Review: 40771 TIE Fighter with Imperial Hangar Rack
Posted by CapnRex101,
75419 Death Star has proven very contentious and the associated gift-with-purchase has also been severely criticised. 40771 TIE Fighter with Imperial Hangar Rack complements the Death Star nicely, although the docking bay arguably seems incomplete without it.
Furthermore, the TIE Fighter looks more like a caricature than one would expect for a display model, or at least something intended to supplement an expensive 18+ set. However, I do like the idea of a gift-with-purchase that slots into a bigger set and adding three extra minifigures to the Death Star is no bad thing.
Summary
40771 TIE Fighter with Imperial Hangar Rack, 236 pieces.
Though I like its compatibility with the Death Star, this TIE Fighter is underwhelming
- Directly connects to 75419 Death Star
- Nice maintenance cart design
- A fun TIE Fighter for play
- Nothing truly exclusive
- TIE Fighter is wholly unsuitable for a display model
- Nothing truly exclusive
The set was provided for review by LEGO. All opinions expressed are those of the author.
Minifigures
Three minifigures are included, although none have exclusive parts. The TIE Fighter Pilot has appeared regularly in recent years and this minifigure uses the standard helmet, torso and legs produced in 2023. The uniform looks fine, but lacks the printed arms from 75382 TIE Interceptor and I wish the helmet with silver stripes had returned from 75300 Imperial TIE Fighter.
The warm tan head under the helmet is only available here and in 75419 Death Star. Its facial expression looks great, but I wonder whether a head and hair element inspired by Iden Versio could have been included. Iden did participate in the Battle of Yavin and identifying the pilot as her would make the minifigure more special.
Two standard Stormtroopers are provided too. These minifigures are very common, but more are welcome and there is ample room for them aboard the Death Star. While the dual-moulded helmets tend to divide opinion, they are impressively detailed and the printed torso and legs are good too, as ever.
Again, these heads are only otherwise found in the Death Star, but they are not used for any of the six Stormtroopers in the main set, so their repetition does not concern me. Moreover, I think we can safely assume these heads will appear elsewhere, as generic designs typically do.
The Completed Model
Maintenance carts are a common sight in any Star Wars hangar bay, tending starfighters and ferrying cargo around. This model looks at home in an Imperial hangar, with somewhere for a character to stand behind the controls and vibrant fuel tanks on the back. A splash of dark red and yellow is appreciated in the hangar.
Two printed crates are also among the cargo, housing printed thermal detonators. I am always happy to see these boxes in another set because they are helpful for adding extra detail to any scene.
LEGO Star Wars includes no shortage of Imperial TIE Fighters, but this example is decidedly unusual. The general shape is there, but its proportions are squashed to fit inside the hangar, while accommodating a figure inside. Perhaps this would be charming as something akin to a giant Microfighter, but the vehicle seems totally out of place with an 18+ set.
Removing the front of the cockpit reveals space for the TIE Pilot. Managing to fit the character inside is a feat and I like the combination of red and black pieces here, resembling TIE Fighter cockpits featured in the films. However, the compromises caused by having to seat a figure are severe and these were less apparent with similar TIE Advanced models released before.
Maybe another TIE Advanced x1, as seen in 10188 Death Star, 75159 Death Star and 75251 Darth Vader's Castle, would have been a better choice. Even so, the TIE Fighter's solar array wings are easily recognisable at this scale, despite the rather rudimentary details denoting the frames on each side.
I like the angled 1x1 tile forming the exhaust neutraliser grid on the rear, but the red-tipped twin ion engines are missing, unfortunately. As mentioned, this could be an enjoyable model for play at a low price, but not in this context.
TIE Fighters are generally stored on racks, ready for easy deployment into battle. This rack is quite simple and lacks the complex gantries visible onscreen, although its design matches the established aesthetic of Imperial infrastructure. I like the whips used for cables or fuel lines and the rack fits into place using Technic pins, firmly anchored to the Death Star.
The supports are ideally spaced for the TIE Fighter, so it slots perfectly into place. Any issues are perhaps less apparent once the starfighter is ensconced in the hangar, though it definitely contrasts with the Imperial Shuttle, which is reasonably accurate, despite its small size. On the other hand, I like how the TIE Fighter lines up with the Death Star corridor level, as though its pilot could board from there.
Personally, I think the hangar looks excellent even without the TIE Fighter. There is clearly an area of negative space to the left of the shuttle, although the docking bays seen in the movies are never packed with vehicles aboard either Death Star. Either configuration works for me and the hangar bay is actually among my favourite parts of 75419 Death Star.
Overall
Gifts-with-purchase, especially those intended to accompany the most expensive sets, walk a fine line. They should serve as an appropriate incentive and reward for anyone buying sets on release, but including anything too desirable is liable to cause frustration among the far greater number of people who cannot get the gift-with-purchase, for whatever reason.
With that in mind, I think 40771 TIE Fighter with Imperial Hangar Rack is a good idea. This set complements 75419 Death Star perfectly and will only be of interest to those also interested in the Death Star. However, I totally understand those who now see the Death Star as incomplete without the TIE Fighter and the starfighter itself is certainly quite distorted, so this is far from a must-have.
70 likes
59 comments on this article
You are going to talk about the minifigures in 75149, right?
The way I see it, we knew what this gwp was going to be and the piece count months ago, so I don’t understand why people are surprised that this tie fighter looks crummy. Nobody complained about the micro tie advance in the previous death stars, and this isn’t meant to hold up to the modern playset standards. I think this set complements the Death Star quite nicely, and I’m surprised at the amount of detail they were able to pack in the tie fighter for it’s size.
@RawBrick69 said:
"You are going to talk about the minifigures in 75149, right?"
??????
I'm actually really impressed they managed a TIE Fighter that fits a minifig in a GWP. It's not the most attractive design and definitely not as good as the rest of the Death Star, but I can appreciate what they were trying to - and it would not be hard to part out for anyone who misses the window.
For the tooth-gnashing "tHiS iS dAy OnE dLc EvIl BaD" brigade, I would invite you to consider the fact this is FREE if you buy the set within the early window, limited to the purchase of the Death Star so almost impossible to scalp, and totally recreatable from your own collection. Please stop parroting things you saw on Reddit or YouTube and thought were clever.
@RawBrick69 said:
"You are going to talk about the minifigures in 75149 , right?"
I was very pleased to see Lor San Tekka in minifigure form and the First Order Flametrooper is excellent, so I have no complaints really!
In all seriousness, there will be a separate article about the minifigures in 75419 Death Star.
I’m surprised there was no mention of the bigger controversy - the fact that promotional pictures of the Death Star included the TIE Fighter in place, suggesting the purchases that it is included with the Death Star.
That is unacceptable, and objectively false advertising. And Lego should know better. And I’d have hoped that this review would touch on that.
The only good thing is that there's no exclusive part, so it can be easily reproduced with your own collection. No FOMO here, on contrary of other GWP like 40580 (the stickers and minifig) or 40693 (the vynil wings).
I don’t like false advertising. If you don’t understand, click the set link
Look, I don’t like this GwP at all. It’s just bad execution. However, I’ll give credit for a good idea. It also should have just come with the set. I still think the way to go with this is to buy 75149 and sell it and the Beach Trooper to get it for about $500. I won’t do it, but I think that’s really the way to go. And I think Bricklinker’s will do that, too.
Who knows, I may try to build this for kicks when the instructions come out.
I am planning to get this for as cheap as possible on the aftermarket as soon as 75419 releases, and then I will buy the actual Death Star on sale. Also @CapnRex101 the Poe Dameron minifig was also quite good and accurate to the scene ;)
Other than including a somewhat shoddy design for a TIE fighter, I’m fine with this being the Death Star’s GWP. My frustration is there isn’t MORE being offered with it. 76457 Hogsmeade got the exclusive Room of Requirement, the Quidditch Practice polybag, plus the exclusive Hogsmeade sign and was only $400 (as if $400 wasn’t already asking too much).
This meanwhile comes with one GWP that contains absolutely nothing exclusive. I find that extremely disappointing for the spend threshold required to obtain the Death Star.
These comments are pretty "you can't win," huh?
But it is soooo ugly. A minifig coffin with wings... Just the wrong scale to make anything remotely nice, especially when you must need to wrestle a minifig in somehow.
A really nice GWP would be the factory floor on the prison planet with Cassian and Gollem working on the Death Star part. In striking white and orange.
I don't really like this DLC set, and this Chibi design is a lot worse than Darth Vader's TIE in the original Death Star set.
Should've been part of the set and some forgettable coin should've been the GWP.
@Mr_Hobbles said:
"I’m surprised there was no mention of the bigger controversy - the fact that promotional pictures of the Death Star included the TIE Fighter in place, suggesting the purchases that it is included with the Death Star.
That is unacceptable, and objectively false advertising. And Lego should know better. And I’d have hoped that this review would touch on that."
That is not normally something I would address in a review because it is not about the set itself.
However, I agree that was utterly wrong and a clumsy mistake on LEGO's part. I highly doubt it was deliberate, but errors like that happen far too often, likely because assets are passed from one department to another and communication seems to break down along the way. Perhaps the image of the TIE Fighter in the Death Star hangar was supposed to be shown further down the page on LEGO.com, where the gift-with-purchase is advertised, but that information was lost along the way, so it was included among the standard images.
Defintely should have been part of the main set. A much cooler GWP for the Death Star would have been a Starship Collection type full sphere Death Star. (Smaller scaled of coursse). Also realize people would be mad that its only GWP...
@ScholtzTKO said:
"Defintely should have been part of the main set. A much cooler GWP for the Death Star would have been a Starship Collection type full sphere Death Star. (Smaller scaled of coursse). Also realize people would be mad that its only GWP..."
Like 40591?
I don't know why people are complaining that this should have been part of the set. It only would have inflated the price or they would have cheaped out in other areas. The tie looks really ugly in my opinion and detracts from the rest of the set once added in my opinion. It also makes the hangar feel cramped. If you do really want the tie fighter for some reason you could probably make one from your own parts that looks better.
There have been multiple times where I’ve bought sets at launch and missed out on the GWP because they sold out of the GWP. I’ve been penalized because I didn’t order at the exact hour it was available.
If I was going to get this set (and I’m not, because the price is too high), I’d be pretty disappointed if I missed out on this.
…and then even more upset if they went and released it again as a GWP later like they’ve done before, but I’ve already bought the set without it.
Missed opertunity to include moff jerjerrod
Happy that there's nothing exclusive in the GWP! I'll just wait till the Death Star hits general distribution and eventual sales, I might get one in a few years...
They really should have included the 'That's No Moon' 80cm x 59cm poster Insider Reward as a GWP too.
Every new bit of news and discussion has reassured me that skipping out on this set is a good idea. Death by a thousand dollars ... er ... cuts.
At the least, the LOTR sets don't come with giant holes to be filled with GWPs (for now)
“ anything too desirable is liable to cause frustration among the far greater number of people who cannot get the gift-with-purchase, for whatever reason.”
I just buy them on eBay. And sets that you can only buy with VIP points.
I did it with 11910 , 40786 , 40712 and may do it with others too.
Why were people so angry over the exclusivity of this? This is literally a 4+ set within an UCS set and it was clear from the packaging.
Already 4 of them on EBAY with the lowest price being $199.95. If you sell the GWP, you basically are paying $800 for the Death Star. Not bad.
I have a strong hunch that this was simply taken out of the Death Star, if there is even a special space left over for it and now it's being instead sold as an exclusive GWP in the hopes that people would be dumb enough to buy it at full price? Remember that the concept sketch model also had a TIE Fighter included https://i.imgur.com/MklmNs9.jpeg. Plus, over 40 minifigs sounds better than 38.
Someone who got this set for free told me I could resell this for 200 dollars to help alleviate the cost of the Death Star. Doesn't look worth it to me, but as a Lego Star Wars fan this is the kind of thing I think about almost exclusively- resell value.
@beatlefan1966 said:
"Already 4 of them on EBAY with the lowest price being $199.95. If you sell the GWP, you basically are paying $800 for the Death Star. Not bad.
"
Great. Now I am really going to buy the DS within the GWP window. I figured that because this GWP was bad it would be on ebay for like $50 USD, not $200 and wait for the DS to go on sale (I want to keep the GWP in my collection). Welp, here goes...
@CapnRex101 said:
"Furthermore, the TIE Fighter looks more like a caricature than one would expect for a display model...."
This whole set looks like a caricature - slice, TIE and shuttle. I'm not angry in the least - rather, very indifferent to all of it and relieved that I'm 'excused' from parting with a lot of money. I'll save my pennies for another day...or a couple more copies of Soundwave. The best set of 2025 so far, IMHO.
I don’t think the addition of the gift-with-purchase will do anything to alleviate the pain of the realisation that you’ve paid $1000 for a dusty shelf ornament whose novelty value wears off more quickly than you’d like. If you’re one of the YouTube-posting fans with a dedicated LEGO basement or loft space, complete with fabulous in-cabinet lighting, then I can see you owning this and enjoying it at least until it becomes supplanted by whatever you buy next. If you’re not then you could perhaps get more satisfaction from building a few dioramas of your own design instead. For what it’s worth, I don’t think the DS is worth the price tag or anything like it, and this “gift” is like offering someone a $20 Amazon voucher if they sign up to a 24-month contract at $40 per month. Increasingly either LEGO is going to have to accept that their fans work bloody hard to earn their money and the company needs to do more to get them to part with it, or they’ve found the magic place where one truly is born every minute.
@jsutton said:
"I don’t think the addition of the gift-with-purchase will do anything to alleviate the pain of the realisation that you’ve paid $1000 for a dusty shelf ornament whose novelty value wears off more quickly than you’d like. If you’re one of the YouTube-posting fans with a dedicated LEGO basement or loft space, complete with fabulous in-cabinet lighting, then I can see you owning this and enjoying it at least until it becomes supplanted by whatever you buy next. If you’re not then you could perhaps get more satisfaction from building a few dioramas of your own design instead. For what it’s worth, I don’t think the DS is worth the price tag or anything like it, and this “gift” is like offering someone a $20 Amazon voucher if they sign up to a 24-month contract at $40 per month. Increasingly either LEGO is going to have to accept that their fans work bloody hard to earn their money and the company needs to do more to get them to part with it, or they’ve found the magic place where one truly is born every minute."
Y'all ain't ready for the $2000 Starkiller Base(plate)
"Nothing truly exclusive".
Except for the box and the instructions. And you only have to look at Lester and Azog to see how important the packaging is when it comes to "nothing exclusive" sets.
I'm mystified by this. It's just hopeless. It's no good for minifigures, it's no good for the established nanoscale (see Hogwarts and the Helicarrier), and it's no good for display because of the proportions. And despite all of this, it's meant to compliment a £900 Lego model. Extraordinary.
I'd very much like to see a review of the backsides of various sets.
It's on topic.
I'm not weird.
@MisterBrickster said:
"For the tooth-gnashing "tHiS iS dAy OnE dLc EvIl BaD" brigade, I would invite you to consider the fact this is FREE if you buy the set within the early window, limited to the purchase of the Death Star so almost impossible to scalp, and totally recreatable from your own collection. Please stop parroting things you saw on Reddit or YouTube and thought were clever."
Some of us don’t visit Reddit. Some of us get all of our reviews from Brickset. Some of us are just a little upset that LEGO appears to have pulled this out of the set to try and drive Day One purchases. Some of us don’t have $1k to spend at 12am release day. Some of us don’t want to spend $200 to complete our set in the aftermarket.
Sincerely,
dONT BE A JeRK ON bRICkSEt brigade, member
@StudMuffin24 said:
" @jsutton said:
"I don’t think the addition of the gift-with-purchase will do anything to alleviate the pain of the realisation that you’ve paid $1000 for a dusty shelf ornament whose novelty value wears off more quickly than you’d like. If you’re one of the YouTube-posting fans with a dedicated LEGO basement or loft space, complete with fabulous in-cabinet lighting, then I can see you owning this and enjoying it at least until it becomes supplanted by whatever you buy next. If you’re not then you could perhaps get more satisfaction from building a few dioramas of your own design instead. For what it’s worth, I don’t think the DS is worth the price tag or anything like it, and this “gift” is like offering someone a $20 Amazon voucher if they sign up to a 24-month contract at $40 per month. Increasingly either LEGO is going to have to accept that their fans work bloody hard to earn their money and the company needs to do more to get them to part with it, or they’ve found the magic place where one truly is born every minute."
Y'all ain't ready for the $2000 Starkiller Base(plate)"
I don’t think anyone is. Now, a $200 Starkiller Base(plate) I could definitely get behind… but if there was ever a year for it, it would’ve been the year we’re in.
@UProbeck said:
" @ScholtzTKO said:
"Defintely should have been part of the main set. A much cooler GWP for the Death Star would have been a Starship Collection type full sphere Death Star. (Smaller scaled of coursse). Also realize people would be mad that its only GWP..."
Like 40591?"
I had the exact same thought.
@watcher21 said:
"Missed opertunity to include moff jerjerrod"
I'm so glad they didn't. Otherwise, the GWP would tempt me.
This doesn't at all. It's an abomination- especially for a $1k display model. It completely ruins the look of it.
I find the BS reviews to be wholely lacking in analysis on this issue. I wonder if the Cap'n we knew and loved has finally gone to the dark side as LAN Captain.
I find the review by Brickfanatics to be much more thoughtful. I believe they called the GWP, "Like a set made by a ten-year-old who insists on plonking his 4+ toy in the middle of your big, expensive, display set."
It’s kind of funny to see people try to argue both that the Death Star set is incomplete without the GWP and that the GWP is a 4+ set that looks awful. Shades of the food is terrible/and such small portions. I think it’s cute and not a bad addition if you want it but also wholly unnecessary and with little appeal outside rare-hunters and just plain liking how it looks in the set. Which is probably a pretty good point for a GWP to hit.
(I don’t think it has any of the actual hallmarks of a 4+ set, personally - have none of you actually built them? - but I figure it’s being used as short-hand for “kinda chibi and distorted” but trying to add a little extra flavour. The Microfighter comparison is closer.)
Nobody wins with this GWP. *Not* having it leaves a hole in the set that will forever distract you, but the actual TIE Fighter itself is awful and the proportions kill the hangar. I again question why they couldn't get the cockpit as small as the one on the mini Advanced X1s, which I have to assume was the original plan. Maybe there were stability issues with the panels with a smaller core? That said, if the TIE Fighter *were* better, the "artificial day one DLC" argument would be even bigger, though I assume it would be similarly made of non-exclusive parts that'd still be reasonably easy to gather separately. As it is, the GWP is only another bent rail in the train wreck surrounding this set.
I look forward to watching people MOC superior compact TIEs and racks to fit into the space.
As somewhat of a completionist I’m not buying the Death Star set as it’ll be missing a key part of it - there’ll be a few like me I’m sure so LEGO’s greed has backfired this time.
@StyleCounselor said:
"I find the BS reviews to be wholely lacking in analysis on this issue. I wonder if the Cap'n we knew and loved has finally gone to the dark side as LAN Captain.
I find the review by Brickfanatics to be much more thoughtful. I believe they called the GWP, "Like a set made by a ten-year-old who insists on plonking his 4+ toy in the middle of your big, expensive, display set.""
The best reviews are always those that agree with whatever you think.
@Hiratha said:
"It’s kind of funny to see people try to argue both that the Death Star set is incomplete without the GWP and that the GWP is a 4+ set that looks awful.)"
I struggle with this myself, lol. I feel like the GWP belongs with the set but I also don’t love the Tie Fighter windscreen. I really like the extra figures, cart, and wing details, though.
Edit: I think my concern with the Tie Fighter is the “dish on dish” look. It just looks off to me.
Why is "Nothing truly exclusive" repeated twice?
@StudMuffin24 said:
" @beatlefan1966 said:
"Already 4 of them on EBAY with the lowest price being $199.95. If you sell the GWP, you basically are paying $800 for the Death Star. Not bad.
"
Great. Now I am really going to buy the DS within the GWP window. I figured that because this GWP was bad it would be on ebay for like $50 USD, not $200 and wait for the DS to go on sale (I want to keep the GWP in my collection). Welp, here goes..."
It’s only $200 right now because it hasn’t officially been released yet. Once the Death Star is released and more of these GWPs start flooding eBay, the value will go down.
I think the set is perfectly fine. Nobody complained about the skewed proportions of the TIE Advanced included with the original Death Star, and that’s exactly what I expected to see for this TIE Fighter.
I also must agree that LEGO can’t win with these GWPs. Make it an add-on for the set and people will complain that it should have been included. Make it a completely separate and unrelated model, or make it too nice, and people will complain that they can’t buy it separately. Make it not nice enough and people will call it trash.
I also think it’s funny that they used the word Imperial to describe the hangar rack instead of the TIE Fighter, lol.
I don’t suppose it’s occurred to anyone throwing a fit over a reviewer daring to have an opinion that disagrees with them that the incentive to agree with the loud and angry bit of the fanbase is just as large if not larger?
Not that I especially want to encourage more conspiracy theory-ing. Maybe we could all just touch grass (or at least green Lego bricks) and realise that reviewers are allowed to form their own opinions and sometimes they’ll be different from yours. That would be nice.
@StyleCounselor said:
" @watcher21 said:
"Missed opertunity to include moff jerjerrod"
I'm so glad they didn't. Otherwise, the GWP would tempt me.
This doesn't at all. It's an abomination- especially for a $1k display model. It completely ruins the look of it.
I find the BS reviews to be wholely lacking in analysis on this issue. I wonder if the Cap'n we knew and loved has finally gone to the dark side as LAN Captain.
I find the review by Brickfanatics to be much more thoughtful. I believe they called the GWP, "Like a set made by a ten-year-old who insists on plonking his 4+ toy in the middle of your big, expensive, display set.""
I am aware that would have tempted/forced people to buy the Death Star.
Now it's just 3 army builder figs, Two printed crates and an almost micro Tie fighter
@MisterBrickster said:
"I'm actually really impressed they managed a TIE Fighter that fits a minifig in a GWP. It's not the most attractive design and definitely not as good as the rest of the Death Star, but I can appreciate what they were trying to - and it would not be hard to part out for anyone who misses the window.
For the tooth-gnashing "tHiS iS dAy OnE dLc EvIl BaD" brigade, I would invite you to consider the fact this is FREE if you buy the set within the early window, limited to the purchase of the Death Star so almost impossible to scalp, and totally recreatable from your own collection. Please stop parroting things you saw on Reddit or YouTube and thought were clever."
I don't think its that impressive. After all, back in 2008 (a whole 17 years ago!) that Death Star included a small TIE Advanced that managed to fit in a minifigure... and that was with it having a scaled-down cockpit to make it proportionally accurate! I don't see this new TIE fitting a minifigure as very inpressive when the cockpit is virtually the same size as those of the last two playset TIEs.
I’m in the camp vehemently that LEGO taking this set out of their premiere $1k set to make it a Gw/P was shameful.
And even worse that after the initial hype, where many who’ll buy this down the road a year or two or more, won’t be able to get this.
You know the after market will have this at $150+ on eBay.
A good gift with purchase for a set like this should be something like a small Darth Vader bust with small Death Star both on a display base.
Hell, for $1k the freebie should be the brick built Star Wars logo!
@TheMikeStrikesBack said:
" @StudMuffin24 said:
" @beatlefan1966 said:
"Already 4 of them on EBAY with the lowest price being $199.95. If you sell the GWP, you basically are paying $800 for the Death Star. Not bad.
"
Great. Now I am really going to buy the DS within the GWP window. I figured that because this GWP was bad it would be on ebay for like $50 USD, not $200 and wait for the DS to go on sale (I want to keep the GWP in my collection). Welp, here goes..."
It’s only $200 right now because it hasn’t officially been released yet. Once the Death Star is released and more of these GWPs start flooding eBay, the value will go down.
I think the set is perfectly fine. Nobody complained about the skewed proportions of the TIE Advanced included with the original Death Star, and that’s exactly what I expected to see for this TIE Fighter.
I also must agree that LEGO can’t win with these GWPs. Make it an add-on for the set and people will complain that it should have been included. Make it a completely separate and unrelated model, or make it too nice, and people will complain that they can’t buy it separately. Make it not nice enough and people will call it trash.
I also think it’s funny that they used the word Imperial to describe the hangar rack instead of the TIE Fighter, lol.
"
Maybe just don’t do GWP’s?
@DJ_Hamford said:
" @MisterBrickster said:
"I'm actually really impressed they managed a TIE Fighter that fits a minifig in a GWP. It's not the most attractive design and definitely not as good as the rest of the Death Star, but I can appreciate what they were trying to - and it would not be hard to part out for anyone who misses the window.
For the tooth-gnashing "tHiS iS dAy OnE dLc EvIl BaD" brigade, I would invite you to consider the fact this is FREE if you buy the set within the early window, limited to the purchase of the Death Star so almost impossible to scalp, and totally recreatable from your own collection. Please stop parroting things you saw on Reddit or YouTube and thought were clever."
I don't think its that impressive. After all, back in 2008 (a whole 17 years ago!) that Death Star included a small TIE Advanced that managed to fit in a minifigure... and that was with it having a scaled-down cockpit to make it proportionally accurate! I don't see this new TIE fitting a minifigure as very inpressive when the cockpit is virtually the same size as those of the last two playset TIEs."
Oh I totally agree it’s not a patch on the mini vehicles we’ve had in other sets.
It’s the fact they managed it in a GWP size set that’s surprising, given the restrictive budgets they get for those. I would far rather they’d included it in the main set and used some of the parts budget to make it look better. TBH I suspect this GWP was more about getting some more stormtroopers for buyers without sacrificing other things in the main model.
"Nothing truly exclusive"
That's my only issue with it. It's not meant to be a 'wow-set', but it should contain something exclusive to be worth getting.
It's a pro - meaning those who cannot get it now can build it later to add to their death star if they wish so.
It's a con - it's not persuading anyone to get the death star now, and a GWP that comes with a €1000 set should contain something exclusive.
Okay, what in the world is this excuse for a gwp?
First of all, the idea itself is interesting, but the enormously squished down TIE just looks miserable
Second, the minifigures are nothing special and if you want to get some, its definitely NOT through this set.
Third, it's just a plain uninteresting choice. Could've done something much better, for example a lift that appears at the end of return of the jedi and have the rotj luke and darth vader there. But maybe some other ide would be better.
But definitely not THIS.
@Reg said:
"As somewhat of a completionist I’m not buying the Death Star set as it’ll be missing a key part of it - there’ll be a few like me I’m sure so LEGO’s greed has backfired this time."
So not a completionist then.
@legoDad42 said:
"I’m in the camp vehemently that LEGO taking this set out of their premiere $1k set to make it a Gw/P was shameful.
And even worse that after the initial hype, where many who’ll buy this down the road a year or two or more, won’t be able to get this.
You know the after market will have this at $150+ on eBay.
A good gift with purchase for a set like this should be something like a small Darth Vader bust with small Death Star both on a display base.
Hell, for $1k the freebie should be the brick built Star Wars logo!
"
It will be easy to buy without box or instructions much cheaper. It often happens with exclusive packaging but more common parts.
The kind of GWP where "oh, you shouldn't have" feels pretty appropriate.
@CapnRex101 said:
" @StyleCounselor said:
"I find the BS reviews to be wholely lacking in analysis on this issue. I wonder if the Cap'n we knew and loved has finally gone to the dark side as LAN Captain.
I find the review by Brickfanatics to be much more thoughtful. I believe they called the GWP, "Like a set made by a ten-year-old who insists on plonking his 4+ toy in the middle of your big, expensive, display set.""
The best reviews are always those that agree with whatever you think."
I heartily disagree. I'm not a guy who loves hot-take YouTubers. Nevertheless, I constantly seek out contrary opinions- especially about Lego sets.
If you believe it truly compliments this set, explain why. Provide enough reasons, analysis, and evidence to support your opinion.
You stated the following which seems clearly fallacious: A) The Death Star is an incredibly expensive, finished display set; B) The GWP is an amateurish caricature; yet somehow, C) The GWP compliments the Death Star "perfectly."
Likewise, your incredibly brief discussion of the reasonability of the Death Star price was also severely lacking in sufficient analysis especially for the size and the scrutiny. You stated that it was reasonable in comparison with the AT-AT and Falcon. Why? Where are the pictures and analysis (other LANs like Solid Brix provided them) and came to the opposite reasonable conclusion (also Brick Fanatics)?
We come to this site in large part because of your reviews. I have disagreed with you many, many, many times. However, you usually provide some research, criticism, or evidence (usually photos) that softens my opinion or changes my mind completely. Again, that's why I bother to come here.
The reviews regarding the Death Star have been utterly lacking in this regard. I find this utterly mystifying considering the expense, size, and controversy of this set. Add to that the amount of LAN coverage, interviews, and special access, and we the consumer feel like we're getting a snow job. Especially when the interviews have provided such lame justifications, it seems like Lego brought the whole LAN in to 'set 'em straight' on this $1k set.
Your decision to gloss over these issues severely undermines your credibility. If you truly believe your free $1k set is awesome, convince us. It's your job!
@StyleCounselor
You realise it’s not remotely consistent to both give examples of LAN reviewers who volubly didn’t like the set and claim that Lego extorted “the whole” of LAN reviewers to, what, scold people who didn’t like the set into liking it? This perhaps should have given you a moment of pause re: the fun conspiracy theory maybe not adding up.
Maybe you just don’t like the reviews very much and there’s nothing else special going on. That’s okay.