Talk:Combiner - Revision history

Poliwag06: /* Scrapped combiner and volcanicus */ new section

2023-07-04T15:39:59Z

Scrapped combiner and volcanicus: new section

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:39, 4 July 2023
Line 95:		Line 95:
	:I second this motion. Or make a section for same combiner different configuration. It's still G1 Volcanicus. --[[User:Metalstar\|Metalstar]] ([[User talk:Metalstar\|talk]]) 12:58, 23 February 2023 (EST)		:I second this motion. Or make a section for same combiner different configuration. It's still G1 Volcanicus. --[[User:Metalstar\|Metalstar]] ([[User talk:Metalstar\|talk]]) 12:58, 23 February 2023 (EST)
	::Guys, the Combiner list is organized by toys first, not characters. There's lots of different toys listed on there for same characters. --[[User:Sabrblade\|Sabrblade]] ([[User talk:Sabrblade\|talk]]) 13:53, 23 February 2023 (EST)		::Guys, the Combiner list is organized by toys first, not characters. There's lots of different toys listed on there for same characters. --[[User:Sabrblade\|Sabrblade]] ([[User talk:Sabrblade\|talk]]) 13:53, 23 February 2023 (EST)

			== Scrapped combiner and volcanicus ==

			So the not about the scrapped dino combiner...
			Isn't volcanicus like 2/5 of it?
			(And also 3/5 becuz legacy gave us an Ankylosaurus if you squint)?[[User:Poliwag06\|Poliwag06]] ([[User talk:Poliwag06\|talk]]) 11:39, 4 July 2023 (EDT)

Sabrblade: /* Volcanicus identity crisis */

2023-02-23T18:53:20Z

Volcanicus identity crisis

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:53, 23 February 2023
Line 91:		Line 91:
	::::I think the distinction is that these are not homages but the same characters, because these combiners are in IDW, they are explicitly G1. That's why, for example, looking at Superion's page it includes the information that in some parts of G1 fiction, Alpha Bravo is a team member. These aren't homages in a different continuity family, these are alternate versions of the G1 combiners in the same continuity family. To me the line of thinking goes like this: "Defensor, Superion, Menasor, and Bruticus are G1 scramble city-type combiners and depicted as such the Combiner Wars G1 fiction. Optimus Maximus, Victorion, and Sky Reign are part of the same toyline as the Generations updates to the G1 scramble city-type combiners using the same combining gimmick, therefore they are also scramble city-type combiners." I feel like that is an entirely separate discussion to my suggestion though, I went ahead and moved Ultra Prime and Galvatronus into the Official Mix-n-match category since there wasn't any comment opposed to that particular move. [[User:Cehteshami\|Cehteshami]] ([[User talk:Cehteshami\|talk]]) 16:33, 21 July 2015 (EDT)		::::I think the distinction is that these are not homages but the same characters, because these combiners are in IDW, they are explicitly G1. That's why, for example, looking at Superion's page it includes the information that in some parts of G1 fiction, Alpha Bravo is a team member. These aren't homages in a different continuity family, these are alternate versions of the G1 combiners in the same continuity family. To me the line of thinking goes like this: "Defensor, Superion, Menasor, and Bruticus are G1 scramble city-type combiners and depicted as such the Combiner Wars G1 fiction. Optimus Maximus, Victorion, and Sky Reign are part of the same toyline as the Generations updates to the G1 scramble city-type combiners using the same combining gimmick, therefore they are also scramble city-type combiners." I feel like that is an entirely separate discussion to my suggestion though, I went ahead and moved Ultra Prime and Galvatronus into the Official Mix-n-match category since there wasn't any comment opposed to that particular move. [[User:Cehteshami\|Cehteshami]] ([[User talk:Cehteshami\|talk]]) 16:33, 21 July 2015 (EDT)

	== Volcanicus identity crisis ==		==Volcanicus identity crisis==

	So, should we list volcanicus as both scramble city and not scramble city?[[User:Poliwag06\|Poliwag06]] ([[User talk:Poliwag06\|talk]]) 09:55, 23 February 2023 (EST)		So, should we list volcanicus as both scramble city and not scramble city?[[User:Poliwag06\|Poliwag06]] ([[User talk:Poliwag06\|talk]]) 09:55, 23 February 2023 (EST)
			:I second this motion. Or make a section for same combiner different configuration. It's still G1 Volcanicus. --[[User:Metalstar\|Metalstar]] ([[User talk:Metalstar\|talk]]) 12:58, 23 February 2023 (EST)
	I second this motion. Or make a section for same combiner different configuration. It's still G1 Volcanicus. --[[User:Metalstar\|Metalstar]] ([[User talk:Metalstar\|talk]]) 12:58, 23 February 2023 (EST)		::Guys, the Combiner list is organized by toys first, not characters. There's lots of different toys listed on there for same characters. --[[User:Sabrblade\|Sabrblade]] ([[User talk:Sabrblade\|talk]]) 13:53, 23 February 2023 (EST)

Metalstar: /* Volcanicus identity crisis */

2023-02-23T17:58:47Z

Volcanicus identity crisis

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:58, 23 February 2023
Line 94:		Line 94:

	So, should we list volcanicus as both scramble city and not scramble city?[[User:Poliwag06\|Poliwag06]] ([[User talk:Poliwag06\|talk]]) 09:55, 23 February 2023 (EST)		So, should we list volcanicus as both scramble city and not scramble city?[[User:Poliwag06\|Poliwag06]] ([[User talk:Poliwag06\|talk]]) 09:55, 23 February 2023 (EST)

			I second this motion. Or make a section for same combiner different configuration. It's still G1 Volcanicus. --[[User:Metalstar\|Metalstar]] ([[User talk:Metalstar\|talk]]) 12:58, 23 February 2023 (EST)

Poliwag06: /* Volcanicus identity crisis */ new section

2023-02-23T14:55:13Z

Volcanicus identity crisis: new section

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:55, 23 February 2023
Line 90:		Line 90:
	:::[[Bruticus Maximus (Energon)]] and the others of that type are also homages to Generation 1 Scramble City combiners, but get their own category. Not to mention these "new" scramble city types often get a sixth member (chest-plate/weapon) that can't become a limb, unlike the Seacons. That's enough diferences to split them off, in my opinion.[[User:Ascendron\|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron\|talk]]) 14:42, 21 July 2015 (EDT)		:::[[Bruticus Maximus (Energon)]] and the others of that type are also homages to Generation 1 Scramble City combiners, but get their own category. Not to mention these "new" scramble city types often get a sixth member (chest-plate/weapon) that can't become a limb, unlike the Seacons. That's enough diferences to split them off, in my opinion.[[User:Ascendron\|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron\|talk]]) 14:42, 21 July 2015 (EDT)
	::::I think the distinction is that these are not homages but the same characters, because these combiners are in IDW, they are explicitly G1. That's why, for example, looking at Superion's page it includes the information that in some parts of G1 fiction, Alpha Bravo is a team member. These aren't homages in a different continuity family, these are alternate versions of the G1 combiners in the same continuity family. To me the line of thinking goes like this: "Defensor, Superion, Menasor, and Bruticus are G1 scramble city-type combiners and depicted as such the Combiner Wars G1 fiction. Optimus Maximus, Victorion, and Sky Reign are part of the same toyline as the Generations updates to the G1 scramble city-type combiners using the same combining gimmick, therefore they are also scramble city-type combiners." I feel like that is an entirely separate discussion to my suggestion though, I went ahead and moved Ultra Prime and Galvatronus into the Official Mix-n-match category since there wasn't any comment opposed to that particular move. [[User:Cehteshami\|Cehteshami]] ([[User talk:Cehteshami\|talk]]) 16:33, 21 July 2015 (EDT)		::::I think the distinction is that these are not homages but the same characters, because these combiners are in IDW, they are explicitly G1. That's why, for example, looking at Superion's page it includes the information that in some parts of G1 fiction, Alpha Bravo is a team member. These aren't homages in a different continuity family, these are alternate versions of the G1 combiners in the same continuity family. To me the line of thinking goes like this: "Defensor, Superion, Menasor, and Bruticus are G1 scramble city-type combiners and depicted as such the Combiner Wars G1 fiction. Optimus Maximus, Victorion, and Sky Reign are part of the same toyline as the Generations updates to the G1 scramble city-type combiners using the same combining gimmick, therefore they are also scramble city-type combiners." I feel like that is an entirely separate discussion to my suggestion though, I went ahead and moved Ultra Prime and Galvatronus into the Official Mix-n-match category since there wasn't any comment opposed to that particular move. [[User:Cehteshami\|Cehteshami]] ([[User talk:Cehteshami\|talk]]) 16:33, 21 July 2015 (EDT)

			== Volcanicus identity crisis ==

			So, should we list volcanicus as both scramble city and not scramble city?[[User:Poliwag06\|Poliwag06]] ([[User talk:Poliwag06\|talk]]) 09:55, 23 February 2023 (EST)

NexusShard17 at 19:30, 9 November 2020

2020-11-09T19:30:44Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:30, 9 November 2020
Line 73:		Line 73:
	:IDW already has Prowl as a part of Devastator. --[[User:Abates\|abates]] ([[User talk:Abates\|talk]]) 17:07, 28 April 2015 (EDT)		:IDW already has Prowl as a part of Devastator. --[[User:Abates\|abates]] ([[User talk:Abates\|talk]]) 17:07, 28 April 2015 (EDT)
	Yeah, but I mean that a big part of Menasor is that he's unstable because the Stunticons hate Motormaster. That mind is Menasor. What happens if you take out say, Drag Strip and put in a Protectobot or something. From my limited sources, it looks like Prowlestator was just a bigger Prowl. I could be wrong though.		Yeah, but I mean that a big part of Menasor is that he's unstable because the Stunticons hate Motormaster. That mind is Menasor. What happens if you take out say, Drag Strip and put in a Protectobot or something. From my limited sources, it looks like Prowlestator was just a bigger Prowl. I could be wrong though.
	::It hasn't specifically been done with Menasor, but [[God Neptune ~~(BWSG)\|God Neptune]]~~ is canonically a different character to [[Piranacon (G1)\|Piranacon]]. --[[User:Abates\|abates]] ([[User talk:Abates\|talk]]) 21:40, 28 April 2015 (EDT)		::It hasn't specifically been done with Menasor, but God Neptune is canonically a different character to [[Piranacon (G1)\|Piranacon]]. --[[User:Abates\|abates]] ([[User talk:Abates\|talk]]) 21:40, 28 April 2015 (EDT)
	Thanks. ''That's'' what I was looking for. [[User:Avalanche\|Avalanche]] ([[User talk:Avalanche\|talk]]) 10:34, 29 April 2015 (EDT)		Thanks. ''That's'' what I was looking for. [[User:Avalanche\|Avalanche]] ([[User talk:Avalanche\|talk]]) 10:34, 29 April 2015 (EDT)

Cyberlink420 at 23:48, 29 June 2020

2020-06-29T23:48:21Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:48, 29 June 2020
Line 68:		Line 68:
	when a Scramble City combiner switches limbs with another? Could Menasor with another team's member attached still be considered Menasor in a mental sense, considering Menasor is defined by his personality with the five Stunticons as components? [[User:Avalanche\|Avalanche]] ([[User talk:Avalanche\|talk]]) 16:53, 28 April 2015 (EDT)		when a Scramble City combiner switches limbs with another? Could Menasor with another team's member attached still be considered Menasor in a mental sense, considering Menasor is defined by his personality with the five Stunticons as components? [[User:Avalanche\|Avalanche]] ([[User talk:Avalanche\|talk]]) 16:53, 28 April 2015 (EDT)

	:In western fiction, nobody knows. In Japan you get [[Abomenaticus]], [[Comperian]], [[Cybertron Super Scramble]], [[Decepticon Super Scramble\|Destron Super Scramble]], and [[Scramble 7]]. - [[User:Gimmick\|Gimmick]] ([[User talk:Gimmick\|talk]]) 16:51, 28 April 2015 (EDT)		:In western fiction, nobody knows. In Japan you get [[Abomenaticus]], [[Comperian]], [[Autobot Super Scramble\|Cybertron Super Scramble]], [[Decepticon Super Scramble\|Destron Super Scramble]], and [[Scramble 7]]. - [[User:Gimmick\|Gimmick]] ([[User talk:Gimmick\|talk]]) 16:51, 28 April 2015 (EDT)

	Thanks. too bad western fiction doesn't have an answer. I'd like to see what IDW could whip up. [[User:Avalanche\|Avalanche]] ([[User talk:Avalanche\|talk]]) 16:53, 28 April 2015 (EDT)		Thanks. too bad western fiction doesn't have an answer. I'd like to see what IDW could whip up. [[User:Avalanche\|Avalanche]] ([[User talk:Avalanche\|talk]]) 16:53, 28 April 2015 (EDT)

Cyberlink420 at 23:41, 29 June 2020

2020-06-29T23:41:18Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:41, 29 June 2020
Line 68:		Line 68:
	when a Scramble City combiner switches limbs with another? Could Menasor with another team's member attached still be considered Menasor in a mental sense, considering Menasor is defined by his personality with the five Stunticons as components? [[User:Avalanche\|Avalanche]] ([[User talk:Avalanche\|talk]]) 16:53, 28 April 2015 (EDT)		when a Scramble City combiner switches limbs with another? Could Menasor with another team's member attached still be considered Menasor in a mental sense, considering Menasor is defined by his personality with the five Stunticons as components? [[User:Avalanche\|Avalanche]] ([[User talk:Avalanche\|talk]]) 16:53, 28 April 2015 (EDT)

	:In western fiction, nobody knows. In Japan you get [[Abomenaticus]], [[Comperian]], [[Cybertron Super Scramble]], [[Destron Super Scramble]], and [[Scramble 7]]. - [[User:Gimmick\|Gimmick]] ([[User talk:Gimmick\|talk]]) 16:51, 28 April 2015 (EDT)		:In western fiction, nobody knows. In Japan you get [[Abomenaticus]], [[Comperian]], [[Cybertron Super Scramble]], [[Decepticon Super Scramble\|Destron Super Scramble]], and [[Scramble 7]]. - [[User:Gimmick\|Gimmick]] ([[User talk:Gimmick\|talk]]) 16:51, 28 April 2015 (EDT)

	Thanks. too bad western fiction doesn't have an answer. I'd like to see what IDW could whip up. [[User:Avalanche\|Avalanche]] ([[User talk:Avalanche\|talk]]) 16:53, 28 April 2015 (EDT)		Thanks. too bad western fiction doesn't have an answer. I'd like to see what IDW could whip up. [[User:Avalanche\|Avalanche]] ([[User talk:Avalanche\|talk]]) 16:53, 28 April 2015 (EDT)

Abates: /* When their minds don't combine. */

2017-12-17T02:05:30Z

When their minds don't combine.

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:05, 17 December 2017
Line 30:		Line 30:
	== When their minds don't combine. ==		== When their minds don't combine. ==

	I was going on the assumption that the combiner's minds must also combine to be a true combiner. I've seen examples where they don't. In [[Dreadwing Down!]], [[Dreadwind (G1)\|Dreadwind]] and [[Darkwing\|Darkwing]] talk back and forth when they are in [[Dreadwing (G1)\|Dreadwing]] mode. Is that typical of Dreadwing? <strike>Is he truly a "combiner"? Was he ever called a combiner?</strike> [[Rail Racer (RID)\|Rail Racer]] from RID has spoken of himself in the plural ("we are"). <strike>If it was up to me (and I understand it isn't), I'd be inclined to give that a new term, like "connector" or something.</strike> <small>[edit: I looked it up like I should have done before posting.]</small> - [[User:Starfield\|Starfield]] 16:33, 31 May 2009 (EDT)		I was going on the assumption that the combiner's minds must also combine to be a true combiner. I've seen examples where they don't. In [[Dreadwing Down!]], [[Dreadwind (G1)\|Dreadwind]] and [[Darkwing (G1)\|Darkwing]] talk back and forth when they are in [[Dreadwing (G1)\|Dreadwing]] mode. Is that typical of Dreadwing? <strike>Is he truly a "combiner"? Was he ever called a combiner?</strike> [[Rail Racer (RID)\|Rail Racer]] from RID has spoken of himself in the plural ("we are"). <strike>If it was up to me (and I understand it isn't), I'd be inclined to give that a new term, like "connector" or something.</strike> <small>[edit: I looked it up like I should have done before posting.]</small> - [[User:Starfield\|Starfield]] 16:33, 31 May 2009 (EDT)

	== Faction symbols... Why? ==		== Faction symbols... Why? ==

Saix: clean up, replaced: → (33), Darkwing (G1) → Darkwing

2016-03-12T19:42:37Z

clean up, replaced: → (33), Darkwing (G1) → Darkwing

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:42, 12 March 2016
Line 1:		Line 1:
	==List of toys?==		==List of toys?==
	Personally, I am inclined to say that this article is not an appropriate place to make a list of combining toys. Arguably there is ''no'' appropriate place for that, since we already have a combiners category. Does anybody else want to chime in? I don't want to just revert Evil-yuusha's work without at least making sure I'm not alone on it. --[[User:Steve-o\|Steve-o]] 05:34, 21 February 2007 (UTC)		Personally, I am inclined to say that this article is not an appropriate place to make a list of combining toys. Arguably there is ''no'' appropriate place for that, since we already have a combiners category. Does anybody else want to chime in? I don't want to just revert Evil-yuusha's work without at least making sure I'm not alone on it. --[[User:Steve-o\|Steve-o]] 05:34, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
	:I like the article as it is. Yes, there's a combiners category, but I think having an article with a list of combiners that's further broken down by method of combination is cool, too. --[[User:KilMichaelMcC\|KilMichaelMcC]] 05:50, 21 February 2007 (UTC)		:I like the article as it is. Yes, there's a combiners category, but I think having an article with a list of combiners that's further broken down by method of combination is cool, too. --[[User:KilMichaelMcC\|KilMichaelMcC]] 05:50, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
	::I'm gonna have to agree, primarily on the basis that it's not just a simple list; the combiners are broken down into type, and the various types explained and detailed. - [[User:Dark T Zeratul\|Dark T Zeratul]] 08:09, 21 February 2007 (UTC)		::I'm gonna have to agree, primarily on the basis that it's not just a simple list; the combiners are broken down into type, and the various types explained and detailed. - [[User:Dark T Zeratul\|Dark T Zeratul]] 08:09, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

	Okay, then, let's discuss how to improve this. I think that having the lists inbetween definitions of terminology is a bad idea. It puts too much space between the definitions. Also, the lists remove two-robot combiners from the "gestalt" category even though the text of the article explicitly cites that as a point of contention. At the very least, I think the lists should be moved to a newly-created section of this page, but creating a new "List of combiners" article might be even better. The page was written as an explanation of what combiners ARE and what different words people use for them, so inserting complete lists of combiners into the middle is incongruous. --[[User:Steve-o\|Steve-o]] 21:44, 23 February 2007 (UTC)		Okay, then, let's discuss how to improve this. I think that having the lists inbetween definitions of terminology is a bad idea. It puts too much space between the definitions. Also, the lists remove two-robot combiners from the "gestalt" category even though the text of the article explicitly cites that as a point of contention. At the very least, I think the lists should be moved to a newly-created section of this page, but creating a new "List of combiners" article might be even better. The page was written as an explanation of what combiners ARE and what different words people use for them, so inserting complete lists of combiners into the middle is incongruous. --[[User:Steve-o\|Steve-o]] 21:44, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

	:::Hey everybody, I kinda just added those list on a whim (something to do on lunch break), sorry I started so much discussion! I didnt know there was a combiner list elsewhere, in fact I still can't find it! (Help!) Actually, since then I've been working on an updated draft for the Combiners page that clarifies some stuff and more or less reorganizes everything. I guess I agree with Steve-o, the list do kinda break up the flow of the page, but Im not sure how to move (or remove) them and still have them tie in with their associated terms at-a-glance. In trying to unmuddy the Combiner waters, I devised some new terms (at least i ''think'' theyre new!) to describe the often-argued "gestalt or not gestalt" combiners, as well as the "not quite an official combiner" characters. If anyone would like details before I post, or if the Mods think Im being too bold, please let me know! [[User:Evil-yuusha\|Evil-yuusha]] 18:45, 1 March 2007 (UTC)		:::Hey everybody, I kinda just added those list on a whim (something to do on lunch break), sorry I started so much discussion! I didnt know there was a combiner list elsewhere, in fact I still can't find it! (Help!) Actually, since then I've been working on an updated draft for the Combiners page that clarifies some stuff and more or less reorganizes everything. I guess I agree with Steve-o, the list do kinda break up the flow of the page, but Im not sure how to move (or remove) them and still have them tie in with their associated terms at-a-glance. In trying to unmuddy the Combiner waters, I devised some new terms (at least i ''think'' theyre new!) to describe the often-argued "gestalt or not gestalt" combiners, as well as the "not quite an official combiner" characters. If anyone would like details before I post, or if the Mods think Im being too bold, please let me know! [[User:Evil-yuusha\|Evil-yuusha]] 18:45, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

	Thanks for chiming in again, Evil-yuusha. For the time being, I've moved the lists into a new section just before the trivia, and changed their headers slightly to avoid giving preference to one or another meaning for "gestalt". Personally, I'm satisfied with that, but if anybody has other ideas, feel free to bring them up. The only other combiner list would be [[:Category:Combiners]], which is organized alphabetically, like all other categories, so it's probably not ideal for all purposes. I think that introducing newly-coined terminology is something the Wiki should be wary of, although we did invent the phrase "continuity family" so it's not totally out of the question. I would recommend bringing up ideas of that sort on the talk page before incorporating them into the article. --[[User:Steve-o\|Steve-o]] 00:11, 2 March 2007 (UTC)		Thanks for chiming in again, Evil-yuusha. For the time being, I've moved the lists into a new section just before the trivia, and changed their headers slightly to avoid giving preference to one or another meaning for "gestalt". Personally, I'm satisfied with that, but if anybody has other ideas, feel free to bring them up. The only other combiner list would be [[:Category:Combiners]], which is organized alphabetically, like all other categories, so it's probably not ideal for all purposes. I think that introducing newly-coined terminology is something the Wiki should be wary of, although we did invent the phrase "continuity family" so it's not totally out of the question. I would recommend bringing up ideas of that sort on the talk page before incorporating them into the article. --[[User:Steve-o\|Steve-o]] 00:11, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

	:Well, the article as it stands now still leaves some ambiguity as to what is or is not a combiner proper, and of those, what qualifies as a gestalt. I thought that the term "Demi-Gestalt" could acknowledge lesser combiners that have the basic criteria of a gestalt, but still sets them apart from the "giants", as some fans feel they should be (like Slamdance).		:Well, the article as it stands now still leaves some ambiguity as to what is or is not a combiner proper, and of those, what qualifies as a gestalt. I thought that the term "Demi-Gestalt" could acknowledge lesser combiners that have the basic criteria of a gestalt, but still sets them apart from the "giants", as some fans feel they should be (like Slamdance).
Line 16:		Line 16:
	:As a side note, I think the term "Super Robot" needs to be redefined, as it can refer to most any "big, strong robot", be it combiner, gestalt, pseudo-combiner, or anything else. - [[User:Evil-yuusha\|Evil-yuusha]] 18:53, 7 March 2007 (UTC)		:As a side note, I think the term "Super Robot" needs to be redefined, as it can refer to most any "big, strong robot", be it combiner, gestalt, pseudo-combiner, or anything else. - [[User:Evil-yuusha\|Evil-yuusha]] 18:53, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

	::I am pretty adamant that we not try to prescribe a definition for "gestalt". To some fans it applies only to large combiners, to some only to combiners with more than two members, and to some to any combiner. There is no "real" or official definition of it for us to go off of, so, I would prefer we simply describe its varied usage and leave it at that. Similarly for Super Robot: it is used, repeatedly, in official materials to describe -- as you say -- almost any big, strong robot. It's not a very useful term for that reason, but that's what it is. I don't think we can legitimately redefine it. I can go along with your pseudo-combiner thing, although I feel a little like there must be a better choice of words... To me at least, there is little combiner-esque about Omega Supreme. He combines with his PARTS, yeah... but "combiner" has pretty much always meant combining-robots in Transformers. I admit the Not combiners section could use some work. Feel free to take a stab at it. --[[User:Steve-o\|Steve-o]] 22:21, 7 March 2007 (UTC)		::I am pretty adamant that we not try to prescribe a definition for "gestalt". To some fans it applies only to large combiners, to some only to combiners with more than two members, and to some to any combiner. There is no "real" or official definition of it for us to go off of, so, I would prefer we simply describe its varied usage and leave it at that. Similarly for Super Robot: it is used, repeatedly, in official materials to describe -- as you say -- almost any big, strong robot. It's not a very useful term for that reason, but that's what it is. I don't think we can legitimately redefine it. I can go along with your pseudo-combiner thing, although I feel a little like there must be a better choice of words... To me at least, there is little combiner-esque about Omega Supreme. He combines with his PARTS, yeah... but "combiner" has pretty much always meant combining-robots in Transformers. I admit the Not combiners section could use some work. Feel free to take a stab at it. --[[User:Steve-o\|Steve-o]] 22:21, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

	==Merge team articles with super-robot articles?==		==Merge team articles with super-robot articles?==
Line 30:		Line 30:
	== When their minds don't combine. ==		== When their minds don't combine. ==

	I was going on the assumption that the combiner's minds must also combine to be a true combiner. I've seen examples where they don't. In [[Dreadwing Down!]], [[Dreadwind (G1)\|Dreadwind]] and [[Darkwing ~~(G1)~~\|Darkwing]] talk back and forth when they are in [[Dreadwing (G1)\|Dreadwing]] mode. Is that typical of Dreadwing? <strike>Is he truly a "combiner"? Was he ever called a combiner?</strike> [[Rail Racer (RID)\|Rail Racer]] from RID has spoken of himself in the plural ("we are"). <strike>If it was up to me (and I understand it isn't), I'd be inclined to give that a new term, like "connector" or something.</strike> <small>[edit: I looked it up like I should have done before posting.]</small> - [[User:Starfield\|Starfield]] 16:33, 31 May 2009 (EDT)		I was going on the assumption that the combiner's minds must also combine to be a true combiner. I've seen examples where they don't. In [[Dreadwing Down!]], [[Dreadwind (G1)\|Dreadwind]] and [[Darkwing\|Darkwing]] talk back and forth when they are in [[Dreadwing (G1)\|Dreadwing]] mode. Is that typical of Dreadwing? <strike>Is he truly a "combiner"? Was he ever called a combiner?</strike> [[Rail Racer (RID)\|Rail Racer]] from RID has spoken of himself in the plural ("we are"). <strike>If it was up to me (and I understand it isn't), I'd be inclined to give that a new term, like "connector" or something.</strike> <small>[edit: I looked it up like I should have done before posting.]</small> - [[User:Starfield\|Starfield]] 16:33, 31 May 2009 (EDT)

	== Faction symbols... Why? ==		== Faction symbols... Why? ==
Line 50:		Line 50:
	== Megatron + Tidal Wave ==		== Megatron + Tidal Wave ==

	In ''Armada'', Tidal Wave could attach to Megatron in pieces to give him the "ultimate power", wouldn't that be a combiner of some kind? And speaking of Tidal Wave, he is technically three different ships or pieces that don't transform on their own but combine to form him. Wouldn't that be considered something? --[[User:LokitheGrammarNazi\|LokitheGrammarNazi]] 11:29, 20 September 2010 (EDT)		In ''Armada'', Tidal Wave could attach to Megatron in pieces to give him the "ultimate power", wouldn't that be a combiner of some kind? And speaking of Tidal Wave, he is technically three different ships or pieces that don't transform on their own but combine to form him. Wouldn't that be considered something? --[[User:LokitheGrammarNazi\|LokitheGrammarNazi]] 11:29, 20 September 2010 (EDT)

	== Diaclone ==		== Diaclone ==

Cehteshami: /* Moving Ultra Prime and Galvatronus? */

2015-07-21T20:33:30Z

Moving Ultra Prime and Galvatronus?

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:33, 21 July 2015
Line 89:		Line 89:
	::I think the classification is based on the combination method, not the line the toys sold from. So the Generations updates to Scramble City Combiners are also called Scramble City-Type, and their wave-mates get brought in under that classification due to the nature of their combination. At least that's what I guess the logic behind the decision is, I wasn't the one that originally put them there. [[User:Cehteshami\|Cehteshami]] ([[User talk:Cehteshami\|talk]]) 14:34, 21 July 2015 (EDT)		::I think the classification is based on the combination method, not the line the toys sold from. So the Generations updates to Scramble City Combiners are also called Scramble City-Type, and their wave-mates get brought in under that classification due to the nature of their combination. At least that's what I guess the logic behind the decision is, I wasn't the one that originally put them there. [[User:Cehteshami\|Cehteshami]] ([[User talk:Cehteshami\|talk]]) 14:34, 21 July 2015 (EDT)
	:::[[Bruticus Maximus (Energon)]] and the others of that type are also homages to Generation 1 Scramble City combiners, but get their own category. Not to mention these "new" scramble city types often get a sixth member (chest-plate/weapon) that can't become a limb, unlike the Seacons. That's enough diferences to split them off, in my opinion.[[User:Ascendron\|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron\|talk]]) 14:42, 21 July 2015 (EDT)		:::[[Bruticus Maximus (Energon)]] and the others of that type are also homages to Generation 1 Scramble City combiners, but get their own category. Not to mention these "new" scramble city types often get a sixth member (chest-plate/weapon) that can't become a limb, unlike the Seacons. That's enough diferences to split them off, in my opinion.[[User:Ascendron\|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron\|talk]]) 14:42, 21 July 2015 (EDT)
			::::I think the distinction is that these are not homages but the same characters, because these combiners are in IDW, they are explicitly G1. That's why, for example, looking at Superion's page it includes the information that in some parts of G1 fiction, Alpha Bravo is a team member. These aren't homages in a different continuity family, these are alternate versions of the G1 combiners in the same continuity family. To me the line of thinking goes like this: "Defensor, Superion, Menasor, and Bruticus are G1 scramble city-type combiners and depicted as such the Combiner Wars G1 fiction. Optimus Maximus, Victorion, and Sky Reign are part of the same toyline as the Generations updates to the G1 scramble city-type combiners using the same combining gimmick, therefore they are also scramble city-type combiners." I feel like that is an entirely separate discussion to my suggestion though, I went ahead and moved Ultra Prime and Galvatronus into the Official Mix-n-match category since there wasn't any comment opposed to that particular move. [[User:Cehteshami\|Cehteshami]] ([[User talk:Cehteshami\|talk]]) 16:33, 21 July 2015 (EDT)

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:53, 23 February 2023
Line 91:		Line 91:
	::::I think the distinction is that these are not homages but the same characters, because these combiners are in IDW, they are explicitly G1. That's why, for example, looking at Superion's page it includes the information that in some parts of G1 fiction, Alpha Bravo is a team member. These aren't homages in a different continuity family, these are alternate versions of the G1 combiners in the same continuity family. To me the line of thinking goes like this: "Defensor, Superion, Menasor, and Bruticus are G1 scramble city-type combiners and depicted as such the Combiner Wars G1 fiction. Optimus Maximus, Victorion, and Sky Reign are part of the same toyline as the Generations updates to the G1 scramble city-type combiners using the same combining gimmick, therefore they are also scramble city-type combiners." I feel like that is an entirely separate discussion to my suggestion though, I went ahead and moved Ultra Prime and Galvatronus into the Official Mix-n-match category since there wasn't any comment opposed to that particular move. [[User:Cehteshami\|Cehteshami]] ([[User talk:Cehteshami\|talk]]) 16:33, 21 July 2015 (EDT)		::::I think the distinction is that these are not homages but the same characters, because these combiners are in IDW, they are explicitly G1. That's why, for example, looking at Superion's page it includes the information that in some parts of G1 fiction, Alpha Bravo is a team member. These aren't homages in a different continuity family, these are alternate versions of the G1 combiners in the same continuity family. To me the line of thinking goes like this: "Defensor, Superion, Menasor, and Bruticus are G1 scramble city-type combiners and depicted as such the Combiner Wars G1 fiction. Optimus Maximus, Victorion, and Sky Reign are part of the same toyline as the Generations updates to the G1 scramble city-type combiners using the same combining gimmick, therefore they are also scramble city-type combiners." I feel like that is an entirely separate discussion to my suggestion though, I went ahead and moved Ultra Prime and Galvatronus into the Official Mix-n-match category since there wasn't any comment opposed to that particular move. [[User:Cehteshami\|Cehteshami]] ([[User talk:Cehteshami\|talk]]) 16:33, 21 July 2015 (EDT)

	== Volcanicus identity crisis ==		==Volcanicus identity crisis==

	So, should we list volcanicus as both scramble city and not scramble city?[[User:Poliwag06\|Poliwag06]] ([[User talk:Poliwag06\|talk]]) 09:55, 23 February 2023 (EST)		So, should we list volcanicus as both scramble city and not scramble city?[[User:Poliwag06\|Poliwag06]] ([[User talk:Poliwag06\|talk]]) 09:55, 23 February 2023 (EST)
			:I second this motion. Or make a section for same combiner different configuration. It's still G1 Volcanicus. --[[User:Metalstar\|Metalstar]] ([[User talk:Metalstar\|talk]]) 12:58, 23 February 2023 (EST)
	I second this motion. Or make a section for same combiner different configuration. It's still G1 Volcanicus. --[[User:Metalstar\|Metalstar]] ([[User talk:Metalstar\|talk]]) 12:58, 23 February 2023 (EST)		::Guys, the Combiner list is organized by toys first, not characters. There's lots of different toys listed on there for same characters. --[[User:Sabrblade\|Sabrblade]] ([[User talk:Sabrblade\|talk]]) 13:53, 23 February 2023 (EST)

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:48, 29 June 2020
Line 68:		Line 68:
	when a Scramble City combiner switches limbs with another? Could Menasor with another team's member attached still be considered Menasor in a mental sense, considering Menasor is defined by his personality with the five Stunticons as components? [[User:Avalanche\|Avalanche]] ([[User talk:Avalanche\|talk]]) 16:53, 28 April 2015 (EDT)		when a Scramble City combiner switches limbs with another? Could Menasor with another team's member attached still be considered Menasor in a mental sense, considering Menasor is defined by his personality with the five Stunticons as components? [[User:Avalanche\|Avalanche]] ([[User talk:Avalanche\|talk]]) 16:53, 28 April 2015 (EDT)

	:In western fiction, nobody knows. In Japan you get [[Abomenaticus]], [[Comperian]], [[Cybertron Super Scramble]], [[Decepticon Super Scramble\|Destron Super Scramble]], and [[Scramble 7]]. - [[User:Gimmick\|Gimmick]] ([[User talk:Gimmick\|talk]]) 16:51, 28 April 2015 (EDT)		:In western fiction, nobody knows. In Japan you get [[Abomenaticus]], [[Comperian]], [[Autobot Super Scramble\|Cybertron Super Scramble]], [[Decepticon Super Scramble\|Destron Super Scramble]], and [[Scramble 7]]. - [[User:Gimmick\|Gimmick]] ([[User talk:Gimmick\|talk]]) 16:51, 28 April 2015 (EDT)

	Thanks. too bad western fiction doesn't have an answer. I'd like to see what IDW could whip up. [[User:Avalanche\|Avalanche]] ([[User talk:Avalanche\|talk]]) 16:53, 28 April 2015 (EDT)		Thanks. too bad western fiction doesn't have an answer. I'd like to see what IDW could whip up. [[User:Avalanche\|Avalanche]] ([[User talk:Avalanche\|talk]]) 16:53, 28 April 2015 (EDT)

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:41, 29 June 2020
Line 68:		Line 68:
	when a Scramble City combiner switches limbs with another? Could Menasor with another team's member attached still be considered Menasor in a mental sense, considering Menasor is defined by his personality with the five Stunticons as components? [[User:Avalanche\|Avalanche]] ([[User talk:Avalanche\|talk]]) 16:53, 28 April 2015 (EDT)		when a Scramble City combiner switches limbs with another? Could Menasor with another team's member attached still be considered Menasor in a mental sense, considering Menasor is defined by his personality with the five Stunticons as components? [[User:Avalanche\|Avalanche]] ([[User talk:Avalanche\|talk]]) 16:53, 28 April 2015 (EDT)

	:In western fiction, nobody knows. In Japan you get [[Abomenaticus]], [[Comperian]], [[Cybertron Super Scramble]], [[Destron Super Scramble]], and [[Scramble 7]]. - [[User:Gimmick\|Gimmick]] ([[User talk:Gimmick\|talk]]) 16:51, 28 April 2015 (EDT)		:In western fiction, nobody knows. In Japan you get [[Abomenaticus]], [[Comperian]], [[Cybertron Super Scramble]], [[Decepticon Super Scramble\|Destron Super Scramble]], and [[Scramble 7]]. - [[User:Gimmick\|Gimmick]] ([[User talk:Gimmick\|talk]]) 16:51, 28 April 2015 (EDT)

	Thanks. too bad western fiction doesn't have an answer. I'd like to see what IDW could whip up. [[User:Avalanche\|Avalanche]] ([[User talk:Avalanche\|talk]]) 16:53, 28 April 2015 (EDT)		Thanks. too bad western fiction doesn't have an answer. I'd like to see what IDW could whip up. [[User:Avalanche\|Avalanche]] ([[User talk:Avalanche\|talk]]) 16:53, 28 April 2015 (EDT)

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:33, 21 July 2015
Line 89:		Line 89:
	::I think the classification is based on the combination method, not the line the toys sold from. So the Generations updates to Scramble City Combiners are also called Scramble City-Type, and their wave-mates get brought in under that classification due to the nature of their combination. At least that's what I guess the logic behind the decision is, I wasn't the one that originally put them there. [[User:Cehteshami\|Cehteshami]] ([[User talk:Cehteshami\|talk]]) 14:34, 21 July 2015 (EDT)		::I think the classification is based on the combination method, not the line the toys sold from. So the Generations updates to Scramble City Combiners are also called Scramble City-Type, and their wave-mates get brought in under that classification due to the nature of their combination. At least that's what I guess the logic behind the decision is, I wasn't the one that originally put them there. [[User:Cehteshami\|Cehteshami]] ([[User talk:Cehteshami\|talk]]) 14:34, 21 July 2015 (EDT)
	:::[[Bruticus Maximus (Energon)]] and the others of that type are also homages to Generation 1 Scramble City combiners, but get their own category. Not to mention these "new" scramble city types often get a sixth member (chest-plate/weapon) that can't become a limb, unlike the Seacons. That's enough diferences to split them off, in my opinion.[[User:Ascendron\|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron\|talk]]) 14:42, 21 July 2015 (EDT)		:::[[Bruticus Maximus (Energon)]] and the others of that type are also homages to Generation 1 Scramble City combiners, but get their own category. Not to mention these "new" scramble city types often get a sixth member (chest-plate/weapon) that can't become a limb, unlike the Seacons. That's enough diferences to split them off, in my opinion.[[User:Ascendron\|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron\|talk]]) 14:42, 21 July 2015 (EDT)
			::::I think the distinction is that these are not homages but the same characters, because these combiners are in IDW, they are explicitly G1. That's why, for example, looking at Superion's page it includes the information that in some parts of G1 fiction, Alpha Bravo is a team member. These aren't homages in a different continuity family, these are alternate versions of the G1 combiners in the same continuity family. To me the line of thinking goes like this: "Defensor, Superion, Menasor, and Bruticus are G1 scramble city-type combiners and depicted as such the Combiner Wars G1 fiction. Optimus Maximus, Victorion, and Sky Reign are part of the same toyline as the Generations updates to the G1 scramble city-type combiners using the same combining gimmick, therefore they are also scramble city-type combiners." I feel like that is an entirely separate discussion to my suggestion though, I went ahead and moved Ultra Prime and Galvatronus into the Official Mix-n-match category since there wasn't any comment opposed to that particular move. [[User:Cehteshami\|Cehteshami]] ([[User talk:Cehteshami\|talk]]) 16:33, 21 July 2015 (EDT)