thetang22

That's how I feel about it. Lego could have gone hundreds (thousands?) of different directions with classic Castle. Heck, we've been offering suggestions like crazy over the past few years about all the different ways classic Castle can be done different than it has over the decades. But it seems Lego understands 2 basic directions for Castle these days: 1) uninspired repetition of the same types of sets, or... 2) make Castle so drastically different that it's hard to even look at it and think it is Castle. There is SOOOOOOO much untapped ground between those 2 styles that would be creative and still look/feel like classic Castle, but Lego seems uninterested in it.

Plot twist: The next "Castle" theme is actually going to be a "City" theme, and it's going to be a Renaissance Festival :) (while that's a joke, I think it could be kinda fun, in a way) Regarding Fantasy vs. Realistic...I think Fantasy is more likely to have wacky building/vehicle designs, whereas Realistic would give us much more traditional structures. On the other hand, I'd be more interested in the potential factions of a Fantasy theme, despite preferring more traditional structures.

YOU ARE PLAYING WRONG!!! (Seriously though...as long as the kid is having fun, the above concerns really shouldn't be much of an issue.) I had several factions as a kid (late 80's/early 90's)....and I can say that I remember loving the variety. I would make up different stories about what the different groups were doing on any given day, and the sheer variety encouraged further imagination (which is one of the biggest things Lego is supposed to do, in my opinion). So some figures would get used less often than others...that's the way most toys work - favorites are established. In the beginning, my Crusaders were the favorite and got played with the most. Then the early 90's Robin Hood movie came out, and the Forest Men started getting all the action. Eventually I merged over into Black Knights, and they became my new favorite. I got some Wolfpack, and while they never were my favorite as a kid, they definitely served their purpose. I lastly got some Dragon Masters towards the end of my Lego childhood...and they were never my favorite...but still got used a lot as bad guys to my "good guy" Black Knights. To make things even more crazy, I started collecting some Pirates stuff in it's early days too, and it got mixed with my Castle stuff when I played. Imagination: With lots of factions, there's plenty to do.

Just play it safe and buy the missing head in question, then give the buyer BOTH heads. If you are concerned on making the person wait... perhaps send what you currently have, and send the alternate head once you have received it (if shipping wouldn't be TOO steep).

That was my exact thought. It looks good, but does feel as though it should have windows by that high up.

I see this as a big issue with Lego. I'm not exactly sure how long it has been like this, but it seems most sets are required to have an "opposition" element to them. As if every set has to be 1 side vs. the other. There are some exceptions (I think)...but for the most part it's always 1 faction attacking another. And in design purposes, that means they have to do "something" for the attacking side...whether a carriage, a catapult, a brick built monster....or something. As a result, as x105Black indicates....these primary structures are losing out on piece counts that could make the structure itself more compelling or useful. I look back at many of my sets from the late 80s/early 90s, and while there were some sets that featured 1 side vs. another....I seem to remember there were a LOT of sets that featured almost nothing but 1 faction, and maybe a prisoner from another faction. It was sorta nice collecting a favored faction back then, rather than having a 2-faction system in which every set included figures from both.

I'd be fully behind a theme inspired by the setting of Heroica. Just leave the "game" portion of it in the past...because that was the worst part of it.

I agree with a lot of what you said. I do think Lego wanted to capitalize on the success of Ninjago with NK, but was unable to produce the "it" factor with NK. I also think it was TOO similar to Ninjago that it likely had potentially overlapping appeal to the same crowd of kids, and probably hit an either/or mentality for those deciding to make the purchase. That's the way I always viewed Chima. Lego taking the mentality of "Hey, Ninjago was surprisingly way more successful than anticipated, so that must be the new formula for success with kids (in the fantasy genre(s)) we should follow. Let's create a new off-beat theme and make it highly influenced by the types of concepts Ninjago had....but within a new story/setting/characters." Then once the dust settled, it seemed Chima was just too similar to an existing theme (Ninjago), and it ultimately failed to recapture the magic.

This is pretty much the way I see it.

It feels as though the result was leaving an even bigger void where traditional Castle used to be. It was a gamble doing Nexo, for sure. However, Lego could have also created a big-bang theme with traditional Castle (with some medieval fantasy)....but decided on wheels and lasers instead.

I was lucky enough to get this for Christmas when I was a kid. And it was definitely the set I got the most mileage out of. There was so much quality content in it: Lots of minifigs, 4 horses, a great castle, and a few unexpected treats.

What I DON'T want to see: good guy human knights vs bad guy human knights, in which the alignment is very implied. Rather: 1) if it is humans vs humans, let's have a situation like classic castle in which alignment was a bit more ambiguous. Were the Crusaders or the Forestmen the "good guys"? It wasn't so clear, and depended on the story the kid wanted to tell that day. The good guys were more of a user choice, rather than the narrative being heavily implied like more modern sets. Also, have at least 1 human faction that is not based on typical knights. 2) something inspired by Fantasy Era, with multiple factions. This was one of the more inspiring parts of Nexo Knights...lots of monsters that could have easily fit into Fantasy Era if they removed all the futuristic vehicles. For a new set, have a knight faction, as usual, but also have other fantasy factions, such as elves, dwarves, gnomes, etc... 3) I've talked about this idea in the past - a theme inspired around defending a village from monsters/invaders. This would be a character-centric theme...and not really have your traditional knights. Instead, it takes place around a small medieval village that is being attacked by the bad guys (either Fantasy monsters, or brute invaders). The townsfolk have to take up arms to defend themselves, and some unsuspecting heroes could emerge. For instance, the blacksmith dons the armor and weapons he forges and represents your warrior-type character. The potion shop is tended by a wizardly character. The Inn could be tended by a character that turns into some other medieval fantasy trope, and so forth. The idea is these characters would be normal village-folk, but when represented with a threat to their village, they turn into more heroic characters inspired by classic medieval fantasy books and games. This would give an opportunity to create more sets like Medieval Market Village...with the whole theme designed around all the sets completing a larger village. If Lego is dead set on lots of vehicles (like they seem to always be), reserve those to the invaders. The village buildings could have plenty of interesting play features on their own, as the narrative could be that these villagers have built creative defensive measures to deal with the Invaders. The viability of a set doesn't always need to be measured by its ability to "vroom vroom" around on wheels or wings.

Lego doesn't include a significant more of an army-building-viable model in their boxes of these collectible minifigs, do they? Don't they still produce something like 3-4 of each fig per box? And I'd have to assume they generally produce a consistent number of boxes in line with previous series when releasing a new (non-themed) collectible minifigure box. i guess the thing I'm thinking is that I doubt including an army-builder in a series would really net Lego any more money than normal. I'd assume each series would be a 1-time production, and that they would not do additional production cycles based on popularity of 1-2 army building figs per cycle. I may be wrong in that point, but if it is correct that they are limited in their supply, they can only expect to sell "x" number of boxes of this stuff, regardless of army builders being in it or not. Taking that into consideration, it seems the minifig series (non-themed) hasn't had a problem selling over the years. i would think army building of these figures is much more an after-market thing for a lot of people, which doesn't really do anything for Lego directly.

I think these particular entries have a nice design on the whole. I'm going to play devil's advocate here for a moment, in regards to the army-building talk. Do they NEED to be viable for army building? Can't they just be awesome in a way that makes you want to get 1 of each? Is army-building the main measure of a figure's usability and awesomeness? Is there not a sigh of relief that you can enjoy it without the nagging sense of obligation to get 5, 10, or even 100+ of the same figure (and thereby dodging the cost associated with that)? No ill intent with these comments, merely a consideration for discussion.

This guy is a pretty iconic design in the Warhammer universe, and almost certainly where the inspiration came from.

I always enjoy a good micro build, and this is just that.

Was this actually used for a gaming event, or just happen to use to grid mat?

The intention of the poll was something that obviously doesn't apply to you, so just move on. You don't always have to argue with every point that's brought up. Good grief man....it's exhausting.

I'm not really sure exactly how to respond to this. Why? The goal is to have a bias (a different bias than the other poll), to see if the results would end up the way some of us expect they would (a sort of validation (or invalidation) of the though process, as x105Black hinted at).

Very cool!

A poll like that could be specifically asking for a traditional Castle perspective on it...stating the case for it being in this section. Plus, the sheer fact that Lego themselves seem to consider it a Castle theme (despite it not being one ) should lend some validity to wanting to see a poll on it from a Castle perspective instead of an Action perspective. Another factor being, whether Eurobricks wants to consider it Action or Castle, it's a fact that it's existence is affecting Castle...therefore warranting some discussion about the topic in the Castle (Historic) section.

Don't underestimate the importance of "where" the poll is conducted (as you kinda indicated). Bias is a big factor when it comes to location of polls. Nexo Knights would do better with a Ninjago/Chima loving crowd than it would with the traditional Castle crowd...so a poll located in a forum dedicated to Action themes will certainly get more of the crowd who is predisposed to vote in favor of it. Place it somewhere like a traditional Castle forum, and you'll likely get a pretty different result. You see that kind of thing in video game forums quite a bit. Fans posting polls like "What game is better...game X or game Y?" The idiotic nature of it is that they are posting the poll in the forums for game X....so naturally the majority of people who even know about the poll are likely there because of game X...therefore the poll is going to be biased in favor of game X. Well DUH......

You have some points of consideration. Luckily, within the context of a Lego Castle hotel....with an idea as niche as that, they have to rely on the well-known content to "sell" the concept to potential customers. They might have minor references to some of the more obscure content, but for something like that to be successful, it has to take inspiration from "the hits". That's a pretty funny point . While on that point, I do have to say that, while I really enjoy this community, I've always been flabbergasted about the moderation of off-topic content here. I'm quite surprised this discussion hasn't yet been policed by the mods considering this very point, based on past experience. I've been a member of many internet hobby forum communities over the past 15+ years, and can say confidently that this forum takes the cake ***BY FAR*** when it comes to policing posts veering off-topic. Almost to the point where it seems like posts going off topic is considered just as bad as going aggressively psychotic on another forum member. It just seems strange the level of importance mods seem to give it. I understand the inspiration for why it's done....it's just that that inspiration is basically true for nearly all forums (not just Eurobricks), yet this is the only place to take it to such an extreme. All those other forums have still been pleasant places to be part of, and still easy enough to navigate and find topics of interest. I just don't understand why it is taken SOOOOO seriously here when so many other places have a much more lax approach and still manage to have successful forums.

Well, that's true of most real world events. I think it's safe to say at this point...."Lego History" doesn't change, as it is well documented by everyone, rather than just the "winners" as in much of the rest of history.

Yeah - theme'ing it classically would definitely keep it relevant. History doesn't change, so it's always safe theme'ing after roots of the series. They could have featured areas that are based on whatever the current Castle line is...but that should be small in comparison to the whole.