LEGO Star Wars 2013 Pictures and Rumors

[Fuppylodders]

Yeah. By the way, has there ever been a non-OT UCS except Obi-Wan's Jedi StarFighter?

Only the 10195 Dropship+AT-OT, but that wasn't named as a UCS, it was more of a (personal opinion) really nice big set that lacked a few more clones...

There was also the UCS Naboo N1.. but that was just... eugh :P (only thing special was its chromed pieces)

I agree paisana, I would much prefer an A-Wing or something else... but meh, they have done, what they have done. This was also clearly in the pipeline for a few years now, so they clearly had thought this through for a long time whether to re-do the UCS X-Wing for a new design.

[Basteq]

As far as I remember the last UCS named this way was Millenium Falcon in 2007. None of the 10... sets were named this way after.

[Mr Man]

Yeah. By the way, has there ever been a non-OT UCS except Obi-Wan's Jedi StarFighter?

Just the Naboo Fighter.

[MadMan]

I think UCS sets should limit themselves to the most iconic vehicles - so an AT-AT is a good choice, whilst the Sandcrawler is not.

I really am surprised we got a B-Wing before a Slave I, though. The Slave I is such a great, unique design. Then again, so is the B-Wing.

I don't know if I'll get this X-Wing - I sold my old minifig one to buy the recently released minifig one, but now might wait and get this....

[Sam892]

I'm hoping that LEGO continues this trend of new year next film in series style of sets. I know the 3D release has been cancelled but, its great that the PT is seeing a bit of glamorous treatment. I know that the films weren't great but, some of the locations and ships. Hopefully this continues next year with EP 3.

[Basteq]

I think UCS sets should limit themselves to the most iconic vehicles - so an AT-AT is a good choice, whilst the Sandcrawler is not.

I really am surprised we got a B-Wing before a Slave I, though. The Slave I is such a great, unique design. Then again, so is the B-Wing.

That's very subjective.

Slave I is quite big as a playtoy and mostly in scale, but it would be nice to see the big brother.

[Faefrost]

I think UCS sets should limit themselves to the most iconic vehicles - so an AT-AT is a good choice, whilst the Sandcrawler is not.

I really am surprised we got a B-Wing before a Slave I, though. The Slave I is such a great, unique design. Then again, so is the B-Wing.

I don't know if I'll get this X-Wing - I sold my old minifig one to buy the recently released minifig one, but now might wait and get this....

I would love to see a nice highly detailed Slave 1. But how much bigger than the standard released versions could you get it? Isn't it somewhat limited by the curves?

[Anio]

Isn't it somewhat limited by the curves?

Yes. Definitely, yes.

[MadMan]

Yes. Definitely, yes.

Well, there would certainly be a way for them to get around that, I'm sure.

If not, just release a Slave I with a display stand. My main reason for wanting a UCS version is so it can be displayed upright.

Edited February 15, 2013 by MadMan

[jmagaletta]

I think the UCS line should be geared toward the more bigger ships/buildings of the saga. So many other options could have been explored before doing a redo of an older UCS set. Here are examples from each of the movies.

Episode I: Trade Federation Ship, Naboo Cruiser, Jedi Temple

Episode II: Acclamator Star Destroyer, SPHA-T, Slave 1

Episode III: Venator Star Destroyer(my personal hope for a UCS), Invisible Hand, Jedi Temple again

Episode IV: Sandcrawler

Episode V: AT-AT, Cloud City

Episode VI: Medical Frigate, Various Mon Calamari Cruisers

There are even more possibilies if you include starfighters/smaller vehicles. (ARC-170, Eta-2s, A-Wings, Different Tie series, land speeder, AT-TE, RGS....etc.

[CorneliusMurdock]

The pictures have been removed now. An official announcement about this set should be released soon.

[jmagaletta]

Why not a UCS Venator. I think that would be one PT set that would do good as a UCS. Who is with me.

[Haderach]

Thrilled about this release since I collect mostly UCS and don't have the year 2000 version. I certainly understand everyone's frustration with respect to a new X-Wing before other iconic ships we want to see at UCS scale that haven't been released yet. To the investors, those who are upset that the new in box year 2000 edition that you've been hoarding to sell later, no sympathy from me :)

That said, the lower guns are a little droopy and unstable, even the upper guns are a bit uneven. I would expect the release photos to not reflect this, sort of a bummer, only time will tell. Looks like something that is easy enough to reinforce though. Still a gorgeous model, I wonder if the lower wings have stickers also.

Edited February 15, 2013 by Erdbeereis
Removed photo

[The_Chosen_1]

Hm....I have mixed feelings about the UCS X-Wing. On one hand, I missed the first one and will probably pick this one up if I can afford it. It's definitely a big improvement over the first iteration.

On the other hand, I agree that this marks a change in what constitutes a UCS set. Does it mean that something won't ever be released again? Obviously the answer is now "no".

[Anio]

Well, there would certainly be a way for them to get around that, I'm sure.

If not, just release a Slave I with a display stand. My main reason for wanting a UCS version is so it can be displayed upright.

If you search correctly, you should find an instruction for an UCS Slave 1 pretty easily. =)

Excepted if you are only looking for an official model. :)

Why not a UCS Venator. I think that would be one PT set that would do good as a UCS. Who is with me.

I'm on it ! =)

To the investors, those who are upset that the new in box year 2000 edition that you've been hoarding to sell later, no sympathy from me :)

Well said !

[Ritz Brick]

Since when has Ultimate Collector Series ever meant that it has to have a large piece count and is exactly what EVERYONE wants?

[calculon]

what the megabluck happened to that picture!?! it cant be real... ?

More to be found here:

*Link removed*

to me its no improvement at all. The cannons.. The engines.. I dont like them. To me the 7191 looks much more accurate. why is it so inclined!?!?! For 200 € here that's a no go to me & a major failure in design.

*EDIT by STAFF*- Do not post pictures or links to them until the official announcement, please. Just be patient.

Edited February 15, 2013 by CorneliusMurdock

[ISDAvenger]

I must say Lego has an infatuation with X Wings. Rather redundant and boring if you ask me. There are a lot of other space craft within the Star Wars universe, lets try and be creative for a change shall we.

[Haderach]

what the megabluck happened to that picture!?! it cant be real... ?

More to be found here:

*Link Removed*

to me its no improvement at all. The cannons.. The engines.. I dont like them. To me the 7191 looks much more accurate. why is it so inclined!?!?! For 200 € here that's a no go to me & a major failure in design.

I believe various sites are being asked to take the pictures down, hothbricks.com posted that they were asked to remove theirs and it looks like the admin here did the same. Very understandable, no complaints.

Edited February 15, 2013 by CorneliusMurdock

[Lobot]

Interesting news, this looks really nice & is a 'must buy' for me unlike the B-wing that I just can't get that excited about. It's seems like a reasonable RRP as well, which is always good. However, I don't understand why they are including an R2 unit (again) but not a pilot (again).....perhaps someone can explain that one to me? Surely if it's R2 scaled it should be scaled for a (Luke) as well

Now that the 'unique UCS' has been broken, I'm looking forward to an updated Falcon in the next 5 years, it's bound to be a massive seller for Lego. I just hope that they release a UCS Sandcrawler & Slave 1 before then.

[legolandia]

Only one who can complain are the original buyers of the ucs, but not collectors but buyers who have x-wing still in box ready to sell for a couple times bigger price than it was rrp. And honestly, they are not a majority of lego buyers and for me they aren't real collectors but folks who decided to invest in lego bricks. For the sake of their investment I hope that they have cash-in their investment until today, because after this news not only that x-wing ucs will plunge, but I wouldn't recommend buying tie-interceptor or M. falcon.

Sorry to disagree but I am a collector myself and I have collected various things for a long time. I can assure you that even collectors do have an expectation that the items they pay a lot of money for would increase (or at least maintain their value) in the future. When a set is released under the name of Ultimate Collector Series that implies that it is a collectible item and therefore it is released either in limited numbers or for a limited time (the latter in Lego UCS case) and in the majority of cases that implies that its value will be either the same or increase in the future.

This is generally the case with all forms of art and Lego SW is a form of art, especially the UCS series. The UCS series is certainly not aimed at kids to play with. In fact quite a lot of UCS sets have very little playability. I would love to see a kid play with a Super Star Destroyer.

Therefore although Lego may not specify in writing the way a product is marketed implies that it is very unlikely that product would be released again. Call it "a gentleman's agreement". So it is quite understandable that a lot of collectors of UCS sets would not be very happy with re-releases.

And by the way I see no reason (either than greed and milking a cash cow) for Lego to re-release a UCS set when there are so many more "important" ships that could be made into UCS. And there will be many more in years to come when the new films are released. What happened to Jedi temple, the large separatist/trade federation ships and so many more?

Edited February 15, 2013 by legolandia

[Blondie-Wan]

Wow, I'm delighted - partly because it's a nice set (though I'd have preferred a different new canopy element), and partly because it means that a Star Wars vehicle can receive the UCS treatment more than once. Those of us who missed out on 10179 can dare hope for another, even better rendition of the Millennium Falcon.

[Basteq]

Sorry to disagree but I am a collector myself and I have collected various things for a long time. I can assure you that even collectors do have an expectation that the items they pay a lot of money for would increase (or at least maintain their value) in the future. When a set is released under the name of Ultimate Collector Series that implies that it is a collectible item and therefore it is released either in limited numbers or for a limited time (the latter in Lego UCS case) and in the majority of cases that implies that its value will be either the same or increase in the future.

This is generally the case with all forms of art and Lego SW is a form of art, especially the UCS series. The UCS series is certainly not aimed at kids to play with. In fact quite a lot of UCS sets have very little playability. I would love to see a kid play with a Super Star Destroyer.

Therefore although Lego may not specify in writing the way a product is marketed implies that it is very unlikely that product would be released again. Call it "a gentleman's agreement". So it is quite understandable that a lot of collectors of UCS sets would not be very happy with re-releases.

I'm also a collector and not very happy to get remakes, but on the other hand it's X-wing with new design, bricks, stickers and slightly different way to be built, so I guess it not all bad.

The old one may slightly decrease in value but for real collectors it will remain unique.

It's not like X wing, and TIE & Y-wing were re-released only with different numbers.

[mpaisana]

I'm also a collector and not very happy to get remakes,

Its funny, one of the things I like the most as a collector is to have different versions of the same ship / minifig / building. Its really cool to see the differences, almost as if you can see Lego's design logic evolving between sets and years :) I really like both my versions of Luke's landspeeder, it's really cool to compare both ships!

I don't buy UCS Lego because I can't afford those sets. The only set I would get would be a Slave I, because of it's aggressive and uncanny design. As for the Sandcrawler, which someone said before that it isn't an iconic vehicle, couldn't disagree more.

Edited February 15, 2013 by mpaisana

[Basteq]

Its funny, one of the things I like the most as a collector is to have different versions of the same ship / minifig / building. Its really cool to see the differences, almost as if you can see Lego's design logic evolving between sets and years :) I really like both my versions of Luke's landspeeder, it's really cool to compare both ships!

It may be cool but I'd still want a different ship to fill my shelves with ;)