LordsofMedieval

Oh, yup! That's perfect. It even looks a bit like a prosthetic, I'm sure she'll be happy with that. Thanks.

Serious gouging if there isn't some kind of really specialized part. Look at the new El Dorado Fortress: Same part count, $80 less. And that's also a product without licensing concerns/aimed specifically at AFOLs. No, I totally agree with @hsousa - something with this price doesn't add up.

Perhaps it comes with a motor? I mean, that would at least partially explain the price - if it included the kit to run the engine.

I bought my 41745 today for my niece without taking a particularly hard look at the box, or realizing that there would be awkward questions. Sadly (or, I guess, thankfully?) she has a keener eye than I do, and the first words out of her mouth were "where's her hand?" It took me a second to grasp that Autumn is disabled... although why she chooses not to use a prosthetic limb when that technology has come such a long way recently is just a bit baffling. My gut reaction (although I didn't give voice to it) was to say something a bit dark like "it was bit off by a werewolf" or "lost in a vicious duel in Theed Palace," but I was obliged to instead have a small 'conversation' (which I didn't want to have) about Autumn's disability (thank you Lego - truly). However, my niece would like Autumn to look a bit more complete, especially since she is riding horses in the set. Has anyone come up with a decent solution to give her some kind of, uh... glove or claw?

My guess is that it has something to do with a bunch of people belonging to a minority race worshipping stone statues on islands. And... I suppose that might be offensive to... someone? Except, they still exist in the world today.

I think a lot of people just... wanted something a little different. When we look at the last two enormous AFOL nostalgia sets - Pirates of Barracuda Bay and Lion Knights' Castle - they were less updates than reimaginings; a demonstration of what Lego could do with the given themes after 30 years of development as a toy. And an obvious advantage of this was that neither set was burdened by specific expectations - the castle and the ship weren't locked into looking exactly like preceding creations, and they weren't held back by the limitations of outdated parts (like baseplates). This set is not like that. This set is attempting to remake a specific product (while not really improving on it - IMO - in significant ways), and is dealing with all the repercussions associated with such an endeavor: Why aren't the minifigures identical? Why are the palm trees inferior? Why is the dock still black? Why aren't newer, better parts (such as the newer version of the bluecoat flag) being used? I could carry on. And don't mistake me - I'm buying the thing. But I think it's important to acknowledge that Lego invited criticism by approaching the set in this manner. They could have satisfied virtually all comers by creating something new that fell into line with older themes - something that was obviously bleeding edge in terms of techniques, and not hamstrung by box-checking; a set that could be an individual creation unto itself. But they didn't do that. They made a kind of semi-clone... a weird homage with some fairly obvious shortcomings. And that's going to ruffle feathers. You're right - this is probably "it" for Pirates for 5 or even 10 years. People don't really have a choice (which is all according to Lego's plan). But I can't fault someone for taking issue with Neo El Dorado. Because I think, with a $220 USD budget, Lego can do better than this; they can produce something a lot more impressive. And they didn't... because it had to look like... this.

If this doesn't make it through - and I wish very much that it does - do you have any plans to sell instructions? I'd just like to own the thing, frankly. Sabre Island was always my second favorite pirate set - and this feels like it had a baby with Lagoon Lockup (my all-timer).

Speaking of this, do we have any shots of what the backside of the 'giant rock' looks like? Is there something down there, or is it just dead space?

But, I mean... that's kind of the point. You're talking about maybe one woman per army per major war (if that). Look, it is what it is, and I'm not personally bent out of shape about it. I just don't think people should be stomping on other people for the latter group's sometimes visceral reactions to the sex-of-minifigures issue. We all view this hobby differently - for some people, it is very historically-grounded; for others, it is just a freeform fantasy. Nothing is wrong with either perspective. But people in the historical camp shouldn't find themselves getting hammered by the fantasy one for holding the views that they have - especially when those views are, with a few extremely rare exceptions, accurate to how things were IRL.

The palm trees have my vote for biggest flaw. I used to love bending those things into different shapes as a child - even using them as crude make-believe catapults. Now they're just lifeless.

I dunno. To be honest, I'm a heterosexual male, and if I were a kid these days, I think I'd almost exclusively be buying Friends sets. They're just so much better than city (in terms of complexity and value). Plus the minidolls are both pretty and cool (and, in a lot of ways, more interesting than traditional minifigures). I believe it's kind of unpredictable what people are going to want to play with when they're young... and it doesn't actually say anything about their sexuality. And this isn't a round-about way of saying PURGE THE GIRLS! One of the greatest pirates who ever lived was a female. It's more just saying - I think adults obsess over these gender/play things more than kids do. Kids just want a neat toy.

No, it really isn't. But using hyperbole to try and silence people who are making criticisms definitely is crossing a line. Nobody is attacking real women here - they're criticizing a decision made by a company; a decision that was born out of a specific ideology. And trying to cow people into reticence over expressing their feelings on that decision is the very antithesis of free thought. This is a forum. The very word was invented to describe a place of debate. Not all views expressed in debates have to be positive.

I think anything named El Dorado Fortress is almost certainly doomed. But I also think it's fairly likely that any competing idea - anything even close to this - will never be greenlit even if it makes it to 10,000 votes. I often feel like Lego's releases of sets like these are designed to quell or quiet a market as much as to make money. "Oh, they're clamoring for an Imperial base again, Bill." "Third time this week, isn't it?" "Better release something. That'll shut 'em up for a decade."

I mean, I think you're either going to view it as genius or wasteful. And, for the record, I'm not saying we should see baseplates return - I think they're a garbage part myself. I'm more arguing that, in attempting to capture the original, they (from my perspective) devoted too much to the rock that the fortress sits on, and not the fortress itself. Again, this is just my own opinion, but I would have preferred to see a new design idea that incorporated elements of both El Dorado Fortress and the Imperial Trading Post, but which wouldn't have been so hamstrung by certain visuals like "we have to build a rock for this thing to sit on, and it has to be this high, etc." *Edit* As an example of this, look at Return to Sabre Island. Yes, it's an idea inspired - loosely - by a classic set, but it's grown beyond that to arguably something that's so, SO much better than this. --- It is what it is. And I'll probably still be buying one. I just disagree with some choices they made.

Also, that's just uncalled for. Troll somewhere else.

It's cool, but this is definitely not Lego's best work. The dock is extremely weak (black was only used on the original because light brown was in its infancy as a brick color at the time - not because black was a good choice for a dock), and I don't really like the idea of half the part count of the set being devoted to a brick-built stand-in for a baseplate that originally cost them like five cents to make. The direct result of that choice means that the fortress itself is just kind of... hooray? I mean, yes, it looks a lot like the original. But I don't really see anything that's breaking new ground here, either (mostly because all the flexibility they might have had to do something grander was hoovered up by devoting parts to rocks). I also don't know if anyone else has noticed this, but it's worth pointing out that the palm trees are much less detailed even than the original. Setting aside that Lego has made a conscious decision not to use the newer frond pieces (which, IMO, make for a WAY more convincing palm when done right), these trees lack the iconic multi-piece, shapeable stem. They're instead formed from a dino tail-like single cast trunk. That's just... lame. Finally, while it's nice to get the Tradepost ship, I guess this will rule out seeing the Tradepost receive any similar treatment? --- *Edit* I guess I'm also going to join the chorus of people who think the 50 percent female characters thing is just... weird. I have no issue with any of the pirates being women - there were definitely lady pirates, and to a great extent the very reality of being a pirate is one of rebellion against societal norms. However, female soldiers? Uh... right. Sorry, but that's just silly. Women are obviously capable of being soldiers - they're perfectly capable of being knights, samurai, Jedi, wizards, etc., too. But in a theme that is rooted fairly strongly in actual history, seeing female bluecoats just seems jarring. Not saying it's impossible - more just commenting that this is being done to check some kind of political box. And I'm really tired of seeing that in Lego.

Thanks. I actually completely rebuilt it tonight. I was unsatisfied with the positioning and the size of the cab originally. Although it featured that nice, graceful upslope, it was too large and slightly too far forward to match the real thing (which is puny even in real life; I'm pretty sure the engineer actually spends most of his time on the plate between the engine and tender). While this might not look like a huge difference, achieving it required breaking the locomotive down to the wheels and offsetting everything by 1/2 stud.

It's going to be very difficult to accomplish the fenders without going 8w. Not impossible (and, hey, they could always introduce a new piece [lol, who am I kidding]), but difficult.

Cool. Reminds me so much of the shadowbox layouts a lot of Brits seem to favor.

Awesome, but depressing.

The way you did the roofs on the cars is nothing short of brilliant.

Wow, I like it a lot. I feel like the heads would kill each other, though.

This is really awesome.

The new plane is just amazing. I'm completely blown away by the brick-built engines. Finally they're trying something new.

One would hope that they won't alter this into a 6w like the Emerald Night. If it is converted into 6w... well, some people will be pleased. But it will eliminate me as a buyer, that's for sure.