1330 replies to this topic

[natesroom]

Nagyzee, on 05 December 2012 - 01:27 AM, said:

What is this fetish with people wanting the same shield design for several figures to make a 'faction'? If there ever is a new Forestmen faction I'd like them to have a different shield than the Forest Maiden's. More variety. And there can be many different shield designs inside a single faction, too. Ever heard of heraldry and how every noble family had different crests? Sure, it's understandable why TLG makes factions have uniform crests (easy identification for kids), but I as an AFOL sure like when we get different designs at least in the CMS. Reusing a CMS shield pattern in a normal line or vice versa is just a wasted opportunity in my opinion. (Like with the S9 Hero Knight figure.)

I totally disagree!!! I want more of the new ones that were created. I also want more variety too but it would be awesome to see it fleshed out.

[Nagyzee]

natesroom, on 05 December 2012 - 08:02 PM, said:

I totally disagree!!! I want more of the new ones that were created. I also want more variety too but it would be awesome to see it fleshed out.

Then buy more. TLG uses only one crest per faction in its usual castle lines anyhow with those being in huge supply so it would be awful if collectible minifigures didn't provide some variation but more of the same.

[Ruffian]

Well given that there is a new Falcon Knight in the last Kingdoms set (Kingdoms Joust 10223) and given that the Minifig Series 9 has a Crown Kingdom Knight it might be a return to those two factions...... I am just excited to see more new sets and not to have Castle dissapear due to LOTR and The Hobbit.

[rogueang]

Nagyzee, on 05 December 2012 - 08:48 PM, said:

Then buy more. TLG uses only one crest per faction in its usual castle lines anyhow with those being in huge supply so it would be awful if collectible minifigures didn't provide some variation but more of the same.

There are a number of different types of Lego collectors.  There are the casual collectors, who may only purchase a few sets each year, and don't consider buying multiples.  For this type of collector, they may only pick up more figs from a faction if new sets are released with them.  When I was younger, I never even considered buying duplicates of sets, and I would have fallen into this category.

There are also the army builders who look at every new set as a potential avenue for new factions, pieces, etc.  They see a CMF with a new shield and say "I have a new faction thanks to this one figure!"  I definitely fall into this category now as an AFOL.  Castle sets now appeal to me more based off the figures and parts included then the set overall.  There has definitely been more appeal to the sets lately as Lego has moved more towards high quality sets (Medieval Marketplace, Dwarves Mine, Joust), but it's still the figs that matter the most to me.

I would think that the majority of EB'ers would fall more into the army builder category as AFOLs, but that it's probably more of an even split in terms of the consumer base.

Personally, I feel that since you can drop $20 on Bricklink to pick up 20 of a shield you want, it is a complete waste to bring back a faction that's already had a run.  I'm all for rereleasing old sets like the Black Falcon's fortress was, but a repeat shield is a wasted shield IMO.

[Tyrant]

rogueang, on 06 December 2012 - 12:18 AM, said:

There are a number of different types of Lego collectors.  There are the casual collectors, who may only purchase a few sets each year, and don't consider buying multiples.  For this type of collector, they may only pick up more figs from a faction if new sets are released with them.  When I was younger, I never even considered buying duplicates of sets, and I would have fallen into this category.

There are also the army builders who look at every new set as a potential avenue for new factions, pieces, etc.  They see a CMF with a new shield and say "I have a new faction thanks to this one figure!"  I definitely fall into this category now as an AFOL.  Castle sets now appeal to me more based off the figures and parts included then the set overall.  There has definitely been more appeal to the sets lately as Lego has moved more towards high quality sets (Medieval Marketplace, Dwarves Mine, Joust), but it's still the figs that matter the most to me.

I would think that the majority of EB'ers would fall more into the army builder category as AFOLs, but that it's probably more of an even split in terms of the consumer base.

Personally, I feel that since you can drop $20 on Bricklink to pick up 20 of a shield you want, it is a complete waste to bring back a faction that's already had a run.  I'm all for rereleasing old sets like the Black Falcon's fortress was, but a repeat shield is a wasted shield IMO.

As much as I want the Black Falcons back, I agree that they (and any other faction) would need to be revamped and not just the same old figures/shields. I would prefer they keep the core emblem of the black/white falcon but add detail like the new figures/shields. The one we got in the Joust set is improvement enough for me if they nake more of them (not that I would turn down further improvement).

[Huntleyfx]

As an army builder, I am extremely excited to accumulate large quantities of the Heroic Knight. While it is true that each knight would have his own heraldry symbols, most knights would wear the symbol of their liege lord. In addition, most of that heraldry would be based off of a related symbol for each of the lord's knights. That, and the fact I already have several of the Golden Knights will really allow me to bump up the might of the Crown forces.

[Graysmith]

A user on the Swedish LEGO site/forum Swebrick said that he'd seen a distributor's catalogue (of sets due next summer) and mentioned that KINGDOMS is COMING BACK! He didn't give any details as it was only mentioned in passing, and I haven't been able to get him to say anything more about it, whether he saw any photos of the actual sets or anything like that.. But yeah. Kingdoms 2013!! So excited.

[Blakstone]

Graysmith, on 06 December 2012 - 03:41 PM, said:

A user on the Swedish LEGO site/forum Swebrick said that he'd seen a distributor's catalogue (of sets due next summer) and mentioned that KINGDOMS is COMING BACK! He didn't give any details as it was only mentioned in passing, and I haven't been able to get him to say anything more about it, whether he saw any photos of the actual sets or anything like that.. But yeah. Kingdoms 2013!! So excited.

Excellent!

[Gryphon Ink]

Graysmith, on 06 December 2012 - 03:41 PM, said:

KINGDOMS is COMING BACK!

Does that mean that the rumored "Dragon Mountain" set is actually a Dragon Knights base?  I'll be in my bunk.

[TheLegoDr]

That would make more sense since they said no fantasy elements would be included and to have a dragon mountain without a dragon seems silly. But to have it for a dragon faction makes sense.

[october]

So King's Castle could be a falcon castle?

[Zeya]

Nicker, on 20 November 2012 - 05:21 AM, said:

Here are some set names that someone posted on Classic Castle that claimed they were from a reliable source although these may only be tentative names for the sets. Just thought I would pass this info on here as well.

70400 Forest Ambush
70401 Gold Getaway
70402 The Gatehouse Raid
70403 Dragon Mountain
70404 Kings Castle

october, on 06 December 2012 - 07:50 PM, said:

So King's Castle could be a falcon castle?

It's been said that one of the castles is a return, so I'll bet they'll just print more copies of 2010's Kingdoms 7496 King's Castle with the new set number above.

Also assuming Kingdoms brand returns, the above sets start to sound like they'll be more guerrilla based attacks from the dragon faction. Dragon Mountain would likely be a dragon faction castle perched on a cliff/mountain, maybe using the raised baseplate with ramp and pit.

[omegabob]

Tyrant, on 06 December 2012 - 01:04 AM, said:

As much as I want the Black Falcons back, I agree that they (and any other faction) would need to be revamped and not just the same old figures/shields. I would prefer they keep the core emblem of the black/white falcon but add detail like the new figures/shields. The one we got in the Joust set is improvement enough for me if they nake more of them (not that I would turn down further improvement).

I agree that if the old factions are brought back they should be updated and improved first.  One thing I would really like to see is printed armor with updated logos (like the new Black Falcon).  I feel bad for my old Knights with their plain (and not even pearl or metallic), unprinted armor is seen next to the new printed armors that have been turning up since the Crownies and beyond.

[Faefrost]

Zeya, on 06 December 2012 - 08:00 PM, said:

It's been said that one of the castles is a return, so I'll bet they'll just print more copies of 2010's Kingdoms 7496 King's Castle with the new set number above.

Also assuming Kingdoms brand returns, the above sets start to sound like they'll be more guerrilla based attacks from the dragon faction. Dragon Mountain would likely be a dragon faction castle perched on a cliff/mountain, maybe using the raised baseplate with ramp and pit.

If only they would give us something like the 8637 Volcano Base from the Agents theme. A real brick built mountain play set. ( or do something similar for the Lonely Mountain in a Hobbit set.)

Nicker, on 20 November 2012 - 05:21 AM, said:

Here are some set names that someone posted on Classic Castle that claimed they were from a reliable source although these may only be tentative names for the sets. Just thought I would pass this info on here as well.

70400 Forest Ambush
70401 Gold Getaway
70402 The Gatehouse Raid
70403 Dragon Mountain
70404 Kings Castle

Those names do seem to mesh very very well with another wave of the Kingdoms theme.
Forrest Ambush and Gold Getaway sound like they fit in with the 7188 Kings Carriage Ambush set. Gatehouse Raid sounds in line with 7948 Outpost Attack and 7187 Escape from Dragons Prison, Kings Castle will probably be a new or re released Lion Knights castle.

Dragon Mountain however? If the name is right, than I can't see them not including an actual Dragon? If it was simply the headquarters or castle of the Dragon Knights it would be Dragon Mountain Fortress or something similar. Dragon Mountain conjures a cave with a Dragon to fight. Regardless of a lack of otherwise Fantasy elements, Dragons + Knights is a common play setting. Plus it will be at a minimum 2 or 4 release cycles out from any expected or hoped for Smaug sets, so no real conflict there.

[Ardelon]

I myself wouldnt like to see any change to the classic faction shields.I just cant see them as the same faction otherwise. For this reason, I wasnt too thriilled with the Joust Falcon knight, though sadly he does hint at the way TLG would go if remaking older factions. News faces and torsos and metallic colors, sure. Browns and grays would have to be updated anyway. But new shields? Bleh.

[Nicker]

I kinda thought Kingdoms would likely continue since there was actually 2 Kingdoms sets released in 2012. Kingdoms Joust and Kingdoms Chess. I'm really hoping for the Black Falcons return like many others here. I really hope the new Kings castle turns out to be for the Black Falcons.

[Nagyzee]

Huntleyfx, on 06 December 2012 - 03:10 AM, said:

As an army builder, I am extremely excited to accumulate large quantities of the Heroic Knight. While it is true that each knight would have his own heraldry symbols, most knights would wear the symbol of their liege lord. In addition, most of that heraldry would be based off of a related symbol for each of the lord's knights. That, and the fact I already have several of the Golden Knights will really allow me to bump up the might of the Crown forces.

Well, in the high and late middle ages when heraldry really came into notion lesser knights indeed often wore the symbol of their liege lord into battle. But that usually wasn't the king. And that middle "rank" / link is sadly largely missing in LEGO Castle. We got very few lord type figures so far (and none with different heraldry inside a faction). In my ideal Crown Kingdom only the royal guard and the king's other personal forces would sport the crown symbol while other influential families and their retinue of lesser knights would go to war sporting their own symbols. Of course I understand that such a detailed faction will never be made by Lego and I have no problem with that. I'll simply consolidate several Lego factions into one kingdom. I just hope that Lego provides as many separate shield designs over the years and over several themes / runs as possible.

So I hope that the speculation above is not true and it won't be Kingdoms that returns, or if it returns then it is at least with two new factions design-wise.

[The_Creator]

Graysmith, on 06 December 2012 - 03:41 PM, said:

A user on the Swedish LEGO site/forum Swebrick said that he'd seen a distributor's catalogue (of sets due next summer) and mentioned that KINGDOMS is COMING BACK! He didn't give any details as it was only mentioned in passing, and I haven't been able to get him to say anything more about it, whether he saw any photos of the actual sets or anything like that.. But yeah. Kingdoms 2013!! So excited.

EPIC! So excited
Too bad that 70404 is probably a re-release of 7946 but still, and 2013 looks like a Very expensive year for me

[Hive]

I find it amusing that some people complain about how everyone wearing the same shields/hereldy is ahistorical and unrealistic in connection with a buildable kids' toy... What about the fact thats we have buildings that are most often only half and/or completely out of proportions, the inclusion of fantasy elements like wizards and dragons, clothing and buildings being too colorful, all the figures having yellow skin, etc...?

LEGO has never, and will never become, realistic. I find this whole discussion to be silly, it's not meant for historical accuracy - it's meant for fun. I love history myself, and have a particular fondnes for the middle ages, but I see and enjoy LEGO for what it is... instead of arbitrarily trying to give it attributes it doesn't have.

[The_Cook]

Hive, on 07 December 2012 - 09:49 AM, said:

I see and enjoy LEGO for what it is... instead of arbitrarily trying to give it attributes it doesn't have.

Whoah there fella, that's crazy talk!

[rogueang]

Hive, on 07 December 2012 - 09:49 AM, said:

I find it amusing that some people complain about how everyone wearing the same shields/hereldy is ahistorical and unrealistic in connection with a buildable kids' toy... What about the fact thats we have buildings that are most often only half and/or completely out of proportions, the inclusion of fantasy elements like wizards and dragons, clothing and buildings being too colorful, all the figures having yellow skin, etc...?

LEGO has never, and will never become, realistic. I find this whole discussion to be silly, it's not meant for historical accuracy - it's meant for fun. I love history myself, and have a particular fondnes for the middle ages, but I see and enjoy LEGO for what it is... instead of arbitrarily trying to give it attributes it doesn't have.

Oh, did you not notice the Spartan, Legionairre, Highlander, Musketeer, Aztec Warrior, Geisha, Shakespearean Actor... those ARE historically accurate.

Lego is what you want to make out of it. If I want my Lego based fantasy to be somewhat realistic from a historical perspective, yet integrate fantasy elements into it, that's my perogative, and Lego provides the means to do it.

[Hive]

The_Cook, on 07 December 2012 - 01:25 PM, said:

Whoah there fella, that's crazy talk!

You're right, my bad.

Let me make it up to you all by complaining that the Lion Knights' red and white sweathers aren't exactly super historically accurate. For shame, LEGO! I vote we burn the designers on the stake. Who's with me?

[yogurt]

rogueang, on 07 December 2012 - 01:26 PM, said:

Oh, did you not notice the Spartan, Legionairre, Highlander, Musketeer, Aztec Warrior, Geisha, Shakespearean Actor... those ARE historically accurate.

Lego is what you want to make out of it. If I want my Lego based fantasy to be somewhat realistic from a historical perspective, yet integrate fantasy elements into it, that's my perogative, and Lego provides the means to do it.

Except they're not accurate, why is the legionaire carrying a spear instead of a throwing pilum? why has he got bare arms? The Spartans hoplon is too small and the wrong shape. Why does the Spartan have a moustache? Spartans had a unique beard style with no moustache. Sorry for being pedantic but that's just me.

[Nagyzee]

Hive, on 07 December 2012 - 09:49 AM, said:

I find it amusing that some people complain about how everyone wearing the same shields/hereldy is ahistorical and unrealistic in connection with a buildable kids' toy... What about the fact thats we have buildings that are most often only half and/or completely out of proportions, the inclusion of fantasy elements like wizards and dragons, clothing and buildings being too colorful, all the figures having yellow skin, etc...?

LEGO has never, and will never become, realistic. I find this whole discussion to be silly, it's not meant for historical accuracy - it's meant for fun. I love history myself, and have a particular fondnes for the middle ages, but I see and enjoy LEGO for what it is... instead of arbitrarily trying to give it attributes it doesn't have.

You completely missed my point, sorry. I accept the whole one crest / faction solution of LEGO, it absolutely makes sense. I'd never expect them to make significantly more intricate and historic factions as it's indeed a child's toy after all. The historical aspects just came up as I tried to explain why I would like them to not return to previous designs but offering new ones with each new faction or collectible minifigure. So in my opinion:
- only one new crest for every new faction = okay
- going back to (not so) old designs instead of offering a new one = wasted opportunity

[legobear]

Let's get back to discussing about the possible outcomes for each set number.