Bobbtom

I completely agree with you on these points. The ratio of main characters and soldiers is not good for this theme.

Does anyone know if waiting for 2x points is a good idea for the Orthanc? I'm looking to get it to complete my collection, but don't know if its a good idea since many lego investors will probably buy them in droves once 2x points hit.

You guys remember the Battle the pass from the kingdoms line? 11 mnifigs. 11. for $40. Great set. Should have gotten more than 1.

No. This is not a argument point. It's common sense that no company is going to say that their product on the shelves is poorly designed. I did not say this. I said internally. Use their own lego men? This makes absolutely no sense. By this logic, we don't need Stormtroopers or German soldiers in Indiana jones sets since we could just use our own "lego men". You think that lego would be successful if they made stormtroopers using doctor torsos and legs with firemen hats? No they wouldn't. An iron hill polybag would have been great! I have no idea why they didn't release one. I have to agree with you on the weather top. For $60, its a terrible small set, but It was fun building it and the ring wraiths are great. I knew someone would ask this eventually. There are no sales figures. Lego doesn't release them. What I posted is based on the evidence from users that posted what they say and evidence from threads on this website. There is no other source of information. Just because there is no official data doesn't mean that everything we say is false. Everything that I've said and other users have posted are based on what we saw based on our own experience with lego lines. It's an educated conclusion that makes sense of all the information that others have posted saying that sales are bad for Middle Earth sets. If the line was successful, it would make sense to make more LOTR sets, but they didn't. Hence our conclusions. MIddle Earth sets could have bee popular if lego also made the sets appeal to castle builders. We could have gotten typical castle sets like caravan ambushes with an Isldur under attack scene or the scene from TTT where the Rohan caravan was attacked by wargs among other scenes. Think about my analogy for a second before saying that it doesn't make sense. The books are old. More people have seen the movies than read the books. The movies were released recently. There you go. More people have seen the movies than the books because that's just the way entertainment concerning movies work. Hence why the sets are based on the movies, not the books. (Haldir, etc). Common sense. You're just attacking me instead of my arguments. Focus on the argument not on me. I'm not forcing anything on anyone. I'm not saying what you're saying. I'm responding with my opinion as to why some users are wrong. Your post here aims to discredit me by saying I'm "narrow, forcing, lazy". Stop it. Focus on the words not the user. I am not going to spam these threads with the same post from another thread. If user makes a point that I didn't say something about yet, I will post something new. You are putting words in my mouth. Here you go again. " You claim that making these sets character focused was the sole reason the sales faltered. You also claim that the movies weren't hero-centric like the books, simply because there were cinematic battle scenes. ". You said you read my previous post, which if you did, that is not what I said. I never said it was the sole reasons. I've mentioned several other. The main climatic point of the movies are the battle scenes, Hence why audiences like the movies, because it had cool battle scenes. No review and no person that watched the movie is going to say that the council of elrond scene was the best scene. I'm going to anticipate what others are going to say and address this point now. I'm not saying that the COE scene is unimportant. It is very important since it sets up key elements of the story. What I'm saying is that the sccene translates horrible into a mass market LOTR set. You're probably going to point out my one sort of "forcing" my opinion on others with the post where I said. "denial". It's not forcing. I'm not saying the poster is basically stupid like you called me. I'm going a point as to why I have a different opinion and why they have theirs. There's a reason why some here are defending the lines saying how they were so good yet sales were terrible. You think that because a marketing team is expensive that they will always be right? If that were the case, there would never be any movie sales flop or lego sales flops. That is incorrect. The marketing team was wrong, which is why we got the low sales. If you continue to attack me instead of my posts, I will cease discussing this with you.

It would have been fine if Lego made a blend of both types of sets for variety and a diversity of sets. They kept the character focus til the end with BOFA even though this focus got them low sales. Even they wouldn't admit that some of the sets werely poorly designed for a $100 or $50 set. They've probably maintained internally that there is no interest in Middle Earth when there could have been if they appealed to castle buyers. Case point: If a kid saw BOFA and remembered that Dain led a charge, how is Lego Dain supposed to lead a charge when he has no soldiers.

The tree is great. Great use of LOTR elements to make the prince look special and stand out from the crowd.

The DO looks really good. It's next on my list to get after Orthanc. Lego is very adept at taking all an AFOL's money.

The new 2015 sets are available for purchase on Amazon NOW! http://www.amazon.com/s/?_encoding=UTF8&camp=1789&creative=390957&keywords=lego%20pirates&linkCode=ur2&linkId=QCNUWUXKNPE2YUOC&qid=1423414745&rh=n:165793011,k:lego%20pirates&sort=date-desc-rank&tag=m190a92c-20&linkId=HULMZ2QZWYIAZ2RO These sets look really good. I've been keen on getting a few soldier's forts and making a MOC out of multiple sets.

I never said any of what you said about Tolkein and his characters. The book is different from the movie and what consumers versus readers of the books want is completely different. Calling my argument lazy? Your argument is putting words in my mouth. The sets are based on the movies and its obvious what buyers want to buy and recreate from the movie. I'm taking what little evidence we have and making logical conclusions that make sense while others here maintain that the characters were so good and everyone only wants the sets for characters yet we have terrible sales for Middle Earth. This makes no sense and you know it. You've just invalidated the entire star wars and Castle lines.

Rewatch the movie. I am not going to argue with someone whose facts are wrong. Just because a scene is important in a movie doesn't mean it translates well into a Lego set.

Agreed. Here is someone that accepts what really happened. Have fun with your star wars if they made no stormtroopers.

Just go to the Future LOTR thread and find my old posts a few pages back. I'd have to repeat everything that I said if you didn't. Quick Points @ @Ardelon The point isn't that the same character stops people from buying them completely. The point is that there are NO solders for the good team at all except for the one rohan soldier. They spread out all the main characters in sets putting unique ones in some and repeated some in others at some points skimming on minifigs in places where they could have added soldiers. Combined with overpriced sets that didn't appeal to many buyers got us the poor sales. Hypernova, your point ties in with Ardelon. You're in denial. If what you were saying is true, the line would have succeeded. It did not. What you're saying is validating the line if it succeeded. This isn't some DC/Marvel line where only the main characters are wanted. The main focus of the movie is not the characters and you know it. No one watches it for the council of elrond scene and then stop watching the movie. It's about the BATTLES. with heroes and SOLDIERS. Which lego FAILED to allow fans of the movie to recreate in many aspects. In doing so they failed to appeal to castle builders with sets like the Goblin king battle.

It's entirely possible to have all the main characters and generic characters at the same time. What lego did was spread main characters and only main characters, out in every set so that collectors would be inclined to get all of them. This didn't work. We got repeats in a whole bunch of sets that were at often times overpriced in comparison to other sets with the same price. This also doesn't stop them from putting more minifigs such as soldiers, in sets that blantly should have had more.

The entire castle line consist of sets with "army builder" material. There are generic soldiers in nearly every set and is a staple of what lego releases every few years. Lego's research in the Middle Earline line is wrong. That is why the sets performed badly. You have the forest ambush with much more play value and 4 soldiers compared to riddles for the ring with 2 minifigs and a wall. Middle Earth is not like DC or Marvel where the only figures you need are the main characters and the villians. This is a battle focused line that would have succeeded if it appealed to castle buyers by including soldiers and not 500 gandalfs. Restrictions are nothing. All lego has to do and has been doing is including a wall or a vehicle.

I can repeat my argument all day. I don't mind if people here are too lazy to flip back two pages or go to the other thread. If you want more indept analyis go to the future LOTR thread and find my posts. Obviously people want named characters, but for all the est to have the same repeating character? No one want 500 gandalfs or 500 gimilis, which is why once they get a LOTR, set there's no incentive to buy more. You already have something from one set, why would you want another? This combined with the fact that the price for many LOTR/Hobbit sets were terrible compared to similar sets is why sales were so bad. The Goblin king Battle sat on shelves for ages with no one buying them at full price. That is a character focused set. What you're saying is providing evidence why the line succeeded, which it didn't. If the line succeeded, then its clear that most buyers want character focused sets. In reality, it was clearly the opposite. The sets weren't as popular as lego wanted them to be. If you claim that not many people watched or liked the movies, that is only part of the truth. Lego has plenty of sets that are not based off of a movie that many consumers buy anyway. What lego failed to do was make the line appeal to castle buyers and people in general that did not watch the movie. This is entirely possible with the Middle Earth theme as it basically is fantasy medieval.. Instead, we got ugly sets that those that didn't watch the movie passed over and also are overpriced which garnered terrible sales.

I'm not sure what you're trying to say, but if you're trying to say that more people want character focused sets rather than soldiers that appeal to castle buyers; I've already addressed it in this thread. It is false. So are the price ranges and I've already addressed this as well. Many,LOTR/Hobbit sets are overpriced in comparison to other sets on the shelves.

Just don't approve the set and release another wave under the LOTR license. Just like the Helicarrier and Elsa's palace. The Ideas brand is not a real obstacle to more LOTR sets. How to make these sets appeal to children is the problem. (Hint: Stop making all the sets character focused. Don't charge $80-$100 for tiny sets).

Out of all the Ideas sets released it would be the worst. Even Birds would be better. No one but some AFOL that likes pianos will buy it. No child is going to say "I want lego. Let's pass over all the cool sets and get a piano" This is not even considering if they already have a piano at home. They can play an actual piano. What's the point of buying it? Even worse, you can nearly buy your own keyboard that can play actual music with the money spent on this piano. Sets that are good for business are ones that will appeal to children, as they are the main consumers of Lego. For IDEAS, since many AFOLS vote on them, the ideal set would be one that appealed to Kids AND AFOLS

No, not that video. That video is posted everywhere. I'm referring to the one with the lotherien set.

The picture is not years old. It's one day old. The video with the picture was released yesterday.

Do you have a link to this video?

If that piano wins I am going to doubt the competency of the selection team for Lego Ideas.

Now this is a set that could have gotten better sales than The Goblin king or The Black Gate. It's been shown that consumers aren't interested in character focused sets hence the poor sales of most Middle Earth sets. There is no way that set would be $100. Because it has no real special elements like a Cave troll, it would be $60-70 depending on how many new molds it would use. If Lego made molds for gondor helmets, this set would be $70. With a few tweaks to the design to make it look more like a city, castle consumers would buy this instantly. The play features are better than those of many LOTR sets like the black gate whose's only major features are opening gates. one catapult and another gate(hidden switch).

Anyone know when the Orthanc is retiring? I'd like to get my hands on one, but am waiting for a sale or 2x points.

I agree. If it was truly a conflict Hasbro would have definitely protested. For the entire Hobbit/LOTR line Lego continued to focus solely on the characters even though it was obvious that it wasn't what most consumers wanted. Hence the LOTR/Hobbit shelves sitting on shelves for years. Granted I have the set and will get lonely mountain soon, but only because I like the Hobbit and LOTR. If I didn't like the theme, I would instantly scoff at the price and buy something else that offers more. Sets that focused more on battles would have attracted castle builders. Minas Tinith, the scene where the wargs attacked Theoden's men are typical sets in a castle line. The last Hobbit wave doesn't seen to be widely sought by that many. It is true that stores had fewer in stock. Target only had a few of each set as opposed to 10 Goblin King Battles when that set was released. Walmart had no BOFA sets outright. I went to the stores often and they took a few months just to run out of sets like BOFA and Lonely Mountain which only had a few in stock each and was never restocked. The BOFA line could have been so much better. The price for the sets are ludicrous for what you get. $130 for the Lonely Mountain set that doesn't even reach 900 pieces and the price is "justified" just because of the Dragon. We've had $50 and $100 that had dragons. No one besides hardcore fans are going to buy the Smaug set and stores knew it. For $20 more dollars you could get a modular building. For LESS you can get sets with MORE pieces that aren't just two walls and a dragon. The BOFA set follows a similar description. There are no armies in it; just the continued focus on characters that has failed to produce this line good sales to justify more waves.