Talk:Targetmaster (technology)
We need to rewrite this slightly to accomodate the several Targetmaster partners who are not Nebulans, like the Deployers and some Action Master partners (the latter as depicted in Dreamwave's MTMTE profiles). --ItsWalky 04:58, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
And the Seacons.... -Derik 05:58, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
...are Targetmasters Binary Bonded? -Derik 06:37, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
The Nebulans are. The robots (i.e., the Japanese gun-guys, Seacons, Action Master partners, etc)... prrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrobably not. --M Sipher 06:54, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
...the japanese bun-guys are either fused to a single partner by an explosion, or mini-cons relepathicly bonded with their partners (depending on hwo revisionist you want to be while interpetign the beeping transformers only their partners understand.) That sounds pretty darn bonded to me. -Derik 07:10, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
- Also, one nice thing about makign some vidcaps here? It gave me an excuse to rewatch the David Wise interview. MAN that was a good interview. -Derik 07:12, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
Oh, and random note? Double Targetmasters is a real phrase. Used ina UK letters page, fully proper-noun capitalized, by Dreadwind. Official enought o put in as a sub-section. (though the article isn't nearly ready for it yet.) -Derik 07:31, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
- I'm pretty sure I've already lost this argument, but I really don't think that a comic letters page is sufficient to call something "official."--G.B. Blackrock 16:49, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
Action Master partners counted as Targetmasters? Wow: that means there were a lot more Targetmasters than I suspected! It's the craze that's sweeping the nation! -Dataraven 07:44, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
- Yeah. Dreamwave liked avoiding the term Action Master as if it were cancer. So most of the AM partners were labelled Targetmaster weapons. --ItsWalky 13:00, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
"[Nebulans] gain the power to transform themselves into a gun, and if that was good enough for Megatron, then who are they to argue with the results?" That can't be appropriate Wiki-language can it?--G.B. Blackrock 16:52, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
"Historically, the Targetmasters were created from the second generation of Transformers to come to Nebulos:" Perhaps someone's interpreting the word "generation" differently than I'm doing, but I can't think of any continuity in which this is actually true. The TFs who became TMs came at the same time at the original TFs who became Headmasters. They may have undergone their change to TMs later, but they were still "first generation to Nebulos."--G.B. Blackrock 16:56, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
(To G.B. Blackrock, re. reverted edit of 69.14.228.28). I would guess it was just a rant based on current US politics. I didn't even see such a debate in the DW comics. :)--Autobus Prime 17:58, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
G.B. Blackrock - I believe that in the cartoon, the Targetmasters actually did arrive on the planets after the Headmasters, but since we are trying to be continuity-neutral, I bow to your authority. Either way, thanks for the clean-up on this article - I think it looks even better now. -- Dataraven 18:21, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
- If you mean The Rebirth, the Autobots and Decepticons who became Targetmasters arrived on Nebulos at the same time as the pre-Headmasters - the entire contingent of Autobots in their out-of-control Plasma Energy-zapped ship, and the Decepticons in the Decepticon mothership from the Movie. Also, Targetmaster technology is Decepticon-initiated in the cartoon, as Cyclonus only offered "the heads of the animals" to the Hive for conversion. Dunno if that needs to go anywhere. --Monzo 23:08, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
I wrote Sureshot, nto Sixshot. And I specificly mentioned him as a non_Targetmaster because he turns intoa gun emplacement in his 3rd mode. This is a relevant distinction to make because the Deployers basically do the same thing-b ut they ARE Targetmasters, thus there is probably some important factor diffirentiating them. -Derik 01:38, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
- No he doesn't. Sure you're not thinking of Scattershot? --M Sipher 01:45, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
- Probably. But the fact remains, I suremely did not mean Sixshot. -Derik 01:55, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
