Talk:Ring of Hate!

Brainstorm detects "dihydrogen monoxide" (a.k.a. water) on Nebulos, despite the fact that according to the Crater Critters issue, the Transformers consider water to be a myth. Why would Brainstorm have a scanner that detects chemicals that supposedly don't exist?

I take serious issue with this assertion, which seems to be a long-standing idea in the fandom. In the issue in question, Ratbat says "The only cure is a chemical so RARE its very existence is SUSPECT!" Statements elsewhere refer to it as "legendary" and... possibly "unknown" or some equivalent, too (working from memory here.) And then Goldbug is totally surprised to find out that water is the cure. My reading of all this is that they don't know what the chemical is. They only know that the cure is SOME chemical, which, whatever it is, is rare or non-existent on Cybertron. It's perfectly believable, then, that Brainstorm would note the presence of this unfamiliar chemical in the air and report on its effects. I mean, it's a scanner. It detects stuff. That's what a scanner does. -- Repowers 08:49, 12 June 2009 (EDT)

Cameos

There are two Throttlebot-looking guys at the end of Scorponok's captive line; of course, the Throttlebots are supposed to be on Earth at this point in the comic, so it's either an error or two generics that happen to look like Throttlebots (the generic theory is supported by the fact that one of them has three wheels on his legs, unlike any of the real Throttlebots). Also, on page 3, in the big fight panel, there's a Decepticon shown from behind that looks an awful lot like Sixshot in robot mode. -Mazenoise 11:06, 12 June 2009 (EDT)

World-Watchers or Worldwatchers?

The name of Galen's organization is hyphenated at a line break so it could either be the World-Watchers or the Worldwatchers. I'm guessing World-Watchers but are there any other opinions? - Starfield 23:24, 10 April 2010 (EDT)

Wait, in the next issue and in the UK annual it is spelled "World Watchers" so I guess that is it. - Starfield 23:48, 10 April 2010 (EDT)

Thousands

Is it really an 'error' to refer to fifty thousand vorns as 'thousands of vorns'? Yes, it is also tens of thousands, but it's still thousands, and it seems a perfectably believable turn of phrase - just as a human might say 'three hundred years' rather than 'three centuries'. --MissRatbat 03:30, 26 January 2013 (EST)