Talk:Starscream (G1)

From MediaWiki
Jump to navigationJump to search

Is Starscream really the second in command though? I mean, he certainly takes over whenever Megs is incapacitated, but I don't believe that Megatron ever gave him control over a friggin' Planet.

So what I'm suggesting here is that Shockwave is the actual second-in-command, not Starscream. Unless it is actually written somewhere that Starscream IS the second in command. In which case my comment is cheerfully withdrawn.--Octopus Prime- King of the Road! 23:00, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

Point. Maybe I should have said "Second in Command of the Forces on Earth". Also, when Megatron fell in the movie, it was He, and not Shockwave, who took command. But you're right, I'm not sure if it is ever actually stated, or in fact correct.


Yeah, Everyone assumes that Ol' Mr. Screamy is the second in command, but I'm pretty sure that that is only based on the fact that he gets the most screen time (as he should, because he's the best Decepticon).

Also, didn't he get the title of Leadership because he beat the ever loving crap out of all the other Decepticons?--Octopus Prime- King of the Road! 00:04, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

Actually, we never see Starscream enter that battle, its just we see them arguing over it, and then when we're back on Cybertron, Starscream is the victor, thou we never even saw him make his stake in the previous scene. Sounds more like he waited for everyone else to beat the ever loving poop out of each other, then beat the remaining love out of an already injured candidate... G1 Cartoon Starscream never did anything that didn't make him look like an fool. And his voice never helped. However, Energon and Galaxy Force Starscreams. Particually Galaxy Force. You can see he's planning it all out carefully, trying to wait until Master Megatron slips just enough for him to take over. And He could do so too. Never seen what Starscream was like in the comics though. How was he there?



Considerably whinier then he was in the G1 cartoon. Though he DID attain near-Godhood for a brief time (thanks to the vast powers of the Underbase), during which time he pretty well destroyed both sides of the war. Then he got greedy, took more power and it blew him up. Inexplicably, despite being pivotal in the near extinction of his own race, Megatron decided to revive Starscream with Pretender technology.

Meg's never was very bright. --Octopus Prime- King of the Road! 00:20, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

Not quite as dim as G1-Season 3 Galvatron. "Look! A Ghost!" <Bang Bang> "Look! A School Girl!" <Bang Bang> "Look! My Foot!" <Bang Bang, followed by screaming>


I hate it when I forget to check the minor edit box. --Andrusi 19:42, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I though you had rewritten the Titanium section, which I wouldn't haved minded as my description of his transforming WW toy is abit crap. Have I forgotten any G1 Starscream toys there? I think there was a Legends release of the Pretender inner robot, but bah, I don't have enough to say about. --FFN 19:52, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
The Pretender Starscream section already mentions the Legends release; I expanded it to match Bumblebee's entry. --Andrusi 19:59, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
The Legends release should be given its own headers, as it was a separate release in America. In theory, you should be able to scroll down through the toy list and see every toy release in bold. (Well, minus foreign releases, since we tend to treat those as variants.) --ItsWalky 20:20, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
Okay, I added a Legends entry, but I don't think its worth the bother adding a new picture for it, since its the same as the Pretender inner bot. --FFN 21:12, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Tech spec numbers

Maddening! Pretender Starscream's TS numbers are clearly based on the correct ones, ie those given to Skywarp on the 1984 packaging. But AM Starscream, G2 Starscream and MW Starscream all use the ones on Starscream's 1984 packaging, ie the ones that actually belong to Thundercracker. Whyyyyy. -LV 01:35, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

*slap!* Don't you ever expect sense from tech specs again. --Andrusi 01:52, 11 February 2007 (UTC)