Slegengr

I agree that a significant element of the secondary prices is tied to collecting originals, but I also think that there is a market for sets that people would like to buy as adults that they dreamed of getting as a child, regardless of the exact form. I still think the modern remakes of sets are the best course for almost all considerations, since they have less impact on the collector's market, hit heavily with nostalgia, and can still be nice new sets with appeal to children. Today's market is definitely more complicated now that people are buying LEGO sets as an investment. This seems to be the case with Benny's Space Squad: many people likely bought the set for nostalgia while children were also likely interested, but some people likely bought the set out for a while in hopes of investment when supply ran out and demand (especially to nostalgic adults) was still high. This does put TLG in a position that is hard to predict, though I am quite confident that there is enough demand for the classic themes that at least small releases or 3-5 set waves could do well, maybe even every few years. This could all be a view limited by my personal nostalgia for the classics and near-complete disinterest in all the licensed themes (though I do understand why pop-culture connections increase sales). If LEGO would reproduce original sets, it is always likely to frustrate the secondary market investors, since sets with high enough demand to be worth reproducing are the sets with high secondary market prices due to the rarity/collector-aspect/investment cycle. This is something I don't think TLG takes lightly, especially now that they own BrickLink and have direct source of secondary market information. The case with the Taj Mahal seems likely to be repeated if they reproduce other large retired sets like the ones you mentioned. As I stated previously and as you mentioned, modern remakes seem a much better course for profitability, interest to AFOL's, and interest to children, so I still do not really want to see classic sets reproduced nearly exact to the original, even if TLG would bring back or refabricate retired molds to make the originals as historically exact as possible. Nostalgia is such a funny thing: starve it and the demand skyrockets; feed it too much and main-stream modernity might kill interest; I'm sure this is a delicate balance that TLG has to take into account, but I still hope they can see that a few nice modern remakes of Space, Pirates, and Castle (or even new sets with similar classic appeal merged with modern parts/techniques) are in demand enough to produce instead of having almost none. I also hope that they don't continue wrapping the whole nostalgia package into primarily large, 18+ sets or GWP. I'm really curious how sets like the Forest Hideout GWP would have faired financially if they are sold like typical sets. This might be discussion for a different thread, though. Interesting, I did not even know this set existed. It's definitely a case of a set remake without parts from discontinued molds.

Hoo, boy... though I touched on it earlier, the GWP discussion is a long one that goes a different direction than intended in this thread (though still an interesting discussion to be had, just probably elsewhere). Yes, that is what I think: many sets from the 80's and 90's have critical pieces/molds that have been discontinued. Though there are sometimes similar modern counterparts, the differences are enough that they justify (in my opinion) a complete modernized remake with reasonable faithfulness to the original (the Forest Hideout mentioned above is a perfect example).

I was in the middle of responding to your message when you submitted this response, so hopefully I can be forgiven for a double-post... Though I would be thrilled with reproductions of classic sets, I think I understand the marketing behind not doing so. Thankfully, I bought into the second-hand market for classic themes heavily during what is now likely historically the peak time: 2010-2015. Second-hand availability was good with online sales methods while pricing was reasonable due to relatively niche interest. I bought many second-hand collections through eBay and sorted out classic sets, especially Castle and some Pirates with a little Space, sourced the few missing pieces through BrickLink, and made great progress towards completing a collection of my childhood dreams, often in multiples of many Castle sets. Through 2020-2022, the value of these sets has doubled according to BrickLink average sales prices. The Icons sets are the perfect idea, in my opinion, due to reasons mentioned above. I am taking this opportunity to revel in the improvements with new pieces while having the similar nostalgia and being able to share my childhood with my nephews through these sets. One of my most favorite interests in the LEGO hobby is redesigning my own versions of updated classic sets, which I plan to do extensively over the coming years to share these sets with my nephews.

I don't know all the details, but the Legends sets were in the Shop-At-Home catalogs in the USA, so they had advertising. The marketing was likely still less than it could have been! My older brothers bought 2 of the Legends Black Falcon's Fortress and 2 of the Guarded Inn while my mother ordered the Black Seas Barracuda that I and my brother earned through summer work. The concept was great for me having a chance at sets I had missed being too young or not born at time of release. I don't recall the switched hair pieces; do you have any more details on that? The gray-scale box was a mistake for sure, in my opinion. It seems like TLG in general does not understand their market information properly and consistently bungles the concepts. Maybe I am just missing the insider information as a consumer, but it seems like TLG could make a lot of money off more nostalgia connections, especially right now when people in their 30's/40' who lived through LEGO's "Golden Era" may have children to introduce to LEGO and would love the nostalgia connection. Does TLG really not understand the meaning behind second-hand prices on old sets? They certainly seemed to understand with the Eldorado Fortress remake: price matched the BrickLink average sales price for the original almost exactly... The concept of competing with themselves is sometimes a valid one, but I don't know that comparing classic reproductions/nostalgia to Star Wars is quite the same thing. Classic Space and Star Wars, though both "Space" are really not at all in the same market, in my opinion.

@SpacePolice89 In some cases it is possible, but I think the concept runs into trouble for numerous reasons: 1. The "Legends" sets released in the early 2000's are reported to have not done very well, so TLG is less inclined to consider set remakes. (Would this concept work better today with more parents with a nostalgic connection to the sets from 1980-2000 with children at a good introductory age for LEGO sets? I think so, and think there is evidence of such with the success of The LEGO Movie and the current Icons line.) 2. Techniques as well as pieces are dated. Old builds are basic compared to standards of today (partly due to more limited piece types available). Some parts used require out-of-production molds. 3. Market disruption would occur since people collect the old sets for nostalgia and due to rarity today. Reproducing a set would upset collectors and is less likely to draw in new customers without the nostalgia/collector connection. 4. Modernized remakes with appeal to nostalgia seems much more likely to do well. I personally think this is the best route as evidenced by the success of the recent Icons sets and Gift-With-Purchase (whether or not consumers like GWP...). This gives the best of both worlds: appeal to nostalgia and interest for today's modern consumer, potentially rebuilding/reinforcing nostalgia for the LEGO brand and originals with new connections to the original "Golden Era" nostalgia. For examples of retired molds from your example sets (all would require updates to outdated colors): 6267 Lagoon Lock-Up: 16x32 baseplate (baseplates in general are rare today), cloth sail, 2-piece jail cell door, adjustable palm tree trunk pieces 6927 All-Terrain Vehicle: 2x2 short support columns?, windshield slope, inverted cockpit slope, short ladders, rocket cones?, technic wheels 6078 Royal Drawbridge: 2x2x4 octagonal columns, 16x32 baseplate, 4x4x6 corner wall panels, small triangular LURP? (maybe BURP as well?), chrome great-sword, dragon helmet, dragon plumes, cap helmet with chinstrap aventail 6615 Eagle Stunt Flyer: wing plates, tail plate, tail fin, engine circular housing, propeller, exhaust pipe 6145 Crystal Crawler: wheels, bendable grapple arms (all pieces), faceted octagonal bubble windshield, propellers, octagonal corner column piece, spring-loaded pieces for locking the direction of the front propeller supports In each of these cases, the pieces that are out-of-production (some for many years) are very critical to the sets. I think it would be difficult to try to maintain the original set while replacing these parts with modern pieces that are a near-exact match to the original (sometimes not even an option, as far as I know). The way I see it, in almost all regards, the modern Icon remakes are a much more viable option, since they maintain a nostalgia connection with the freedom to use modern pieces to reinterpret the original sets, sometimes with significant improvements to the build and design. I also agree with all of the points @MAB made above.

Ah, sorry you did not find it there. I will look through my old catalogs and leaflets, but I doubt I have enough from the 80's to be confident I might find what you want.

Check out peeron/picsl scans to find what you are looking for: http://www.peeron.com/scans/ There are many scans of catalogs over the years and you can select by year to search. A couple that I found that might be what you are looking for: http://www.peeron.com/catalogs/1985/medium/7/ http://www.peeron.com/catalogs/1987/medium/6/?id=160 & http://www.peeron.com/catalogs/1987/medium/7/?id=160

Main Building Category 6278/6292 Enchanted Island by Danny_Boy4 6267 Lagoon Lock-Up/Soldiers’ Tavern by Aanchir 6269 Islander Palace by BrynnOfCastlegate 6273 Rock Island Refuge by CollinsAnimationStudio 6260/6257 Pirates - Shipwreck Island/ Castaway's Raft by _R_R_ Mini Set Building Category Sloop Windy by Marooned Marin Captain's Cabin by MontyMatte Buried Treasure 6235 by omby54 Treasure Island by Oky 6232 Skeleton Crew by Jack Sassy

Adventure awaits at the Sailor's Hideout! Based loosely on Classic Pirates set 6258 Smuggler's Shanty, this is a new set using similar building techniques introduced in the updated 10320 Eldorado Fortress. Designed as a set that will be completed (including instructions and box) in physical bricks for a birthday present for my nephew, the building techniques are very sturdy and fairly basic in the style of an official LEGO set. Set includes 2 sailor minifigures, a monkey, a shark, a parrot, and a crab. Watch out for the mischievous monkey and the pesky shark! Use the fishing pole to catch fish and hang them to dry on the shack roof beams. Take a nap in the shack on the rug made from an old sail. Island Front: Island Rear: Dig up the buried treasure under the campfire: Sail the dory up to the pier: Dory (sails are new parts and will be made custom for the physical build; probably with color stripes but I could not get the image to apply properly in Stud.io part designer): Full album of images on Flickr ...and I forgot the string for the fishing pole before rendering the images! There will be one included in the physical build and one would be included in the theoretical set. I should mention that some of the design decisions for the dory are based on discussions about @Marooned Marin's design for Sloop Windy. Credit to Marooned Marin for the spar attachment to the mast, and this is not a mini set entry so it will not compete against Sloop Windy in the contest. No design stealing/infringement is intended. (@Mister Phes for indexing, thanks!)

Oh, no problem, I did not take your critique as harsh! I'm just good at over-explaining myself while still not communicating what I meant. It's hard to fully explain, but I wanted most of the basic features of the set to be 4+ building techniques with a few sections of more difficult techniques to challenge my nephew. I should also mention that his dad (my brother) will be thrilled with the opportunity to help out as needed from his own LEGO experience and will likely relish the opportunity to hearken back to our childhood LEGO nostalgia. I could also mention that this nephew has an older brother that just turned 7 who built 10497 Galaxy Explorer at age 6 with shockingly little need for assistance even through the technic portions. I was building another set alongside him at the table and kept expecting to need to help him but consistently found that he was farther along than expected when I checked with him. This older brother may have troubles letting his younger brother build this set without interfering... In all, this set is quite a hodgepodge of building technique complexity that likely would be either more complex or more simplified if it were an official set.

All of the updates are improvements in my opinion! The stern cannons look much better and more reasonable in scale now. Since this contest is centered around making something that could be an official set, this is my reason and likely the reason for others that we complain about too many cannons. Official sets have never included enough cannons even to fill all of the gun ports. Of course, all of the cannons should be a sure inclusion on a MOC!

Return to Classic LEGO Pirates with this updated 2023 version of set 6281: Pirate's Perilous Pitfall! Model contains about 2400 pieces and would retail around the same price point as the 2023 Eldorado Fortress. With 5 minifigures, 2 animals, special features, and 6 play functions, hours of adventure await! Model separates for a wider view and open play access: Additional connection points are included on the edges of the main rock structure to allow for other models to be attached to expand on the set. What is the meaning behind this spooky skeleton? It may warn of dangers ahead! Use the rock steps to access the platform: Watchtower includes climbing ladder, a table and seats with a treasure map, and a hiding place for a chest of treasure at the bottom: Crystals and stalactites fill the interior of the cave and rusty iron spikes protrude from the rocks beneath the bridge: The golden crown is kept safe in the throne room. What secret does the throne hide? Pivot and fire the cannon on the dock, rotate the tiller of the sunken ship, and keep guard with the stern deck swivel guns: "Cut" the ropes to allow the mast to topple! 1. 2. 3. Pull the rope to lift the bridge! 1. 2. 3. Step on the bridge trapdoor and fall onto the spikes below, releasing the boulder avalanche! 1. 2. 3. Pull the pin to release the throne trapdoor and drop unsuspecting adventurers into the prison below! 1. 2. 3. Look out for the crocodile if you try to escape the prison! 4. Pull the string on the back cliff to lift the trapdoor and push in the pin to hold it in place: 5. 6. I hope you enjoy this Classic Pirates set remake! Link to full image album on Flickr

Well, after 30 years of collecting (I won't say how much money I've spent ;) and no Dark Age, I do have more than a few pieces to share. Besides, I don't want my nephews to be totally jealous when they get to come play in my LEGO room with an extensive collection but have very little at home. It's also hard to say that it is really just for my nephews, as most sets will likely be made with an extra copy for me and I get to relive my childhood nostalgia while implementing AFOL experience in the design of these sets. Classic set remakes are near the top of my list of favorite builds, especially for sets to which I have special affinity. P.S. Would you be able to edit your last response to cut out or hide the quote of my post? It is showing up as a full repeat of all of my responses from my last post, which makes for a long list to scroll through. I'd appreciate it, Thanks!

Thanks for feedback, MstrOfPppts! To be clear, this set was literally designed as a gift for my nephew who is turning 4 in October, so the 4+ feel is quite intentional. Adding this as an entry was more just a way of sharing the design and getting some feedback rather than with intentions of trying to win the contest. This was a unique challenge for me to design something that would be visually appealing and have a few challenging techniques to encourage his learning while also being basic enough that my nephew might be able to build this without help. He may need initial help with the sails and the gap fillers between the leaves, but I hope this just challenging enough to encourage his learning of new techniques over time. I will note that the rudder solution, as far as I know, was my original design and suggestion in the discussion of Marooned Marin's Sloop Windy as I linked in the original post. This is the same discussion from which I got the design for the connection for spars to masts from Marooned Marin. Since this is not in the mini-build category where Sloop Windy is found, I did not consider this infringement as the designs would not be competing, but maybe I'm wrong about that. The hidden treasure concept is my original, though quite an obvious solution in my opinion, and I did not notice until after submitting this entry that @Oky used the identical technique in his mini-build Treasure Island, even down to using the shovel as a lever for removing the tiles. Again, no infringement of design was intended and the simplicity of the design is intentional. I'm okay with this entry not standing out and being lost in the voting, as I had fun designing it and did so with the primary intention of making an actual 4+ set for my nephew. After several failed attempts at covering the gaps between the leaves, I was happy to find a sufficient result that was not overly complex (albeit likely complex for my nephew that is turning 4). It is one of my favorite design details of this build, which is no surprise since it is one of the few techniques that goes beyond the 4+ limitation. The red-green dory color-scheme will likely be extended to the sails with green and white stripes for the actual build but I had troubles with the decal application in Stud.io and gave up on this for the digital submission. A dory with primary visual of tan sails next to an island with primary visual of tan sand is really not ideal, in my opinion. For the monkey hands color change, I'm still undecided on final choice. The monkeys I have obviously have the yellow hands, but I could easily change them and don't know if it is a significant issue of monkey race based on skin color? It is certainly not my intention with this change. As mentioned below, images I find of many different monkey species of darker fur color seem to have darker skin color, so the color change would be more accurate. Since I am still a fan of the race-neutral yellow for minifigures, I certainly could leave the yellow hands on the monkey, especially if this will be perceived as an issue... Thanks again for feedback. Thanks, Fraunces! I'm glad you like the results of my design decisions. Thanks, Mazin! After several iterations and disliked/failed designs for covering the gaps between the leaves on the roof, I was happy with this result, both in aesthetics and in build techniques that are complex enough to challenge my nephew and yet simple enough (hopefully) that he can learn without significant frustration. The limitation on island size is intentional for my design intent for my nephew, so I don't plan to change that at this point. This contest really has no direct bearing on my design and just coincided as a fun way to share the design. Hiding the treasure under the fire is primarily driven by force of the design, but I though it would be an interesting idea as well. The simplicity of the design was exactly what I wanted for my design intent. Again, not to sound redundant, but the simplicity of the hanging fish is intentional since the set is designed as a gift for my nephew's 4th birthday. This is also part of the reason why the back is plain in contrast, as well as my belief that an official set would likely not include 4 fish so there could be 2 on each side. Additional accessories also seem to me like they might exceed official set limitations, but I do like the idea of an axe for chopping the firewood and will likely add this for the physical build. Wood carving would be a fun inclusion as a pastime for the sailor on the shore, though I don't plan to give away my rare old parrot in brown color to my nephew at this age! I may try to incorporate this idea some other way. The parrot needed a perch, so I added the top cones, but I do agree that they seem to imply some form of added decoration to be needed. The design for the minifigure in the boat was a personal choice for a basic minifigure with readily-available parts and classic appeal to entice my nephew into appreciation for the classics! ...not so fitting for this contest and I could have changed the design for these renders even if I intend to build with different pieces, but I'm satisfied with my choice. As a real set, the torso would certainly be an updated version or new design. Thanks, iragm! I also like the tanbark sails, but I am torn for final design between appreciation for realism and childhood preferences. Though tan is more realistic, the tan color matches the sand too closely and I certainly would have preferred a color-striped sail on my LEGO builds as a child. The original set lends itself well to my design intent for my nephew. I'm not totally happy with the 5-stud width caused by even spacing between columns and mid-rail post, but it worked out well enough in the end. Wow, thanks for the suggestion on the double jumper plate for the buried treasure cover! I forgot that piece existed. It would surely work better for attaching the fire and maintaining the play feature for a 4-year-old. The seaweed on the shoreline was primarily included for the clip plates to be additional attachment points between base plates for sturdiness. Maybe they are unnecessary. I'm still inclined to include them regardless of necessity, but I could be convinced otherwise. Maybe I will answer this debate further with the physical build if it is sturdy enough. Another thing I noticed is that I originally needed an attachment since the first design had one of the wedge plates attached to the sand along only one line of studs, but I since modified the design with a 2-stud-deep overlap that likely makes the additional clip plates and seaweed unneeded. It will remain under the pier either way, since I find it a fitting and interesting inclusion. Accessories and animals are one of the best aspects of sets for children, so including them was a guarantee in my design requirements! Though I considered adding an Imperial Guard in the dory (originally he was an Armada soldier), I decided to make him a more neutral sailor for a few reasons. 1. Parts are more readily available and cheaper and I already have uses for all of my updated Imperial minifigures in my armies (not that I couldn't spare 1 Imperial torso...), 2. I like this jacket with epaulets and have rarely seen this combination (though I'm sure it's been used before), 3. I tried to avoid direct references to violence/conflict for the most part since my nephew will be 4 and I think his mother will take some convincing over time to such inclusions in a toy. I could argue that "boys will be boys" so to speak, but as much as I've already convinced her to listen to me and my brother (her husband) about our childhood LEGO experiences and advice, I don't want to spoil a good thing by moving too fast with the perception that I am encouraging violence with my choice of gifts. For an official set, very likely the sailor in the dory would be an Imperial Guard or Armada soldier. Though I referenced 6258 Smuggler's Shanty a bit in the shack design since it was a set I enjoyed as a child, the reference is very loose. (Just to make sure this is clear, since my personal preference is either for quite faithful remakes or completely new designs rather than for the middle ground) Thanks, durazno33! Yes, I thought my basis was not wrong that dark nougat hands would be a better match to real monkeys. The yellow hands, though the classic choice (probably due to limited color palette at original introduction), have never seemed as accurate as flesh-tones even though the same could be said for minifigure skin as well. I already have well-established personal preference for yellow skin on minifigures due to the race-neutral aspect and surely due in part to nostalgia, but I guess I don't think race is an issue with monkeys and chose a more accurate representation. The point about the flag color is noted. This would have been particularly bad if I had used one potential solution for filling the gaps between leaves with the same streamer flag piece in green, as there would be a color and shape match in that case. I'm still kind of partial to the red-green color scheme of the boat, though, so I'm not sure what I think about this. I'll have to check the aesthetics of using dark green for the green components of the dory, although then I'd probably have to change the seaweed to green instead of dark green. Maybe I'll try out different dory color schemes altogether, as I have a few of the rowboat pieces in several different colors. Thanks, Marooned Marin! After our discussion on your thread, I tinkered around with the bowsprit attachment solutions until settling on this design. Since I was not building for the Mini challenge, exact piece limitation did not matter as much. One fun aspect of this design is that the cross-axle technic brick could be changed for a pin technic brick to make the jib swing to better catch the wind like some small sailing vessels such as the Galway Hooker (one of my personal favorite aesthetics/designs for small sailing vessels), which seems to have a hinged jib from what I've seen in pictures. I'd like to learn more about sailing some day so I can know more specifics about design and function of these components. I just realized that none of the views in my renders show the back side of the mast/booms/bowsprit to show how it is built. I'm still not sure whether or not I will include the round plates with hole to help keep the sail shaping by pushing the clew. Due to the method of attachment on the luff of the gaff sail and head and clew of jib sail, these round plates may be unneeded. Not a render, just a screenshot:

Thanks for feedback, JeffBuilds! Opinions on the original set do differ. I don't think it was an outstanding set, but I do have nostalgia for it, think the overall presentation is decent, and really liked all the different play features and the fact that there are 4 primary structure types in the build: shipwreck, concrete pier, mountain with cave, and palisade tower (and platform with bridge). Had there been more Armada sets made to compare to 6281, my opinions might be different, but I always liked the Armada and this set had one of my favorite minifigures growing up with the green "Captain Valiant" figure with the chrome breastplate. The jungle setting made the set better in my mind, and something about some of the original artwork in the Shop-at-Home magazines has always been very appealing to me. So, yeah, I have good associations with the set through nostalgia that not all others share, and I do understand the criticisms of the original set. I think it is important to remember that this was originally a playset designed for children that, within the target age range, probably like the set in general and did not notice the flaws as much as AFOL's of today will notice them. That being said, a strong part of my interest in remaking this set was to hopefully improve on or eradicate the flaws with the intention of completing instructions, sourcing parts, and making a box with bagged components to give this as a "set" to my nephews to share some of my nostalgia with them. As an AFOL with a childhood through the peak era of raised baseplates and an AFOL today, I love brick-built remakes of the classic raised baseplates. Eldorado Fortress had this to perfection, in my opinion, and I had a lot of fun with this set making the raised baseplate to appear as an abandoned section of a worn-out concrete pier. I do like the result with the brick-built sail (except, of course, the messy back view trying to connect all the slopes in a decent manner even though I intend to make a cloth sail for the physical build; too bad there are not dual-molded 2-color plates, half red, half white! ...though I don't actually think this would be a worthwhile investment for TLG to make this type of piece, especially since the color combinations are almost limitless). You are correct that the original shipwreck did not have a collapsing mast and I lifted the idea from the play feature on ship sets of the same era. It makes a lot of sense on a shipwreck in my opinion, since the wood could be rotting away to the point of collapse. Now, resetting it for future collapses may not be so realistic... Adding solid logs to the top of the rope bridge was the first piece of this remake that I designed. I work in structural engineering, so this was an absolute requirement! Indeed, the original set did not have spikes under the trap bridge, but I felt they added a fitting Pirate appeal to the set and an extra element of play feature trying to avoid the spikes. Falling from the trap bridge in the original set would not be fun, but left reasonable chance that the falling minifigure would survive without injury, come back around the pier, build a short bridge over the gap after the stone already fell, and make it safely into the throne room (where the fortunate adventurer would then trigger the throne trapdoor and fall into the crocodile cave anyways...). I'm glad you like my redesign. The main thing I am looking into now before proceeding with steps toward making this a physical unofficial set is that I would like to try to make the sand at the bottom with the same curved slopes and round wedge bricks as Pirates of Barracuda Bay and Eldorado fortress official sets to have a brick-height base rather than needing to build up a layer of plates atop the base layer to allow for the wedge plate shoreline. I also plan to expand the shore a bit and add some extra rock structures to hold the base plates together without the curved wave tiles in this current render, as this is too weak of a design. Of course we can still be friends. :) Differing opinions are certainly allowable. I appreciate your feedback. Thanks, Mazin! The play value was a primary stand-out feature in my mind that made this set ideal for a remake. Are there sets with more play features, especially after the easy introduction of the falling mast concept from ships of the same era as the original set? Probably not many... It was very fun designing the play features in a modern manner that still referenced the original, especially as I pictured playing these features with my young nephews once I physically build the final set. The boulder is a bit strange, though I think it is a great inclusion in a playset. It seems silly to me that the boulder likely poses no danger to the minifigure triggering its release, and silly that the boulder would likely roll right along the pier straight into the palisade tower, but it is still fun in my mind in a zany, LEGO play manner that does not always have to make perfect sense in physical parallel. I'm glad you like the little details I tried to include in this update. I also would like such a place to visit in real life, maybe with a few less real dangers, though. The tower would be a nice place to build Pirate LEGO sets! Since I had no good way to include the skull and cutlasses on the sail, I decided to embed them in the rock faces on either side of the rolling boulder (this adds some appeal to the back view of the model as well). I was happy with this result in such small scale and wondered how noticeable this detail would be. Nice suggestions with the shipwreck. I do intend to add a few large stones supporting the wreck to make it fit in a bit better above the water line (and to provide attachment points for the base plates in an effort to eliminate the weak curved tile waves currently used). The bare ribs of the hull were intended to add play value as you mentioned. Since the crocodile's lair could be in the prison cave under the mountain, I did not make the shipwreck into a lair, but it is a great suggestion! As should be remembered with any set, the mostly-empty interior was partially intentional as an opportunity for each builder to customize the interior as they chose with many options such as you suggest. I prefer when sets leave some areas more open-ended rather than completing a single intention or storyline (which is also my primary dislike with licensed themes: too locked to a single storyline and not open enough to creativity like original LEGO themes with enough suggestions to help a storyline but no full completion/definition of the story). I know presentation is always an issue, but I figured that those that find enough interest in my design will likely follow through each picture/step of the play features. I'm fairly certain that there will still be many that only look at the first few pictures and skip most of the reading, but I still enjoyed making the details available for those who are interested enough to look into them. The addition of the falling mast was a primary factor that made my decision to remake this particular set, as it seemed a fun and obvious inclusion to the play features! The rotating tiller is kind of a silly inclusion as a "play feature" due to being useless, but it seemed to me like the kind of thing that TLG might mention on an official set. Maybe it could be used to swat away the crocodile or a foe attempting to climb onto the deck, but it really is just a "play feature" by design default with no real intention of being very useful. This is one area I am considering expanding on or adding to the design with a triggered effect of some sort, though it maybe will remain the same and should just not have been specifically mentioned. Going into this remake of this particular set, I knew there would be a love/hate relationship for many people, but I have personal connection and interest in the original set and am planning to build this set to gift to my nephews, so I designed for my own interests rather than caring solely what all others would think about it. As has been mentioned several times, some people did not like the original set, some view it indifferently, some liked it. In the end, I liked the original set, chose it for the redesign, and have little concern whether or not others view this choice good or bad based on their opinion of the original set. Of course, I am happy if others like this remake, but I enjoyed the design process and the plans for the physical build and interactions with my nephews regardless of this contest and final opinions of others. I will mention, though, that I do appreciate the feedback and constructive criticisms offered by others, as it gives me new thoughts how it might be improved. Another factor in this is that I prefer when a set remake stays true to the original as much as possible, sometimes even down to basic color choices matching the original, and a new design might as well be unique rather than basing it on an old set if it is not true enough to the original to feel almost exactly the same. This has a specific effect on my design choices here even knowing that some may find this entry less interesting due to opinions about the original set that may still hold true to this remake. I appreciate your detailed thoughts on this! As to the long, flat, empty rock structure, it is intended to represent an abandoned and deteriorating concrete pier. As such, though I started designing caves for added play features, I decided that it does not actually make sense in this case to have anything other than a solid rock pier (ignore the lack of explanation on how there could be a small waterfall coming out of the pier; it had to be included as a reference to the original raised baseplate even if it does not really make sense!). If this design were an official set, I think there is enough play value elsewhere in the set and the concept of having an empty walkway atop the pier for tower and throne room access is enough of an explanation to leave the pier plain and solid, in my opinion. Thanks for suggestions, but my preferred way to add play value is with additional sets/builds that attach to the connecting points to expand on the possibilities and storylines. This is how I view official LEGO sets in comparison to MOC's: some features are left out to provide enough motivation to buy the other sets that could be included in the wave of sets. This was, at least, my personal decision with this remake. Though I did not have time to finish any in time for this contest, I intend to design future additional sets to go along with this set for the physical build. There will definitely be animals included in the expansion sets, since that is one significant limitation of the original set 6281 which is why there are only one parrot and one crocodile in this remake. Pertaining to the minifigure designs, being a remake is a significant limitation in my opinion, since the minifigures need to match the originals enough to be recognizable. I did make some modernizations within the limitations of availability in Stud.io and all figures would have updated versions of the torso prints (maybe some new head prints as well, though some of the heads will actually be updated versions that were not included here due again to Stud.io limitations) if this were to be an official set. I plan to work with custom decals in the future in Stud.io but did not have enough time for this added benefit for this entry. Personally, I really liked the design of all of the specific minifigures in the original set (maybe it's just my nostalgia speaking) and am happy with basic modernizations as shown. Thanks again for detailed feedback! Thanks, iragm! Though I did not know of the full extent of the dislike or lack of interest in the original set before deciding on this set for a remake, I was aware that there were several issues or oversimplifications in the original. Since this was a set I dreamed of getting as a child, I have only good personal associations with the set even though I recognize limitations as an AFOL. I was pleasantly surprised with the results for the brick-built sail tattering and see a benefit in the weight added by bricks for the falling mast play feature, but I am still heavily leaning towards a custom or original cloth sail. Fleshing out the shipwreck and placing it at a tilt was one of my inspiring concepts toward deciding to remake this set, especially to add the falling mast play feature. Since this is a remake, I wanted the minifigures to be as close to the original as possible. Each figure has a few modernizations included and all would actually include new designs for the torso print (including front and back printing. Due to time limitations and my introduction to the possibility for custom decals in Stud.io being too recent for any meaningful testing or experience, these renders are within the limitations of current availability within Stud.io and I was happy enough with the results. The pirate captain in this original set has always been one of my favorite Piretes minifigures produced (I like the version with the cocked hat in set 6249 Pirate's Ambush even better), so I was also happy with the result in this modernized version. I'm glad you also like the foliage and rockwork decisions. Though it could be done better in a MOC and though I may be redesigning it somewhat if I change the sand to curved slopes at brick height, I thought this amount of foliage reasonable for an official set, though this set's jungle pier setting does require more foliage than was included in either of the official sets Pirates of Barracuda Bay or the 2023 remake of Eldorado Fortress. The rockwork follows the same basic design concepts as the recent sets, so it is not original and is really just reconfigured in this design to match the original raised baseplate. I'm still happy enough with the result. Nope, the bridge does not (yet) lower into the water when the set is separated. This is a major design flaw that requires either a redesign so it does lower into the water, or the inclusion of an additional set that would be some form of pier or boulder that replaces the cannon pier attached to the shipwreck removed during set separation. This is an idea that I plan to work out in the future though it was not resolved before the entry deadline. Definitely a significant limitation currently... The shipwreck and falling mast play feature were definitely quite enjoyable to design. Thanks for your feedback! Indeed, most of the play features are updates of the original except for the falling mast and spikes under the trap bridge. Redesigning and trying to improve them was very enjoyable. As mentioned previously but I'll say again here: I work as a structural engineer, so the unsupported rope bridge during retraction with a pull rope could not remain! The solid top logs and the hanging planks were the first part of this entire set remake that I addressed and completed. The rolling stone really should not be permitted to roll very far, considering it would just run right into the palisade tower anyways! This is certainly a sill design flaw from the original, and the angularity of the stone (and design in general) is driven by part limitations (not just in Stud.io, but TLG production as well, as far as I'm aware). I was happy enough with this design for now, but may need to redesign after physical testing of this play feature. For a Pirates set, I thought the spikes under the trap bridge would be fitting. I'm still undecided on what color to use, as I can see your point. These pieces are not currently available in dark/earth orange anyways, so I already have to decide if I will use metallic colors in the physical build. Though some of the wrong appearance in this model seems to be due to rendering issues with the color and the shadows added from lighting, it still seems a bit funny to me to use the same color for the spikes as is used in some of the wood railing details at the palisade tower and cannon pier... I really want these spikes to appear rusty, though, and dark/earth orange seems to be the best color match for rusty iron. If I use a silver color, the spikes may blend in too much with the rocks. Gold might be a passable compromise, but then they will look like an unrealistic waste of the pirate treasure (though ironic that a hopeful treasure thief may be injured by treasure). As this was a distinctive goal, I am glad you think I kept well to the aesthetics and design philosophy of the official modern Pirates sets. Since it is a classic remake, I wanted the colors to match the original as much as possible but still decided on a few updates for particularly strange colors. The ship ribs/framing and platform surfaces, which would be wood, are still designed in black to match the original (a design choice that I personally appreciated in the 2023 Eldorado Fortress remake), but the yellow wood in the original railings was changed to dark/earth orange since yellow would not work well enough for me. I chose to represent them as a wood color variation rather than as gilded(?) railing supports. At one point, I had included masonry brick bricks in light gray, dark gray, and sand green for detailing, but changed them all to sand green since this is likely a limitation that would be applied in an official set, and was pleased with the results. The same applies to the olive green corner slope bricks (still not sure if I wish they existed in green or if I do prefer the olive green, though I'm leaning toward the latter), so I think this piece shape is only included in the one color in the entire set. I don't think this is an absolute design limitation for official sets, but do think it is something that would be taken into consideration since it would limit the number of stops/bins needed when filling the bags of pieces during manufacture of the set. Ever since LEGO introduced the Slope 45 1 x 1 x 2/3 Quadruple Convex Pyramid, I've wanted to use it to make quartz crystals and thought this would be a fitting place to do so. They add nice visual appeal with just a few parts and, though I have not researched the exact science behind crystal formation, seem to fit well with a cave and on rocks near water. The choice of clear crystals in this application is a clear winner in my opinion (pun intended) as it adds a bit of distinction without standing out like other colors would. There was no question in my mind that the waterfall had to be included since this is a remake of a classic set that had that detail in the baseplate (even if it does not really make much sense; what is the water source? ...it is still a fun detail). Thanks for noticing and confirming my inclusion of the skull motif and cutlasses on the rock face (included on back and front). I was pleasantly surprised with the results as well for such a relatively small scale. It seemed believable enough to me to be included as a visual break in an otherwise-bare cliff face. The tattering effect of the brick-built sail was surprisingly convincing to me even though I am still more likely to include cloth sails on the physical build. Though I did not check into this during design and just stumbled across the concept while searching through curved slopes/wedges in Stud.io, I would not be surprised to find others using this same tattering technique, either in official sets or custom sets/MOC's with brick-built cloth. I'm glad you like my design for the shipwreck. Since the original set had the battlements on the lower platform in black, I assumed they were meant to be wood and reused the palisade design for a coherent design. I used the facet brick to mimic the original, but I really like your suggestions to have angled log-brick palisade, especially since there is not really a good option to physically build the facet brick solution with available pieces in the right color. This is definitely something I will look into for completing the process on this set for my nephews! Since the plain red carpet of the original seemed too plain, I decided to include that throne for sitting to appreciate the crown treasure and am glad you also like this inclusion. It adds a bit of fun to the trapdoor play feature, since a minifigure should be able to be seated on the throne while the trap is activated. The head for the crown is in Stud.io and will certainly be physically built in gold. The render gives a strange appearance due to pearl gold being contrasted with chrome gold. It should look better in the physical build. Note that Captain Buck o' Neer's epaulets are also pearl gold and appear similar to yellow in the close-up render of the throne room. (P.S. The captain is not named officially so I made up a name in the style of most of the 90's official names; eventually I'll have to make an additional set for the island of Neer, maybe Fahr as well; intentionally cheesy, I know) Thanks for checking into this. I originally copied the script to a flashdrive, but also tried and failed with a direct download and unzip to desktop. As a work-around, I did find a free online converter that served my purposes, though I did not yet get my unit conversions to work perfectly and had to use some random scaling factors to transfer into Stud.io. For my other entry, Sailor's Hideout, I got custom sails to work, although I still need to learn how to properly apply decals to curved surfaces so the sails could be striped instead of tan matching the color of the sand. For some reason, when I applied a striped image decal, the stripes only applied to a portion of the curve and I could not find a way to change decal application depth to go around the curve.

Agreed, this ship is similar to the Ironram! @Stoertebricker This is a nice ship and styled in a believable manner to a classic set! The removeable deck is a nice inclusion. Hinges on the cabin corners for play access are also great to include. The figurehead is a design I've always liked, and the net on the bow is not something I've seen often on MOC's but should be included more often, in my opinion. I think there are too many cannons, especially for a representation of what could be an official set. The cannons on the poop deck seem to take up too much space and seem especially out of place to me, even though I've wondered why more actual sailing ships did not have front- or rear-facing cannons to cover more sides than just the broadsides.

Thanks for feedback, hatchpattern! Small island builds like this will always be of interest to me. They offer so much for playability as nice small sets. The pier is a bit small for ships to dock, but the dory could bring in crew or cargo from ships to shore. Having columns in between the corner sand slopes definitely worked nicely for revealing the posts embedded in the sand. I considered adding a palm tree, but decided the island was not large enough for it without appearing cluttered. I guess the only trees on this island were cut down to make the shanty. Though not for this contest, there will be more MOC sets and classic set remakes to follow, as I plan to keep making sets for my nephews so I can relive my childhood and share the experiences with them.

Welcome to Eurobricks, @hatchpattern! It looks like you have an excellent start to a great collection! Your display areas look nice, especially that shelf of ships! I'm interested to see more of your collection. I like the Castle theme best, but Pirates and Space are close second favorites. I'm looking forward to seeing your MOC's when you start building. Since it was one of my childhood themes, Fright Knights are also of interest to me, so your manor should be quite interesting! Do you have set 21322? It is an excellent set in my opinion for a wonderful merge of Classic Pirates and modern building techniques. Set 10210 is rare and expensive these days, but it is one of the best ships LEGO ever released as a set and worth it in my opinion unless you take on the task of designing, sourcing pieces, and building a similar MOC ship to save some cost.

Thanks for the feedback, Rogue Redcoat! The use of the 1x2 clip is intentional to provide extra attachment over seams between the water plates at the base of the build. Though the monkey included in an actual set would certainly be the single-piece monkey as included in the 10320 Eldorado Fortress, as my set is designed to be made into a real, personal set to gift to my nephew for his birthday and I have strong preferences for the poseable monkeys as well as around 20 extra monkeys right now collected over the years from used lots, the choice for the old monkey was no question for me.

Yeah, kind of interesting: you know what else is useless? The sail. Maybe I could have made the tiller broken and used the port onto the deck into a gun port, though this would deviate from the original. I also just realized that the sail should probably have a support frame so it can at least act as an awning. The concept of reusing broken ship parts for alternate purposes may be further explored as I revise this set before making instructions and ordering parts for the physical build.

Thanks for the suggestion, but I'm not sure it's a good fit for this set remake when trying to stay close to the original since the tiller and cannon pivot are so far apart. I would rather not fill up the ship with mechanics since the empty skeleton of the ship is meant to function as battlements. Since the firing action of the cannon requires hands-on play, pivoting the cannon with direct contact on the cannon seems better than remote lever control. I appreciate the suggestions, as they help keep creative ideas flowing! Taking a look back, I realize that there could seem to be an implication that the cannon pivot and tiller pivot are connected somehow, though this was not my intention. Thanks again for more comments. Of course, since I included the spikes, I like that as a new detail as well. I saw the other entry with the retractable rope bridge. It is a creative and effective solution, but I prefer my design since this is a classic set remake and mine appears more true to the original. Granted, opinions can certainly differ. I'm sure that a significant part of why I liked the set is that it was released during a time of my peak childhood interest. I'll always have that nostalgic connection even though I never got the set as a child (I've since BrickLinked the parts to now have the set) and spent hours dreaming over it in the LEGO Shop at Home magazines. The Classic Pirates style is also a favorite of mine, since I first got started with LEGO products in the early 90's when some sets were still available. I see what you mean with limited ideas and combination of color schemes. When I first built my remake, I included only light gray rocks for the primary coloration for the entire build. When reviewing the original, I realized that dark gray was used for the mountain, so I changed it to remain true to the original. This combination also maintains the idea that there is a concrete pier next to a stone mountain cliff with the color difference. Though I thought the original was fine for color choices, I do think this remake improves on the color scheme while still remaining reasonably true to the original. I have a few newer heads that are better choices for the minifigures but were not available in Stud.io, so their inclusion will have to wait for the physical build. Due to limited time and my recent introduction to the ability for custom Stud.io decals, I did not accomplish this for this entry and decided to just use what is available in Stud.io. This is a whole new world of possibilities for me, though, as I will have this as a tool for future Stud.io builds! The gray beard head was introduced on the Maharaja Llalu in the Adventurers Orient theme. Technically, all of the heads I used are still relatively old (newest was from about 15 years ago), even though they include the pupil within the black eye.

Thanks for feedback, Rogue Redcoat! I know the rudder is technically useless since the ship is sunken, but I still thought it was a "play feature" to include. I'm not sure I understand how you would suggest making the tiller move the cannon? The cannon and tiller/rudder are far apart and would likely require mechanics with a drive belt/chain which would be too complicated for an actual LEGO set, in my opinion. I find the idea intriguing, just not sure how to make it work? Limited living space is due to basing this directly on the original set. I did add a table to the throne cave that was not in the original set, but additional details seemed to exceed the limitations I assume for LEGO set design. A MOC would certainly include more details. Thanks for the suggestion on the rope bridge. My method for the bridge design was determined by a need for a stiff upper beam so the pull-rope could realistically lift the bridge. Since others have used your suggested design idea for the rope bridge and since my design should not be floppy, it was a conscious design decision on my part to not use your suggested piece/method even though I tried a few designs with that piece. For a true hanging rope bridge, that design with the string with climbing grips is still my favorite modernization of the rope bridge piece. Though the clips and bars on the baseplate similar to 10320 Eldorado Fortress are not used in the set, their inclusion is with the idea of modular expansions that would come in other sets of the theoretical new Pirates wave. I have always loved modular designs, especially in the classic Castle sets with a portion of wall, so I added attachment points and intend to develop sets in the future to attach here. I'm starting down a path of modernizing many of my favorite childhood sets to make into physical sets to gift to my nephews so I can help give them a similar childhood experience to mine with the classic LEGO sets.

Thanks, durazno33! The bridge was the first component of this set that I designed and it started from the need to have solid top beams for lifting the bridge with the rope. I liked the way these pieces came together for function and aesthetics and am glad you like it also. Yes, the tan curved slopes are meant to represent the dried fronds in a solid, simplified way that LEGO might actually use in a set. It is blocky, but that makes it LEGO style, in my opinion. Realistically, TLG would probably not include them (or even the coconuts) in an official set... @Mister Phes Please add this to the Building Entries Index, thanks!

I did not have the set while growing up but I did dream about it while looking at the Shop at Home magazines of the day. As a working adult with disposable income, I have bought many second-hand lots for salvaging old sets and placed many MANY BrickLink orders to collect most of the classic sets (primarily Castle, Pirates, and Space) over the last several years and got all the pieces for set 6281 except the rare and absurdly expensive red trapdoor piece. Indeed, the brick-built sail is just due to Stud.io limitations and will actually be made from printed cloth. Incidentally, I'm working on some custom sails to import into Stud.io using your tutorial but cannot get the Github .py converter to run on my computer.

Thanks for feedback, MstrOfPppts! I personally don't understand the dislike for the original set (though it does rely heavily on the raised baseplate, it is similar in complexity to what would be expected in sets of the time period). It is one of my favorite sets and the first set that came to mind for a remake when Eldorado Fortress was released. I had intentions to make an updated version of this set as a theoretical LEGO set even before this contest was announced. The brick "raised baseplate" was intended to be an abandoned concrete pier as you mentioned, which is part of the reason the pavers on the top are at the same level (also to keep it similar to the original set). All of the play features except the falling mast are in the original set and the concept of the falling mast comes from the ships of the same era as the original set. Maybe the spikes are a bit cruel, but LEGO has included equally-cruel concepts in official sets, at least in my opinion. (Reference falling axe/spear traps; first one that comes to mind is the trap with 4 axes that swing down into the doorway of 6093 Flying Ninja's Fortress) I definitely want to keep the water-splitting feature, though this is what I consider to be the weakest part of this design (both literally and figuratively). After this original concept with the wedge/round plates for shaping the bottom of the raised part of the "baseplate", I have seen references that use the curved slope bricks like the sand in Eldorado Fortress 2023 which is a better solution for integrity and for simplification of keeping first layer at brick height rather than needing doubled plates to get to the same level. Though not for this contest due to limited time, I am planning to redesign the base with this concept before making my physical version. This should also help with being able to extend out the base over the water plate gaps for more connected strength. The macaroni tiles are indeed a weak option. I considered adding rocks in the water for better joints and will probably do so for the physical build, but went with the macaroni tiles here to keep the same color/appearance as the original baseplate. I am open to and glad for suggestions to improve this design before physical build. One limitation with the brick-height curved-slope sand is that it makes attachment of foliage more difficult, but it would probably still be fine with less foliage on the beach. I wanted to "exactly" mimic the original baseplate, but will likely hold this limitation less crucial for the physical build, since playability and structural integrity are much more important. The bridge is more bulky since the top beam is meant to be a log rather than a rope, not just a method of recreating the original rope bridge. In actuality, a strictly-rope bridge like the representation in the original set could not be lifted with the pull-rope, as it would just collapse. By using logs as the top beam, the bridge would be rigid for lifting. Does this clear up the appearance of the bridge, or do you still think it is too bulky? The brick-built sail is only a representation of what would indeed be actual cloth. Though I plan to follow Marooned Marin's tutorial to learn how to make cloth sails in Stud.io, I did not have enough time to try this out for this build. I'm curious about your recommendation on the minifigures? Only one of the heads does not have the "pupils" in the eyes (the pirate captain), which happens to be one of my top favorite classic pirate heads. (I would love an updated version) The other 4 minifigures are as updated as I think reasonably possible (even within Stud.io limitations), though I am open to suggestions. I'd love it if LEGO would actually release the morion and breatplate in any of the newer molded metallic colors! Thanks, Fraunces. This is one of my favorite classic sets, and I first had intentions to make a modern update after the release of Eldorado Fortress 2023. I would be interested to know which parts of this set are too MOC-like and not enough like an official set? The design incorporates many typical limitations of an actual set. The main issues I considered are how much foliage to include, an official set would not have the weakly-joined water plates with macaroni waves, and the sail would not be brick-built like this (which I did not intend for the real set and only did this for a Stud.io representation). I thought the rest was reasonably limited to what could be official, but I am open to suggestions. My intention, both for the contest limitations and for my planned physical build, were to make this as close as possible to what could be official. Thanks, Marooned Marin. The play features match the original set with the addition of the toppling mast (see my reply above to MstrOfPppts for more details) and are a big part of why I liked the original set (ignore the fact that the Pirates would have to rebuild the log watchtower every time the boulder rolled down and smashed through!). I appreciate the response and am also interested in suggestions for improvement for my physical build. The spark for remaking this set is with the intention to give it to my young nephews for a similar experience as when I was a child, so it needs to actually be a good play set! Thanks, Jack Sassy! As mentioned in above replies, I first got intentions to remake this classic set to give to my nephews after inspiration from the release of Eldorado Fortress. It is one of my favorite classic sets (I have it, but missing the elusive red carpet trapdoor hinge...). As mentioned in above replies, I am always open to suggestions for improvement before I make this a physical build, so let me know if you have any.