Classic-Castle.com


The source for all your LEGO Castle needs!

Weekly Set Review: Battle Dragon

Discussion of official LEGO Castle Theme sets and products

Postby FishRfine » Tue Dec 18, 2007 12:49 am

yeah, guys i can get one of those for 5 bucks, with instructions but no box, 100% complete. should I go for it?
User avatar
FishRfine
Freeman
 
Posts: 96
Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2007 9:43 pm
Location: VERY VERY CLOSE

Postby MarioDAlessio » Tue Dec 18, 2007 5:15 am

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
User avatar
MarioDAlessio
Foot Soldier
 
Posts: 238
Joined: Wed Jun 20, 2007 10:15 am
Location: Sydney Australia

Postby Aliencat » Tue Dec 18, 2007 4:15 pm

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!
Between plotting to kill you all and chasing balls of yarn, I also build MOCs

Image
User avatar
Aliencat
Josh's Minion
 
Posts: 2171
Joined: Wed Jun 20, 2007 3:21 pm
Location: Malé, Maldives

Postby JCool » Wed Dec 19, 2007 4:43 pm

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!
-Joe "Cool"
User avatar
JCool
Apprentice
 
Posts: 158
Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2005 12:15 pm
Location: Raleigh, NC

Postby Elephant Knight » Thu Dec 20, 2007 4:46 am

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
Don't ask about something: Just do it.

Flickr, Colour it Blacktron, A Pirate's Life

The theory of Ketchup: With enough Ketchup, everything tastes the same.
User avatar
Elephant Knight
CC Spriggan
 
Posts: 832
Joined: Mon Nov 12, 2007 1:34 am
Location: Hiding.

Postby DerBum » Thu Dec 20, 2007 2:51 pm

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.
DerBum
Laborer
 
Posts: 139
Joined: Wed Sep 26, 2007 3:20 pm

Postby Jojo » Sat Dec 22, 2007 2:43 pm

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
User avatar
Jojo
Master
 
Posts: 1685
Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2003 4:26 am
Location: Westfalen

Postby DerBum » Sun Dec 23, 2007 12:13 am

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.
DerBum
Laborer
 
Posts: 139
Joined: Wed Sep 26, 2007 3:20 pm

Re: Weekly Set Review: Battle Dragon

Postby Count Blacktron » Fri Dec 18, 2009 2:27 pm

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:
There is no life I know to compare with pure imagination. Living there, you'll be free if you truly wish to be. -Willy Wonka, 1971-
User avatar
Count Blacktron
Sheriff
 
Posts: 1412
Joined: Sat Oct 14, 2006 6:20 am
Location: Cave of Caerbannog

Re: Weekly Set Review: Battle Dragon

Postby dyntar » Fri Dec 18, 2009 2:39 pm

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...
User avatar
dyntar
Foot Soldier
 
Posts: 236
Joined: Sat Jul 18, 2009 4:05 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: Weekly Set Review: Battle Dragon

Postby Baned » Sun Dec 20, 2009 5:52 am

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.
Peeron contributions: 577 (Viking Chess), 7009, 7654, 7655, 7695, 7771, 8813, 8821, and 8822.

My Brickshelf Gallery
User avatar
Baned
Foot Soldier
 
Posts: 244
Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2007 12:48 am
Location: AEthelmearc

Re: Weekly Set Review: Battle Dragon

Postby quaraga » Tue Dec 29, 2009 5:30 am

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:
He who thinks you should look at the box that says "Quaraga" if you want to find out his username (about as useful to you as his real name). he only wants you to look so he can laugh about you looking there because he's a total smart...
User avatar
quaraga
Total n00b
Total n00b
 
Posts: 232
Joined: Mon Dec 28, 2009 4:10 am
Location: roflysst (rolling on the floor laughing, yet still somehow typing)

Re: Weekly Set Review: Battle Dragon

Postby ottoatm » Sat Jan 02, 2010 10:23 am

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:
Knight Templar
n. pl. Knights Templars or Knights Templar
1.A member of an order of knights founded about 1118 to protect pilgrims in the Holy Land during the Second Crusade.

My Lego Stories: The Land of Legelot!
CW-THE Lego Story Writer's Guild
User avatar
ottoatm
Knight Templar
Knight Templar
 
Posts: 3082
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2003 4:52 am
Location: New York

Re: Weekly Set Review: Battle Dragon

Postby J_MAN » Fri Jul 02, 2010 3:58 am

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.
J_MAN
Gong Farmer
Gong Farmer
 
Posts: 167
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2010 10:51 pm

Re: Weekly Set Review: Battle Dragon

Postby veevers24 » Sat Aug 14, 2010 5:16 pm

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
User avatar
veevers24
Newbie of the Month
 
Posts: 62
Joined: Wed Jul 21, 2010 11:34 am
Location: Exeter, England

Previous

Return to LEGO Castle Sets

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Troy and 2 guests