a review for the Arc170 is already out on Youtube, somehow, considering leaks were just released. Figures look great, mechanism works well but so many stickers. My hands are already dreading the cockpits. 

[Flawless Cowboy]

1 hour ago, Samppu said:

Indeed, it is dull to disdain them being childlike, because they can be perfectly concealed in almost every case, and their launching mechanism can be made more clever than simple finger pressing

The problem is most times LSW implements them, they look hideous. Take the new arc-170. Not only does it clumsily stick out behind the wing, requiring manual activation, it also replaces the second gun that sits on top of the long cannon. The previous two renditions did not have this issue. It’s lazy in its implementation and it removes a key detail of the Star fighter. If they were implemented more like the spring shooters on the 2019 Slave I, I’d be all for it. 

Edited December 4, 2024 by Flawless Cowboy

[Lego Nostalgia]

24 minutes ago, Flawless Cowboy said:

The problem is most times LSW implements them, they look hideous. Take the new arc-170. Not only does it clumsily stick out behind the wing, requiring manual activation, it also replaces the second gun that sits on top of the long cannon. The previous two renditions did not have this issue. It’s lazy in its implementation and it removes a key detail of the Star fighter. If they were implemented more like the spring shooters on the 2019 Slave I, I’d be all for it. 

I prefer the flick fire missiles, good times, technic rubber tip missile was cool too

[Mandalorianknight]

2 hours ago, Lego Nostalgia said:

I prefer the flick fire missiles, good times, technic rubber tip missile was cool too

As a kid I liked them in universe- I used to imagine that the technic grey pin was the delivery system and the transparent cone was the explosive- but they worked the worst out of all the LSW shooters. The technic cannon I was a big fan of- anytime a ship is known for having a large cannon/packing a real punch, if a technic cannon can fit inside it, it should be used. It's by far the strongest missile they've had.

I also wasn't fully opposed to the six-stud shooters, they just overused them waaay to much when they first came out for a part that had to be integrated into the build a lot more than other ones. (Also, you're never getting that ammo back and they look bad without them... maybe I am fully opposed to the six stud shooters)

I do like play features in the ships- they don't have to be all that complex either, I was a big fan of the 2015 Naboo starfighter being able to be refueled.

[MaximillianRebo]

Review up on JB Spielwaren of the ARC 170. Ship looks good and the technic mechanism seems to work well, especially hidden as it is inside the ship. Scale wise the ship doesn't look too small, especially compared to the figs, although the fuselage does look a bit short in comparison to the wingspan. The underside is pretty blocky though, with some oversized plates on the base of the ship - perhaps to protect the technic mechanism, or give it extra stability when landed? I'm not fussed about landing gear, there's no way you could fit decent retractable landing gear in without making the body of the ship much bigger. Lots of stickers of course, including canopy stickers which, like on the Ghost, end up looking more greyish than white when applied.

[Unknown Jedi Master]

Seems there won’t be any official 20th anniversary sets for ROTS, given the lack of a such logo on the ARC-170 box. 
 

Still hopeful there will be some more Episode 3 sets, with how much speculation we’ve had over the past few years over the anniversary. 

[Samppu]

14 hours ago, Flawless Cowboy said:

The problem is most times LSW implements them, they look hideous. Take the new arc-170. Not only does it clumsily stick out behind the wing, requiring manual activation, it also replaces the second gun that sits on top of the long cannon. The previous two renditions did not have this issue. It’s lazy in its implementation and it removes a key detail of the Star fighter. If they were implemented more like the spring shooters on the 2019 Slave I, I’d be all for it. 

This I can agree.

Even putting them under wings would have been preferable with ARC-170, but that is an easy thing to change if one wants, though.

[THELEGOBATMAN]

Funnily enough it'll also be the 10th anniversary of The Force Awakens.

I really want more sets for the Sequels.

[Swordy]

From Lucasfilms’ perspective, a celebration of 20 years of RotS would be too soon and repetitive, given they celebrated 25 years of Phantom Menace this year. 25 and 30 are more impressive numbers than 20 for the sixth Star Wars film released.

As far as LEGO goes, I expect a couple sets from RotS to unofficially coincide with the anniversary, along with maybe one or two sets from TFA. AotC seems to be filling up any potentially anniversary-themed 18+ sets this year, so probably no RotS diorama or buildable figure. (I still have hope for a buildable Grievous someday.) I wouldn’t expect the August wave to be entirely RotS or AotC themed. I don’t even think there will be any more RotS sets next year.

Edited December 4, 2024 by Swordy

[BacktoBricks]

13 hours ago, MaximillianRebo said:

Review up on JB Spielwaren of the ARC 170. 

I can't understand much of what he is saying, but I do love when he points at the astromech's plain back and says 'Lazy, lazy.' 

[Kit Figsto]

15 hours ago, Mandalorianknight said:

As a kid I liked them in universe- I used to imagine that the technic grey pin was the delivery system and the transparent cone was the explosive- but they worked the worst out of all the LSW shooters.

I think the flick-fires looked the best, but anyone saying they worked the best is purely looking at them through nostalgia goggles.  The original method of just using a 4L bar or whatever was better for the actual functionality, because they just sat in the Technic pin hole, but the second that you tilted the ship forward, they fell out.  Once they moved to the Technic pin bar, they stayed in, but there was a lot of friction, so actually getting them to fire was more difficult.

The new laser shooters definitely work the best, the main issue I have with them is that often, the trigger section is very exposed such that if you pick the ship up wrong and basically place any amount of pressure on the back of the missile, it’s instantly gone somewhere across the room.

[mon-o-mat]

34 minutes ago, Kit Figsto said:

I think the flick-fires looked the best, but anyone saying they worked the best is purely looking at them through nostalgia goggles.  The original method of just using a 4L bar or whatever was better for the actual functionality, because they just sat in the Technic pin hole, but the second that you tilted the ship forward, they fell out.  Once they moved to the Technic pin bar, they stayed in, but there was a lot of friction, so actually getting them to fire was more difficult.

The new laser shooters definitely work the best, the main issue I have with them is that often, the trigger section is very exposed such that if you pick the ship up wrong and basically place any amount of pressure on the back of the missile, it’s instantly gone somewhere across the room.

Flick-fires worked good as long as they were exposed and easy to flick at. Which of course on many Star Wars set they were not. I don't think that those pins had more friction than the technic bar, as the length of the friction element is shorter.

The old spring loaded Technic/Bionicle shooter may have been powerfull, but it also was large and akward to fit into a system set and often didn't make any sense were they put it (cough 2008 AT-TE). They also often had the same problems with their exposed triggers.

But as a kid I think I would have prefered the modern shooters over what we had back then (akward Bionicle shooters on some of the larger sets or nothing). As an adult collector, the spring loaded shooters are pretty dircreet, especially when not laoded.