Page 3 of 3

Posted: Tue Dec 18, 2007 12:49 am
by FishRfine
yeah, guys i can get one of those for 5 bucks, with instructions but no box, 100% complete. should I go for it?

Posted: Tue Dec 18, 2007 5:15 am
by MarioDAlessio
Not a set I would buy multiples of when you compare what else was on offer in 1990(and for that matter now).

http://www.classic-castle.com/sets/oop1990.html

It seems this set and others that year were colourful and blended factions.

I would call the Knight holding the BF sheild a BF look at 6059 Knight's Stronghold is that armoured knight a BF.

http://classic-castle.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=204

Mario

Posted: Tue Dec 18, 2007 4:15 pm
by Aliencat
FishRfine wrote:yeah, guys i can get one of those for 5 bucks, with instructions but no box, 100% complete. should I go for it?
Yes!

Posted: Wed Dec 19, 2007 4:43 pm
by JCool
I must be one of the few people that actually likes this set. Granted I haven't built this in the many years since I first got it, but certainly it must hold up.... right?!

*goes off and builds*

#@&! Well... not quite that bad... I understand where some people are coming from in their comments on the set, but I like the simplicity of the design and the fact that for such a small set there were two minifigs included (a big deal for me back in the day). It has a few pieces that could be used for other creations (most likely why mine didn't last long). I'd happily pay the $5 retail price for another one of these.... but probably only 1, not much of a need for an army of these little things!

Posted: Thu Dec 20, 2007 4:46 am
by Elephant Knight
Not a very good set, espesially for the time period. The only redeming feture is the Falcon sheild, and that isn't that redeming.

All in all, 3 out of 10.

EKnight

Posted: Thu Dec 20, 2007 2:51 pm
by DerBum
I know I have already posted my opinion about this set, but man alive I cannot believe the bashing it is taking. When this set came out I was in Lego's target age group and I enjoyed it. It was a simple boat, inexpensive and included two men... BFs to boot! This set was great for riverine operations and provided me with a good deal of enjoyment. Looking back I can say that it wasnt the best, but it cannot possibly be as bad as it is being portayed.

Posted: Sat Dec 22, 2007 2:43 pm
by Jojo
Hello (again)!

DerBum wrote:but man alive I cannot believe the bashing it is taking.
Dear child, having a non-glorifying opinion of something is not equivalent to bashing that respective something.


Bye
Jojo

Posted: Sun Dec 23, 2007 12:13 am
by DerBum
Well, I wouldn’t consider myself to be a child... maybe in spirit, but I am not what most would consider young anymore...

When I used the term "bashing" I didn’t mean to say that people were bashing this set... I meant that it was taking a beating figuratively. Nobody in particular was unfairly judging the set, I simply didn’t see a lot of positive comments about it and so therefore it was taking a bashing. I welcome people offering their honest opinions about things; I was only trying to encourage others like me who enjoyed this set to speak out.

As an aside, I dug out the pieces to my other copy of this set and built it... now I have two again; brings back many childhood memories.

Re: Weekly Set Review: Battle Dragon

Posted: Fri Dec 18, 2009 2:27 pm
by Count Blacktron
I always assumed that the boatsman was being hijacked by the Black Falcon soldier in this set. At least, that's what the catalog and box front pictures looked like to me. :wink:

Re: Weekly Set Review: Battle Dragon

Posted: Fri Dec 18, 2009 2:39 pm
by dyntar
ok.. so shoot me with a crossbow for digging up this thread..[ok shoot him /\ curse my slow typing] But the torso use in this set has always annoyed me.. i collected Eagles/falcons and then black dragons when i was growing up. The lions were always the enemy. [Lions also include the crusaders.. as they were always the same faction according to aussie catalogs..] .. Its kinda like a troll wearing a crown symbol on their torso.. it just aint done lol

The way i have always figured this set is that... the eagles had been dieing out because of the strength of the Lions/crusaders.
So they joined forces with the strengthening Black Dragon/knight faction.
thats why we get the Battle dragon and 6057 the sea dragon.
i figure this set to be the Eagle/Falcons last set before fully combining with the Black Dragons.

Even though the figure head is a dragon. In europe at medieval times most ships probably would have had dragon figureheads.

This is a great little set. Its kind of unbalanced to be a real boat. too tall to be a real ship of that size but it has a symbolic meaning to me as it was one of the last sets i got before entering my dark ages... after the Lions, Eagles/falcons and Black knights disappeared i lost interest.

This is when the good sets started to die out.
my 2 cents...

Re: Weekly Set Review: Battle Dragon

Posted: Sun Dec 20, 2009 5:52 am
by Baned
This was my first Castle set, so I LOVED it on that fact alone. Soon followed it with 6103, 6009, 1491, 6042, and then more and more... haha

I always viewed this as a Black Knight's vessel that was taken over by the Falcon, and that's why a lot of official imagery of this set shows the oarsmen at "gunpoint" (or crossbow-point) and he had no weapons to defend himself.

Re: Weekly Set Review: Battle Dragon

Posted: Tue Dec 29, 2009 5:30 am
by quaraga
I agree that the BF is in controll and forcing his slave to row.
as far as I can see though the BF doesnt have a quiver. also stirrup style c-bows are stupid (see the 100 year war in which the biggest problem the french faced was that stirrup c-bows got pwned by the englesh longbows) now crank c-bows (used in the crusades) were so powerful that the church banned the use of them against cristians(a crank of 10 pound draw weight that ended up with a bow of several hundred pound draw weight = aniallation) :twisted:

Re: Weekly Set Review: Battle Dragon

Posted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 10:23 am
by ottoatm
I can't believe I never posted on this set...!

I like this set very much - "back in the day" this was one of the few boats, and the dragon in front is cool for a set. I don't have a problem with the two factions in one boat, as you are free to define their relationship (allies, enemies fighting for control of the little boat as it speeds down a river, etc :) ) It's also a nice way to get some small pieces (if you want them) for a decent price.

Also, "back in the day" this was how you built your armies. These new battle packs are cheating! (but wonderful) :tasty:

Re: Weekly Set Review: Battle Dragon

Posted: Fri Jul 02, 2010 3:58 am
by J_MAN
This is an interesting set. The Black Falcon soldier looks weird in the red pants and a gray helmet, not to mention the lack and odd selection of weapons in this set. :? A crossbow and a shield? Who can use a crossbow and a shield at the same time? But hey, two more knights and some accessories are always welcome, so for that I'd give this set a 6/10.

Re: Weekly Set Review: Battle Dragon

Posted: Sat Aug 14, 2010 5:16 pm
by veevers24
i have two of these and stupidly as a child threw the second set of instructions away - doh

a good set with two minifigs

The best bit is the dragons head - I have seen people straight copy this in grey/dark grey for their MOCs