LEGO Star Wars 2012 Pictures and Rumors

[Ceroknight]

The thing is, I found it ludicrous that when 10221 was revealed, people were complaining about minifigures of all things.

There are some people, like me , who considers minifigures highly before getting a set.

Also I read somewhere about the idea of a motorized R2-D2? That sounds really neat!

[The_Chosen_1]

I'd be in for a B-Wing if it includes minifigs and is to scale.

[starstreak]

B-Wing? Sweet! I'll buy any version. But I hope it's a UCS. One better made than that Jedi Starfighter. So many people made very good looking UCS, Lego will be hard pressed to beat them. I hope it's not to Minifig scale. You always have to "give" a little to shape to put the minifig in just right...

[uboat77]

I would buy an B-Wing anytime, regardeless of any possible minifigs (but a pilot would help ), as i don't have none...

quick question: did the previous versions of the B-Wing had any kind of movable wings, or were they fixed? if they were movable, i don't see the problem of that happening on the new version...

[Fallenangel]

quick question: did the previous versions of the B-Wing had any kind of movable wings, or were they fixed? if they were movable, i don't see the problem of that happening on the new version...

Both 7180 and 6208 had movable S-foils that were attached via click hinges; I think click hinges would be stable enough to work at the UCS scale as well.

[cavegod]

yep clickhinges work on my ucs b-wing but only just, a minifig would be fine if it came with a display stand along the lines of

that would be nice, but to make th eb-wing minifig scale then you are going system scale not ucs.

[kamigawa]

The thing is, I found it ludicrous that when 10221 was revealed, people were complaining about minifigures of all things.

Well, if you already knew that minifigs were threre just to inflate the price of the set, you would be complaining about them before the set's flaws. Those may be there because the builder could not make a better set with the pieces he had, but the minifigs were included just because the set needed a higher price tag.

[Fallenangel]

Well, if you already knew that minifigs were threre just to inflate the price of the set, you would be complaining about them before the set's flaws. Those may be there because the builder could not make a better set with the pieces he had, but the minifigs were included just because the set needed a higher price tag.

I thought that the additional price from minifigures was small in comparison to the price of the UCS set as a whole (thus making the above reasoning irrelevant)?

And in any case, I was referring to complaints about the choice of minifigures as opposed to their inclusion (which could also constitute a complaint in the case of 10221, but not for reasons directly related to price).

[kamigawa]

And in any case, I was referring to complaints about the choice of minifigures as opposed to their inclusion (which could also constitute a complaint in the case of 10221, but not for reasons directly related to price).

Sorry, my bad.

I thought that the additional price from minifigures was small in comparison to the price of the UCS set as a whole (thus making the above reasoning irrelevant)?

Minifigs can fetch extremely high prices on Bricklink, and there are tons of people who would buy without batting an eye whatever has a bunch of minifigs (as if their inclusion suddenly made any set worth buying). By adding some minifigs, TLG instantly raises the number of future sales AND can consequently raise the set's price "because there are minifigs in it!". Yeah, as if we asked for them. In a UCS.

Edited August 26, 2011 by kamigawa

[Aanchir]

yep clickhinges work on my ucs b-wing but only just, a minifig would be fine if it came with a display stand along the lines of

that would be nice, but to make th eb-wing minifig scale then you are going system scale not ucs.

Unlike a lot of people, I don't think of UCS as a "scale". The UCS Naboo Starfighter and UCS Millennium Falcon make that clear, both being extremely close to what we'd call minifig scale. For that matter, other UCS sets not at minifig scale can vary enormously: the UCS X-Wing, TIE Interceptor, Snowspeeder, and TIE Advanced are all very obviously at a larger scale than minifigure-based sets, whereas no type of UCS Star Destroyer could possibly be done at anything but a smaller scale.

For me, UCS is not a scale but rather a level of detail. While UCS sets are usually large, presumably to make them more desirable as collectors' items and to make greater detail possible, the thing they all tend to share is an impressively authentic level of detail, with complex greebles where necessary and realistic shaping wherever possible.

[uboat77]

Unlike a lot of people, I don't think of UCS as a "scale". The UCS Naboo Starfighter and UCS Millennium Falcon make that clear, both being extremely close to what we'd call minifig scale. For that matter, other UCS sets not at minifig scale can vary enormously: the UCS X-Wing, TIE Interceptor, Snowspeeder, and TIE Advanced are all very obviously at a larger scale than minifigure-based sets, whereas no type of UCS Star Destroyer could possibly be done at anything but a smaller scale.

For me, UCS is not a scale but rather a level of detail. While UCS sets are usually large, presumably to make them more desirable as collectors' items and to make greater detail possible, the thing they all tend to share is an impressively authentic level of detail, with complex greebles where necessary and realistic shaping wherever possible.

I do agree with Aanchir! I only have one UCS set, the AT-ST, and even being not in minifig scale, it's simply awesome I would love to have a B-Wing UCS minifig scale, but if it's not minifig scale, i'll bet the level of detail will be really good, paring with some of the MOC's we have seen so far

[Fallenangel]

Unlike a lot of people, I don't think of UCS as a "scale". The UCS Naboo Starfighter and UCS Millennium Falcon make that clear, both being extremely close to what we'd call minifig scale. For that matter, other UCS sets not at minifig scale can vary enormously: the UCS X-Wing, TIE Interceptor, Snowspeeder, and TIE Advanced are all very obviously at a larger scale than minifigure-based sets, whereas no type of UCS Star Destroyer could possibly be done at anything but a smaller scale.

For me, UCS is not a scale but rather a level of detail. While UCS sets are usually large, presumably to make them more desirable as collectors' items and to make greater detail possible, the thing they all tend to share is an impressively authentic level of detail, with complex greebles where necessary and realistic shaping wherever possible.

"UCS" is whatever The LEGO Group and AFOLs want it to be, but there is also a "UCS scale" that 7191, 7181, and 10175 were all built to, as well as all of Walter Kovacs' UCS TIE MOCs. It's around the same scale as Reto's UCS MOCs, which were built at the conventional 1/24 scale. Obviously many UCS MOCs are not built to UCS scale and do not have to be for people to consider them UCS. I think UCS was defined by the scale with 7191 and 7181 until The LEGO Group started releasing other UCS sets like 10030 and 10129 which are obviously at very different scales.

I'm pretty sure there's already a thread for arguing over what is and isn't UCS, so let's dig that up and post in it...

EDIT: Found it.

Edited August 26, 2011 by fallenangel309

[KimT]

We do have a topic on UCS, UCS scale, Non-UCS 10XXX sets and such.

[Klaus-Dieter]

Again only UCS sets as huge 10xxx Exclusives in 2012 - that's really bad news.

TLG seems to have forgotten that there are even Lego SW OT fans which do want big sets but no UCS sets.

Klaus-Dieter

[Lutin]

Again only UCS sets as huge 10xxx Exclusives in 2012 - that's really bad news.

TLG seems to have forgotten that there are even Lego SW OT fans which do want big sets but no UCS sets.

Klaus-Dieter

We don't know that for sure. Unless you have some informations about the complete 2012 line up?

And for the list we have yet, it sound promising for me. But I will wait for some prelim pics before jumping to the roof.

Edited August 27, 2011 by Lutin

[cavegod]

Again only UCS sets as huge 10xxx Exclusives in 2012 - that's really bad news.

TLG seems to have forgotten that there are even Lego SW OT fans which do want big sets but no UCS sets.

Klaus-Dieter

it's bad news every year when i only see the crappy system sets and only 1 or 2 UCS sets!

[RenegadeClone]

Looking forward to a UCS B-Wing to go along with my own squadron...

Roll on 2012!!

[Algernon]

VERY excited for the new B-wing and new X-wing! They might very well be the first Star Wars sets I purchase in years.

Are we POSITIVE that the B-wing is UCS? I like UCS sets, but I would prefer a minifig-scale B-wing to go along with the X-wing.

[Mr Man]

'but I would prefer a minifig-scale B-wing to go along with the X-wing.'

And the Y-Wing . Imaging a brand new remade scaled X, Y, and B wing in one year (Oh we need a A wing to TLG ).

[Fallenangel]

Are we POSITIVE that the B-wing is UCS? I like UCS sets, but I would prefer a minifig-scale B-wing to go along with the X-wing.

Consider this: 10XXX sets are typically very large and cost $100+. The last LEGO B-wing, 6208, was scaled to minifigures and cost $35. I doubt that this new B-wing would cost that much more than the previous rendition unless it was considerably larger than minifigure scale.

[Brickdoctor]

VERY excited for the new B-wing and new X-wing! They might very well be the first Star Wars sets I purchase in years.

Are we POSITIVE that the B-wing is UCS? I like UCS sets, but I would prefer a minifig-scale B-wing to go along with the X-wing.

It's listed with a 5-digit number, so unless it's part of a much larger exclusive playset, it's most likely UCS.

[Fallenangel]

It's listed with a 5-digit number, so unless it's part of a much larger exclusive playset, it's most likely UCS.

Even then, remember that 6208 came with a bunch of other stuff and was still only $35.

[StoutFiles]

And the Y-Wing . Imaging a brand new remade scaled X, Y, and B wing in one year (Oh we need a A wing to TLG ).

We had an A-wing on '09...do we need another one this soon?

it's bad news every year when i only see the crappy system sets and only 1 or 2 UCS sets!

Haha, I wouldn't consider "all" the system sets crappy. The new Tantive IV, for instance, is arguably better than the old UCS set.

Every year they don't release a new Cloud City, though, is a failed year for me. Still holding out hope that they'll replace the Death Star with a CC set.

[North Lego Star]

Hello everyone I'm new!

I must say this year is going to be pretty good, I'm really looking foward to the new battle packs(less minifiguers and not as good as quality speeders but it still sounds good)I read the first-post and well I have doubts that we'll get a new Y-wing if we're already getting a x-wing and b-wing(what would we get for the 30th anniversary of ROTJ?)

Over all I'm looking foward to this year, can't wait for picturs!!!!

[Fallenangel]

I read the first-post and, well, I have doubts that we'll get a new Y-wing if we're already getting an X-wing and X-wing(what would we get for the 30th anniversary of ROTJ?).

The last Y-wing release was around the same time as the last X-wing and B-wing release, so I really don't see much reason to doubt the possibility of a new Y-wing. That and all information on the first page is more or less confirmed.