PDA

View Full Version : Discussion of Collection counting methods



dirge
21st January 2008, 07:32 PM
Simple, really. Debate, discuss, disagree. Ad nauseum :)

Borgeman
21st January 2008, 07:34 PM
why thank you dirge :)

George

jaydisc
21st January 2008, 07:45 PM
Excrement! :D

If I may begin:

To me, much of the extra articles all cover something that is already quite clearly summed up in Article 1, which is:

1. Any product created under licence from Hasbro Inc. and/or Takara(Tomy) Co., Ltd under the "Transformers?" logo.

and

2. The toy must transform.

Which articles are TRULY required for further clarification and which articles go against that clarification?

e.g. Article 12 seems to greatly conflict with point 2

dirge
21st January 2008, 07:54 PM
jaydisc is referring to Gok's UCM, by the way

Transformers Juniors & Choro-Qs don't conflict, but I agree that Revoltechs and bearbricks do!

Really the only non transforming figures which have specifically defined as actual Transformers by HasTakTomy are the Actionmasters. And while a _lot_ of fans aren't so keen on them, few would argue their status as proper Transformers for that reason.

The other stuff like Revoltech and HOCs were never really defined by HasTakTomy as true Transformers. So I don't count 'em.

I also don't count the two Microman figures (Superlink Kicker and Ga'mede), even though I possess and enjoy both (:

TheDirtyDigger
21st January 2008, 08:00 PM
I count customs coz I think they are actually cooler than factory-produced.

roller
21st January 2008, 08:49 PM
revoltechs are just cartoon accurate moveable figures

they must never be counted or a torrent of 'your mum' jokes will sear onto your speech pattern

GoktimusPrime
21st January 2008, 09:26 PM
To me, much of the extra articles all cover something that is already quite clearly summed up in Article 1, which is:

1. Any product created under licence from Hasbro Inc. and/or Takara(Tomy) Co., Ltd under the "Transformers?" logo.
That is true. Article01 is the only article that wasn't decided by popular vote because it is a legal fact. Having said that, it is a very broad definition... by this definition, Transformers DVDs, comic books, bedsheets, Zippo lighters, dinner plates, drinking glasses/cups, cards, board games, video/computer games, bags and undies would count too. :)


and

2. The toy must transform.
So you don't count Action Masters? (o_O) Action Masters were a prominent part of the late G1 toy line, and they also feature in G1 continuity (and arguably in early G2 continuity too - when Megatron journeyed to Transcaparthia he had been restored to life by Nucleon, although he still retained the ablity to transform, unlike his AM toy).

And would you count Happy Meal toys and model kits that can transform, like say Transmetal Dinobot?

http://thumbs.ebaystatic.com/pict/110020991938_0.jpg Happy Meal Transmetal Dinobot transforms from dinosaur to robot & back!


Which articles are TRULY required for further clarification and which articles go against that clarification?

e.g. Article 12 seems to greatly conflict with point 2
I think the rationale is that Nebulans, Pretender shells and Action Master partners are not meaningful Transformer action figures on their own. If you owned Krunk but not Snapdragon, you couldn't really play with that toy as a fully functioning Transformer - Krunk transforms from a Nebulan into Snapdragon's head. Without Snapdragon, he's pretty useless as a Transformer toy. What would you do with Skullgrin's shell if all you had was the shell? Would you count Action Master Jazz's Turboboard as a separate Transformer?

Now say if you had regular Chromedome and TF Jr. Chromedome. Both can transform - in almost the same way. Both their heads can detach and transform into a smaller Master Robot/Nebulan - both even have a tech specs meter in their chests! Granted that TF Jr Chromedome is a smaller and simpler version of regular Chromedome, he is still a meaningful and functioning Transformer action figure in his own right. Ditto Choro Q Megatron. He transforms from a Walther P-38 to robot and back. Sure, both modes are super-deformed and the gun mode rolls with an oh-so-cute pull-back motor - but it is still a meaningful Transformer in its own right.

A child could play with a TF Jr or Choro-Q Transformer as a fully functional and meaningful Transformer action figure on their own. You can't really do that with a Pretender Shell!

TheDirtyDigger
21st January 2008, 09:56 PM
I don't count my kids TF's even though they got Slumberbee and a heap of real gears and movie and energon Arcee's. Theirs is theirs...mine is mine.

STL
21st January 2008, 10:16 PM
I don't count my kids TF's even though they got Slumberbee and a heap of real gears and movie and energon Arcee's. Theirs is theirs...mine is mine.

Bah. I'll count your collection as part of mine since when you become all old and senile and unable to transform your TFs, they'll all be mine.
:p

Soundwarp
22nd January 2008, 07:05 AM
Excrement! :D

If I may begin:

To me, much of the extra articles all cover something that is already quite clearly summed up in Article 1, which is:

1. Any product created under licence from Hasbro Inc. and/or Takara(Tomy) Co., Ltd under the "Transformers?" logo.

and

2. The toy must transform.

Which articles are TRULY required for further clarification and which articles go against that clarification?

e.g. Article 12 seems to greatly conflict with point 2

Well if it meets either of them it should be ok...

The biggest thing is Action Masters etc....

They don't transform but they are Transformers

GoktimusPrime
22nd January 2008, 12:18 PM
hmmm found the unicron link -> http://www.angelfire.com/mech/jinsao...s/Unicron.html

hmmmm... this is going to be debatable in the UCM since the original form is not even a "Transformer" as such

According to Article01 (and more importantly, the law!) they don't count because customs are not officially licensed by HasTak. When it comes to the legality of customs, if it's an original character/creation that's significantly different (>10%?) from the original toy then it counts as your own original creation. But the fact that it was created without licence means that it does not legally classify as a Transformer product.

What becomes more of a legal 'no-no' is when you create customs based on characters already owned by HasTak, like Classics Runamuck - although HasTak have never made a Classics Runamuck, the fact is that the Runamuck character, name and likeness is legal intellectual property of HasTak and HasTak can sue you if you tried to sell such customs. I've personally never heard of them taking legal action against anyone who's done so, but I have heard and seen auctions for such customs on eBay getting shut down because they infringe eBay user Terms of Service (as they are a copyright infringement).

iceburn
22nd January 2008, 12:59 PM
Bah. I'll count your collection as part of mine since when you become all old and senile and unable to transform your TFs, they'll all be mine.
:p

Where's your will STL??? haha, so that i can count yours as part of my collection now

Saintly
22nd January 2008, 01:02 PM
According to Article01 (and more importantly, the law!) they don't count because customs are not officially licensed by HasTak. When it comes to the legality of customs, if it's an original character/creation that's significantly different (>10%?) from the original toy then it counts as your own original creation. But the fact that it was created without licence means that it does not legally classify as a Transformer product.

What becomes more of a legal 'no-no' is when you create customs based on characters already owned by HasTak, like Classics Runamuck - although HasTak have never made a Classics Runamuck, the fact is that the Runamuck character, name and likeness is legal intellectual property of HasTak and HasTak can sue you if you tried to sell such customs. I've personally never heard of them taking legal action against anyone who's done so, but I have heard and seen auctions for such customs on eBay getting shut down because they infringe eBay user Terms of Service (as they are a copyright infringement).

Then I guess if HasTak wants to, they could essentially shutdown the whole C.A.S.E network... after that, we're going to hear alot of screaming TF'ers bashing down the HasTak corporate office doors :D

jaydisc
22nd January 2008, 01:31 PM
That is true. Article01 is the only article that wasn't decided by popular vote because it is a legal fact. Having said that, it is a very broad definition... by this definition, Transformers DVDs, comic books, bedsheets, Zippo lighters, dinner plates, drinking glasses/cups, cards, board games, video/computer games, bags and undies would count too. :)

Right after I copied that, I immediately wanted to correct it to reflect:

Any product created under licence from Hasbro Inc. and/or Takara(Tomy) Co., Ltd as a "Transformer".


So you don't count Action Masters? (o_O) Action Masters were a prominent part of the late G1 toy line, and they also feature in G1 continuity (and arguably in early G2 continuity too - when Megatron journeyed to Transcaparthia he had been restored to life by Nucleon, although he still retained the ablity to transform, unlike his AM toy).

ActionMasters seem to be the most prominently requested exception to rule 2. My first opinion is to exclude them. Simply put, they don't transform. However, they do come with a transforming accessory, or arguable are the accessory to a transforming vehicle (e.g. Jazz's skateboard).

I would like someone who is for the inclusion of ActionMasters to specifically detail what makes them different from say a Robot Hero or a Robot Replica.

Additionally, I think one must also consider intent. Robot Heros and Replicas are clearly meant to fill a different niche of the market. They are more display pieces and not toys or action figures. This is seemingly not the case with ActionMasters.


And would you count Happy Meal toys and model kits that can transform, like say Transmetal Dinobot?

I'm not too familiar with the toy, but give it the simple litmus test:

1. Was it a licensed Transformer(tm)
2. Did it transform?

After some very quick research, the answer seems to be yes for both, so yes I would count it.


I think the rationale is that Nebulans, Pretender shells and Action Master partners are not meaningful Transformer action figures on their own. If you owned Krunk but not Snapdragon, you couldn't really play with that toy as a fully functioning Transformer - Krunk transforms from a Nebulan into Snapdragon's head. Without Snapdragon, he's pretty useless as a Transformer toy. What would you do with Skullgrin's shell if all you had was the shell? Would you count Action Master Jazz's Turboboard as a separate Transformer?

I think again we have to look at intent. Headmasters, Targetmasters and Pretenders, at least to me, are clearly sold as one Transformer and act as one Transformer. Arguing that a piece of one of these should be counted separately is silly and akin to saying that Classics Optimus Prime's smokestacks should count separately.


Now say if you had regular Chromedome and TF Jr. Chromedome. Both can transform - in almost the same way. Both their heads can detach and transform into a smaller Master Robot/Nebulan - both even have a tech specs meter in their chests! Granted that TF Jr Chromedome is a smaller and simpler version of regular Chromedome, he is still a meaningful and functioning Transformer action figure in his own right. Ditto Choro Q Megatron. He transforms from a Walther P-38 to robot and back. Sure, both modes are super-deformed and the gun mode rolls with an oh-so-cute pull-back motor - but it is still a meaningful Transformer in its own right.

Again, ask yourself the two simple questions. In both of your above examples, the answer is yes.

Customs

As much as I love Customs and would display them with my TFs, I don't think they can be counted in any universally accepted system as the definition and range of customs is so broad. I could imagine a whole other set of 18 articles defining what makes an acceptable custom and what does not. And, quite simply put, to not be hypocritical, it fails the simple 2 question test.

TheDirtyDigger
22nd January 2008, 01:56 PM
Customs

As much as I love Customs and would display them with my TFs, I don't think they can be counted in any universally accepted system as the definition and range of customs is so broad. I could imagine a whole other set of 18 articles defining what makes an acceptable custom and what does not. And, quite simply put, to not be hypocritical, it fails the simple 2 question test.


Hell...I love customs so much I've now decided to count them twice.

jaydisc
22nd January 2008, 01:58 PM
Hell...I love customs so much I've now decided to count them twice.

How about you get to count every piece of a custom that came from a different Transformer? :D

Paulbot
22nd January 2008, 02:36 PM
ActionMasters seem to be the most prominently requested exception to rule 2. My first opinion is to exclude them. Simply put, they don't transform. However, they do come with a transforming accessory, or arguable are the accessory to a transforming vehicle (e.g. Jazz's skateboard).

I would like someone who is for the inclusion of ActionMasters to specifically detail what makes them different from say a Robot Hero or a Robot Replica.

Additionally, I think one must also consider intent. Robot Heros and Replicas are clearly meant to fill a different niche of the market. They are more display pieces and not toys or action figures. This is seemingly not the case with ActionMasters.


Action Masters were the evolution of the Transformers toyline. They weren't a subline or tie-in, these were the main line Transformers action figures.

It was backed up by the fiction both in the comics, commercials and on the toy boxes that there were Transformers who had lost the ability to transform.

Robot Heroes and Replicas on the otherhand are statue versions of characters that should be able to transform.

GoktimusPrime
22nd January 2008, 04:02 PM
Paulbot has explained it quite well - as you said jaydisc, one must look at the intent. Action Masters were intended to be part of the mainstream toyline and new incarnations of those characters.

Robot Heroes Optimus Prime is simply a non-transformable figurine that represents the Optimus Prime character who can transform - thus the rationale that it doesn't count as a Transformer action figure. Action Master Optimus Prime on the other hand, is the final incarnation of Optimus Prime in the Anglophone G1 continuity!

In the toy continuity, it was explained that Optimus Prime travelled through a black hole in search of a new fuel source (hence the "Nucleon Quest Convoy" toy) and returned with the discovery of Nucleon which replaced Energon as the new fuel source for Transformers. But they eventually discoverd that Nucleon made them lose the ability to transform, so they made new weapons/vehicles for themselves that could transform to compensate.

Nucleon Quest Convoy
http://transformers.iespana.es/transformers/tf061_c307x_nucleonquest.jpg
Apparently going through a black hole made PM Prime turn black. :p

In the Marvel Comics, many Transformers had been slain by Starscream during the Underbase saga, and although Grimlock, Jazz and Bumblebee (and Starscream) had been revived as Classic Pretenders by Ratchet, Grimlock desperately wanted his fellow Dinobots to be restored as well. With Ratchet presumed KIA he had to find another way to bring them back to life. He found out about some miracle energy source on a planet called Hydrus Four. He sought permission from PM Optimus Prime to go there and retrieve this energy, but Prime denied his request. So naturally Grimlock defied Prime's orders and took the Ark to Hydrus Four where he tested the Nucleon on himself first - discovering that it instantly made him feel more powerful and more alive - and then used it to revive his Dinobots. The Dinobots then pumped every stasis pod aboard the Ark with Nucleon. Wheee. The Nucleon eventually started locking up some of Grimlock's joints - giving him symptoms similar to arthritis - and he eventually went into a chrysalis stage. After bursting from this chrysalis, Grimlock had evolved into a full Action Master where he was immensely more powerful in robot mode, but had utterly lost the ability to transform into Dinobot mode. Grimlock began to fear that when the other Dinobots would eventually go through the same stage, whether they would thank or curse him for using Nucleon to restore them... but the G1 series was axed before this question could be answered. :p Other Action Master characters we saw in G1 included Krok (Bludgeon's 2nd in command) and Optimus Prime, who was not made into an Action Master by Nucleon, but by the Last Autobot who created AM Prime with Hi-Q (whose mind had merged with that of the late Powermaster Optimus Prime).

Action Master Grimlock beats the crap out of Fangry
http://www.tfarchive.com/comics/marvel/covers/uk325.jpg

Action Master Optimus Prime
http://www.tfarchive.com/comics/marvel/covers/uk331.jpg

Action Master Krok was Bludgeon's 2nd in command of the Decepticons
http://images1.wikia.nocookie.net/transformers/images/thumb/6/62/Krok.jpg/180px-Krok.jpg

Action Master Banzaitron - a lethal assassin ("Cybertron Chronicles")
http://www.unicron.us/tf1990/comicpics/banzaitron.gif

liegeprime
22nd January 2008, 04:38 PM
Other Action Master characters we saw in G1 included Krok (Bludgeon's 2nd in command) and Optimus Prime, who was not made into an Action Master by Nucleon, but by the Last Autobot who created AM Prime with Hi-Q (whose mind had merged with that of the late Powermaster Optimus Prime).



Sorry to digress, but I was having a hard time with this part of the Marvel story continuity actually... Since the last autobot reassembled Prime ( as shown in the comics illustration) with the core as Hi-Q ( and organic-cyborg being) then wouldnt that robotization ( if there's such a word) process effectively kill Hi-Q altogether and being semi organic wouldnt that mean that we have, if the series continued a rotting organic core in prime ( instead of a matrix)..... ewwwww..prime smells like a dead rat then, also, shouldn't that be a charge for murder..... things that should have been addressed hehehehe... but again this is just a random digressing rant... carry on....

GoktimusPrime
22nd January 2008, 05:25 PM
...yeah, good luck getting the Last Autobot to a courthouse. :)

I made a fan comic once when I was a kid where it showed Hi-Q still living inside Action Master Optimus Prime kinda like his 'heart'. Okay, lame concept, but it scored top marks (and an award) for my school art major project! :D

My current theory is that Ultra Magnus ate Hi-Q... just like how he ate Sparkplug (which is why you never see him in late G1 you see!) :p

"Guilty!" http://www.popcrunch.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/06/judgejudy1.jpghttp://images4.wikia.nocookie.net/transformers/images/thumb/f/fe/LastAutobot.jpg/327px-LastAutobot.jpg

liegeprime
22nd January 2008, 05:38 PM
hehehehe Still he has to eat , motor oil and energon chips is just not satisfying the caloric requirements for his organic parts :D:D... or ....as my theory holds hi-Q is dead and has rotted or petrified inside prime - making him smell like a skunk, but his troops are too courteous to shove him in a shower or something:rolleyes: This also kinda explains why Action master prime is rather small... after all his main frame core is that of a small semi organic creature...:D

er.. I thought Sparkplug just got old and died from exhaustion from taking care of his brat of a grandson Daniel... fixing broken autobots is more easier than taking care of this kid... you just wanna get a 2x4 and... WHACK:eek: him at times

GoktimusPrime
22nd January 2008, 11:28 PM
Daniel was what - 10 years old when Transformers the Movie happened? We never saw Sparkplug after G1 Season 2 - so some time after Daniel was born Sparkplug went missing... hrmm... couldn't bare the thought of having such a lame grandson? ;)

Soundwarp
23rd January 2008, 10:23 AM
Wow this has turned into a great topic......

I am taking in all of the opinions and supposed "laws" and it is helping me, but at the end of the day we all will decide for ourselves what we choose to count.

I myself have but after threads like this i have altered my thinking in some ways.

Keep it coming.

GoktimusPrime
23rd January 2008, 10:39 AM
The universal counting method is useful for direct comparisons so that when you say you have X Transformers and I say I have Y Transformers, we will know that X and Y were calculated using the same standards (i.e.: we're speaking the same language :)). And it's only required if you're participating in the annual collection count survey. Other than that, everyone is free to count their Transformers however they see fit. :)

kup
23rd January 2008, 12:09 PM
When I count, I follow the following personal method:

- Only count Transforming toys however Action Master are included in the count due to the transforming accessories but mainly fo being part of the main line at the time.

- Do not count doubles unless there is a significant change between the releases of the same mold representing the same character. For example I would count White Astrotrain and Purple/gray Astrotrain as two separate figures but will count two identical Cosmos as only 1 count not 2 separate counts.

- I only normally count figures that are 100% complete with all accessories. I dont like counting figures with missing stuff, particularly when the missing accessory impacts one of the modes (robot,vehicle or base) such as G1 Blurr's shield or Octane's tanker shield or tail fin weapon.

Aside from the above, I generally follow Gok's counting method.
________
Honda Cb200 History (http://www.honda-wiki.org/wiki/Honda_CB200)

Paulbot
23rd January 2008, 12:51 PM
I know you're not alone in counting this way, but I just don't see how can you not count doubles? If you have two identical Cosmos toys, one in each hand, how can you say "I only have one Transformer"?

kup
23rd January 2008, 02:28 PM
I collect characters or different incarnations of the same character. I am a character driven collector more than a toy line collector. Since Cosmos never had an identical twin brother, he only counts as one for example.

Astrotrain however has been represented in both his white and purple incarnations so he counts as two. Kind of like buying a Masters of the Universe He-Man figure, one with regular armor and the other with Snow armor. They are both He-man but each toy is differently equiped so I would count them as two.

Galvatron is another example of the above. I only own the Takara reissue (purple) but if I buy the original 'gray' G1 Galvatron I would count him as separate since he is another interpretation of the same character as seen in the G1 UK Marvel comics. Same character, same mold but different interpretations of him. If I buy another Purple Galvatron which is identical to the one I already have, I would only count him as one.

All the above is mainly motivated by me being more of a character driven collector rather than a straight toy line collector. This also influences what I collect as I dont normally care about collecting figures that have no fiction attached to them. I would also put forth the money to buy a crap toy if I like how the character was portrayed in the comics and cartoon, that is why I collect the '88 Pretenders even if most of the Autobot Pretenders were crap toys.
________
UPSKIRT ASIAN (http://www.fucktube.com/categories/1107/asian/videos/1)

jaydisc
23rd January 2008, 02:36 PM
Well, paulbot and Kup, I think we all agree that doubles packaged or branded differently definitely count... e.g. Takara vs. Hasbro Galvatron, or Kup vs. Targetmaster Kup. However, should someone with only 2000 Seaspray's have a bigger "collection" than Griffin?

kup
23rd January 2008, 02:39 PM
I agree with Jaydisc. Although I don't care to go and find a Target Master Kup if I already own the original 86 one, however if I ever did get my hands on it, I would defenetly count it separately. Again, different interpretation of the same character but not a straight double.
________
WEED VAPORIZERS (http://weedvaporizers.info/)

kup
23rd January 2008, 02:43 PM
Well, paulbot and Kup, I think we all agree that doubles packaged or branded differently definitely count... e.g. Takara vs. Hasbro Galvatron, or Kup vs. Targetmaster Kup. However, should someone with only 2000 Seaspray's have a bigger "collection" than Griffin?

Or someone with 3000 Wheelies! OH NO! :eek:
________
Dodge charger (http://www.dodge-wiki.com/wiki/Dodge_Charger)

TheDirtyDigger
23rd January 2008, 02:48 PM
such as G1 Blurr's shield or Octane's tanker

Goddamit Kup. Now that I've agreed with you my collection has dropped by two.



Uhhhh anybody out there in Ozformerland got a spare Blurr's shield or Octane's tanker?



should someone with only 2000 Seaspray's have a bigger "collection"

HAHA....On my way....only 1995 to go! MUHAHAHAHAHAAHAHA

iceburn
23rd January 2008, 03:03 PM
hahaha i've got 1999 seasprays to go!!

griffin
23rd January 2008, 03:26 PM
AM Rollout was in the comic as well. He and Krok were the only 2 AMs in the comic who weren't pre-existing characters, despite the AM toyline having more new characters than pre-existing ones.

Paulbot
23rd January 2008, 03:31 PM
However, should someone with only 2000 Seaspray's have a bigger "collection" than Griffin?

A rather unique collection, and rather boring, but I would say yes, the Admiral of the fleet of Seasprays has more toys.

I guess it comes down to "I have 2000 Transformers" vs "I have 2000 different Transformers".

I tend to count in the first way --although the only exact doubles I have is a second Chase, and a second Concept Camaro Bumblebee (and that third with "Battle damage"tm!)

kup
23rd January 2008, 05:56 PM
If I have say...1 normal Bumblebee 08, 1 Bumbleee 08 with battle damage and 1 Bumblebee 08 with a battlemask head, then I would count each of them as one since they are not doubles (or triples) but different versions of the same figure/character at different stages.

I have no interest in collecting all three but if I did, my personal counting method would treat them as three.
________
Cyclechaos (http://www.cyclechaos.com/wiki/List_of_Kawasaki_motorcycles)

Soundwarp
3rd February 2008, 07:57 PM
Or someone with 3000 Wheelies! OH NO! :eek:

Could you imagine meeting someone with 3000 Wheelies?

jaydisc
6th March 2008, 12:30 AM
How would you count Tidal Wave... and why?

Paulbot
6th March 2008, 08:09 AM
One Transformer that splits into three vehicles, just like Flywheels, Battletrap, and Overlord are each one Transformer that splits into two vehicles.

iceburn
6th March 2008, 08:32 AM
Tidal Wave says it all. 1 Transformer but don't forget to count the minicon as another TF :P

GoktimusPrime
6th March 2008, 10:53 AM
Yup, Paulbot and iceburn are correct. :)

kup
7th March 2008, 12:58 PM
Do people actually sit down and compare collections?

As in: "HA HA!!! The UCM says that I beat you by ONE toy! You loose, fool!!"

I find it hard to get my head around the whole concept of the need to have a UCM since my collection is my own and I don't really care if anyone has a bigger or smaller collection than me.

I know that I will never have a collection in the same league as Griffin's or Gok's and its not due to their massive numbers but because several of the figures and lines in their collection don't hold any interest with me and therefore I will never buy them. That doesn't mean that their collections are any less impressive but it does mean that people like me would never reach that collection size even if we could.

So the Counting method is completly irrelevant to me and any other who does not intend to complete full Transformer lines and/or has no interest in comparing it to other similar collections.

Collecting is too much of a personal thing for most of us. We collect and inclulde what we like. I can't imagine too many people collecting to 'compete' with other and needing to use the Counting Method as the field rules.

GoktimusPrime
7th March 2008, 10:50 PM
This quote from griffin basically answers your question...

The point of a universal counting method though is to give you two numbers - one for your own count, and one to compare to the rest of the community for us to have an idea of the average collection size.

Another issue raised...

That said though, this UCM starts to put people off using it if it has 20+ conditions to it. There might be heaps of variables during the 23 years of TFs, but this counting method is its own worst enemy trying to keep track of them all.
Unfortunately such is the nature of the beast because everything from Article02 onwards deals with subjective opinions about what should and shouldn't count, and as the Transformers expands so too will the need to add more articles to deal with it. I've tried to simplify it where possible - for example, I had a separate poll for Be@rbricks, Revoltech etc because some US fan was asking about it, but then "merged" those TFs with the pre-existing Article12 (they count as "non mainline" Transformers), thus eliminating the need for a separate article just for them.

At the end of the day, if you don't like the UCM, don't use it. The only time you have to use it is if you're going to participate in the annual survey for the average collection size - but that survey is not compulsory, so if you're some kind of conscientious objector, then feel free not to participate in the survey! :p

It would be ideal if as many people as possible did participate in the survey though as it would help to give us a better idea of what the average collection size is.

Once again, please be aware that the already existing Articles of the UCM cannot be significantly altered or changed or else it would render comparative data useless.

kup
7th March 2008, 11:05 PM
I am not saying that I don't like the UCM or object to it since I don't really care about comparing collection numbers and so forth. However I do find the whole concept of a need for an elaborate UCM which includes several different articles of comparison and so forth as bizarre. I can't imagine people sitting down with the rules in hand to count their collection so that they can submit their number for comparison with other people in order to measure sizes or participate in a survey.

Oh well, to each their own.

Edit: Fixed appalling Grammar and Spelling

turtle boy
7th March 2008, 11:17 PM
I can see what Kup's trying to say, and I agree. Pursonaly, I'm not out to beat other fans with numbers and what not. I'm out to see how many items under the Transformers name i can get into one room. I myself, don't count my collection, I make my brother do that, and he just come to me with a number and I add that to my sig:P

Borgeman
7th March 2008, 11:43 PM
in other words, kup (+me +others no doubt) cant see ourselves or others re-counting our collection, while sifting through the UCM articles to see what counts and what doesnt, just for the purposes of a survey....

i see/understand/agree with the whole idea of a way to fairly compare one collection to another, its just too much effort in my eyes. Heck, i dont even have an accurate "King George's Kingdom" count of my collection right now :P

George

GoktimusPrime
8th March 2008, 02:51 PM
Well like I said, although I like to encourage others to use the UCM and to participate in the survey, neither are compulsory.

If you don't want to ever use the UCM and don't want to participate in the survey, then fine. Don't.

The UCM is like the rules of a game or sport. If you don't like the rules, then don't play the game/sport. :)

As I'm sure most of you would appreciate, when doing a survey it's important that everyone is counting by the same rules - just as when you play a game or sport it's important that everyone is playing by the same rules.

STL
8th March 2008, 10:15 PM
Heck, i dont even have an accurate "King George's Kingdom" count of my collection right now :P



I'm happy to do it for you. ;)

kup
9th March 2008, 12:12 AM
I havent made a head count in a very long time and my collection has at least trippled since then.

If I count my collection my own way, it would likely be very similar ot the UCM as I do agree with much of the counting rules and the rules that I don't agree with don't really apply in my case since I don't own the figures in question. In essence a natural 'kup' counting method would be compatible the UCM rules.

However I have thought about doing a count with the UCM but I am too lazy to do it and just enjoy my collection for what it is rather than the numbers I have possibly due to lack of motivation since I don't care about surveys and comparisons :)

jaydisc
9th March 2008, 07:59 AM
My count would not be UCM compliant because I buy doubles of figures as backups and according to the UCM, they should count, which I disagree with.

Also, I got major issues with the counting of revoltech or bearbricks.

As others have said, the UCM is way too overcooked. To me, there are only two questions:

1. Is it a "Transformer" (r)/(tm) ?
2. Does it transform?

If yes to both, it counts. If not, it doesn't.

dirge
9th March 2008, 09:01 AM
To be fair, the UCM exists for a specific project of Gok's. So while it's not something I use personally outside of his polls, I'm not going to criticise it because other than for the purpose of his polls, he's not expecting me to use it.

I reserve the right to criticise those who feel insecure enough their collections that they want to count _brickbears_, however!

jaydisc
9th March 2008, 11:01 AM
I'm sorry, but this thread is reserved for the discussion of Non-UCM methodologies. Please move on. :D

I think we should add an article for EVERY character, let alone line, let alone style. There are hardly enough. And let's be serious for the moment, this stuff is complex!


1. Is it a "Transformer" (r)/(tm) ?
2. Does it transform?

If yes to both, it counts. If not, it doesn't.

dirge
9th March 2008, 11:21 AM
I have moved a post discussing the UCM into the relevant thread (http://www.otca.com.au/boards/showthread.php?t=217).

Can we please accept that this method exists for a specific purpose and move on? If you want to discuss the merits of the (collective) decisions made in the UCM polls, fine, but can we please cease sniping at the UCM's existence? I'll just delete any more posts which question why it exists. That has been explained several times.

In other news, I realised I wasn't counting a few of my reissues - Anime Astrotrain, White Astrotrain, Anime Galvatron & Ghost Starscream (I had listed them as variants), although I was counting Movie Preview Ultra Magnus. Yay my count increases by four d:

GoktimusPrime
9th March 2008, 11:48 AM
1. Is it a "Transformer" (r)/(tm) ?
2. Does it transform?

If yes to both, it counts. If not, it doesn't.
According to your system...
b. Do Action Masters and their weapons and vehicles also count? (are Catgut, Wingthing and Turboboard Transformers?)
d. According to your rules, all multiples and variants would count.
g. How do multi-in-1s count? (would you count Magmatron and Reflector?)
h. "Peripheral" Transformers would count (e.g.: Scamper, Full-Tilt, Gasket, Grommet, Sixgun et al.)

jaydisc
9th March 2008, 12:01 PM
Please apply my two questions to each of your and tell me where you think it fails and we'll discuss those.

To me, in many of these queries, the answer to my question two is obviously no, so it doesn't count. Tell me where you specifically think the two question test fails.

jaydisc
9th March 2008, 12:03 PM
Can we please accept that this method exists for a specific purpose and move on? If you want to discuss the merits of the (collective) decisions made in the UCM polls, fine, but can we please cease sniping at the UCM's existence? I'll just delete any more posts which question why it exists. That has been explained several times.

I thought the ENTIRE point of this thread was for those that did NOT want to move on and to spare us from discussing it in the UCM thread. Now, you're taking that away from us?

dirge
9th March 2008, 12:06 PM
I thought the ENTIRE point of this thread was for those that did NOT want to move on and to spare us from discussing it in the UCM thread. Now, you're taking that away from us?

You're more than welcome to question the collective decision making. IE why people feel the need to count Brickbears. But please respect the reason for the UCM existing.

If you don't want to participate in the annual polls (for which the UCM was created), fine. Noone is forcing you to do so. But respect what Goktimus is trying to do with those polls. End of debate.

roller
9th March 2008, 12:06 PM
hotcross buns soon

dirge
9th March 2008, 12:12 PM
Tell me where you specifically think the two question test fails.

As I said, I pretty much follow the same system.

The Actionmasters are a defined anomaly, because Hasbro specifically marketed them as "Transformers that have lost the ability to transform".

Your second question does introduce some issues relating to transforming "accessories" such as AM Partners and Targetmaster guns (etc). Most fans don't count them, but others insists they are Transformers.

jaydisc
9th March 2008, 12:30 PM
According to your system...
b. Do Action Masters and their weapons and vehicles also count? (are Catgut, Wingthing and Turboboard Transformers?)
d. According to your rules, all multiples and variants would count.
g. How do multi-in-1s count? (would you count Magmatron and Reflector?)
h. "Peripheral" Transformers would count (e.g.: Scamper, Full-Tilt, Gasket, Grommet, Sixgun et al.)

b. No. I know this is disputed, but it fails the 2nd test.
d. This is not a Transformer specific question. This is a generic "collector" question. Do two 1974 pennies make a 2 coin collection? I don't know. I personally consider a collection an array of UNIQUE pieces.
g. If there is only one collective alt or robot mode, then it counts as one.
h. "Peripherals" are just that.

EDIT: Based on the reduction of your questions, it seems to me that to you only these four situations require clarification (which I still disagree with), so that means you should really only need four articles at most.

The_Damned
9th March 2008, 01:05 PM
what the hell is a brick bear?

GoktimusPrime
9th March 2008, 04:08 PM
b. No. I know this is disputed, but it fails the 2nd test.
But what about their weapons and vehicles? Catgut transforms from a robot (cat) to Treadshot's gun. Would he and all the other Action Master Transformers' weapons and vehicles count? Because if you counted Catgut then you'd also have to count AM Prowl's motorcycle.


d. This is not a Transformer specific question. This is a generic "collector" question. Do two 1974 pennies make a 2 coin collection? I don't know. I personally consider a collection an array of UNIQUE pieces.
And variants are a form of uniqueness - some moreso than others. How different must a variant be before you consider it unique enough to count separately? That's the rationale behind the "Substitutional Rationale" method of counting variants (used in the 2005 survey but not used in the UCM).
e.g.: look at these Transformers and think about whether you would count them separately or not...
+ yellow 1984 Bumblebee vs red 1984 Bumblebee vs "Mazda Familia" Bumblebee (aka "Bumblejumper")
+ 1984 Optimus Prime w/ purple Roller vs w/ grey Roller vs w/ blue Roller vs Goodbye Convoy
+ 1984 Sideswipe vs Classic Sideswipe vs Collectors Edition Sideswipe vs TFC Sideswipe
+ 1986 Galvatron vs reissue Galvatron (resculpted face, new sounds & showlike colours) vs e-Hobby Galvatron II (same mould as reissue Galvatron w/ one different voice line & original G1 colours)
+ Original bat Optimus Primal & croc Megatron vs CD-ROM Convobat & Megalligator
+ Original Sixwing (Autobot) vs reissue Sixwing (Decepticon)


EDIT: Based on the reduction of your questions, it seems to me that to you only these four situations require clarification (which I still disagree with), so that means you should really only need four articles at most.
Actually, I had stacks more questions, but I was convinced to delete most of those and spare you from them. If you really want I can throw them at you and see how your counting method fairs against closer scrutiny.

Paulbot
9th March 2008, 05:04 PM
The UCM exists for the polls but those polls round up/down to the hundreds, so counting or not counting three shoes and two MP3 players is not going to make any difference to the total so I don't see any need to poll on it other than trying to be very particular about the specific number of Transformers some one has.

roller
9th March 2008, 05:36 PM
i like cheese

GoktimusPrime
9th March 2008, 06:28 PM
The UCM exists for the polls but those polls round up/down to the hundreds, so counting or not counting three shoes and two MP3 players is not going to make any difference to the total so I don't see any need to poll on it other than trying to be very particular about the specific number of Transformers some one has.
People complain if I don't make polls that cover everything... (-_-) The rules are also there just in case any of these lines become significantly large. I admit that stuff like Music and Sport Label TFs are unlikely to become large enough to effect a collection count rounded to the nearest hundred, but in the unlikely event that it happens at least the rules are covered for it.


i like cheese
Do you count different kinds of cheeses? Say, Camembert and Brie. What about variants of the same kind of cheese, such as solid, grated or cheese stick forms of Parmesan? Do foods containing cheese additives and flavouring count, like cheese flavoured chips... and what about cheese dips? Would they still count if they were mixed with other flavours like French onion? What if you fart and say that you squeezed the cheese?

dirge
9th March 2008, 07:54 PM
The crappy thing is that much of the contention has arisen through the abiguity of Hasbro or TakaraTomy.

For example, by reissuing Astrotrain in white, Hasbro have created a "reissue" of a toy they never issued. So could you dismiss reissue Astrotrain as a variant, or count it as a second figure alongside your original?

I'm not looking for the answer to that question - each to their own. But moves like that just make counting less than straightforward.

GoktimusPrime
9th March 2008, 10:39 PM
Ditto Takara(Tomy)'s "reissues" of Gears, Ironhide, Ratchet and Sky Lynx. Sky Lynx's box actually calls it a "special" reissue (you all can see the word "special" on the box as it's in English right beneath the Kanji for "reissue").

http://i12.ebayimg.com/04/i/000/de/ec/6d46_1.JPG

Encore Ironhide and Ratchet are reissues though - the first release of Ratchet and Ironhide was in 2000.
Does Ricochet count as a reissue/variant or an entirely new/separate character from Stepper? I personally haven't read Ricochet's tech specs and am not familiar with whether or not he's intended to be the same character.

STL
9th March 2008, 10:41 PM
i like cheese

Me too.

Borgeman
9th March 2008, 11:37 PM
i like cheese also :)

and gok, have you ever thought of merging articles together, so we dont end up with a 400 page book on how to count tfs?

eg:

Article X - The following Lines count:
(then add all of the stuff from articles 11,12,13,14,15,16,17(and 20 at this rate) in list form here)

Article Y - The following Lines DONT count:
(then add all of the stuff from articles 08 and 17 in list form here)


George

GoktimusPrime
10th March 2008, 09:20 AM
I already have merged some articles... well, there have been more polls than there are articles. There would be nearly 25-30 Articles by now if I hadn't merged some. The most recent example of this was the poll results for Be@rbricks and Revoltech, which I just merged with the Article for "non-mainline" Transformers. And if I'd listened to some fans we would probably have even more (e.g.: some people wanted separate polls for PVCs and statues and busts - I decided to lump them all together as I find that with those kinds of things, people either count them or they don't).

Saintly
10th March 2008, 09:36 AM
is that all i missed out on for the past four days? :)

eating cheese while counting? :D

TheDirtyDigger
10th March 2008, 09:47 AM
what the hell is a brick bear?


Are they the same as those BTR (Lego Ko) sets?

GoktimusPrime
10th March 2008, 11:19 AM
Do you mean Be@rbricks?

Regular Be@rbricks:
http://www.pinkghost.net/images/catalog/mini/bearbrick14.jpg

Transforemrs Be@rbricks:
http://www.individualsole.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/07/bear1.jpg

1orion2many
10th March 2008, 11:33 AM
:rolleyes:I've seen those around , ugly little critters and I'd do more than critisize someone that counts them in thier collection, a paint job and logo do not make a Transformer:p:D.

GoktimusPrime
10th March 2008, 04:36 PM
This whole thing is stupid. How can you have a _universal_ system if it's only you, griff and dirge using it? (others too, maybe, but not everyone!)
Everyone who participated in last year's survey used it and it's optional if people want to use it for comparative purposes outside of that survey.

The primary purpose of this system was for the survey. The secondary purpose was to create a common system for counting that everyone could use, but of course, everyone has their own individual definition of what is the right or wrong way of counting so we could be arguing here for years and pages after pages about it and we would still never come to an agreem--oh wait... we already have! Notice how this argument's perpetuated since 2005 and still nobody can decide what's the "right" way to count Transformers?

That's because there is NO "right" or "wrong" way to count Transformers; except for Article01 - it must be licensed and marketed as Transformers by HasTak to legitimately count; this can be proven in a court of law. Other than that, everything else is based on subjective personal opinions - which is why we can NEVER come to an agreement on what is the absolutely definitive way of counting Transformers.

So the dilemma is that there's no way we can ever conclusively agree to a counting method yet we needed a common counting method in order for people to make comparisons - particularly for surveys. You'll remember that in 2005 I tried to conduct a survey using the "Substitution Rationale" rule that a lot of people vehemently objected to and I copped a lot of crap for it - even flames. The biggest complaint I got was that "this is Gok trying to impose his system onto the rest of the community."

So I thought that the best way to make it not "Gok's system" was to make it "everyone's" system - and the fairest way I could think of to do that was to go through a democratic process of polls where everyone could vote and decide on what they thought was the best way to vote. And it took a jolly long time - over a year before the system was ready for the survey - and the polls were conducted over numerous boards in numerous languages with fans from virtually across the globe participating and electing what they thought was the appropriate method of counting.

And thus the UCM was born. If you can think of a better/fairer way to create a common method for the fandom, then go ahead and make one.


See, I would argue that anything sold in the toy section under the brand name of 'Transformers' should be counted as thats how Hasbro and others do their check lists.
iirc Hasbro catalogues counted Micromaster Patrols and Squads as single units, e.g.: Race Car Patrol counted as one. And Hasbro's web site counted Mini-Con Teams as single units too, so for example the Street Action Team counted as one. Poll results indicate that the majority of fans count Micromasters and Mini-Cons individually.

Hasbro's latest catalogues also include the voice changer helmet and role-play weapons. Would you count them in your TF collection? I wouldn't (and unless someone massively starts kicking a fuss about it I can't be bothered making a poll about it - if someone did complain, I'd initially try and find an existing article to cover it).

Catalogues don't cover issues like variants and multiples either. Yes, I agree that it's silly to count multiples and common variants, but they are fair questions to ask people when considering counting toys.

There's heaps more stuff that catalogues don't cover...


And of course their vehicles and weapsons don't. They're not characters.
Some are and some aren't - Overrun's Attack Coptor, Prowl's bike and Jazz's Turboboard obviously aren't characters but Wingthing, Catgut, Scorpulator and Gatoraider seem to be characters.

And what about Nebulans and "peripheral" Transformers like Scamper and Sixgun etc (who even feature in the G1 cartoon and comics with speaking lines!) - they're absolutely portrayed as characters but most fans wouldn't count them separately.


Ooo, what about that one? As long as the toy is a character of some kind, its also a Transformer... right?
According to you, sure - but others might disagree and others would debate over which kinds of characters should count and which ones shouldn't (e.g.: Nebulans etc).

We will be here forever arguing about what is the right or wrong way for everyone to commonly count their toys... the idea of democratically creating the UCM is that I can at least sit back and tell you not to blame me for any of these rules - it's what the fans voted for.

Borgeman
10th March 2008, 06:27 PM
iirc Hasbro catalogues counted Micromaster Patrols and Squads as single units, e.g.: Race Car Patrol counted as one. And Hasbro's web site counted Mini-Con Teams as single units too, so for example the Street Action Team counted as one. Poll results indicate that the majority of fans count Micromasters and Mini-Cons individually.


no i dont think so gok - Hasbro is a toy company that sells toys to make money - if 3 minicons are sold as a set, habro will advertise them as ONE set, and will have them under that one name on checklists.... because really, hasbro dont give two shits about who collects and how we count them - as long as we bought them, they are happy


and on a side note, if those failed lego experiments known as bearbricks count, then to me the UCM loses all value - how can they count and robot heroes not count? robot heroes have some articluations, and are actual transformers characters, no a random pile of plastic with a tf symbol on it.

at the end of the day, the problem with UCM for the simple fact that people will never vote on the true merits of the toy - they will vote based on whether they like it or not.... eg i wouldnt have voted for the bearbricks, based on the fact that cause they look crap and arent actual transformers, not based on liscencing and legitimency etc.... so excluding the few people who are willing to wholeheartedley follow the system, no one else will - either through non participation, or through not following the counting rules.

if iperson x agreed with 9 out of 10 rules, and thought rule 10 was a joke, then they wont agree with it. and im quite sure most people will fall in this position.


George

kup
10th March 2008, 06:52 PM
no i dont think so gok - Hasbro is a toy company that sells toys to make money - if 3 minicons are sold as a set, habro will advertise them as ONE set, and will have them under that one name on checklists.... because really, hasbro dont give two shits about who collects and how we count them - as long as we bought them, they are happy


The UCM was not formed by Goktimus on his own. Goktimus spear headed its creation but all the rules and regulations within were actually formed democratically though a series of polls in different fan forums. The collective Communities of several fan sites constructed the rules not Gok on his own.

As I stated before, I don't fully agree or comprehend the practical use of the rules but I respect that Gok went through all the effort of forming them in the fairest way possible and commend how he set the stage for the community to have almost all the input on its formation.

The intention of the rules were not for imposing it on others but to benefit the community.

So show some respect :)

dirge
10th March 2008, 06:55 PM
Hasbro is a toy company that sells toys to make money - if 3 minicons are sold as a set, habro will advertise them as ONE set


True. But the point he's making is that Hasbro's definitions don't always fit into the fan view. Would you only count a MiniCon team as _one_ if you had all three?

We're all aware of Hasbro's motives, of course, but they're well beyond the scope of a fan counting his/her collection.



and on a side note, if those failed lego experiments known as bearbricks count, then to me the UCM loses all value


It only matters for comparison anyway. That's all. Noone is asking anyone to take it as gospel. It exists purely as an _optional_ basis of comparison. Even then, if you don't have any bearbricks, and I don't have any bearbricks, it doesn't matter either way.

There are fans out there who insist on counting crap like bearbricks to boost their numbers. So bearbricks are addressed.



how can they count and robot heroes not count?


I think you'd find they'll be voted down, just as Robot Heroes were. The twits who count bearbricks are likely to be in the minority.

They're being polled so the issue is addressed. That doesn't mean the person running the poll _wants_ them to count.

I will repeat myself yet again - the UCM exists for a specific reason, and has never been anything but optional. Will everyone please refrain from attacking it's existence because they happen to disagree with some of the clauses. If you don't agree, just leave it alone and don't vote in the polls it exists to serve.


If you think counting Actionmasters or Bearbricks is stupid, fine. You're more than welcome to count your collection however you want. I don't use the UCM - I don't count doubles for starters. I'll use it when participating in Gok's annual poll, and that's it. I respect the intention of trying to create a consistent basis for comparison, regardless of what I think of some of the rules.

TheDirtyDigger
10th March 2008, 07:25 PM
I like the idea of the UCM because I am a bit of a statistics nerd.
To me a Book of Lists is just as pleasurable as a girly mag.

My mind envisions how the UCM could even be taken further and I crave exact figures, demographics etc etc. but it's not my place and I wouldn't want to spoil my reputation as a notoriously lazy and spoilt playboy.

The only thing about it that irks me is the whole democracy, power-to-the-people, 'we trust in you' thing.

I had my way and it'd be me making every decision, dictating every article and collection numbers from each member would be compulsorily acquired by coercion, torture or any other means I deem appropriate at the time.:)

The_Damned
10th March 2008, 07:26 PM
do bear brick count in a collection?

dirge
10th March 2008, 08:05 PM
To me a Book of Lists is just as pleasurable as a girly mag.


:eek:

TheDirtyDigger
10th March 2008, 08:09 PM
:eek:

Hey just coz I'm pretty don't mean I got no smarts...

dirge
10th March 2008, 09:53 PM
Out of curiousity, does anyone actually have the TF Bearbricks? (I'm not going to ask if you count them or not!)

dirge
11th March 2008, 07:37 PM
I have removed some posts from this thread. It does not exist so anyone can attack others' methods of counting, rather to discuss differing viewpoints. By all means, feel free to disagree and question. But refrain from attacking, please.


do bear brick count in a collection?

If the majority of those participating in the polls say yes, then yes.

But it's a method devised purely for a series of surveys. The UCM only carries weight if you choose to participate in that survey. It's universal only in the context of allowing comparisons to be made using a pre-defined set ot rules. If you choose to use the system or not is up to you.

And as regarding bearbricks, it's only relevant if you have them, anyway. From what I gather, few OzFormers members - if any - have them.

If you choose not to consider them as something you'd count, then the answer is no (:

jaydisc
11th March 2008, 10:50 PM
OK, I need to be more constructive...


But what about their weapons and vehicles? Catgut transforms from a robot (cat) to Treadshot's gun. Would he and all the other Action Master Transformers' weapons and vehicles count? Because if you counted Catgut then you'd also have to count AM Prowl's motorcycle.

The targetmaster and headmaster thing may be slightly ambiguous, but these are just accessories, so they don't count. I think they fail the first question... they are not a Transformer. They are just Transformer accessories.


And variants are a form of uniqueness - some moreso than others. How different must a variant be before you consider it unique enough to count separately? That's the rationale behind the "Substitutional Rationale" method of counting variants (used in the 2005 survey but not used in the UCM).
e.g.: look at these Transformers and think about whether you would count them separately or not...
+ yellow 1984 Bumblebee vs red 1984 Bumblebee vs "Mazda Familia" Bumblebee (aka "Bumblejumper")
+ 1984 Optimus Prime w/ purple Roller vs w/ grey Roller vs w/ blue Roller vs Goodbye Convoy
+ 1984 Sideswipe vs Classic Sideswipe vs Collectors Edition Sideswipe vs TFC Sideswipe
+ 1986 Galvatron vs reissue Galvatron (resculpted face, new sounds & showlike colours) vs e-Hobby Galvatron II (same mould as reissue Galvatron w/ one different voice line & original G1 colours)
+ Original bat Optimus Primal & croc Megatron vs CD-ROM Convobat & Megalligator
+ Original Sixwing (Autobot) vs reissue Sixwing (Decepticon)

Again, you're overcooking:

1. Is it a Transformer?
2. Does it transform?

Yes? Yes? Then it counts!

Regarding variants, I say the answer is simple. Does Hasbro/Takara consider it a variant? Obviously a re-sculpted head, a reissue or a different paint job is a variant. But with Optimus Prime's roller, if a difference in an accessory's color is because the factory ran out of paint, then I wouldn't consider it a variant.


Actually, I had stacks more questions, but I was convinced to delete most of those and spare you from them. If you really want I can throw them at you and see how your counting method fairs against closer scrutiny.

Send me a few more and we'll see how I go.

griffin
12th March 2008, 01:53 AM
Try to keep in mind that as much as Goktimus' name is attached to this counting method, the resulting conditions in it are decided by the fans voting, not him. If you criticise the counting method, you are really criticising the majority of fans who voted, but instead look like you are having a go at Goktimus who at least had a go at creating a 'universal' counting method (give him credit for at least trying). I might not like some of it either, but I at least focus my criticism at the people who only voted in favour of conditions that make their collections seem bigger in comparisson to others (like duplicates and mere *licensed* stuff like bearbricks and revoltech). These would never be counted in my collection, even if I submitted a total figure for the poll on Ozformer member collection sizes. Sure, duplicates and licensed stuff would add another couple of hundred to my collection count, but it just feels like cheating, so I just won't do it.

jaydisc
12th March 2008, 06:07 AM
OK, I hope the mods don't mind me saying so, but last night I had some posts in this topic deleted. The core reason was that many of my posts here and possibly in other places were interpreted as an attack on Gok's UCM. As I looked back and reviewed, this was correct, and it was unfair and unjustified and for that, I am sorry.

And then last night it happened... It was the oddest, most unexpected thing... I began writing what they call a counting method. Not a post. A counting method. You know, a suggestion for the future of our community. A night like this doesn't come along very often. I seized it. What started out as one page, became 25. Suddenly, I was my father's son again. I was remembering the simple pleasures of this hobby.

The result is AN ALTERNATIVE!

So, one of the common critiques echoed about the UCM is it's too complex. There are already 20 or so articles and there is talk of more. So I wanted my alternative to not require pages of documentation or a law degree. I wanted my counting system to be REALLY EASY.

Many of you might have seen me echo the two question test that makes up my counting system:


Is it a Transformer? (tm)/(r)/(c)
Does it transform?


If the answer to both is "yes", than it counts! If the answer to either is "no", then it doesn't count.

The next critique that I wanted to avoid was the label of "Universal". From what I understand (please correct me if I'm wrong), part of the process of arriving at the UCM was having discussions and polls at many major forums, thus declaring to have earned its "Universal" label. While having all that extra input is helpful, I think the label can be a hindrance. So, my counting system is "Un-universal"

So, without further ado, I would like to present, the:

The

Really
Easy
Counting
Transformers
Un-universal
Method

Or..... R.E.C.T.U.M. for short.

Now, there is one situation where I think the two question test fails, but due to the dispute on this one, I've decided to add ONE (and ONLY ONE) clause. This is regarding whether or not doubles count. Now, when I say doubles, I mean doubles... NOT variants. If the manufacturer (Hasbro, Takara, etc.) recognizes it as a variant, it's a variant and as long as it passes the two question test, it passes. But, if you have two of the same, identical figure (say, one MISB, one loose), we've introduced a clause that you can attach to your count to let us know that doubles are included. This clause is called:

Doubles
Included [in]
Count [are]
Kosher

Some people like their R.E.C.T.U.M. with D.I.C.K. and some people like their R.E.C.T.U.M. without D.I.C.K.

So, finally in summation, if you want to use the R.E.C.T.U.M., please do, and feel free to share it, display it, and give people the option of D.I.C.K. to go with it.

THANK YOU GOOD NIGHT!!!


"That’s how you become great, man. Hang your balls out there."

Bartrim
12th March 2008, 07:41 AM
*Stands up and applaudes Jaydisc*

So simple... so brillant I love it:D

Although I'm not too keen on your anagrams.

Paulbot
12th March 2008, 08:18 AM
Jay your couting system doesn't include the Action Masters so a lot of people aren't going to use it as you discount the toys that made up half the Transformers toyline for two years.

And why am I reminded of a speech at the end of "Team America: World Police"....?

jaydisc
12th March 2008, 08:31 AM
Jay your couting system doesn't include the Action Masters so a lot of people aren't going to use it as you discount the toys that made up half the Transformers toyline for two years.

And why am I reminded of a speech at the end of "Team America: World Police"....?

I do fear that ActionMasters are the greatest casualty of my system and welcome suggestions of how to include them while keeping the mantra of simplicity.

And the movie I borrowed heavily from was Jerry Maguire, not Team America :D

STL
12th March 2008, 08:46 AM
I remember both movies. Pretty damn hilarious.

Honest to god though, why do Action Masters matter so much? It annoys me that just b/c it has fiction = "makes it a Transformer". The fiction itself is nothing more than a toy ad.

What really is important is to look at substance and not form. Effectively they're the same as Mega SCFs. They had some very loose fiction that made them relevant yes but ultimately they're lame rationalisations of cheap figures Hasbro wanted to make.

I don't care for the issue of counting personally but the irrational rationalisation of Action Masters really annoys me. If you like them for what they are, fine. I like non-Transforming figures too. I probably have close to 60-70. But don't come up with a lame excuse for including them.

There's a fine distinction between what one holds with affection and what constitutes a Transformer.

jaydisc
12th March 2008, 08:57 AM
Brilliantly put.

Bartrim
12th March 2008, 08:59 AM
Totally agree STL. Very well said.

dirge
12th March 2008, 09:08 AM
Not sure about the names... but otherwise I can't be too critical.


I do fear that ActionMasters are the greatest casualty of my system and welcome suggestions of how to include them while keeping the mantra of simplicity.



Honest to god though, why do Action Masters matter so much? It annoys me that just b/c it has fiction = "makes it a Transformer". The fiction itself is nothing more than a toy ad.


Hasbro themselves defined Actionmasters, in the original toyads, as Transformers that have lost the ability to transform, which means that most fans accept them as Transformers because of Hasbro's specific definition. So while your test is simple, the second clause ends up fighting the first in regard to AMs. They _did_ transform but no longer do.

Of course, most people who dislike AMs don't get them anyway, so you could safely include them somehow without generating any controversy (in fact, you'd remove the main point of contention). This would complicate the system slightly, of course, but it would essentially be a qualifer to the second clause.

I doubt you'd find many fans would argue the case for items such as HOCs, which weren't specifically marketed as Transformers.

jaydisc
12th March 2008, 09:15 AM
I'm afraid fiction isn't a good enough reason for inclusion or complication.

Let me offer an analogy: Would you count the half of a robot replica included in the Final Stand Screen Battle? Now, Bumblebee can't transform because his legs were blown off. Therefore, should he count?

STL
12th March 2008, 09:35 AM
Hasbro themselves defined Actionmasters, in the original toyads, as Transformers that have lost the ability to transform, which means that most fans accept them as Transformers because of Hasbro's specific definition. So while your test is simple, the second clause ends up fighting the first in regard to AMs. They _did_ transform but no longer do.


That's pretty weak.



I doubt you'd find many fans would argue the case for items such as HOCs, which weren't specifically marketed as Transformers.

So.... Hasbro and Takara announce that HoCs/Mega SCFs were TFs that lost the ability to transform. You'd start counting them? Again pretty weak.

I imagine we live in a world that has a greater intellectual capacity to distinguish between what companies tell us and what companies are doing. Inherently, Hasbro is, as a multi-national profit seeking firm would, seek to find a plausible way to market it's new lame product. I'm -speculating- here but much like Micromasters which preceded it and was intended to be like Micro Machines, Action Masters I imagine might have been a reaction to the articulate action figure. So Hasbro just wanted to enter the market. It's an economic choice that they're entitled to make. They then use a PR team to try and get it out there; compel silly kids like ourselves at the time that this is part of the bigger TF universe.

There are many instances between our lives where there is a distinction between the letter of the law, the word of a government, the marketing ploy of a corporation and what in substance is actually happening. Being gullible enough to accept marketing ploys without considering their true motivations and nature is sadly inane.

I for one will be grabbing Action Masters like Krok, Prowl and Banzaitron but I'm not thick headed enough to start justifying that they are transformers. I like what I collect but my adulation for Transformers will not blind me to glaring truths.

springah
12th March 2008, 09:47 AM
Yeah, see, I'd count Action Masters for sure.

I don't even know why, but I would.

But yeah, over it all, UCM is good. Should evolve over time..

Paulbot
12th March 2008, 09:48 AM
What I'd like to suggest: any toy that has a Tech Spec card should count as a Transformer.


Action Masters weren't a small subline or tie in like the Mega SCFs, they were the major selling point and core part of the toyline for a year, ignoring them because they don't transform is silly. They didn't have "loose" fiction. The Comics had an ongoing major subplot related to Grimlock using Nucleon, having his body upgraded to the Action Master form and losing the ability to transform. It was a coincidence that the Autobots he revived with Nucleon all had Action Master toys and the plot was ongoing had the comic not been cancelled.

Bartrim
12th March 2008, 09:50 AM
I for one will be grabbing Action Masters like Krok, Prowl and Banzaitron but I'm not thick headed enough to start justifying that they are transformers. I like what I collect but my adulation for Transformers will not blind me to glaring truths.

Again I am in total agreement. My example is my titanium 3 inch movie Ironhide. I love the figure. He sits on my bedside table (much to the anger of the wife:p) but I don't count him when I count my TF's.

jaydisc
12th March 2008, 09:59 AM
But yeah, over it all, UCM is good. Should evolve over time..

Part of my quest for another counting method was due to the UCM's perceived INFLEXIBILITY or inability to evolve.


What I'd like to suggest: any toy that has a Tech Spec card should count as a Transformer.

This would include gestalts then. They don't transform ;)

I have a question regarding non-transforming Transformers. ActionMasters were the first I assume. Robot Replicas/Heroes are the latest I assume. At what point did Hastak start creating these merchandise/non-transforming figures?

Paulbot
12th March 2008, 10:04 AM
The gestalts do count as Transformer toys but I'm not suggesting you count your Transformers by counting tech spec cards. If you had the Devastator giftset (and I tend to ignore those giftsets as I never saw them ever on sale in Australia and didn't know they existed until 1997) you would count it as six toys the same way if you bought the Race Car Patrol you would count it as four toys (despite one tech spec cad).

Paulbot
12th March 2008, 10:07 AM
And I'd amend it to add that any toy with a tech spec that includes reference or infers to the fact that character can't transform.

So tech specs on Heroes of Cybertron and small Titanium toys for example don't count as they describe transforming characters which the non-transforming figure represent.

TheDirtyDigger
12th March 2008, 11:09 AM
Nice one Jd.

I like the simplicity of the R.E.C.T.U.M.

And I appreciate the fact that it's optional as to whether you put D.I.C.K. to R.E.C.T.U.M.
I know mine will be much larger if I do.

liegeprime
12th March 2008, 11:14 AM
Could you imagine meeting someone with 3000 Wheelies?

a masochist TF collector??!?:D:D

Kyle
12th March 2008, 12:02 PM
...Some people like their R.E.C.T.U.M. with D.I.C.K. and some people like their R.E.C.T.U.M. without D.I.C.K. ...

Brilliant!!!

jaydisc you're a genius!

griffin
12th March 2008, 12:05 PM
The techspec idea is complicated, as many toys either had no cards, multiple cards (combiners) or one card for a group.

The way I count a figure is if it converts or has a convertable component. That way the mainline of Actionmasters count because they came with a convertable component, while things like Mega SCFs, Robot Replicas and Movie Scene Bumblebee don't.
My 'more simplified' counting method is:
1 -Officially produced by Hasbro, Takara or foreign equivalent as a legitimately saleable figure (not a prototype or pre-production figure).
2 -Converts or has a converting component.
3 -Is officially defined as a character, but not be part of another character.
4 -Must be functional/playable (can be broken if it is still playable) and not be a duplicate (has to be distinguishable in some way).

Kyle
12th March 2008, 12:14 PM
Would you count some of these as well as the older capsule model kits from Japan? (I mean only the transforming ones.)

http://search.ebay.com/search/search.dll?from=R40&_trksid=m37&satitle=kabaya+transformers&category0=

roller
12th March 2008, 12:52 PM
I love it how over the months of discussion about the counting method some people keep typing


"Dont attack the UCM's existence"

I find this statement hilarious

What if people attack my existence? will you all rise to protect me?

TheDirtyDigger
12th March 2008, 01:37 PM
I love it how over the months of discussion about the counting method some people keep typing


"Dont attack the UCM's existence"

I find this statement hilarious

What if people attack my existence? will you all rise to protect me?

I will!;)

Who's been picking on you lad???
Tell me! Tell me now....I'll rip out their optics!:mad:

GoktimusPrime
12th March 2008, 04:20 PM
Like Paulbot said, Action Masters aren't like SCF/HOCs or Robot Replicas in terms of being small sub-lines - they were part of the major line, dominating the Transformers line in Hasbro markets, especially in North America. They also played a significant role in G1 canon. Removing SCF/HOCs or Robot Replicas does not alter TF lore, but removing Action Masters _would_ change TF lore. Action Master Snarl even makes an appearance in Transformers Classics.

Action Master Grimlock
http://tfarchive.com/comics/marvel/covers/uk325.jpg

Action Master Optimus Prime
http://tfarchive.com/comics/marvel/covers/uk331.jpg

Nucleon Quest Convoy
http://transformers.iespana.es/transformers/tf061_c307x_nucleonquest.jpg

Krok, Bludgeon's lieutenant http://images1.wikia.nocookie.net/transformers/images/thumb/6/62/Krok.jpg/180px-Krok.jpg

Action Master Prowl goes head to head with Bludgeon during the shaky days of the Autobot-Decepticon Alliance
http://tfarchive.com/comics/marvel/covers/us77.jpg


Part of my quest for another counting method was due to the UCM's perceived INFLEXIBILITY or inability to evolve.
The UCM must remain static in order for poll results between years to be comparable, which is the entire purpose of the system's existence. If the rules changed on an annual basis then it would make it impossible to compare annual trends to observe any changes. I've already explained this to you several times. You're more than welcome to create an alternative counting method (although I agree with Bartrim that you might want to consider renaming them to more tasteful acronyms - remember that there are children who read this board too and might want to consider using your alternative method)


1. Is it a Transformer? (tm)/(r)/(c)
2. Does it transform?
Okay, here's a few for ya...

1/ As you've said so yourself, your system doesn't adequately address Action Masters and Nebulans, Master Robots, Brainmaster/Motorvator partners and some Action Master partners remain ambiguous under this definition.

2/ How do gestalts count? In other words, does Devastator count as a Transformer? So if you have all the Constructicons and all the bits to form Devastator, do they count as six Constructicons or seven (including Devastator as the 7th)? Devastator is a licensed Transformer character (thus satisfying your 1st rule) and he transforms into the 6 Constructicons (thus satisfying your 2nd rule).

3/ How do you count combiners? The same as multi-in-1s? (I suspect that this would be the case - Reflector is essentially a combiner).

4/ Do you count Happy Meal Transformers, most of which are licensed Transformers characters who can transform. And the Happy Meal Armada Transformers can interact with Mini-Cons and merge into gestalts!
http://www.toyarchive.com/STAForSale/NEW2001+/TF/BeastWars/HappyMealBlackaLoose1a.jpghttp://www.toyarchive.com/STAForSale/NEW2001+/TF/BeastWars/HappyMealBlackaLoose1b.jpg

5/ Do you count candy and gum toys or model kits that can transform?
http://i.pbase.com/v3/75/130375/4/50066734.DSC_0727.jpg Kabaya Super Link Galvatron loves candy!

6/ Do you count build-Transformers like Built-To-Rule? They're licensed and transform but are essentially Transformers Lego (just from a different brand).
http://content.answers.com/main/content/wp/en/thumb/4/4a/180px-Inferno-btrenergon.jpg Built To Rule Inferno

7/ Similar question to Action Masters - what about other licensed "Transformers" characters who don't transform because they were never meant to transform? e.g.: Alpha Quintesson, Transmutate (who is a Cybertronian), Kicker, Gamede etc

8/ Do you count Play Skool Transformers? The Go-Go-Go-Bots (aka Transformers Big Adventures) even had their own cartoon and comic series and game!
http://images.wikia.com/transformers/images/1/1d/Aerobot_comet_fists.jpg


What if people attack my existence? will you all rise to protect me?

Hell no!

http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y227/goktimusprime/Transformers/Transfan%20Meets/Sydney%20Meet%20February%202008/sydmeet0209_08.jpg

jaydisc
12th March 2008, 05:53 PM
Like Paulbot said, Action Masters aren't like SCF/HOCs or Robot Replicas in terms of being small sub-lines - they were part of the major line, dominating the Transformers line in Hasbro markets, especially in North America. They also played a significant role in G1 canon. Removing SCF/HOCs or Robot Replicas does not alter TF lore, but removing Action Masters _would_ change TF lore. Action Master Snarl even makes an appearance in Transformers Classics.

Now, remember what the R and E in R.E.C.T.U.M. stand for..... REALLY EASY. So, here's the point:

1. Knowing fiction or lore should not be required to count how many toys you own.
2. And as STL so beautifully put, fiction exists as a marketing tool. I will not be assimilated! :mad:

How would you respond to my example of the Final Stand Screen Battle analogy?


The UCM must remain static in order for poll results between years to be comparable, which is the entire purpose of the system's existence. If the rules changed on an annual basis then it would make it impossible to compare annual trends to observe any changes. I've already explained this to you several times.

You either misread or misinterpreted. Regardless of the reason, I was simply telling him that the UCM does not "evolve" as you have just reinforced and explained why.


You're more than welcome to create an alternative counting method (although I agree with Bartrim that you might want to consider renaming them to more tasteful acronyms - remember that there are children who read this board too and might want to consider using your alternative method)

BenBen's heard it all before. And we're not really talking about profanity, except for the doubles clause. I'll try to work on that one.


Okay, here's a few for ya...

1/ As you've said so yourself, your system doesn't adequately address Action Masters and Nebulans, Master Robots, Brainmaster/Motorvator partners and some Action Master partners remain ambiguous under this definition.

Is it a Transformer? No!
The heads of Headmaster and the weapons of Targetmaster are not Transformers... they are simply Transformer accessories, or whatever fan dangled words you use to describe them. Next!


2/ How do gestalts count? In other words, does Devastator count as a Transformer? So if you have all the Constructicons and all the bits to form Devastator, do they count as six Constructicons or seven (including Devastator as the 7th)? Devastator is a licensed Transformer character (thus satisfying your 1st rule) and he transforms into the 6 Constructicons (thus satisfying your 2nd rule).

Does Devestator transform? No!
While Devestator's individual bits can transform from one mode to another, the combined gestalt can not. Next!


3/ How do you count combiners? The same as multi-in-1s? (I suspect that this would be the case - Reflector is essentially a combiner).

[Using reflector as the example]. Does each individual piece transform? No! So the individuals don't count. Is there a collective transformation? Yes, but only one... hence one count. The same situation reversed applies to Tidal Wave. Next!


4/ Do you count Happy Meal Transformers, most of which are licensed Transformers characters who can transform. And the Happy Meal Armada Transformers can interact with Mini-Cons and merge into gestalts!

I'm too familiar with these, but this isn't too tricky. Is it a Transformer? Yes (I think). Does it transform? Yes (I think). BY JOVE IT COUNTS! Next!


5/ Do you count candy and gum toys or model kits that can transform?

Again, you should be able to answer these questions much more capably than I, so why don't you try this one. Is it a Transformer? Does it transform?


6/ Do you count build-Transformers like Built-To-Rule? They're licensed and transform but are essentially Transformers Lego (just from a different brand).

Sing along now! Is it a Transformer? Yes! Does it transform? Yes!


7/ Similar question to Action Masters - what about other licensed "Transformers" characters who don't transform because they were never meant to transform? e.g.: Alpha Quintesson, Transmutate (who is a Cybertronian), Kicker, Gamede etc

Shame on you now! Does it transform? No! Next!


8/ Do you count Play Skool Transformers? The Go-Go-Go-Bots (aka Transformers Big Adventures) even had their own cartoon and comic series and game!

Yes + Yes = YES!

The_Damned
12th March 2008, 09:04 PM
nice system, instead of d.i.c.k the sub clause could be W.E.C - With Extra Cheese.....

GoktimusPrime
12th March 2008, 09:42 PM
BenBen's heard it all before. And we're not really talking about profanity, except for the doubles clause. I'll try to work on that one.
There are other minors who read this board aside from benben... including goodness knows how many unregistered lurkers. Some parents might be concerned if their children were exposed to material with ambiguously "profane" acronyms on it.


Is it a Transformer? No!
The heads of Headmaster and the weapons of Targetmaster are not Transformers... they are simply Transformer accessories, or whatever fan dangled words you use to describe them. Next!
But what makes them not Transformers? They're toys manufactured under licence and they transform - e.g.: Aimless transforms from a robot (especially in Japan where he was a robot, not a Nebulan) to a gun... just like original G1 Megatron. Why doesn't it count as a Transformer?

fwiw I actually agree that Nebulans, Master Robots et al do NOT count as Transformers - but this is just our subjective opinion on this matter. It's not a fact!

And this is the problem with creating a counting method than can be entirely accepted by the entire community.

You say that they don't count. I agree that they don't count. According to poll results from the UCM the majority of fans agree that they don't count (hence why they also don't count according to the UCM) - but the fact is that there is a number of fans who would strongly disagree with us and count them.

Just because their point of view is different from ours doesn't make it any less valid. And as I was saying, aside from Article01, all the definitions listed in the UCM are based on highly subjective opinions... not facts. Hence why I keep saying that there's no "right" or "wrong" way to count Transformers. Everyone has their own view of what is right or wrong. People like you and I think that it's right not to count Nebulans et al., whereas others would believe the complete opposite. Who's "right"? Neither of us... it's purely a matter of personal preference.

We prefer not to count Nebulans.


Does Devestator transform? No!
While Devestator's individual bits can transform from one mode to another, the combined gestalt can not. Next!
Devastator most certainly does transform. He transforms from a gestalt robot in six smaller robots and/or construction vehicles (i.e.: the Constructicons). Okay, this might not fit into your definition of "transformation," but your rules never stated a specific definition of "transform" so it's open to subjective interpretation. And what about gestalts like SixTurbo? That gestalt robot kinda transforms into a jet (independently of the Autobots that merge to form him). Does SixTurbo count separately from Circuit, Discharge, Glide, Neo-Wheel, Road Police and Sireen?

As for your answers to questions 4, 5, 6 and 8 - the problem you're going to come up against is that many fans (according to polls the majority of fans) would disagree with counting those kinds of Transformers. It doesn't matter if you think you're right, fans will still disagree with you.


(re: Action Masters)
Shame on you now! Does it transform? No! Next!
And again you will find that the majority of fans would object with you there (and again poll results support this).

I can understand how some people have argued that the UCM is too complicated, and as I've said before I have already merged some of the articles in an attempt to simplify the system, but it hasn't been easy. But to me your system appears to be on the other end of the spectrum - for me at least it feels too simple. I feel that it requires either further clarifications or redefinitions of existing rules or additional rules to allow it to cater for what I personally believe should and shouldn't count in a Transformers collection.


1. Knowing fiction or lore should not be required to count how many toys you own.
2. And as STL so beautifully put, fiction exists as a marketing tool. I will not be assimilated!
That's your personal opinion - and you're fully entitled to it. But others disagree. kup has admitted to being a character/fiction driven collector - he seldomly buys a toy unless he likes the character.

What you're basically doing there is imposing your own personal values onto the rest of the community. In other words, you're saying, "TF fiction doesn't enter into the equation when I count my Transformers, nor should it for everyone else!"

Is that fair? For example, I'm not really into the whole "show-accuracy" thing. The toys came first and where there were discrepancies between the G1 toys and cartoon, usually it was because the animators made the changes. Having said that, I cannot deny that "show accuracy" is a VERY powerful sentiment amongst the fandom. e-Hobby Astrotrain made me aware of that. I picked that toy up thinking, "oh cool, it's Astrotrain in the same colours as the G1 catalogues," but then a buttload of other fans went, "z0mg!!1! Show-accurate Astrotrain!!" and fully fapped till Kingdom Come(TM) over that toy until it's now selling for obscenely high prices on the secondary market! Phwoar!

I'm not saying you're wrong or right, but again, you need to realise that this standard you're imposing is based on your own personal opinions and feelings rather than concrete demonstratable facts.

For that reason I cannot see the entire fandom coming to completely and entirely agree on a single method of counting.

The UCM is far from being the "perfect" or "most agreeable" method of counting Transformers, but I believe that it is the fairest as the rules have been determined via democracy rather than any single fan's opinion. The UCM represents what we as a fandom 'collectively' have determined to be the most ideal way of counting Transformers.

STL
12th March 2008, 10:08 PM
I would've replied but Jaydisc has nailed the same points I would've made. It's really quite simple.

I mean, I don't like that Action Masters/Revoltechs/MegaSCFs/Statues aren't counted under the system but it makes sense. I love some of those toys but some counting system isn't going to undermine my enjoyment of them. You can do what Griffin already does and separate the two likes. You have <x> Transformers and <y> non-transforming Transformer toys.

The only thing I'd add is "Does it transform from a robot mode to an alternate mode?" seems to be a clearer interpretation.

It really is charmingly simple.

Paulbot
12th March 2008, 10:12 PM
Nah Jaydisc's first statement was better.

Robot mode to alternate mode rules out things like the Beast Wars Mutants. (Poor mutants always facing prejudice :( :P )

The TF toylines are so huge people can always find counter arguements.

I've got one of the smaller collections compared to others that have been collecting as long as I have but that doesn't bother me, because I buy what I like. Better to be happy with what you've got than to worry that X has N more TFs than you.

For those of us that count with spreadsheets it's really easy to have a column where you can have your own count, one where you can tick if it's counted in UCM, and another for Jaydisc's option, and another for what ever other counting style you want.

Borgeman
12th March 2008, 10:15 PM
There are other minors who read this board aside from benben... including goodness knows how many unregistered lurkers. Some parents might be concerned if their children were exposed to material with ambiguously "profane" acronyms on it.


the likelyhood that a certain minor (lets call him child x) goes on this site without any prior knowledge of profanities these days is slim to none.... if the parents are concerned, they shouldnt allow their minors to use the net till its absolutely necessary

remember people - 40% of all internet traffic is accounted for by ... yep you guessed it: P.O.R.N *crowd cheers* :P


George

GoktimusPrime
12th March 2008, 10:22 PM
Robot mode to alternate mode rules out things like the Beast Wars Mutants. (Poor mutants always facing prejudice :P )
Would that also rule out Beast Changer (aka Noble/Savage)?? (o_O) I reckon that would peeve off a lot of Beast Machines fans.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e8/Savage-Noble.JPG/240px-Savage-Noble.JPG

dirge
12th March 2008, 10:41 PM
That's pretty weak.

So.... Hasbro and Takara announce that HoCs/Mega SCFs were TFs that lost the ability to transform. You'd start counting them? Again pretty weak.


They created the entire line, so... yes. That's not to say I'd be happy about it, mind you.

It's hardly "weak" to accept that in the end, Hasbro (and Takara in Japan) have complete control over Transformers - they own the trademark and can do what they want with it. If Hasbro decided to tomorrow to completely cancel the entire toyline and series, yet protect the trademarked name through legal action, they could.

There's nothing you or I can do about the fact that Hasbro have ultimate authority. There have been many cases where they have been ambiguous or ambivalent (Alpha-Q is a great example), but they were very clear about Actionmasters.

If you choose to pretend that Hasbro don't have the ultimate authority over the entire Transformers concept, that's your decision. Accepting this reality is not weak.

I personally don't consider Animorph toys to be proper Transformers - because they're not robots. But some fans _do_ count them, and I wouldn't argue against their decision to do so, because Hasbro slapped "Transformers" on the packaging hoping to sell a few more toys. I can't argue against that fact - I can just choose to boycott that line of toys.



I imagine we live in a world that has a greater intellectual capacity to distinguish between what companies tell us and what companies are doing.


Whether or not Hasbro are acting honourably or deviously or... whatever... it's their registered trademark. They can do what they want with it - the upcoming Marvel Transformers line proves that.

If you want to flex your intellectual capacity, don't buy them. I won't be buying Marvel TFs. I can't stop them from being Transformers, but I can stop them from infiltrating my collection.



I for one will be grabbing Action Masters like Krok, Prowl and Banzaitron but I'm not thick headed enough to start justifying that they are transformers.


But you're thick headed enough (to paraphrase your words) to ignore the fact that Hasbro _define_ Transformers, being the creators of the entire concept.

I'd strongly recommend against throwing terms around like, "thick headed" when you're referring to fans accepting something which has been defined by Hasbro. There's a distinct difference between accepting something and endorsing it. Working with Hasbro's definition of AMs doesn't mean believing it was a good idea. Nonetheless, most fans accept Hasbro's having defined AMs as Transformers - even if they don't _like_ AMs, and using a phrase like that may not be the best way for you to put forth your opinion. Which not only goes against the majority, but dismisses a definitive statement from the trademark owner.

Whether or not you choose to count AMs in your collection is your choice, but calling others thick headed for counting them is somewhat rude and perhaps ill-advised.





7/ Similar question to Action Masters - what about other licensed "Transformers" characters who don't transform because they were never meant to transform? e.g.: Alpha Quintesson, Transmutate (who is a Cybertronian), Kicker, Gamede etc

Shame on you now! Does it transform? No!


Please refrain from making it personal. Hasbro's ambivalence on these figures is to blame, here (save for Gamede who is a Microman figure sold with a Transformer). It's not GoktimusPrime's fault that Hasbro didn't care to specifically include or exclude them.

STL
12th March 2008, 11:14 PM
If you want to flex your intellectual capacity, don't buy them. I won't be buying Marvel TFs. I can't stop them from being Transformers, but I can stop them from infiltrating my collection.


Well, I'm not saying there's anything wrong with that. In fact, I kinda look forward to Marvel Transformers. Well, on sale anyway. It is Hasbro's call after all. As a consumer, I can deal with that. It's still my decision whether to buy it or not.

Geez, you take it really personally there. "Infiltrating"? I have preferences for what I'd prefer to see Hasbro producing but it's ultimately their choice. It's not a personal thing to spite us. I can only imagine in the future we'll get more similar lines w/ the increasing popularity of TFs.




But you're thick headed enough (to paraphrase your words) to ignore the fact that Hasbro _define_ Transformers, being the creators of the entire concept.


They have every right to define the Transformers. But as fans I would dearly hope we wield the discretion with which to determine what ultimately constitutes a Transforming Transformer. They can call whatever they want Transformers but there are many instances in fandom where the fans have given clarity to vague concepts.

By definition then, all Transformer products are Transformers. They carry the name, they are identified as such. Hasbro would regard a Robot Replica or Robot Heroes as a Transformer, albeit a non-transforming one. I cannot imagine that Hasbro meant to market them as anything as other than Transformers. Their selling point is that they are Transformers of a sort. That then renders this whole counting thread utterly useless. Hasbro is calling it a Transformer. It's not for us then to reach the conclusion that Robot Heroes or Replicas aren't Transformers by virtue of the fact that they don't transform. They;re marketed by Hasbro as Transformers after all under this logic.I'm sure you'll agree that that is troublesome.

The discretion we wield as fans is borne as a result of the dedication and time we invest in the Transformer concept. We as consumers possess an ultimate sense of proprietary about the line. In legal terms, we do not own the concept. However, corporations like Hasbro -want- us to form a sense of proprietary interest in their offerings. This brings them a stable customer base and helps to ensure stable income streams. If there was no sense of proprietary that collectors or kids felt, the line would lack it's momentum. It would plummet. It would fail. This intangible sense of proprietary is tremendously important. It is what drives many franchises and icons to success.

To blindly contend that the black letter of the law is exactly what Hasbro states is mindboggling and unfortunate. It is fallacious to deny the right that we as fans have to define what constitutes a Transforming Transformer. This is what thsi thread is about. The arguments raised in favour of Action Masters have been cumbersome at best. We do have a voice. We do have the ability to make structured and logical determinations with our own independent free will.

To deny that and rest solely on the basis that if Hasbro calls it a Transformer, it is a Transformer, would be tragic in its implicit undermining of the voice of a key stakeholder.

roller
12th March 2008, 11:21 PM
what does fallacious mean?

Thanatos
12th March 2008, 11:23 PM
Internet is serious business.

Borgeman
12th March 2008, 11:23 PM
PWN!!!!

George

dirge
12th March 2008, 11:34 PM
Geez, you take it really personally there. "Infiltrating"?


As in, whether or not any would end up in my collection (:



By definition then, all Transformer products are Transformers. They carry the name, they are identified as such. Hasbro would regard a Robot Replica or Robot Heroes as a Transformer, albeit a non-transforming one.


Yeah, this is true for a large extent (some things would fall outside the definition, still, but a lot would be included). The reason the fandom - generally - includes AMs is because they were specifically included by Hasbro. As I said, a lot of fans aren't necessarily happy with the inclusion.



I cannot imagine that Hasbro meant to market them as anything as other than Transformers.


Actually, I doubt Hasbro really care about marketing items such as (for example) a HOC as a Transformer or not - they just want the brand name to help selling the toy. It's this lack of definition which causes fans to differ on whether or not to count them. The crap thing is that there _is_ no right answer. As you say, troublesome.



To blindly contend that the black letter of the law is exactly what Hasbro states is mindboggling and unfortunate.


Well, in the case of Actionmasters or Animorphs (I hate to admit it, in the latter case) it removes the ambivalence attached to so many other items. Which is why the general concensus is to count such items.

I personally don't consider Animorphs as TFs, but then I don't have any, which allows me to reconcile my own opinion with Hasbro's marketing decision. It's simply a moot point in my case. And I'm happy about that :)

By the same token, I have no problem with you purchasing Krok while not considering him a proper TF, within your own collection. So long as you'd accept that the majority of fans _would_ count him in theirs.

The_Damned
12th March 2008, 11:46 PM
rectum is hardly a profanity anyway and not offensive in the least, i dont think any parent's, being that i am one would rather see that my child was only looking at some geeky forums with people using a counting system named after body parts, then looking at porn sites or any other kind appalling kind of site that can be easily found at the click of a button.

I can just imagine it some 10 year old reading this forum and he(she) gets the part about r.e.c.t.u.m and the parents walk in and see it on the screen and go OMG look at the filth he is reading and rip telephone cable out of the wall and ban him form the internet in disgust as they cant believe the filth he is looking at.

dirge
13th March 2008, 12:04 AM
The_Damned - I would tend to agree with you that most parents wouldn't have an issue. Rectum _is_ an anatonomical term. But there are some frighteningly conservative views out there.

I don't think it's quite enough for any moderator action, mind you. The odds of someone taking serious offence are very low, and the concepts Jay is discussing are not obscene.

TheDirtyDigger
13th March 2008, 06:21 AM
what does fallacious mean?

False, deceptive or misleading.

roller
13th March 2008, 08:00 AM
thanks dad

Bartrim
13th March 2008, 08:38 AM
thanks dad

Creepy.

Anyway folks does it really matter what counting method we use? In all seriousness it's not like I'm going to do to The_Damned's house look at his collection and say "You said you had 510 transformers but according to UCM you only have 505 you lying bastard! I never want to see you again!"

From what I've seen in the past, surveys like the UCM survey only create friction amongst friendship as some more competitive collector might get upset that someone claims they have more transformers then them due to mis interpretation of a definition. (Typing that made me feel smart:p)

I consider us all friends in this little close knit community. It would be a shame if the thing that united us is the thing that divides us.

In conclusion why don't we all just use the honour system. If The_Damned tells me he has 510 (or whatever the actual ammount is) Transformers I'm not going to sit there and examine ever figure and to prove him wrong. I'm going to believe him because he is my friend and I trust him.

TheDirtyDigger
13th March 2008, 08:49 AM
Creepy.
In conclusion why don't we all just use the honour system. If The_Damned tells me he has 510 (or whatever the actual ammount is) Transformers I'm not going to sit there and examine ever figure and to prove him wrong. I'm going to believe him because he is my friend and I trust him.


Well spoken Bart Rim.:)

This will help me push my count just over the_doctor's 4752 Tfs as well!:cool:

kup
13th March 2008, 08:58 AM
In conclusion why don't we all just use the honour system. If The_Damned tells me he has 510 (or whatever the actual ammount is) Transformers I'm not going to sit there and examine ever figure and to prove him wrong. I'm going to believe him because he is my friend and I trust him.

I am in agreement although at the end of the day, anyone comparing/submiting collection counts is already using an honor system of sorts as there is no one to verify if he did indeed use the UCM or if he is just submitting an estimate or random number.

To be honest, I doubt more than a few people would use the UCM to count their collection as its too cumbersome to use. Typically a fan would just sit down and start a head count on what he considers to be part of his collection and then submit the number.

However as mentioned several times on this thread, the UCM was created to serve not to dictate. So if I were really serious about comparing collection sizes in a uniform and accurate manner with a fellow fan, the UCM is available to me as a counting guideline which is what its meant to be.

Saintly
13th March 2008, 09:20 AM
Anyway folks does it really matter what counting method we use? In all seriousness it's not like I'm going to do to The_Damned's house look at his collection and say "You said you had 510 transformers but according to UCM you only have 505 you lying bastard! I never want to see you again!"

From what I've seen in the past, surveys like the UCM survey only create friction amongst friendship as some more competitive collector might get upset that someone claims they have more transformers then them due to mis interpretation of a definition. (Typing that made me feel smart:p)

I consider us all friends in this little close knit community. It would be a shame if the thing that united us is the thing that divides us.

In conclusion why don't we all just use the honour system. If The_Damned tells me he has 510 (or whatever the actual ammount is) Transformers I'm not going to sit there and examine ever figure and to prove him wrong. I'm going to believe him because he is my friend and I trust him.

well said! :)

GoktimusPrime
13th March 2008, 10:57 AM
By definition then, all Transformer products are Transformers. They carry the name, they are identified as such. Hasbro would regard a Robot Replica or Robot Heroes as a Transformer, albeit a non-transforming one.
EXACTAMUNDO! :)

UCM Article01 is the only factual definition of a Transformer - i.e.: any toy manufactured under licence from Hasbro/Takara and marketed as part of the Transformers line/franchise by HasTak. Everything else is a matter of subjective opinion!! This is why there is no "right" or "wrong" way of classifying or counting Transformers, because by its very nature TF classification is obscenely arbitrary.


Well, in the case of Actionmasters or Animorphs (I hate to admit it, in the latter case) it removes the ambivalence attached to so many other items. Which is why the general concensus is to count such items.

Indeed. Animorphs and Star Wars Transformers do count as Transformers. Under the UCM they are covered by Article01 and I reckon that they would satisfy both of the requirements of jaydisc's systems too. Both Animorphs and SWTFs are officially marketed as Transformers by Hasbro (satisfying rule #1) and they transform (satisfying rule #2).


The_Damned - I would tend to agree with you that most parents wouldn't have an issue. Rectum _is_ an anatonomical term. But there are some frighteningly conservative views out there.

I don't think it's quite enough for any moderator action, mind you. The odds of someone taking serious offence are very low, and the concepts Jay is discussing are not obscene.
I was more concerned about the D.I.C.K. acronym. Rectum isn't a profane word, but given the context of the situation (i.e.: we're not discussing anatomy) then it could be deemed as distasteful.

If these acronyms are to be introduced to fans worldwide then there might be a chance of someone taking offence to it. I don't think anyone here would take offence to it, but on one of the larger international boards it could potentially cause some fuss (the amount of nitpickiness here is nothing compared to what I see on international boards)


Anyway folks does it really matter what counting method we use?
Only if you're making a comparison or participating in a survey. Otherwise it really doesn't matter. Personally people can go ahead and count freakin' Gobots if they wanted to... (-_-)


From what I've seen in the past, surveys like the UCM survey only create friction amongst friendship as some more competitive collector might get upset that someone claims they have more transformers then them due to mis interpretation of a definition. (Typing that made me feel smart)

I consider us all friends in this little close knit community. It would be a shame if the thing that united us is the thing that divides us.
The UCM is fine so long as people remember its purpose - as a means for comparison and survey participation. That's it! And even then it's voluntary (nobody is being forced to participate in the survey).

If you hate the UCM so much that you never want to use it - FINE. Don't! I encourage people to use it and participate in the annual survey, but I'm not forcing it down anyone's throat.

It's an option which is out there if people choose to use it. People are equally capable of choosing NOT to use it if they don't want to.


In conclusion why don't we all just use the honour system. If The_Damned tells me he has 510 (or whatever the actual ammount is) Transformers I'm not going to sit there and examine ever figure and to prove him wrong. I'm going to believe him because he is my friend and I trust him.
That might work if you were making a personal comparison between just yourself and your friends - fine. But on an international survey? Um... not really.

For the sake of fairness we need to ensure that people are counting by the same rules when making any comparison (otherwise the comparison is worthless). Between a small circle of peers you can get away with coming to terms with a general consensus on how to count and work on an "honour system," but when you're dealing with hundreds of fans from across multiple message boards from around the world it doesn't quite work.

The_Damned
13th March 2008, 11:23 AM
but this is an australian fan site not an international one, as voted to by the majority of members.

Bartrim
13th March 2008, 11:30 AM
I'm just a little curious as to why we need 19+seperate articles in the UCM? Are we trying to work out the laws to govern a new country or are we trying to work out how to count toys?

jaydisc
13th March 2008, 11:33 AM
But what makes them not Transformers? They're toys manufactured under licence and they transform - e.g.: Aimless transforms from a robot (especially in Japan where he was a robot, not a Nebulan) to a gun... just like original G1 Megatron. Why doesn't it count as a Transformer?

They're simply accessories with a gimmick. Just look at how they're portrayed on the packaging:

http://lindalane.com/temporary/tf/112823636_tp.jpg

VERY low billing... and they don't even get a tech spec:

http://lindalane.com/temporary/tf/112823649_tp.jpg


fwiw I actually agree that Nebulans, Master Robots et al do NOT count as Transformers - but this is just our subjective opinion on this matter. It's not a fact!

And this is the problem with creating a counting method than can be entirely accepted by the entire community.

You say that they don't count. I agree that they don't count. According to poll results from the UCM the majority of fans agree that they don't count (hence why they also don't count according to the UCM) - but the fact is that there is a number of fans who would strongly disagree with us and count them.

Just because their point of view is different from ours doesn't make it any less valid. And as I was saying, aside from Article01, all the definitions listed in the UCM are based on highly subjective opinions... not facts. Hence why I keep saying that there's no "right" or "wrong" way to count Transformers. Everyone has their own view of what is right or wrong. People like you and I think that it's right not to count Nebulans et al., whereas others would believe the complete opposite. Who's "right"? Neither of us... it's purely a matter of personal preference.

We prefer not to count Nebulans.

Every methodology, theory, idea, document, etc. is subject to interpretation. This is no different.


Devastator most certainly does transform. He transforms from a gestalt robot in six smaller robots and/or construction vehicles (i.e.: the Constructicons). Okay, this might not fit into your definition of "transformation," but your rules never stated a specific definition of "transform" so it's open to subjective interpretation. And what about gestalts like SixTurbo? That gestalt robot kinda transforms into a jet (independently of the Autobots that merge to form him). Does SixTurbo count separately from Circuit, Discharge, Glide, Neo-Wheel, Road Police and Sireen?

Maybe I can think of a better way to communicate gestalts and other combiners. Remember that we are talking about the counting of toys here. In the case of the Constructicons, if you buy six toys, you get a bonus. If you buy the gift set, you're getting six toys (not seven). In the case of Reflector, you are buying one toy. In the case of Tidal Wave, one toy. In the case of Apeface, Metroplex, Batteltrap.... you're still buying one toy. So count it as such. Any attempt to count an accessory or to separately count the amalgamation of already-counted toys is just so obviously wrong to me (and obviously to others as well)


As for your answers to questions 4, 5, 6 and 8 - the problem you're going to come up against is that many fans (according to polls the majority of fans) would disagree with counting those kinds of Transformers. It doesn't matter if you think you're right, fans will still disagree with you.

Hence the "Un-universal" :D


And again you will find that the majority of fans would object with you there (and again poll results support this).

I can understand how some people have argued that the UCM is too complicated, and as I've said before I have already merged some of the articles in an attempt to simplify the system, but it hasn't been easy. But to me your system appears to be on the other end of the spectrum - for me at least it feels too simple. I feel that it requires either further clarifications or redefinitions of existing rules or additional rules to allow it to cater for what I personally believe should and shouldn't count in a Transformers collection.

The world is polar. I believe that the complexity of the UCM has contributed to my drive for simplicity, so I welcome you to take equal credit for my system :) The fact that you think the R.E.C.T.U.M. requires further "clarification" and "redefinition" is simply and demonstrative of my point.


That's your personal opinion - and you're fully entitled to it. But others disagree. kup has admitted to being a character/fiction driven collector - he seldomly buys a toy unless he likes the character.

What you're basically doing there is imposing your own personal values onto the rest of the community. In other words, you're saying, "TF fiction doesn't enter into the equation when I count my Transformers, nor should it for everyone else!"

Is that fair? For example, I'm not really into the whole "show-accuracy" thing. The toys came first and where there were discrepancies between the G1 toys and cartoon, usually it was because the animators made the changes. Having said that, I cannot deny that "show accuracy" is a VERY powerful sentiment amongst the fandom. e-Hobby Astrotrain made me aware of that. I picked that toy up thinking, "oh cool, it's Astrotrain in the same colours as the G1 catalogues," but then a buttload of other fans went, "z0mg!!1! Show-accurate Astrotrain!!" and fully fapped till Kingdom Come(TM) over that toy until it's now selling for obscenely high prices on the secondary market! Phwoar!

I'm not saying you're wrong or right, but again, you need to realise that this standard you're imposing is based on your own personal opinions and feelings rather than concrete demonstrable facts.

Fiction is used as a tool to sell toys. From the cartoon to the comics to the two movies. It is NO DIFFERENT THAN A TV COMMERCIAL with the exception that many (yourself, Kup and even myself included) have varying levels of emotional connections with the folklore. Believe it or not, it's DESIGNED to install that within us (in order to sell us more toys).

Now, beyond the folklore, Hastak (or any manufacturer) uses LOTS of OTHER tools to aide the selling of its products, including, for example, attrative box art. There is a guy named Botch the Crab that has a website DEDICATED to Transformer box art (to those unaware, it's fantastic (http://www.botchthecrab.com/archive/)!) Now, akin to the way Kup uses fiction as a tool to aide his purchasing choices, it's quite possible that another fan could use box art as the criteria for their toy selection...

But that does not mean that we should use box art as a tool to count our toys!


For that reason I cannot see the entire fandom coming to completely and entirely agree on a single method of counting.

The UCM is far from being the "perfect" or "most agreeable" method of counting Transformers, but I believe that it is the fairest as the rules have been determined via democracy rather than any single fan's opinion. The UCM represents what we as a fandom 'collectively' have determined to be the most ideal way of counting Transformers.

I too cannot see the entire fandom agreeing on a single method of counting. And I would have loved to have stood behind the UCM until it demonstrated a clear inflexibility and refusal to accept true democratic reform. I know, yearly trends, blah blah blah.

Bartrim
13th March 2008, 11:52 AM
That might work if you were making a personal comparison between just yourself and your friends - fine. But on an international survey? Um... not really.

For the sake of fairness we need to ensure that people are counting by the same rules when making any comparison (otherwise the comparison is worthless). Between a small circle of peers you can get away with coming to terms with a general consensus on how to count and work on an "honour system," but when you're dealing with hundreds of fans from across multiple message boards from around the world it doesn't quite work.

Just doing some more thinking here (yes I know it is quite dangerous) but effectively don't we use an honour system anyway...or do a panel of "judges" go around and check every participants tally according to the articles of the UCM?

jaydisc
13th March 2008, 12:04 PM
In reference to the requiring of a transformation to robot mode, the immediate issue I foresaw was good ol' Laserbeak and Ravage

Paulbot
13th March 2008, 12:07 PM
I think I'd count Reflector as three toys as each individual toy robot was given it's own name - they just share a gestalt alt mode called Reflector.

I don't have any of the three but if I ever got one of them (Viewfinder for example) I'd count him as 1 in my Transformer toy in his own right.

But that's how I count Transformers and I don't expect anyone else to do the same. :)


In reference to the requiring of a transformation to robot mode, the immediate issue I foresaw was good ol' Laserbeak and Ravage

Yes me too, but you could get away with saying robotic animal mode... so I used the Mutants as an example of Transformers with solely two non-robotic (by any definition) modes.

kup
13th March 2008, 12:58 PM
I just realized that I have been used as an example in an argument.

For Clarity here is what motivates me as a collector:

- My appreciation of the overall fiction (official) in which the character participated, even if it was a minor role.

- My apreciation of the fictional development of the character. This is a mayor motivator and includes characters such as Bludgeon, Thunderwing, etc.

Side Notes: This is also a bit of a controversy when it comes to Counting repaints, particularly Hasbro's lazy attempts as I would likely begin to count an officially released figure after it has been modified to resemble its original character likeness. Example: I would not consider Classics Cliffjumper as nothing more than a Red Bumblebee (a variation) than a unique head count. I would only started counting him as a unique figure after I upgraded him with the Cliffjumper upgrade because he now properly looks like CJ.

My motivation of the fiction also makes me a bit volatile as a collector since my oppinion on a toy could change drastically from before to after I read its fictional representation. This is why I have a love/hate relationship with Simon Furman's writing since he makes me want to buy toys that otherwise I would have no interest in.

- I will ignore figures that I own from lines that I do not apreciate. For example, thanks to group buys, freebies and so forth, I have come into possession of figures from the Energon, Cybertron and Armada lines. These includes Energon Downshift(wheeljack, Damn you Archer!!), Roadblock, a couple of minicons and legends. They are not included in my collection. However I also own Armada Unicron and Cybertron Vector Prime who are from lnes that I generally dislike/ignore but make exception of these characters and make them part of my collection because they have been integrated into continuities that I enjoy.

As you can see from the above, I am very volatile on what I personally include and not include in my collection and that could change from a moment to the next if I happen to read fiction relating to that toy which I enjoy, even when the 'real' toy number in my collection has not increased at all. Its a very personal thing with me so if I ever count my collection, it would only be for my benefit.

However, if I ever do feel inclined to compare collections with someone else, I would need some sort of tool or uniform method as my personal count is too chaotic. Here is where a method such as the concept of UCM comes in handy . I can mutualy agree to use the UCM (or some other method) as a guideline with the other parties involved so that we can get a proper and fair comparison of our collections.

In conclusion, the UCM or any other counting method is nothing more than a guideline to be used for comparison of collection sizes between fans. It doesn't matter which counting method is better or simpler, at the end its your choice if you want to use one at all.

Personally I do not need one as I don't even count my collection and have no interest in comparing it.

dirge
13th March 2008, 11:23 PM
I once came across a fan who would count a set of combiners as one if he picked them up as a boxset, but separately if he bought them separately. Even with stuff like Devastator who was available in both formats.

It's hard to attain consistency when some are determined to contradict themselves!

jaydisc
14th March 2008, 07:54 AM
Ignoring the U.C.M. or R.E.C.T.U.M. how would you count:

1 x Movie Deluxe Bumblebee (Classic Camaro)
1 x Movie Deluxe Bumblebee (Concept Camaro)
1 x Evolution of a Hero gift pack

TheDirtyDigger
14th March 2008, 08:20 AM
4 toys for me.

kup
14th March 2008, 08:28 AM
Ignoring the U.C.M. or R.E.C.T.U.M. how would you count:

1 x Movie Deluxe Bumblebee (Classic Camaro)
1 x Movie Deluxe Bumblebee (Concept Camaro)
1 x Evolution of a Hero gift pack

Movie Deluxe Bumblebee (Classic Camaro) x1
Movie Deluxe Bumblebee (Concept Camaro) x1
Evolution of a Hero gift pack x2 if I don't own the individual releases at all but if I already do, they are just doubles and don't count at all.

So if I own all of the three items, they would only count as 2 as I don't count identical doubles.

If I just own just the Evolution of a Hero set then its 2 because I consider two separate character toys as individuals even if bought as a set.

Paulbot
14th March 2008, 08:42 AM
One of those gift packs toys is a (crappy) repaint not the exact same toy.

I'd count it as "four Transformers (inlcuding one double)".

jaydisc
14th March 2008, 08:44 AM
Yeah, ya see. I'm not a big fan of counting doubles, but because I'm leaving Evolution MISB, I feel the desire to count everything in the pack. I'm torn.

EDIT: Sorry, I should have added that the Deluxe Bumblebees NOT in the gift pack are loose, and the gift pack is MISB.

The_Damned
14th March 2008, 08:54 AM
that is 4 transformers so i would say i own 4 transformers:)

kup
14th March 2008, 09:36 AM
One of those gift packs toys is a (crappy) repaint not the exact same toy.

I'd count it as "four Transformers (inlcuding one double)".

What's the difference? Obviously I was under the impression they were identical. Is it a different shade of yellow? as it looks the same in pics.

Paulbot
14th March 2008, 09:58 AM
The "Battle damage" (otherwise known as Black Smudges)

kup
14th March 2008, 10:07 AM
The "Battle damage" (otherwise known as Black Smudges)

On the 08? If it is then that sucks.

iceburn
14th March 2008, 10:09 AM
yeap..the black marks on both bumblebees (i think) ...but i like :P
yet to transform the '74 version one

GoktimusPrime
14th March 2008, 02:53 PM
Yeah, the Evolution of a Hero set are technically variants - not enough to make me personally want to count them.

I would personally count those four Transformers as two.

roller
14th March 2008, 02:56 PM
if theres a bussle in your hedge-row dont be a law man, its just a sprinkiling for the may Queen...

dirge
15th March 2008, 11:36 AM
I'd count them as two. I don't count doubles and since I don't count toys that are essentially a direct substitute (IE minor variations - in my opinion) as distinct toys, the extra Bumblebees would miss out.

I tend to err on the side caution and undercount, in this regard. Only recently I decided I should probably count my Ghost Starscream separate from Starscream.

jaydisc
15th March 2008, 12:14 PM
Remember, the Concept Camaro in the two pack is "Battle Damaged"

dirge
15th March 2008, 02:29 PM
Remember, the Concept Camaro in the two pack is "Battle Damaged"

Please don't remind me :mad:

Even then, it's still the same toy for me. A non-sensical change to try get collectors to buy the same thing again does not - for me - constitute a new toy.

Paulbot
15th March 2008, 02:54 PM
Bumblebee's battle damage (repainting) isn't the same as Final Battle Jazz's battle damage (remoulding) so I can see why people would discount it as a separate toy.

GoktimusPrime
15th March 2008, 03:21 PM
This is the "substitution rationale" rule for variants - i.e.: variants are discounted if they are perceived as "substitutes." e.g.: many people buy reissues as substitutes for the original - I recently got Encore Sky Lynx as a substitute for not having the original. Now that I have it, I'm not going to be looking for a G1 Sky Lynx any more. So using the substitution rationale my Encore Sky Lynx doesn't count separately from original G1 Sky Lynx - i.e.: if you have both original G1 and Encore Sky Lynxen then they count as one Transformer, not two.

Of course, the substitution rationale itself is quite subjective... individual opinions vary on how different a variant must be in order for it to count separately.

roller
15th March 2008, 08:17 PM
what about reissues that are different from the original release ?

eg: ultramagnus-longer missiles

kup
15th March 2008, 08:54 PM
what about reissues that are different from the original release ?

eg: ultramagnus-longer missiles

You could pass him off as Ultra Magnus after visiting that Cybertronian bar that Rattrap spoke of to Cheetor, the one where the waitresses serve oil without their chest plates.;)

GoktimusPrime
15th March 2008, 11:19 PM
There are many people who would purchase that reissue Magnus and then consider their quest for a G1 Magnus to be over, hence becoming a "substitute" for G1 Magnus.

dirge
15th March 2008, 11:39 PM
There are many people who would purchase that reissue Magnus and then consider their quest for a G1 Magnus to be over, hence becoming a "substitute" for G1 Magnus.

I wouldn't. But then, I would not purchase it, either d:

GoktimusPrime
15th March 2008, 11:43 PM
I did (my G1 Magnus was stolen, grrr) - but I've since replaced his god f'ugly missiles with original G1 ones. ;)

jaydisc
16th March 2008, 06:29 PM
I think "intent" is very relevant to my own count. For example, I actually have one on each (classic and concept) Bumblebees loose. I also have Evolution of a Hero. I have no intention of opening Evolution of a Hero, but I consider it a part of my MISB collection, a sealed display piece, and thus consider it worthy of counting. I also have another MISB concept Camaro Bumblebee, with the intention of being opened if and when I should every break, lose or damage my loose one. I do NOT count that as part of my collection, so in my case, intention is everything when it comes to a double/variant.

GoktimusPrime
4th January 2009, 09:24 AM
From post #21 on the "2008 Acquisitions: Your best and worst?" thread (http://www.otca.com.au/boards/showthread.php?p=73444#post73444)

I changed my counting method late in 2008 from one that was close to the fan-voted method, to a more "official" Hasbro-perspective method I developed (as in, what would *Hasbro* class and count as an actual TFs toy product).
So under that system I suppose the following items would count as 1:
+ An entire Micromaster Patrol or Combiner Squad (e.g.: Sports Car Patrol)
+ An entire Mini-Con Team (e.g.: Street Action Team)
+ Gestalts sold together in a "gift set" (e.g.: Tripredacus, Magnaboss)
+ Decoys, statues, PVCs, meal/candy toys etc.
+ 7.6cm Titanium Series

What I'm also curious about though, how do you count the following:
+ Variants - I think Hasbro would count intentional variants separately (e.g.: movie Bumblebee's variants) but not "unintentional" variants (e.g. red and yellow G1 Bumblebee)
+ Multiples
+ TF condition - loose vs. sealed vs. junkers
+ Takara Transformers, especially "non-mainline" TF toys/merchandise from Japan like Choro-Q, Microman (e.g.: Kicker, Gamede), Q Robo, KT Figures, bottle tops, TF Jrs, Beastformers, Majorette TF cars et al.

griffin
4th January 2009, 03:11 PM
I will post details of the counting system I've been working on for the last few months, but I need to finish up something more important today before I do.


From post #21 on the "2008 Acquisitions: Your best and worst?" thread (http://www.otca.com.au/boards/showthread.php?p=73444#post73444)

So under that system I suppose the following items would count as 1:
+ An entire Micromaster Patrol or Combiner Squad (e.g.: Sports Car Patrol)
Not really, but close.


+ An entire Mini-Con Team (e.g.: Street Action Team)
No.


+ Gestalts sold together in a "gift set" (e.g.: Tripredacus, Magnaboss)
No.


+ Decoys, statues, PVCs, meal/candy toys etc.
Yes, no, yes, yes if produced by an official owner of the brand.


+ 7.6cm Titanium Series
Yes.


What I'm also curious about though, how do you count the following:
+ Variants - I think Hasbro would count intentional variants separately (e.g.: movie Bumblebee's variants) but not "unintentional" variants (e.g. red and yellow G1 Bumblebee)
+ Multiples
+ TF condition - loose vs. sealed vs. junkers
+ Takara Transformers, especially "non-mainline" TF toys/merchandise from Japan like Choro-Q, Microman (e.g.: Kicker, Gamede), Q Robo, KT Figures, bottle tops, TF Jrs, Beastformers, Majorette TF cars et al.

The counting method deals with each of these issues with a 5-item 'testing' criteria. But as mentioned above, details on that later.

BTW - the red and yellow Gen1 Bbees and CJs were confirmed by Hasbro that they were NOT unintentional - they were purposefully produced to pad out the first year of toys.