Metanoios

Some my recent MOCs and modifications: Firenze and Flitwick (Philosopher's Stone appearance) Fluffy modification: Three Broomsticks and butterbeer bottle:

The heads can be posed just like with the ball joints and stay up (the heads aren't that heavy so the clip connection is strong enough). Lego designers have to think about small children throwing the toy around so they have to pay attention to that in their design decisions. My solution is better for aesthetic purposes, still can be posed (to an even larger extent than the ball joints because those are inhibited in their horizontal movement by the sides of the mixel connector) and looks better on display. I don't think the use of the tires is illegal, because they are made of an elastomer and are not really stressed (or stressing other pieces). They rest loosely around the clip connection and the middle ball joint to hide them a bit, yet are loose enough so that they will adjust with the movement / posing and don't inhibit it all that much.

Since someone asked previously about a Fluffy fix, here is my modification of the new Fluffy: Fluffy mod

I have a list of all the parts you would have to substitute in the new sets (76386, 76387 and 76389). The prices listed are derived directly from Lego bricks and pieces ("Steine und Teile" column in the table) and pick a brick. Use the part ids to check the prices on Bricklink. This one is in €: The second one is in US $:

The downloadable instructions on Lego.com for all the released sets do not have this mistake anymore. The printed instructions in the sets will have the mistake for the next 4 to 6 weeks (all the sets I bought had it), because those were already pre-produced prior to launch, but the sets that are produced right this minute won't have that mistake.

Over at the Harry Potter thread you yourself mentioned that one being the least favourite of the 3 and I have to disagree (it's definitely better than the 2019 one and might be on par or even better than the 2020 one). I like the HP one since it offers a lot of useful prints, minifigs and pieces. I just few the calendars as part packs with exclusive figs and prints that I buy once or twice. The Marvel one also offers good additions to the sets. First off (if you don't like the SE sets like Avenger's tower or Helicarrier) it will be one of the only current sets on the market to get the infinity stones for the new Infinity Saga wave. Also the Black widow with arm printing is the best rendition of her character and also works in the context of the first Avengers and Iron Man movies. Nick Fury with the grey cap is straight out of Age of Ultron. Thor with that hair piece is good for those that haven't collected the first Infinity war sets. The white unprinted Iron Man helmet can be used in a Hall of Armour MOC on a work bench as a prototype under construction.

Advent calendars have always been tiny side builds with a few minifigs (with 1 or 2 exclusives) thrown in. What were you guys expecting? A Sanctum Sanctorum build (like the Bugle) for 30 $? Reality can often be disappointing, when you your expectations are disparate and removed from reality. Star Wars advent calendars have been this way since their inception in 2011. Now we are getting a Marvel one for the first time and it is the worst ever? It offers the cheapest way to get multiple infintiy stones to date. Figures have arm printing and there are some exclusive prints. You get 6 or 7 minifigs in a 30 $ Marvel set. There is no Marvel set at that price point which has ever given you that many. Sure some are repeats but that is often the case with other Marvel sets as well. I have tons of Spiderman. " [...], but we all know those are just random things that have no real use." Wow (Owen Wilson/Mobius wow). If you can't find use for bricks from a building toy, I don't know why you are even collecting it in the first place. Just add them to your parts collection and build anything you want with it. Noone expects you to keep the tiny quinjet on display till you're 80. Instead of bit**ing about the AC, let's talk about that wonderful World War 2 Hulkbuster + the three figs of Peggy, Steve and the Hydra Goon. The colours are all wrong and since when is Peggy a bald dude with a blue cape? Steve has a goatee and black hair!!! Talk about screen accuracy. And since when do Hydra goons fight with swords and have armour showing their front attributes? Lego can't get anything right (or is it the leakers )

Since this is a Lego exclusive for the next 6 to 12 months, wouldn't the initial source along the leak chain kind of have to be similar (Lego employee, Marketing/IP team member from WB)? And if I read it correctly, KA1 never alluded to a different or new source in his original post? Because besides the IP holder (WB), Lego employees and their subcontractors, that print the boxes and manuals, who could have seen the set by now, if it releases in October? Factory leaks are only possible for minifigs or unique printed parts really. Just a reddish brown brick among thousands can't be assigned to a particular set or design during the production. Aren't you reading more into a post, that is a simple reiteration of the previous rumour and offers no new valuable information, as you admit yourself? It could be a different employee, but KA1 wouldn't know which source Falconfan and Guyon had exactly, unless they are exchanging this information freely in the "leaker community". If they did, they wouldn't really protect their source by exchanging the name freely on some DM services like Discord etc. (only one black sheep and the source would face serious consequences). So can you maybe explain how you derive the information, that this is a new confirmation in the context of the "leak community" from KA1's words? I am seriously interested

No offense but KA1's post is not a higher level of confirmation than we had previously (oral rumour). We should try to be more precise with our language. A picture of the confidential box art or a detailed description of the actual objects via a Lego product text leak from lego.com or a retail website would be "confirmation". Another oral rumour and a comparison to a 50 $ Friends set in another post here on the forum is not a "confirmation". This is what 41346 looks like: The HP D2C with a rumoured 250 $ price point will most definitely not look like that. And it is highly unlikely that we will get Hermione's favourite robot, Colin Creevey's camera, Myron Wagtail's microphone and the walkie talkies Fred and George used all the time. Even if he/she is saying the scale of the objects is similar, we would get a lot of objects at 250 $ or most likely larger and more detailed objects. So what is this comparison actually confirming? If you like the Friends robot, you will like the HP one, too?

The inside of the Astronomy or the Clock Tower are just as "boxy". And the 2018 Whomping Willow Hogwarts expansion set "interior" is de facto one wall with almost no roof or enclosure and the exterior of that set offers exactly the same amount of details as the 2021 sets. A synthesis of the best aspects of both is the way to go forward. More interesting or recognizable facades with dark blueish grey roofs and modular, stackable and spacious interiors. Because the 2018 to the 2020 Hogwarts castles lack verticality. Only on floor for the majority of the castle (except for the towers) is just inaccurate. The 2021 modular style allows the third floor corridor to actually be on the third floor and not just ground level

^This

Looks like Doc Ock is using a lot of 65578 in light blueish grey for his arms. I like the poseability and look of this build technique for his arm.

It could be because that leaked image is from promotional material for China and they don't like skull/undead imagery there. Skulls are considered bad luck and associated with various superstitions and negative connotations in Chinese culture

But wouldn't an either-or-situation be even worse. If they only did the random chocolate frog cards and not the golden figures at all, some would still moan the randomness of the cards. But the golden figures are a bonus, that you are for sure getting with each set. The infinity stones forced you to buy the whole wave initially, only to be almost all in one relatively cheap set (compared to the whole wave). I think for those that are financially challenged right now, it is adivsable just to wait a bit and maybe the cards will be more easily available (maybe even bricks and pieces or a cheap set). The Marvel example shows that collectable items often become more easily available if you just wait long enough.

Yes but at first (when these comments were written) the article said that the delay would be only for the retailers and that on shop@home the set would release at June 1st, which it seems now, is inaccurate. From that view it is understandable that some thought it was unfair to normal retailers, if the flagship set of the anniversary wave suddenly remains exclusive to shop@home. Concerning the press release. I think a global company on the scale of Lego shouldn't be affected in its operations due to a local, ancient bank holiday. They have employees all over the world which are working. Also Lego posted a social media teaser for the Daily Bugle today and furthermore I don't think that the production error was only discovered on Thursday. Otherwise that would be even more alarming for Lego, judging by a quality assurance perspective, because that would mean they had missed that error completely and it was only discovered because of LAN members reviewing the set. I also hope that the actual production error that caused this delay is not just the missprinted instruction pages... Because this mistake isn't really that grave and I would rather be able to buy the set in June than wait for two months for them to fix the printing error on instruction pages I look at once or never. They could fix that with the production cycle going forward and offering a downloadable chocolate frog collection page or poster. But if the set misses some parts or some of the minifig prints are off, that would justify a delay.

The updated article on zusammengebaut.com mentions that even the shop@home release of 76389 Hogwarts Chamber of Secrets will be postponed to the end of July (27th I think) due to a production error/issue and since the sets for Europe are all produced at the same factory, this should affect all countries in Europe at least (not just Germany). Since @Clone OPatra already mentioned the printing errors and missing pages in the instruction pages, I wonder if they had further quality assurance issues during the production of that set that led to this delay. Lego should be more proactive in this case and issue a press release fast. I know that sometimes the discussion on German Lego sites can be considered "toxic", but in this case (if the set is suddenly postponed two weeks before it's intended release) a slight uproar of the buyers and retailers is justified in my opinion.

Show me anywhere in my response, where I said you couldn't criticise Lego's decision. I did not say that with any word. Instead I offered you a constructive path forward which could potentially really change the product design and line-up of Lego sets if you apply your ideas at the company. I meant that. It was meant as an advise not a personal attack. People spend their lives bit**ing about the state of the world at large, when they have the power to change their immediate environment around them all along. One comment on a forum isn't gonna sway a Lego executive or designer to suddenly make better sets. You could start an online movement on social media, though, or affect the company policy from within by working there. Also aren't you saying with your last sentence that only a negative opinion against something (like the Lego City wave) is in your eyes to "actually HAVE opinions". Isn't that a little bit extreme? Shouldn't the expression of both pro and contra arguments and views be allowed on a Lego discussion forum? Or are you perceiving Eurobricks as a Lego hate "cult", where people can only vent their negative opinions about Lego products and all positive views should be banned? Just asking to clarify your sentence here and not attacking you personally.

By whom or where was it confirmed? Did someone from LAN who got the sets early, like Swiftbricks, post a picture of the last pages of the instructions?

You should work there and make your dreams reality! As far as I remember they have a career section in their "About us" page. "Be the change you want to see in the [Lego] world" Not Ghandi

Concerning the chocolate frog cards. Since there are now confirmed 16 and we know who 6-7 of them are, I have the suspicion that they are deriving the featured characters from the Universal Studios theme park chocolate cards. There are 15 different characters on those. The full list with pictures can be found here: https://fortheloveofharry.com/list-of-all-chocolate-frog-cards/ They share already a lot of commonalities with the leaked characters (the 3 (4) founders, Dumbledore, Bertie Botts, Ollivander). Also I think that the one on the top right, that some think is the Richard Harris Dumbledore, is actually Merlin, but I could be wrong: And I think that two of them (on the leaked pic top left) are the same, just that the gold and silver printing reflects the light differently depending on the angle. The print is the same and that would fit the beard of the Michael Gambon Dumbledore, that is depicted on the Universal studios cards and not Vitruvius. McGonagall is the only difference but maybe she was supposed to be released in the theme parks already (as number 16), but the release was postponed due to Covid. The remaining characters from the Universal cards would then be the following: Gilderoy Lockhart Paracelsus Jocunda Syke Hengist of Woodcroft Daisy Dodderidge Devlin Whitehorn Artemesia Lufkin Helga Hufflepuff Edit: Further note on the frame artwork and colour design: We have three different frame colours and designs on the Lego ones and I think the Lego graphic designer intended them to represent the epochs/centuries, in which the wizards depicted on the card lived. McGonoagall, Dumbledore, Bertie Botts and Ollivander all share the same frame design (gold with negative purple spaces) are from the "current" epoch of modern day wizards and were all born in the 1800s and 1900s. The founders share the bronze frame design and are all obviously from the same epoch, too. Merlin has a silver frame (with no negative spaces in the frame) and is from an earlier century (800-900). Hengist of Woodcroft (if my theory is right) would also have a silver frame. I think the frame design differences are also supposed to make them more easily discernible.

The neck can bend up and down and rotate (most likely a ratcheted technic pin joint, just like the mammoth head). Compare the position on these two pics:

Not entirely accurate for the Harry Potter line and for large lego sets in general. The 2018 Great Hall box art featured the Astronomy tower silhouette (2020 set) prominently on the front box art and the orientation of the Great Hall pic would in the correct movie layout and this viewing angle not feature the Astronomy Tower in the background, so it was a deliberate decision by the box art designer. Also Star Wars UCS sets did have eastereggs for upcoming sets on their box art in the past: 2nd UCS Millenium Falcon shadow was teasered on the Death Star rerelease box and the UCS Star Destroyer was teasered as a shadow silhouette on the side box art of the Millenium Falcon UCS set. Also we know from Interviews by Lego fan media outlets and designers that Lego sets are mostly designed 2-3 years prior to release and one of the final things, that is finished, is the box art designs. So when the 2018 line was getting its finishing touches late 2017/early 2018 , the Astronomy tower probably already existed as a fully built prototype and was green lit by that time as an upcoming set.

Technically, if I were to sell the accessory pack as a lego store employee, I would suggest it with the Hogsmeade set (upcoming and new) or the Diagon Allley set. If the information he has is right however and it isn't Hogsmeade, that he meant, it would imply a minifig scale location from the wizarding world. Sadly I take everything right now with a grain of salt, either pro or contra Gringotts, because hear-say rumours and lists are just not reliable enough and I try to block emotional engagement with these rumours, until we get figure leaks or stickers etc.

What we got at the beginning was "Lower your expectations" and "It is not Gringotts". Followed in February for one week (paraphrasing) "It is a gigantic chess board". The remembral/flying lesson mix-up is actually really interesting and tells us something about the composition of the set list the leakers have from their source: The official set name for 76395 is "Hogwarts: First Flying Lesson". Now if the leaker's list contained all the correct set names and not only vague descriptors, how would someone derive from that name a huge brickbuilt remembral and the fact that the set is most definitely not minifig scale? On the other hand, if the list didn't have that correct set name and it was only an online message with set numbers, prices and internal descriptors, it could be that the only information was "Remembral flying lesson", for example. This could lead someone to think of a brickbuilt remembral, if it was assorted and grouped with names like "Brickbuilt fawkes", "Brickbuilt Harry and Hermione". But if the entire list is of a similar quality and scope of information, isn't the name "Hogwarts Icons" actually completely non-descriptive and impossible to guess what it really is, without prelim pics or at least a detailed set description? Edit: The full name, that was reported, is "Hogwarts Icons Collection".

But wasn't the initial rumour tied to that set name, which the leakers just hadn't shared on this forum yet. And how can you verify that it is different sources when they are anonymous and don't share how they got the info? Journalistic work usually encompasses background checks into sources and confirming that they are indeed privy to the information they claim to possess. This is not possible in this case and the exact reason why it is so easy to fabricate fake or erroneous leaks concerning Lego. We already had proven mix-ups (Chess being D2C, brickbuilt Remembral, Flying Lessons not being minifig scale, Bad Batch official reveal on May 4th [it wasn't], Marvel pics at the end of April) with trusted leakers this year. For example, why do they say "brickbuilt objects" but do not clarify which objects? A word like "sword" or "wand" wouldn't risk their source any more than "iconic Hogwarts objects" or the set name "Hogwarts Icons" (if it is true) would. However the reluctance to even specify the nature of the objects is suggesting that the information they have does not go beyond a set name. Disney Star Wars and Marvel sets get internal development code names (wave for Force Awakens, Last Jedi etc.) and these names are sometimes even passed on to retailers. We have gotten these in the set lists for the new releases multiple times. So an internal label or development name landing on a leaker's set list is a common occurence with Licensed themes and therefore Ockham's razor would actually not exclude that possibility