Bobbtom

Very, very impressive. The bookshelves are particularly great. They have a great look to them.

Deethleech is right. We have been reading your posts. It has the same pattern of agreeing with what we say in one paragraph then condescendingly inferring that we're all fools and idiots in the next. "Be careful also not to double count reports, as some enthusiastic reporters repeat themselves over and over it might make you think there are too many of them." Lines like that for example.

That's not even true because Smaug isn't bright red. The third wave one is bright red. I don't see an excuse for not including Smaug besides lego being stingy about it.

You'll be more disappointed if you watch the movie. Smuag is in the movie for 15 minutes and makes no sense being in the third wave. He should have been in the lackluster second wave that was titled "Desolation of Smuag", and had his NAME on it., yet lego didn't make smaug until now.

Smaug should have been in the first wave. He was pretty much one of the main enemies in the first two movies yet we didn't have him in sets. The second movie, "The desolation of Smaug" and lego ridiculously didn't have him even in the second wave. The third is the worse wave to put him in. He's only in the movie for about the first 15 minutes.

Pretty much all the sets that we have the lowest opinions on. He's new, so we can't blame him too much. His $50 tree illustrates his greenhorn status though.

I got the beginnings of this impression from the Dain helmet.Out of all the helmets with feathers that lego has made, all have removable feathers. Why, for Dain then, is the helmet and feather one piece? Well, one mold is cheaper than two. Because of license agreements , the four sets in wave 3 being obligatory sounds very correct, given we have sets from Wave 3 that combines scenes for no reason. Four sets for an entire movie is a skimpy wave. Why does Galadrial have have the same hair piece as elrond? Even the Arwen one would be better, though her minifig is still good. Answer: Two hairs using the same mod is cheaper for production. I have to agree with the wave two designers probably not being the same as the other ME ones. I've only decided now to get the Wave two hobbit sets because I want to amass a complete collection, but still know exactly why I passed over these sets in 2013. The lackluster set designs made the sets look boring and generic. Smaug came too late and too expensive. It took until wave 3 to get him and his scene in the lonely mountain isn't even in the third movie.

Though Lego will never make 5 battlepacks for a line in one wave, I see your point. The bofa sets don't even properly represent even one army. No armored orcs, elves. Dwarves. Etc. There's no way for buyers to have or represent the main climatic scene of the movie in any form. Remember, kids like armies too. Think of green army men.Separate sets for ravenhill and the bigger battlefield would have been perfect. Main characters are important yes, but dain ironfoot didn't lead a one man army. Smaller sets with one or two regular soldiers and their leaders would have been good, like the wood elf army set. Though the set's wall is pointless as it was not in the movie. Because many of aus assume that the later middle earth waved performed poorly, its fair to guess that Lego decided to be extremely careful with this last wave by combining scenes to save production costs if this third wave sold poorly. Hence the bofa set that combined two locations. The wave is very small with 4 sets and could have been better. Though the second wave had few sets too, remember they included the two preview sets. The witch king battle is very good though. I have 5 of this set and am using the witch king to moc the other wraiths and elrond as elven soldiers

Lonely mountain is a great set if Lego fairly priced it. The way I see it, Lego thought only afols would buy it, so they jacked the price up because they know we'll buy it anyways. Brickjagger's dragon from castle is a good point. Kids will just pretend that dragon is smaug and so will their parents; for $100 less The lonely mountain is very tiny for the $130 you spend it. For $20 more you can get a much larger modular set. Make no mistake, I like the set, the throne is very nice and smaug has a great mold.

Yes it does. As brickjagger mentioned above, no one in the right mind is going to pick Lonely Mountain over Dragon mountain. A set for $130 that is tiny will not get many buyers.

Of course he is. He's an integral focus and an important character from the films and book. I'd really like to have the set and don't contest the dragon's future value. But in context of current prices, the price is abysmal. You get 866 pieces basically two walls and a dragon that uses a bit more plastic than the dragon in King's castle siege, which has nearly 1000 pieces and has a full castle.The licensed theme set price increased point hasn't really applied to the ME line. Many sets are fairly priced like Helms deep, which is also $130, but has a good piece count and a massive fort. If the set retires early, I'll shell out the $130 before the price increases, but I will never consider the set as a good value at $130.

I bought King's Castle siege a few years ago for $100 and it had a castle AND a dragon. I want the lonely mountain, but I'm not going to spend $130 for something substantially less. I'm waiting for a sale.

Terrible, for $130 you can get much larger sets for the same price. Those on a budget looking for a set like kids and adults will definitely pass over it. For $20 you can get a modular. For less you can get bigger sets. Only hardcore fans would get the set for $130 just for a dragon and two small backdrops.

You're purposely ignoring everyone else that has been sharing similar information. How delusional are you?

I recently went to a Lego store that had a huge amount of BOFA sets in the corner of the sore. Whereas the SW sets were constantly being bought with only 5 or 6 left on the shelf for each set, I counted around 20-25 Witch King Battle sets that had a fair amount of dust on them. There were even 10 Lonely mountain sets all stacked.

US Walmarts didn't stock ANY BOFA sets at all in store.

Off topic, but your first point applies to several LOTR/Hobbit sets.

$40 is good, I would have bought two at retail right at release if it were $40. Sure its only $20, but I don't like buying over priced sets on release.

Think about it this way, ignoring the 2012 set. Say you want 4 raptors, so you buy two of these sets for $100. Look at what yo get for $100, two small trucks 2 small motorcycles and 4 raptors. for $100. I don't like how lego is now charging premiums for large molded figures. It's used to be not this expensive before for molded figs. Now, combined with the fact that sets are having smaller pieces overall give us tiny builds with 300 pieces for $50. The other JW sets are priced pretty fairly, just this one is overpriced.

Considering how the other sets have pretty good PPP, the raptor set is ridiculous. $40 still would have been steep, but not bad.The way I see it, lego thinks that raptors will be everyone's favorite, so they put two ratpors and the only chris pratt minifig in this set for $50 in order to capitalize on the set's popular elements. I like the truck and the raptors a lot, but there's no way I'm going to spend $20 more for a set with 300 pieces. Discounts it is. Edit: You got the link for the brickset complaints? I'd image they be fun to read

$50 for the Raptor Rampage for 300 pieces for a set that looks like the Police Dog carrier which is $30. Plain ridiculous. I guess I'll be waiting for a sale for these Jurassic Park sets.

Not a bad idea. I could order plenty of sets to get the $75 free shipping. It's been a long time since I ordered from Lego. I've been an exclusive Amazon prime user. How long does it usually take for lego to send you your free shipping orders?

My focus isn't on the characters. Everyone likes minifigs. I don't like Star Wars either and would prefer the wargs. Even for $50. But $50 for a tree? That's ridiculous in nearly anyone's pov. If it was a $50 wall or fort, cool. A spaceship like I mentioned, a ship, a large vehicle, but a tree? Even the parents would question the value of this set. Imagine if it was $50 for a bush or a chair made of legos. Meager objects like this pale in comparison to other sets on the shelves. During the time the wargs was on shelves, kids could have gotten a dragon for $50 instead of a tree.

Never did I say that the characters were the only reason of bad sales. Nor did I mention that I did not want the main characters at all. Do not believe what the other poster said. I've discussed other points which include that the sets are overpriced. I've even acknowledged that kids are the main buyers of these sets, which other have conveniently ignored. They instead said that I'm wrong because i pointed out that because these sets are marketed towards kids, lego based the sets off the movies. Because of this, the sets should be and could have been more movie orientated for battle scenes. This implies that the more of main consumers (kids) have seen the movie as opposed to read the books. Just because of that "hearsay" that I dare say that less consumers for this line read the books makes me wrong in the eyes of others. $100 for the Goblin king Battle that includes a throne and two platforms. $60 for Weathertop that looks like a $40 set. The point is that kids won't buy these when they can get a much bigger set for the same price. For $50 you get a tree in the attack of the wargs. $80 for moria which includes a wall and a door. Sure we AFOLs like the wargs, but no kid is going to pick a tree over a $50 spaceship from star wars. Which brings the topic of generic soldiers. I've been slandered at that apparently I don't like the main characters and blame their repetition for the line's poor sales. This was never said. I said that the ratio of main characters to generic characters is terrible. The rest of the lego lines that don't rely on main character have them. Pirates, city, CASTLE and many other themes. LOTR is a theme that was and is supposed to relate to castle builders by providing sets that satisfy their wants by including potential sets with castles, the typical carriage ambush and so forth. Many scenes from LOTR and The Hobbit could have appealed to both ME fans and Castle Fans. One of those points just happens to be providing generic soldiers. I get the feeling that some here think I'm bashing the line because I don't like the sets. That is completely false. I am close to completing the entire Tolkien Lego line and actaully want to collect all of them, but at the same time I can clearly see the reasons why a kid won't want a set like Goblin King battle for Christmas.

Are you sure you've read all the posts? Other such as myself noticed that sets like Goblin King battle have been sitting on shelves for age. In fact, I found that this past winter my local Toys R Us surprisingly still has mines of moria in stock along with a huge section of Goblin King battles. When the hobbit lines were at target, sets like Riddles for the ring didn't move at all from shelves until they were at least 25% off.