Talk:Ricochet (Headmasters)

Where does the part about him being friends with Fusion (?) and Bluestreak originate? (That's the kinda of thing I thing could really use citation, even if it is in the bio)

So fusion is from Stepper's bio. (I assume his friendship with Blue is from the same place) So are we treating Stepper and Ricochet as the same character then just with seperate names (as opposed to the Pretenders like Wave)? Is the Takkara bio/personality pretty much exactly the same as Ricochets? If they conflict I think I have to vote them seperate characters.

Ricochet's bio includes lines lifted verbatim from Stepper's bio, the ones most key to hsi personality. It's 2 names for the same character. -Derik 02:59, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Hey, guys, I'm not American, so can someone explain the New Jersey thing?

New Jersey is one of the 50 states, and each car has a license plate that's registered in one of those states. Ricochet's says "New Jersey" on it. --ItsWalky 13:51, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

No, I get that, but why is it 'strangely right somehow'?

New Jersey is a disgusting, rude hellhole filled with despicable people. --ItsWalky 14:00, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Ah, well, now that explains it. Even more so now that I've read the edit. It's strange, for a character I knew nothing about besides "sells poorly, used to fetch high prices, good shot, Targetmaster" I find myself really liking him. But. I have a thing for 'underappreciated' characters.

Explanation for Targetmasterness

Uh, I can't write very well, so uh could one of you guys who can make this go in the article all clever and non-plagiarized?

"Stepper Profile: Cybertron/Stepper Function...Rapid-Fire Attack Motto..."It isn't concentration that improves your aim, it's guts."

Profile Though short-tempered, Stepper is known to have twice the sense of justice of anyone else. His marksmanship is said to be in the top class among the Cybertrons, and he would have contests of skill with his pals Streak and Fusion while they were on Seibertron. Classified as a Targetmaster, Stepper is paired with his partner Nebulon, but their background couldn't be more different from the others in their group. Let's look into this starting from the fact that, unlike his fellow Targetmasters, Nebulon combines at Stepper's back. An engineer on the planet Master, Nebulon volunteered to help Stepper compensate for damage done to Stepper's metabolic functions in a certain incident. Being made symbiotic with Nebulon allowed Stepper to maintain life support. The jet-black portions of his body coloration can function as a "black body," and the energy they gather during normal times can be fired from Nebulon's flame cannon during combat. Those energies' temperatures can exceed 5000�C, but with his car mode reaching top speeds of over 700 km/h, to avoid backdraft problems, he saves its use for later, switching instead to his two normal beam cannons."

http://bwtf.com/tfg1/toys/reviews/2004/stepper/booklet.shtml

Header

I agree with Jackpot. The way characters can bounce to different conintuities? G1 characters from the G1 DW comics showed up in the DW Armada comics. Characters jump the track with enough frequency (or have their models serve as cameos) to where we probably SHOULD clarify when it comes to DW or any other multi-franchise publisher that comes along. --M Sipher 18:03, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

I disagree. I think referring to a character as from the Generation 1 continuity family up top makes it a default assumption that their appearances in "Dreamwave / IDW comics continuity" is in the Generation 1 comics from that publisher. That's safe for, like, 99% of all stories. The only criss-crossings I can even think of are from Armada's Worlds Collide and IDW's Maximal Elders. Everyone else tends to stay in the same continuity families, no matter how many alternate timelines they jump through.

Model cameos could be referenced in Trivia, but do we really want a full heading just to say "Someone who looked like Wheelie (but obviously wasn't) messed up Hot Shot in Armada"? --Xaaron 18:21, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

I agree with Xaaron. We should only distinguish between different Dreamwave continuities when there are more than one per page. If being on G1 Ricochet's page confuses you which Dreamwave continuity we're likely to be referencing perhaps we should stick "G1 Autobot" in front of every individual reference to him on his own page as well, since there's buttloads more of him. --ItsWalky 18:33, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

I mainly balk at "Dreamwave comics continuity" because there is no such thing. An uninformed reader could easily walk away thinking that DW only did one universe, when in fact they did three. That's bad information. And it's such a very easy thing to clarify, I don't see why we shouldn't.

For the record, I put so much stock in headers because they're by far the most visually standout thing on the page. The continuity-note at the top technically covers the bases (if written correctly), but only assuming that the reader reads articles from top to bottom, start to finish, every word. The reality is that most people skim, and the one thing that we know a skimmer will notice is the stuff that's big and bold. So I really really really think that the headers should be able to stand on their own. And to me, that means erring on the side of specificity.

- Jackpot 19:58, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

It sounds like you want headers to convey information that is not relevant to the page it's on. Individual character entries can't possibly clarify all the misconceptions people COULD have from reading the info only relevant to that entry. There are several "Dreamwave comic continuity"s, sure, but what does it matter to Ricochet's entry that there is a Dreamwave Armada continuity? If people want to learn about Dreamwave and all it encompasses, they can go to the Dreamwave entry. --Xaaron 21:26, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

I think you overestimate the can of worms you believe I'm opening. All I'm saying is that we shouldn't use headers that don't actually mean anything and that easily lend themselves to misinformation. "Dreamwave continuity" is not a thing. "Dreamwave G1 continuity" is a thing. - Jackpot 21:49, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

That would really make for an overrepetitive set of headers. Optimus Prime appears in the "Generation 1 cartoon continuity", the "Marvel Comics continuity, Generation 1 and Generation 2", the "Dreamwave Generation 1 continuity", and the "IDW Generation 1 continuity". At what point do we just get the point that this is a Generation 1 character? That's what the "Generation 1 continuity family" top heading is for -- readers don't need to "read articles from top to bottom, start to finish, every word", just the subheading right under the biggest, boldest part of the article. After that, they can just interpret "Dreamwave comics continuity" as meaning "The Generation 1 portion of Dreamwave comics continuity". I don't think it's too much to expect people are capable of making that connection on their own, without repeating "Generation 1" constantly throughout the article. --Xaaron 01:20, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

There aren't that many examples where this is necessary. Most publishers/studios only cover one franchise, so differentiation is needless. IDW and DW are the only ones I can think of where my notion definitely applies... and, hell, I'm even iffy about separating G2. I guess because Classics disregards it, so it's handy to have those events called out.... but if not for that, I'd be all for just saying "Marvel comics." - Jackpot 04:00, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

I'll agree with Jackpot so long as he goes back and edits every G1 article :D --FFN 02:39, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

That implies there's any consistency NOW. I certainly don't see any well-defined pattern, so as I write new stuff, I go with what makes the most sense to me. - Jackpot 04:00, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

2003 Japanese release

Was the 2003 re-release in Japan called "Ricochet with Nightstick?" Or was it called Stepper with Nebulan... or what? Are we supposed to represent these two releases with one entry int he toy history? (Don't we normally only split them if the JP release is a variant...?)

(I seldom get involved with toy sections, so I'm a bit lost.) -Derik 04:23, 14 August 2009 (EDT)

Yeah, there should probably be a separate entry for the J-reissue as "Stepper w/ Nebulon" under a "Transformers Collection" header. - McFeely, not signed in because he's about to leave for Auto Assembly, baybee!

Move to Ricochet (G1)?

There's no page at all right now at Ricochet (G1), not even a redirect. Is there any strong reason for leaving this at (Headmasters) instead? -- Dark T Zeratul 05:37, 10 October 2009 (EDT)

The fact that Headmasters is his franchise of origin? —Interrobang 15:27, 10 October 2009 (EDT)

To elaborate, there is another Ricochet (G1) -- Quickmix's Nebulan Dual Targetmaster partner. Like Barrage (Insecticon) and Barrage (Micromaster), Ricochet (Headmasters) and Ricochet (Nebulan) are labeled as clearly as possible, considering they're both G1 characters. So while a Ricochet (disambig) or Ricochet (G1) redirect may be in order, Stepper / Ricochet cannot just be named Ricochet (G1). --Xaaron 16:50, 10 October 2009 (EDT)

"Stepper"?

Walky, is there a reason why you're using "Stepper" instead of "Ricochet"? Doesn't that go against our English name usage rules? —Interrobang 23:31, 24 August 2011 (EDT)

I'm pretty sure we're supposed to use the name appropriate to each section, so he's "Stepper" in the Japanese fiction sections and "Ricochet" in the North American fiction sections. At any rate, that sure feels more honest. --ItsWalky 23:46, 24 August 2011 (EDT)

Isn't it really more that the Wiki prioritizes the name used in English-originating materials (ie American toy release, US comic appearances, etc) over the ones from Japanese fiction, be they English or Japanese? --Detour 23:48, 24 August 2011 (EDT)

*shrug* I really don't care one way or the other, but we've always used English names, if available, everywhere. Optimus Prime (G1) isn't called "Convoy" in the Japanese fiction sections, episode titles, or Japanese media pages. —Interrobang 23:52, 24 August 2011 (EDT)

Stepper's a rare example of a character who had a Japanese name first and only got a Hasbro name many, many years later (compare with Hasbro's attempt to label Overlord "Gigatron", which failed to stick), and I kinda get what Walky means about "honesty", but as Interro says, it's always been the standard for us to use the one, English name throughout. Like he says, all the American-original characters aren't referred to with their Japanese names in the Japanese-fiction portions of their articles—I don't think we had to discuss it for long back when before we concluded not to flip-flop around like that—but in a reverse example, Deathsaurus is "Deathsaurus" all through his article because that's his American name; he's not "Deszaras" in his Victory cartoon and comic write-ups. - Chris McFeely 11:39, 25 August 2011 (EDT)

Yeah, I was about to change it before I decided to look at the discussion page to see what's up. It really ought to be "Ricochet" in our articles since "Ricochet is to Stepper as Deathsaurus is to Deszaras", to put it in SAT terms. Likewise goes with Nebulon being changed to Nightstick. --DrSpengler 16:00, 25 August 2011 (EDT)

For what it's worth, Japanese-original characters that don't get names in English until many years after the fact feel, to me, like they belong with Japanese names. Deathsaurus I feel less strongly about because it feels more like a spelling variation than like an actual name change. I, personally, would rather see it flip-flop.--Jimsorenson 16:18, 25 August 2011 (EDT)

I'm with Jim on all accounts here.--Nevermore 18:55, 5 February 2012 (EST)

I agree with McFeely. It's going to be necessarily abitrary who gets to have what name where if we start saying "Well, he had his Japanese name ten years before his US name, but HE had his Japanese name FIVE years before his US name. Also, Stepper didn't matter in Japan any more than he did in the US in the twenty years he existed before getting his US name. -LV 19:20, 5 February 2012 (EST)

Ultimately, I can live with the current format, with one exception: The fact that his Japanese name was "Stepper" before Hasbro dubbed him "Ricochet" should be pointed out somewhere a lot more prominently than in the toy section and under "foreign names". I don't mean using his original Japanese name in the fiction section, but I don't think it's okay to treat his Japanese name as a mere trivia footnote either.--Nevermore 06:17, 2 March 2012 (EST)

We are now moving this to "Stepper (Headmasters)" to match the newly-renamed "Nebulon (Headmasters)", yes? S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47 (talk) 17:10, 3 December 2016 (EST)

Nebulon was renamed as an exception to the American Names First policy due to the specific problems over overlapping name reuse when it comes to "Nightstick". Changing the name of this page would not be necessary to accommodate the Nightstick issue. --Xaaron (talk) 18:44, 3 December 2016 (EST)

Now it's a bit jarring with the masmatched names, though. Plus, "Stepper" has seen more uses than "Ricochet" in the character's history. S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47 (talk) 18:57, 3 December 2016 (EST)

I'd far prefer to keep it at the English name. Escargon (talk) 19:56, 3 December 2016 (EST)

It stays at English. There is no graceful solution. There's going to be a disconnect at SOME point, and this is at least a clean, obvious point. --M Sipher (talk) 22:58, 3 December 2016 (EST)

GS Ricochet

I've had one for a couple of months and it's not shown any sign of cracking, though obviously it's still covered in paint so I'm handling it carefully. Not sure if it's worth noting but he also barely has a face - the nose and mouth (especially) are really badly defined. QC glitch? Mold damage? Paint too thick? Shadow XGX-9 (talk) 12:17, 30 July 2022 (EDT)