Lord Admiral

This one. Intact, but in a box currently. It'd shown a lot of wear and tear before I put it away. The bricks were yellow, and the painted patterns were mostly worn away. The only thing I did to put it in the box was take down the flag and the other things on the roof. If that doesn't count, I still have a lot of small vehicles that are still intact that I've never taken apart, but that are also all shelved away in boxes (or maybe they're all in just one box). http://www.peeron.com/inv/sets/6505-1 http://www.peeron.com/inv/sets/6833-1 http://www.peeron.com/inv/sets/6811-1 http://www.peeron.com/inv/sets/6526-1 http://www.peeron.com/inv/sets/6503-1 http://www.peeron.com/inv/sets/1612-1 http://www.peeron.com/inv/sets/6508-1 But I'm not sure those should count...

Nice! I like the color scheme. Believe it or not, it kind of reminds me of the Saks or Macys buildings. Like everybody else, I love the potted plants. Simple and effective, and that's really what hits the spot for me when I look at a model. It's a little on the large side, but it works as giant hedges in minfigure scale. Now all you need are escalators in the interior and you could sell minifigure merchandise right out it. If there is any criticism at all, my only issue is that the backsides are too plain. Cafe Corner is the same. Large buildings are rarely attached to their neighbors. There's usually an alleyway of sorts in between for various reasons (trash, side door, fire escape) and the small space there provides enough room for the decorative cornice to go all the way around.

I think the only ones that would qualify are Alice and Shrek. The general Robin Hood idea was and may again be covered by a subtheme of Castle (elves?). The others are a little too violent. It's amazing how violence is completely marginalized in the US, versus how glaring it is to Europeans.

I gotta agree that the worst set goes to a battle pack. But it's not the one you're thinking of. The worst set of the year unquestionably goes to 852747-Pirates Battle Pack. As for the best set, MMV and Winter Toy Shop look to be the best, though I haven't actually gotten around to building either yet, so I can't say which one is better. BBB, Crystal Sweeper (despite the puke-green color scheme), Maximum Security Transport, these are fair runners up. Edit: I just want to qualify that I'm only considering non-licensed themes. I have a general dislike for non-Classic Star Wars sets, so to work around that bias, I've excluded licensed themes entirely.

Never liked the baddies, but I might just pick up the VPR, custom pieces be damned. It looks cool, unlike the I-can't-decide-if-I-want-to-be-retro '09 sets. Don't get me wrong; I like two of the '09 SP3 sets. But being stuck somewhere between 1989 and 2009 can't be a good thing. Still don't care for the villain SP3 sets though, and I suspect I never will.

I find it difficult to consider Bionicle proper Lego. I mean, they're made by the same company and everything, but I deny that they're actually Lego. This stuff is even worse. Why not just start making action figures and forget the piece counts. Put 'em under a different brand name, call it a day. (Simple marketing test: If a product can't stand on its own without an existing brand behind it, then it's probably not going to stand for very long attached to a name brand. A name can only jump-start popularity. That which has no substance, well, has no substance.) I was hoping for some sets as well. But I was pretty sure from the moment they announced the license that this was the kind of stuff they'd do. The only reason why I'm not actually upset is because this was reasonably within my expectations. But hey, you know what they say; aim low, and you won't ever be disappointed. I'm still hoping for real sets to come out of the license though. I'd pick up an RV. If we could have Sponge Bob sets, Ben 10 sets isn't much farther.

Holy... I need a moment to compose myself... Ok. Here I was, thinking since the pirates line was no more, I could skip half the 2010 sets and save up my money, and somehow, somehome, TLG still manages to find a way to part it with me. I'm stunned. This is an awesome ship. It is a must-have in my book. It doesn't matter whether I have room to put it on display or not. If I can't find the room, I'm going to buy some shelves and put them up just for this. I think it's time to stock up on Cannon Battles. The ship comes with 4 cannons, but I'm pretty sure it can hold 8. Now that's one sweet battleship.

A lot of it comes down to time and money. The patterns of play are the same or very similar, if you factor in the decrease in time and increase in money as we grow older. Of course, life experiences can change us subtly sometimes, drastically other times, and the changes can result in a different way we play. But these are external factors that we have no control over. This is true. I suspect though, people lose the ability to have fun, or at least lose the ability to know what is fun, as they grow up. I'm certain there are social pressures and influences as well to make people eventually forget what they truly enjoy or forget that they actually enjoy what they're doing. And then, just like that, they'll find it again as they grow even older.

MMV is definitely not a set for children. Sure kids interested in building would have a great time putting it together and thoroughly enjoy playing with it, but it doesn't quite have the instant appeal of something that has action right on the box. Besides AFOLs, MMV is most appropriate for TFOLs, and would only seriously appeal to the more creative children. Since there's a social stigma associated with playing with bricks after a certain age, MMV and other AFOL-oriented sets may be a good way to keep teenagers interested, and to maintain teenage mindshare until they get older and turn into full-blown AFOLs. Considering the small market and the risks involved, I can understand why such sets are rare if at all present, and I'm extremely grateful to have MMV at all, but what I can't understand is why action sets have to be <insert that tiresome argument>, why the philosophy behind MMV, which is attention to detail while or in spite of being modest, can't be extended to the smaller sets. Again, dwarves' mine is one of those that stands out as an example. It has a lot of stuff going on, but it doesn't feel like anything was purposefully put there to increase the perceived "value" of the set while the real meat got cut to make up for the fluff. Why does every set have to have a drawbridge, or be some kind of all-encompassing fortress that's been very obviously vastly simplified for cost reasons. For example, it would make me very happy if they came out with a wall set. Just a very high wall, with some archers on top, and some bad guys on the bottom. Maybe a ladder and some rope. Put it out for 25 bucks as a battle pack on steroids. And then have a gate set that would fit with said wall, perhaps with a battering ram below. There could even be multiple instructions for building the wall, so it's worthwhile to buy a few walls and turn it into a garrison. Modularity has been present in sets for a while, so I don't understand why more lines aren't taking advantage of this like the modular town, albeit at a smaller scale. I'm doubtful that we'll get a non-fantastical theme in the future, or that we'll get something like a plain, bland wall. Since I don't mind the fantasy elements, it doesn't terribly bother me that the focus of the theme isn't on castles anymore, so long as the sets are designed and done well. But as that appears to be difficult (the ratio of hits to misses in my book is a little on the low side), I have to wonder if going back to human factions would make things easier all around. It's almost as easy as just switching the color theme and changing the architectural motif a bit. Do it a few times, and suddenly, it's not two factions, but four or five now. It wouldn't upset me if that's the new direction, though I would be a little sad if I don't get to see some of these mythical elves that I've been waiting on for some time now.

I agree with Sandy. There's no reason to bend over backwards for every little thing that makes somebody inside TLG mad. If that were the case, then we might as well cease discussion about all future sets and lines, because I'm sure that makes somebody mad too. Seeing as how the cat's out of the bag, it seems pointless to try to shut everybody up. I don't mind the requests to remove pictures, but to outright stop a discussion is policing thought, and for a company that built its reputation on products that serve creativity and individual thinking, that's quite the 180. TLG has never asked that the discussion cease in the past, even after numerous leaks. Such a request is unlike them, and I can see why it is coming through a third party this time. For what it's worth, Bonaparte's response couldn't have been any better balanced between TLG's supposed wants and the community's wants. If TLG is only recently starting to do focus groups, then it explains a lot of their past failings, and probably explains why the choices for this one seem so monotonous. I did remember something about the yellow for minifigures coming out of a result of a focus group, but I guess they stopped trying after that. After letting the information settle for a bit, I think I can see the reasoning behind "kingdoms" a little more. I don't really like it in general; it doesn't quite roll off the tongue, and it reminds me of Knight's Kingdom (and worse, Knight's Kingdom II, the horribleness of which I'm still not over and still makes me hesitate whenever I pick up a set, regardless of size or theme), but ninja and vikings would both fit snugly under this name (in fact, I'd prefer "empires" to diminish the KK connotation, but I can see how that name isn't quite appropriate either, since empire would indicate something grand, and that just isn't going to happen). "Kingdoms" would be a fair name if TLG wants to diversify the line beyond the fantasy theme, especially if they're planning to return to human factions, which as I said before would really excite me. But again, the chances of that aren't terribly great. At most, we may see more mythological creatures in the future as part of the opposing faction, but that again would make "fantasy" a better name. "Kingdoms" would be a very, very distant fourth if a large part of the theme contained fantastical elements like magic and mythical creatures, but second if the theme went back to all humans again. For the record, my second pick after "fantasy" would've been "warriors," and a distant third would be "knights." "Knights" is limiting, though it actually may work depending on where TLG wants to go with the line. But "warriors" is an excellent all-purpose word that conveys the same meaning without references to a specific class. "Warriors" can apply equally as well to humans vs. humans, and humans vs. non-humans. It's not quite as snazzy as "fantasy" which is why it loses out, but should fantastical elements be relegated to the background in the future, I'd think it the ideal name for the line. In fact, it even encompasses the wild west sub-theme. The only thing is that it clashes with bionicle slightly, but I've never thought of that line as Lego proper, so that doesn't bother me. Don't get me started on the atrocity that is bionicle... It's mostly guesswork that I'm doing, but I wonder if the participants in the study actually have advanced information on where the line will be going. After all, it's a little ridiculous to ask a bunch of people to rename a product line without giving them some context. The popularity of "kingdoms" may indicate that TLG is returning to human-faction vs. human-faction for this line, as in multiple kingdoms at war with each other. One of the factions probably involves knights, but that I think we already take for granted, though it rules out the possibility of non-knights factions (vikings, ninja, etc.). It may also explain the popularity of "castle," as we may see castles released in quick succession in the near future (like KK2 *shudder*). And the fact that somebody like myself can draw such conspiracy theories with this kind of information may be why TLG is so furious over the leak. That and the little snippet about Lego Universe, though to be honest, I'm not sure it's that groundbreaking (I had imagined some of these things to come out as marketing materials prior to product launch to generate interest and hype).

To be fair, both "knights" and "kingdom" share the same negative connotation. I am also surprised that "kingdom" is doing so well. However, it seems the choices are unimaginative and bland, and perhaps it's the best one among the limited choices. After all, castle probably isn't the best choice on the list either. I personally would prefer knights over kingdom, but that's just me. It bothers me that "fantasy" isn't among the choices. It's the most logical one, given the direction of past few "castle" lines and the most recent line. There has been elements of magic in the line since Dragon Masters, and the extreme that this recent line has taken the "magic" subtheme reeks of fantasy. They might be reluctant to seem like they're cashing off Harry Potter and the sudden interest in the fantasy genre, but that seems a bit hypocritical when there outright was a Harry Potter licensed theme. Who do they have working there these days anyway? I'm not sure how much stock I'd place in a PotC line. It's a rumor only, and the what's keeping this rumor going is the cut of the pirates line right after its reintroduction. It's logical to think that with a Disney agreement, that there'd be a PotC line with the movie. But it could also be one of those things that won't materialize. And to be fair, PotC is only partially fantastical. It's set in the real world, and the elements of fantasy are more along the lines of witchcraft, mysticism, and sailors' folklore than dwarves, trolls, and dragons. But if they really think the potential PotC line will cannibalize the current castle line, I have to wonder where they'll take the castle line in 2011 then. The suggested names would make sense if they're going back to human-minifig vs. human-minifig, but I thought TLG was trying to move away from that. Part of me is hoping we'll see a real castle theme revival--and I couldn't care less what name it'll be released under--instead of more fantasy, but since elves remain unreleased, the other part of me wants that to come out first before they drop this line altogether. ;) Funny, town, castle, space, and pirates used to be subtitles to Legoland. But there have always been sub themes, and I'm not sure that's the issue right now. I'm not sure "castle" is a good name for the theme anymore. It was appropriate with the Black Falcons and Crusaders and such, but now? I mean, the theme has had everything from dragons to ninjas under the "castle" brand even before the recent run of trolls and dwarves. On one hand, it doesn't make sense to stick with the castle name anymore, but on the other hand, I have to wonder what their game plans is with the names they suggested.

I've been wanting to reply to this topic for a long time now. Personally, I don't think I play any different than I did in my youth. Today, I have them set up for "display," only occasionally moving them around to change up the scenery. I did pretty much the same thing, when I was young, but I spent more time doing it, and I did it more frequently. Putting my toys away, for lego anyway, meant putting them back on display. You can way the process of changing the positions was a little more convoluted, with the vehicles going through a bit more roundabout way before reaching their final destination, but the result was the same. I never used to break my sets, though I did occasionally drop them and end up having to rebuild it, but that's rarely done intentionally. I think the difference between then and now comes down to time. I don't have the time to really play with my sets anymore, so I just take them through the shortest route to rearrangement, which is to say, I pick them up and move them to their respective new locations and leave it at that. And I do it far less frequently, though if I have time, I do have a little fun with the sets anyway (hmm, that sounds kind of dirty). I occasionally get a chance to watch kids play with Lego bricks now, and they definitely do not play the same way as I did. Their pieces are all over the place. They build the set, then take it apart, and then build various little things with the pieces that get destroyed in the play process or the cleanup process. Or they let the set fall apart, or borrow the pieces from the sets. Nobody really has the sets out for display. Cleanup means dumping them into a box or bin with other pieces from many other sets. And I can see how this behavior would change over time. I never did these things with my sets, though I did have a lot of basic buckets for that purpose. And while I don't take the bricks everywhere I go anymore like I used to, I do go to the PAB wall and pick up a cup of bricks and play around with them, building what I may with what I have. My only gripe with that is the insane amount of time I need to fill up a large PAB cup. I don't really put those on display like the real sets; I just leave them lying around my work table where I can just pick them up whenever and build whatever I feel like at the moment. (Which is why I also lament the change in how Technic is nowadays. I'd love to play around with the cogs and gears and other gizmos and just make something that does something in my spare time, but Technic doesn't play like that anymore.) But interestingly enough, it's the same sort of play as I used to do. Once a child, always a child I guess.

The current fantasy line has its place, without a doubt. I enjoy it. At the same time though, the success of Medieval Market Village shows that there is also a high demand for real medieval sets. And that's the truth of the matter. There's nothing wrong with a fantasy theme. It's not a castle theme though, and with the exception of the knights faction, it really doesn't belong to be labeled as "Castle." IMHO, the true castle theme died a long time ago. The new theme is not a bad thing, like I said, but it's not the old castle theme either. I don't like the new castles. I think they're ridiculous. The new wall parts are just cheap and the "play" of the set feels like a whole bunch of fluff stuffed into a large box that doesn't seem to quite fit it; if you're not careful, the box will explode, sending fluff flying in every direction. It's why I've bought the smaller sets mostly; I don't have any of the large castle sets from this current incarnation of the theme, my largest one being the dwarves' mine (MMV doesn't count). Actually, I really enjoy dwarves' mine, particularly because it doesn't have nearly as much fluff as some of the large castles do. It's quaint. I can't really say the same for the other sets, even some of the smaller ones.

I know it's probably heresey around these parts, but I was never terribly fond of the "castle" name for the theme, though I've never had any better ideas. I'd definitely think medieval would be more descriptive, but that's only because I know what it means. I'm not sure that word is in every kid's vocabulary, while "castle" or "fortress" certainly is. But the name Castle doesn't quite embody the theme anymore. In the past, it was based around the medieval feudal system, with different factions in each castle fighting each other. Now, it's more of a fantasy theme. The "castle" portion is really just a subtheme. I'm not surprised TLG wants to rename the theme. My pick for the name of today's theme would be Lego Fantasy or something along those lines, which is much more representative of the theme as it exists now (wizards, skeletons, dwarves, trolls, elves hopefully, etc.). It surprises me though, that this option isn't in the poll. Both "knights" and "kingdoms" are not representative of the entire theme, though "knights" rolls off the tongue a little better. To be honest, the whole thing reeks of some low-level marketing guy trying to justify his/her existence in the company.

I have to say, a new PotC line wouldn't interest me at all. The movies were blase at best. It might do well initially, but I doubt it'll last. I'm not even terribly excited about the toy story line, though I might get a set here or there. Wasn't there something a few years back about TLG not doing so well partly because they had too many licensed themes, and lost their focus? I foresee history repeating itself... Well...that just means I can save up a bit more next year and the year after I guess. As for Steve's update, the fact that pirates isn't listed as one of the core lines says more than enough about the prospects of a real pirates line coming back. A backhanded compliment if I ever saw one.

Signed. 'nuff said.

Wow. That sucks. But I was wondering if they'd do a Pirates of the Caribbean line with the new Disney license. I guess in the way that the space theme was supplanted by the SW license, pirates may be supplanted by the Disney license. It doesn't matter though, that there may still be a licensed "pirates" line. In the end, the real pirates line is no more, and that's a shame. Ah well. I'm disappointed, and doubly more so that the Pirates Advent Calendar won't be coming to North America (not even Canada). I'm glad I managed to buy every set in this short-lived line, and I'd have been more than willing to part with my money would there be more sets to purchase. I was hoping for a few more ships, some town elements (a real pirates shanty town or something), etc. The only thing I can't believe is that they'll let pirates languish in favor of other--IMHO--inferior lines. There's only been one wave of actual sets, and the second wave of the pirates theme consisting of accessories and auxillary sets have been lame at best. On the other hand, Agents had a second wave of sets, which IMHO was vastly inferior to the first wave. So long, pirates. We hardly knew ye.

WTH... Either they didn't learn anything from the Castle Advent Calendar debacle, or they're taking a loss on each one that they sell in the US.

In a word: retro. Nice. I like all three. The doctor's car is the worst, and the steamroller is the best, but they're all still awesome. It'd be great it TLG released these as regular or even impulse sets. But since they seem to be promotional, it might be too much to ask for.

This sounds like a pretty good program, to allow LUGs to order in bulk. There are probably quite a few who can benefit from this. I'm thinking in addition to AFOLUG's, this would be perfect for Lego builders clubs in schools and such. The only thing of note here is that LUGs of 10 (or of 10 willing participants) are kind of screwed by the rules. There's a minimum of 2,000DKK per order per LUG, and a maximum of 200DKK per person. For a group of exactly 10, that's not a lot of room to maneuver. Every participant pretty much has to order exactly 200DKK, or the order's not going to meet the minimum, but how often do you end up ordering an exact amount of anything?

...when you get into a fistfight with some guy outside a Lego store because he cut the checkout line at a grand opening and the guy in front of you grabbed the last exclusive. ...when you get into a fistfight in the Lego store with a little kid for the last piece on the PAB wall. ..when you get into a fistfight with the Lego store employee who's trying to kick you out for beating up a little kid. Well, OK, that was sort of tongue-in-cheek. I only had a heated discussion with the guy, I was negotiating with the store employee, and the little kid had it coming. Uh..I mean...don't get into fights, kids.

This is true. Only Volumes 1 and 2 are out. I've been waiting for Vol. 3, and now Vol. 4 appears but before Vol. 3 is even announced. The thread on vol 3 can be found here.

I'm hoping it's a swordfish and not a shark. There are plenty of sharks, but I don't think they've released a swordfish yet. It actually kinda bothers me having a minifig riding on a shark, and the size of the new shark mold is more the issue than the minifig actually on the shark. That'd be one huge shark, or one very little guy. I'm not sure a baby could ride most sharks the way that minifig rides it. I'd love to have both, but I have to wonder how big the swordfish is going to be. Considering the diminutive size of the kraken, I'm wondering if it's going to be around the size of the old sharks.

The placement of the cabin certainly doesn't seem natural by any means. But we know that they moved things around, since the mast isn't even at the site of the wreck anymore. I suppose the best explanation is that the ship ran aground on a very small island, and the pirates dismantled the ship and put it back together around said island. The steering wheel was probably somewhere in front of the sterncastle, seeing as the remains of the bow are present, but the stern is nowhere to be found. They effectively moved what should've been the sterncastle to the top of the rocks (maybe the ship snapped into two pieces as expected, and they salvaged what they could of the part that was loose), and moved the mast to a nearby outcropping. I'm also guessing the rope bridge was built from all the leftover rigging.

I don't like the double-sided heads, only because most headgear/hairpieces don't actually cover the entire backside. I have trouble coming to terms with double-sided heads that come with headgear that leaves bits of the mouth (sometimes, the lipstick) sticking out of the second side. I'd much rather they split the two sides it into two heads, to be put into two different sets. For example, the jester has a grinning side and a sad side. I'd rather the advent calendar come with the grinning side, and 7079 drawbridge defense come with the sad side. But I'm sure if they actually did it that way, somebody else would complain.