griffin's T3 (Total Transformers Toy) checklist/counting method.

[griffin]

I mentioned recently that I had been developing a 'more official' counting method to count my collection, which significantly altered the total figure I used to have, because of how I was counting my *toys* as a fan.
After a few months of working the bugs out of my original idea, I think this is finally ready to be put to use, or at least get discussed and picked over by others to work out any flaws I have missed.

When people (well, me) started having problems with the cluttered, clumsy, fan-voted counting method, and all its various 'Articles', a simpler counting method was needed. One that gave a simple 'yes' or 'no' to an item, based on a small, set criteria. That way, you didn't need several 'Articles' that essentially confirm what one or two criteria could specify. As such, I was able to generate a counting method that only required 4 simple assessment criteria.

But before we get into that, let's just look at what it is we are wanting here. We want to count our Transformers collections, and come up with a 'mutually comparible figure'. But what are we counting? Transformers - yes, that's obvious. Transformers toys - well, if we are going to call it a toy collection, the checklist and count needs to reflect that it is indeed counting *toys*. We don't count anything that isn't a toy, and we count everything that is a toy.
We just need to draw the line at a point where there is the least amount of conjecture or confusion.

So who decides what is a 'Transformers(tm) toy'? Fans? Collectors? Kids? Strangers off the street? Well, the key here is identifying and acknowledging that the Transformers(tm) brand is the property of Hasbro and TakaraTomy. They own it, so they determine what is released, and therefore determine what is considered a 'Transformers(tm) toy'. Many long-time fans consider 'convertability' as being a required element to a Transformers(tm) toy, but a 'toy' is anything primarily intended to be played with. That eliminates statues, busts, Unleashed, and mere merchandise, but look at everything else in your collection or someone else's collection - what are 'toys' and what isn't? To make this perspective easier to understand, show a 'non-fan' a Transformers collection and they will see anything that is a toy product, reguardless of if it converts, as a Transformers toy. So it's simple... Is it a toy, and is it an official Transformers(tm) product? If you can answer yes to both of those, it counts as part of your 'Transformers' 'toy' collection. Sure, it means that a collection count can potentially be a lot larger than you previously thought, but we are looking at 25 YEARS of Transformers toys here. The Total number of Transformers Toys so far released IS going to be big. Hence the need for a Total Transformers Toy checklist, which I'd like to spend a few days working on, eventually.

As mentioned above, since it is a 'Transformers(tm)' toy collection, not a 'convertable Transformers(tm)' toy collection, the counting method also has to reflect that. Admittedly, this was never a significant issue before 2007 - the last few years have seen Hasbro and Takara pumping out a heap of non-transformable *toys*, which are beyond question, 'official Transformers(tm) toy products'. If they are 'playable toys' but don't count as 'Transformers(tm) toys', then what are they? The long-time purists like myself who grew up on Transformers(tm) toys as being convertable or having a convertable accessory, need to get beyond that as being a required element for a *toy product* to be allowed to be branded as Transformers(tm).
Like I said, before 2007, this wasn't a big deal because most non-convertable toys could have been brushed aside as mere merchandise by people like me, but when my count of non-convertable Transformers(tm) toy products passed 300 in late 2008, something needed to change with the counting method.

That's the two easy criteria items, and already covers the way some people probably already count their Transformers toy collections.

Now, as much as we'd love to get the people at Hasbro to go through every item they have released over the last 25 years, as a 'Total Transformers Toy checklist', it's just not going to ever happen. The last time they tried, it only covered US Hasbro toys, and wasn't completely accurate. The best way to therefore work out a checklist, is go through existing fan-lists and release data of every officially released Transformers toy, and colate a complete checklist for collectors to refer to. Unfortunately, that is such a huge task, I am yet to complete it (and as mentioned above, would need a good few days to make it a 'complete' list), so I am just going to instead continue outlining the testing criteria I formulated to generate the checklist, for others to use on their own.

Basically, this counting method ignores what fans *want* to have counted, based on their own personal prejudices and ideas, and looks at what the 'owners of the Transformers(tm) brand' would determine as being a 'toy product', to be counted. The 2 remaining criteria assess items that in are multi-packs (to see if they are required to complete another figure), and how playable the item is as a toy (looks at it's condition).

So each item is processed/tested on a case by case basis, and the collector asks the following questions:
1 - Is it an official Transformers(tm) product (produced by Hasbro, TakaraTomy, Kenner, Tonka, GiGi, etc)?
2 - Is it a toy product (it's intended purpose is for it to be played with)?
3 - If it is part of a mult-pack, is it intended to be a stand alone toy, or is required to complete another figure in the pack?
4 - Is it in a playable condition (must be the primary 'named' figure)?

Item Number 1 is one that could blow out a lot of counts by collectors who don't just collect the mainline convertable toys. If a *toy product* is produced by an official source (Hasbro/TakaraTomy/etc), and released through a 3rd party (like BotCon, McDonalds, Boss Coffee, etc) it counts. After all, if you have a 'playable item' (toy) officially branded as 'Transformers(tm)', that you couldn't buy at your nearest retail store, that would mean most exclusives wouldn't count. Remember, this is a Transformers(tm) *toy* collection count. And if you don't specify the 'toy' bit in your counting method (it is a toy collection after all), you would have a much bigger count, because you'd be counting merchandise (non-toy) items as well. That's why item number 2 is there.

Item number 2 may narrow down the count to just toys, but it also opens up the count to multiples, be they intentional varients by the producer, or the exact same item. The point though, is if you do have 'X amount' of toys in your possession, no matter what they are, it is part of your collection and is part of your 'collection count'.
If you wanted to instead count and compare 'different' Transformers toy counts, you would have to go to the trouble of debating and agreeing with each person, how different each toy needs to be, to count as 'different'. This 'Total Transformers Toy' counting method is as simple as the name suggests - your 'Total' count.

Number 3 is the tricky one, because multi-pack toys have always been messy. Now, you could take the opinion that it is easier to just count everything in a multi-pack is just one item, or every individual thing in the pack as separate items. But that creates more problems, with some items over the years released in both multi-packs and individually.
So we need to see if the toy products that are in a multi-pack, are intended to be 'stand-alone toys' or are 'required to complete any other toy in the pack'. If like Gen1 Rumble and Ravage, the two toys are *mutually exclusive* to each other, but are just packaged together by Hasbro due to price point restrictions, they would count as 2 toys. To prove it, Takara released the cassettes separately, because they aren't required to complete the other.
Basically, take a multi-pack and keep separating the individual items in it to a point in which every separate item is *still a complete toy*, and *could* be sold by H/T/e as a separate toy.
This is where we need some examples to illustrate Number 3...
Gen1 Reflector - 3 robots that would only ever be intended to be sold together by H/T/e, so only count as 1. They just wouldn't make sense retailing separately.
Gen1 Soundwave/Buzzsaw - each toy is not required to complete the other, so count as 2.
Cybertron Soundwave/Buzzsaw - Soundwave requires Buzzsaw as a weapon, so can't be separated, and only count as 1.
Titanium Soundwave/Buzzsaw - same as the Gen1 pair, so count as 2.
Micromaster Patrols - 4 toys that could be sold separately at retail, so count as 4.
2-1 Combiner Micromasters - 2 toys that require each other to fulfil their alt-mode purpose, and wouldn't make sense retailing them separately as half a vehicle, so count as 1.
6-1 Combiner Micromasters - 6 toys that did end up being sold separately, because they only interact with each other, not require each other to complete each, so count as 6.
Star Convoy and Hot Rodimus - neither requires the other, as an accessory or even combine, so count as 2.
Decoys - were packed in with year-3 toys and Takara multi-packs, but are mutually exclusive to each other so could (and some redecos were) retail separately, so each counts.
Animorphs Tri-Rex or Magmatron - 3 toys that would make no sense being retailed on their own, like Reflector, so count as 1.
Music Label Rumble & Frenzy - a working set of headphones, but still can be considered a toy, so counts, but the pair are required to stay joined to fulfil their alt-mode purpose, and only count as 1.
"Standard" combiner teams - several toys (usually 5 or 6) that more often get sold on their own, so each figure counts.
Minicon 3-packs - 3 toys that do not require all three to be retailed together, so each counts.
Minicon partners - 2 toys (usually) that must stay paired or else the larger figure is incomplete, so count as 1.
Robot Heroes - same as Minicon 3-packs and Decoys, so each counts.
Minicon partners redecoed and released on their own - when cataloguing a redeco that was released with a different purpose, you can't apply the purpose of the pre-existing version onto it. Just because Armada Unicron needs Dead End to complete it, it doesn't mean that the individually released Bug General is not an individual figure without a Unicron. And vice versa.

I lost a fair bit in my count because of the 2-1 combiner Micromasters and the Minicon partners, but when you are counting a loose collection, the counting needs to be *consistent*. And that is done by its purpose, rather than the personal preference of what mode each toy is displayed in. Things like, Full-Barrel and Overflow - in their alt mode, they are a single truck, not two trucks. Displaying the toy in its intended 'gimmick' form, makes it obvious it is one toy. Just because a collector like me has them displayed in robot mode, doesn't mean it is two toys - because each robot does not fulfil its purpose as a Transformers(tm) toy without the other. Sure, you can play with it, but it doesn't turn into anything that H/T/e would try to sell separately, because it wouldn't make sense on its own. Same with displaying Minicon Partners with their larger figures - even if most prefer to have them displayed separately, it doesn't mean they are 2 toys, because Hasbro intended for them to complete a larger figure. That logic also applies to people who display something like the Combaticons as Bruticus - you don't eliminate 4 toys from your count just because you have 5 toys displayed in a combined form.
If at the time you count your collection, you display each figure in the way the producer/owner (H/T/e) intended for them, the count would be easier to do, as all figures would be paired up ready to be counted or catalogued.
This was something that took me a while to accept as an objective consistent counting method, because all my toys are displayed in robot mode. But, that's not how the H/T/e sell 90-95% of them. I just prefer everything in the same mode - robot mode... :)

So as you can (hopefully) see, each item is looked at from a H/T/e perspective, to determine if it could sell at retail as an individual toy, without making another figure incomplete in the process. Even if it would seem unlikely (like WST Ravage or Titanium Buzzsaw), it is still possible because they could sell as complete toy products mutually exclusive to their larger multi-pack partners. It also takes into account toys like Aramada Demolishor, which was released in Cybertron with a Cyber-Key in place of the Minicon. Just like Armada Demolishor would be 'incomplete' without its Minicon, the Cybertron Demolishor would be incomplete without its Cyber-Key, but doesn't need a Minicon with that 'version' of the toy to be considered complete.
This is why having a 'roster' listing your collection is important. If you keep track of your collection by each individual name, and are able to distinguish between each individual toy in your collection, it makes it easier to count them up. At least, according to the above 4-item testing criteria.

Finally, item number 4 - 'Playable toy' doesn't require a toy to be 'unbroken' to count in your collection, it just shouldn't be missing anything significant that prevents it from being playable/convertable/etc. It could be missing some kibble, or accessories, but shouldn't be missing body parts like head or limbs, otherwise it is a 'junker'.
And while on the topic of accessories, you must at least have the primary figure, or else your collection roster isn't accurately counting the toys, it is counting accessories. In otherwords, if you say you have Pretender Skullgrin, you must have the inner robot. Everything else is an accessory to the 'named' figure. Even if it is a small figure with heaps of accessories, like Micromaster Countdown or Euro Pyro or RiD Optimus, you just have spare accessories if you don't have that figure tabulated on your roster/checklist.

Since the issue of custom and modified Transformers toys has come up recently, it should be noted that each customised figure, no matter how customised it is, goes back to the original premise - ignore what the fan thinks, and just test it based on the criteria. Reguardless of what the fan currently calls the toy, or if they have put a single extra sticker on it, or a whole coat of paint over it, if the foundation toy is an *official Transformers(tm) toy that is still playable*, it would count. In other words, if you have a Starscream toy painted up as Sunstorm and is still playable, it is still officially a Starscream Transformers Toy, and counts as one. Despite what the fan currently calls it, the Transformers Toy product needs to be refered to by its official designation to count.
If the person who owns it can't easily recognise or refer to it as its original official form (as per Item 1), because of major modifications, then it shouldn't count. Each Transformers(tm) toy needs to at least be referred to by its official (original) designation on the checklist/count roster. And since the T3 checklist only uses official H/T/e names, a custom figure could only count if you can check it off as the official figure it started out as.That makes it easy if it is just some repro-stickers, or custom painting, but a figure that has been heavily modified from what was originally released by H/T/e shouldn't really count - especially if a non-fan looks over a Transformers(tm) collection and assumes that everything in it are official Transformers(tm) toys/products. If you have heavily customised toys, it would be best to have them in a separate count and roster, in addition to the official Transformers brand toy count and roster.

(this bit editted later) Counting of sealed toys would also be the same as loose toys. This is a counting method based on if all the toy products are out-of-packaging toys, to give a more comparable figure between collectors. After all, it doesn't matter how your toys are displayed or kept (sealed or loose), the number of actual toys in your possession remains the same.

Discuss, or criticise any flaws I missed... :)

(BTW, this is not a topic to criticise any other existing counting methods, it is only to discuss the merits or flaws of this counting method)

[Kyle]

Very happy with this method, and I'd like to make just one suggestion...

I would still include "sealed or packaged" toys in the count. But each box/package only counts as "one toy", regardless of how many toys are actually inside the package. To make the individual toys inside a box/package count, the following must be performed:

(1) The package must be unsealed.
(2) You (yourself) have transformed all components inside the package through all of their designed/intended modes, at least once. (Or equivalently, followed the instructions step by step from beginning to end, then in reverse, at least once.)

[griffin]

The count would be the same reguardless of if the toys are sealed or loose. If you have a sealed boxed Universe Combaticon set, you still have in your possession, five toys. This is a toy count, not a box count.


A 'Sealed or Packaged collection count' could have a different counting method, or just be counted according to the above method as if they were *toys* and not investment or sealed display items.

That sentence of mine will be removed, as it is misleading, suggesting that I would count Sealed toys differently to Loose ones. It's like having a combiner group on display in combined mode - it doesn't matter how your toys are kept or displayed in your collection, the number you have in your possession remains the same.

[Tiby]

I like this idea in all but the combined mode part. I treat Transformers based on their fictional "sentience", which also comes from the names / tech specs / etc provided to them by the manufacturers. For example, Reflector. They each have separate robot identities, and are each independently sentient. This is as opposed to Optimus Prime, Roller and the trailer, which are not independently sentient, or pretender shells.

I have chosen this method for the reason that Transformers are , at the manufacturer's behest, "Robots in Disguise". They do not need to have an alternate form to continue to be a sentient robot, even though the may need to get their friends together to disguise themselves.

The exception I have here is Nebulan partners (which came with the toys) as they are accessories and not robots (using the US fiction as stated by the manufacturer on boxes, tech specs, etc).

While I understand griffin's proposal to base the collection count on "toys" as physical products, and believe this to be very valid, I prefer myself to base it on the sentient robot modes (or characters) which is how the figures are referred to by the shows, manufacturer tech specs, and fits into the "Robots in Disguise" concept.

[SofaMan]

I like this idea in all but the combined mode part. I treat Transformers based on their fictional "sentience", which also comes from the names / tech specs / etc provided to them by the manufacturers. For example, Reflector. They each have separate robot identities, and are each independently sentient. This is as opposed to Optimus Prime, Roller and the trailer, which are not independently sentient, or pretender shells.

<snip>

The exception I have here is Nebulan partners (which came with the toys) as they are accessories and not robots (using the US fiction as stated by the manufacturer on boxes, tech specs, etc).

I take your point here, but I can also see what Griffin is getting at. Instinctively, I want to count MM Combiners separately - each TF has an individual identity expressed through its own name and individual personality. However once we do that, it does become hard to justify not counting Nebulans individually.

The current UCM is increasingly unwieldy as we keep adding exceptions/clarifications, which is one reason why I tried to break it in half into "What Counts" and "What Doesn't Count". It does need further cleaning up, and I for instance would like to see what is/isn't a TF defined by no more than half a dozen clear principles. There are a fair few UCM Articles that could be rolled into the 4 that Griffin has stated.

Certainly the "What is a HasTak toy?" principle is a good one, but I think we also need to make some allowance for what we consider to be individual toys, discrete from HasTak marketing decisions. Since TFs are "Robots in Disguise", perhaps we should count them based on individual robot modes. Reflector would then count as 3. MM Combiners would count individually. Exceptions like Kicker and Alpha Quintesson are rare enough that we can include them by default.

[Kyle]

I like this idea in all but the combined mode part. I treat Transformers based on their fictional "sentience", which also comes from the names / tech specs / etc provided to them by the manufacturers. For example, Reflector. They each have separate robot identities, and are each independently sentient. This is as opposed to Optimus Prime, Roller and the trailer, which are not independently sentient, or pretender shells.

I have chosen this method for the reason that Transformers are , at the manufacturer's behest, "Robots in Disguise". They do not need to have an alternate form to continue to be a sentient robot, even though the may need to get their friends together to disguise themselves.

The exception I have here is Nebulan partners (which came with the toys) as they are accessories and not robots (using the US fiction as stated by the manufacturer on boxes, tech specs, etc).

While I understand griffin's proposal to base the collection count on "toys" as physical products, and believe this to be very valid, I prefer myself to base it on the sentient robot modes (or characters) which is how the figures are referred to by the shows, manufacturer tech specs, and fits into the "Robots in Disguise" concept.

I like this as well. My mind (as a collector) always wanted to count like Griffin, while my heart (as a fan) always wanted to count like Tiby.

What is the purpose/meaning of counting your collection? The number is only an indicator of sorts. Does "the number" have to be accurate? No, it can never be truly "accurate", because no one will ever be truly happy with any single counting method. No single number will ever be "universal". As the number is only an indicator, why limit yourself to a single number? Why don't we have two numbers, as two numbers make a better indicator?

As such, I propose that we list two numbers:

1) First number (Mind As Collector) considers a "complete" toy. A toy whose mould (not necessarily the toy itself) can be released individually or become a part of another package.

2) Second number (Heart As Fan) considers individual toy which is a "character". It does not have to be transformable or have an alt mode, as long as it is considered a "character".

eg. G1 Optimus Prime + Trailer + Roller = 1, 1 (Roller is a part of the Prime character, so doesn't count individually.)
eg. Star Convoy + Roller + Hot Rodimus = 2, 2
eg. Metroplex + components = 1, 3
eg. Armada Optimus Prime + Sparkplug = 2, 2
eg. Reflector = 1, 3
eg. BW Neo Magmatron = 1, 1
eg. Devastator = 6, 6
eg. Superion = 5, 5
eg. Headmaster with head = 1, 1
eg. Targetmaster with partner = 1, 2
eg. Powermaster/Godmaster with partner = 1, 2
eg. Pretender with shell = 1, 1
eg. Brainmaster with "brain" = 1, 1
eg. Breastforce member with partner = 1, 2
eg. Micromaster Team = 4, 4
eg. Actionmaster = 1, 1
eg. Minicon Team = 3, 3
eg. Animated Safeguard = 1, 2
eg. Robot Heros 2-packs = 2, 2
eg. Universe Hound + Ravage = 1, 2
eg. Masterforce Overlord = 1, 3 (Mega and Giga were the "characters" early on in the series, but the robot body gained sentience later on.)

----------
Edit:
Made some amendments.

[Golden Phoenix]

I agree with most of that. It seems reasonable and fair.
Only problem I have is with what you would say counts as 2 and other count as 1, but everyone will have some gripe here or there
Mine is about the mini-con partners.
I think they should count separately because both figures can still function without the other, it may be reduced, but it still works.
Hasbro/Takara could still market either individually and they could still work, which they have done, they did it with Deluxe Armada Prime and a lot of the partner mini-cons
The mini-con is also interchangeable. In most cases, it doesn't really matter which mini-con you use with the bigger one, you can still get most of the gimmicks working with any mini-con

So for me, any figure that doesn't need the mini-con would count separately.
Figures like Overload with Rollout would count as 1 because Overload can't get to robot mode without Rollout, nor can he get to his shoulder cannon mode without Optimus. He would be stuck in Vehicle mode, which really needs something to drag it around (ie Prime or Rollout)
But Optimus Prime and Sparkplug would count as 2 because Prime could be sold without Sparkplug, or with any other mini-con and still be fine. Same can be said for Sparkplug, which has happened

[heroic_decepticon]

I like this method of counting. Might actually encourage a guy like me to actually start counting my Transformers. Other methods were just too prohibitive with endless 'articles' I cannot be bothered to familiarise myself with.

Kudos! :D

[autobreadticon]

i cant really explain my method but here some examples

toys that have no changes and repackaged in different packaging/series are not counted , e.g Armada Unicron and universe 2.0 Unicron

However characters with significant modifications or repaints are included , Those with slight mod. animated Lockdown and Insiginia Voyager Optimus Prime (Earth mode) should not be included, repaints with significant names e.g Blazing Lockdown and Lockdown are counted as different toys.


Characteres with unique personalities should be counted individually
G1 Optimus Prime with Trailer and Roller should not be counted seperately
i don't think it should be based on packaging, G1 Reflector should represent 3 Transformer Toy, but the combined form is not included
, the toys should be counted based on intended toy character
so Cybertron Laserbeak should be counted

[griffin]

I like this idea in all but the combined mode part. I treat Transformers based on their fictional "sentience", which also comes from the names / tech specs / etc provided to them by the manufacturers. For example, Reflector. They each have separate robot identities, and are each independently sentient. This is as opposed to Optimus Prime, Roller and the trailer, which are not independently sentient, or pretender shells.

I have chosen this method for the reason that Transformers are , at the manufacturer's behest, "Robots in Disguise". They do not need to have an alternate form to continue to be a sentient robot, even though the may need to get their friends together to disguise themselves.

The exception I have here is Nebulan partners (which came with the toys) as they are accessories and not robots (using the US fiction as stated by the manufacturer on boxes, tech specs, etc).

While I understand griffin's proposal to base the collection count on "toys" as physical products, and believe this to be very valid, I prefer myself to base it on the sentient robot modes (or characters) which is how the figures are referred to by the shows, manufacturer tech specs, and fits into the "Robots in Disguise" concept.

I do accept that, and that was how I used to count my Transformers, based on character, not as 'mere toys'. However, the point here was to generate a counting method that made it possible to compare objectively acquired numbers with other collectors, and that means taking the subjective element out of it. This counting method isn't intended to replace your own method if you don't like it, but is meant to offer an easier alternative to counting a collection for the various collection polls held, or to compare tallys between different fans. If we have a collection poll or count comparisson, we just need an easier method than the 20+ article 'fan-voted' method, which in itself is a subjective method, and totals can't be relied upon to be accurate because many don't actually follow the entire UCM list of articles anyway.


I take your point here, but I can also see what Griffin is getting at. Instinctively, I want to count MM Combiners separately - each TF has an individual identity expressed through its own name and individual personality. However once we do that, it does become hard to justify not counting Nebulans individually.

The current UCM is increasingly unwieldy as we keep adding exceptions/clarifications, which is one reason why I tried to break it in half into "What Counts" and "What Doesn't Count". It does need further cleaning up, and I for instance would like to see what is/isn't a TF defined by no more than half a dozen clear principles. There are a fair few UCM Articles that could be rolled into the 4 that Griffin has stated.

Certainly the "What is a HasTak toy?" principle is a good one, but I think we also need to make some allowance for what we consider to be individual toys, discrete from HasTak marketing decisions. Since TFs are "Robots in Disguise", perhaps we should count them based on individual robot modes. Reflector would then count as 3. MM Combiners would count individually. Exceptions like Kicker and Alpha Quintesson are rare enough that we can include them by default.

The exceptions bit is why I wanted to generate an objective counting method, to prevent exceptions. Once you have an exception to a rule, you need to start listing the exceptions or the reason for the exceptions. It defeats the purpose of a simplified counting method. Treating the toys as mere toys, makes it easier to count, but there will still be some that could be debatable based on if multi-pack items can be considered mutually exclusive to each other.

The original idea I had was to just generate a Total Checklist, with all the toy products already listed as separate toy products, but as the list developed to an amazing length (covering TFs products from other countries, and varients and exclusives), and with more discussion on the 'unweidly' UCM started up, I felt I needed to post up my 'toy' counting method for people to consider as an easier alternative for comparing counts.

And as Kyle said above (quoted below), this is just a count for comparing collections or polls, to be in addition to what you personally have as a fan-based count. If we need to be doing a whole new, second count for comparison or polling, why not make it an easy, objective one, that doesn't rely on fan-subjective articles that either causes confusion, or are ignored anyway. And you can't get more objective than just perceiving the toys as 'mere toys' to get that second comparable count.


I like this as well. My mind (as a collector) always wanted to count like Griffin, while my heart (as a fan) always wanted to count like Tiby.

1) First number (Mind As Collector) considers a "complete" toy. A toy whose mould (not necessarily the toy itself) can be released individually or become a part of another package.

2) Second number (Heart As Fan) considers individual toy which is a "character". It does not have to be transformable or have an alt mode, as long as it is considered a "character".


I agree with most of that. It seems reasonable and fair.
Only problem I have is with what you would say counts as 2 and other count as 1, but everyone will have some gripe here or there
Mine is about the mini-con partners.
I think they should count separately because both figures can still function without the other, it may be reduced, but it still works.
Hasbro/Takara could still market either individually and they could still work, which they have done, they did it with Deluxe Armada Prime and a lot of the partner mini-cons
The mini-con is also interchangeable. In most cases, it doesn't really matter which mini-con you use with the bigger one, you can still get most of the gimmicks working with any mini-con

So for me, any figure that doesn't need the mini-con would count separately.
Figures like Overload with Rollout would count as 1 because Overload can't get to robot mode without Rollout, nor can he get to his shoulder cannon mode without Optimus. He would be stuck in Vehicle mode, which really needs something to drag it around (ie Prime or Rollout)
But Optimus Prime and Sparkplug would count as 2 because Prime could be sold without Sparkplug, or with any other mini-con and still be fine. Same can be said for Sparkplug, which has happened

The larger toy may still be playable without the smaller toy, but if ever sold without the Minicon parter, either loose or in packaging, the larger toy would be classed as incomplete by both seller and buyer. You could easily buy an Armada Optimus without Sparkplug, but the seller would be accused of deception or lying if they claimed it was complete. As a toy product, collectors and Hasbro consider Armada Optimus to be complete if it has Sparkplug. As a fan, it doesn't matter so much, because you treat them as two toys when you play or display them, but as an objective count to compare with others or to poll, the larger toy would be classed as incomplete without its minicon partner. Each item in a multi-pack needs to be mutally exclusive (both independant and not requiring the other to complete it) to count as separate (sellable) 'toy products'.


i cant really explain my method but here some examples
toys that have no changes and repackaged in different packaging/series are not counted , e.g Armada Unicron and universe 2.0 Unicron
Characteres with unique personalities should be counted individually
G1 Optimus Prime with Trailer and Roller should not be counted seperately
i don't think it should be based on packaging, G1 Reflector should represent 3 Transformer Toy, but the combined form is not included
, the toys should be counted based on intended toy character
so Cybertron Laserbeak should be counted

As your own personal 'fan-based' count, you can assess each by its character, but for this (second) objective *toy* counting method, it counts each as a 'mere toy product'. It is difficult for us committed fans to look at certain toys like Reflector, and not see it as 3 toys because it is 'written up as' three characters and that's how we see them in fiction. But transform *the toy* it into its alt mode, and pretend that it never had any fiction to it (bio-card or cartoon/comic etc), it would be easier to see it as a single 'toy product', because it is sold as a camera that splits into three components.
Not many fans count Scamper, Brunt, Fasttrack or Cog as separate toys in their count, but they are all individual *character* toys that are packaged with a larger toy. They don't even combine with the larger toy like Slammer or Sixgun do, but if you tried selling Metroplex without Scamper, would you be able to list it as complete? Same with selling Reflector. The individual character names were not product names, they were just on the bio-card, so trying to sell 'Reflector' without all three figures would require you to list it as incomplete.

As for the Unicron bit you mentioned (repacked toys that have no changes to their deco), I'll use a different toy for this example, because Unicron has a Minicon which can confuse this explination with the numbering. Using Energon Sharticon as an example, it was re-released in America in Universe packaging. If by chance you had both, like in a sealed collection, you have in your possession 2 Sharkticons. 2 Sharkticons is 2 toys in your possession that you have acquired. If you spent money acquiring a certain number of toys, you would want to reflect that expense in your count.
Remember, this is an objective counting method, so ignore what characters you are counting, and ask yourself, how many *toys* do you currently have in your possession? No matter how many multiples you have, you own in your possession that particular amount of *toys*. Fortunately, not many collectors have multiples, and they are usually a negligable amount in their collection count. The point is, if you see 40 Acid Storms in a room, you are looking at 40 Transformers toys that belong to one person, not 1 toy. The collection count, or more accurately, the possession count, needs to reflect all acquisitions currently owned.

But as mentioned above, this counting method isn't aimed at replacing your existing method if you don't want to, but does offer an easier alternative to generating an objective comparable figure to other fans' counts.

[Tiby]

Based on a plain objective method for counting toys as products, I agree with your system, Griffin. I also agree with your emphasis that this is not intended to take the fun or magic out of the figures, but rather catalogue them in a uniform way for comparison purposes only.

For example, we can't have "Jedi" as a religion in our census because the comparison data falls down and the answer does not assist the intended purpose of the census. In the same way, character / fiction / tech spec based counting does not assist a count or "census" of Transformer toys, for the purpose of such a census only.

For many of us this will mean 2 systems (our own preferred and the objective method discussed here). Naturally, there is no pressure or need for anyone to participate, unless they want to, as we simply end up with a number for objective, clinical comparison purposes. The end numbers should in no way detract from anyone's enjoyment of their collection or make them feel superior or inferior to another collector. As has been said before, it is not the size of the collection that counts, it is how you feel about it.

Thanks for the idea Griffin. You have my full support (although I do NOT look forward to going through my collection to re-count!!! :o )

[griffin]

In the end, these alternative counting methods are probably just moot anyway, as most will either prefer to just stick to their own counting method when asked to compare, or just don't have the time and patience to recount their collection to get a second comparable count.

I'm just sharing my current counting method, which is toy-based and not character-based, or fan-opinion-based. I don't expect anyone to adopt it or use it, but it's out there now as another counting method alongside the existing ones.
It will also allow others to see how I arrive at the collection count figure I will refer to, or sometimes have in my signature.

[griffin]

I do want to make it completely clear though, that this is just *another* counting method option, it isn't meant to replace any of the existing methods that are out there.
At the beginning of 2008 when we had that topic about your best and worst of 2007, or what you got for the year... I started tabulating two figures for my collection - figures that counted (mostly convertable figures) and items that I had felt didn't count (non-convertable, roleplay, unleashed etc). As the number of non-convertable Transformers toys grew to about 300 by the end of 2008, it was just too much of a hassle keeping track of essentially 'two collections'. I have one collection, and need one figure to reflect that.

It just didn't seem fair to be buying hundreds of Transformers(tm) Toys that don't convert, and not be able to count them. They are toys, they get played with, and they are Transformers(tm)... so why don't they count in a 'Transformers toy collection'? The Geewunners like me need to realise that toys don't have to be convertable to be released under the brand name of 'Transformers'. And lately, there has been a lot of toy-product sold as Transformers(tm) that don't convert. If it is a toy-product, it is part of a 'toy collection'. And a 'toy count' is obviously incomplete if you don't count all the toys in your possession/collection.

[GoktimusPrime]

So G1 Blackout only counts as 0.5 of a Transformer (or more accurately, only counts as a Transformer if you also have Spaceshot)?

[Golden Phoenix]

The larger toy may still be playable without the smaller toy, but if ever sold without the Minicon parter, either loose or in packaging, the larger toy would be classed as incomplete by both seller and buyer. You could easily buy an Armada Optimus without Sparkplug, but the seller would be accused of deception or lying if they claimed it was complete. As a toy product, collectors and Hasbro consider Armada Optimus to be complete if it has Sparkplug. As a fan, it doesn't matter so much, because you treat them as two toys when you play or display them, but as an objective count to compare with others or to poll, the larger toy would be classed as incomplete without its minicon partner. Each item in a multi-pack needs to be mutally exclusive (both independant and not requiring the other to complete it) to count as separate (sellable) 'toy products'.

But couldn't you say he same about the mini-con 3 packs. Because they are teams. So if you sold 2/3 of them, you would say that the team or set isn't complete.

[griffin]

So G1 Blackout only counts as 0.5 of a Transformer (or more accurately, only counts as a Transformer if you also have Spaceshot)?

It is still a playable toy, so it counts as one if you have one or both. If you have one figure, you have an incomplete, playable toy. If you have the second you have a complete playable toy(if you have all the accessories as well). Basically, if you are one of the few who doesn't get some Micromasters in their pairs, it counts as 1 with the first one, and getting the second just completes that 1. You list the pair on your roster/checklist as a single pair, and just note if it is complete or not, based on if you have both figures and their accessories.

The T3 counting method at least identifies each toy by its primary purpose/gimmick, and the *toy* in question is the *jet* called Blackout and Spaceshot, (or even the set packaged as 'Anti-Aircraft Base'). Some toys have the biped mode as its primary purpose, but most prioritise the alt-mode, as seen by how at least 95% of Transformers are packaged in that mode.

No collection count method allows you to count fractions, reguardless of what is missing. You count it as 1 if no other toy on the checklist needs it (Item 3) and is playable as part of the named figure on the checklist (Item 4). Blackout needs Spaceshot to fulfil its purpose as a 'Jet Transformers toy', so can't be counted separately on the checklist.

This method requires fans to resist focussing on the characters, and count them as 'mere toys' when doing a 'toy count'. The jet is the toy that separates into two robots. We wouldn't see either released separately by Hasbro as a toy that only turns into 'half a jet' and nothing else.

Also, while I think of it. One of their marketting tag lines may be 'Robots in Disguise', but dismissing a toy because it doesn't convert into an item of disguise would be like dismissing any toy that isn't 'More than Meets the Eye', because quite a few redecos are quite underwhelming lately...


But couldn't you say he same about the mini-con 3 packs. Because they are teams. So if you sold 2/3 of them, you would say that the team or set isn't complete.

As per Item 3, any multi-pack item that can be (and sometimes is) sold separately, because no other item in the pack needs them to classify them as complete, they count as separate 'toys'. We are counting individual toys, not teams, so 'complete' relates to the individual toys, not the teams.
As mentioned in the last paragraph of the first post, this is a counting method for toys, not packaging. If you have a sealed multi-pack of 3 toys, you own 3 toys. Two just don't magically disappear. You have in your possession as part of your collection, 3 toys, so why not count them as 3 toys? And if you are counting teams as 1 toy, most TFs toys are part of teams, which would make your overall count rather small.
Each Minicon in a 3-pack is it's own playable toy. Just like the Gen1 cassette 2-packs, these would have been sold as 3-packs because it was the smallest price point at the time, and each team was planned to a theme or bonus combining feature. But just like Combiner Teams, these are three toys that combine *in addition* to their primary, individual playability.

As for reselling, if you are selling a Land Military 3-pack, you might describe the set as being 'complete', as a 3-pack, but if you were selling each Minicon separately, you certainly wouldn't be calling Wreckage as 'incomplete' just because it is on its own.
That's how it is easy to differentiate Minicon partners from Minicons in multi-packs - if you try to sell each toy, like on ebay, each multi-pack Minicon can be sold 'complete' on its own, but each partner Minicon is needed to 'complete' the larger figure. If you saw 'Complete Armada Optimus' on ebay, you would expect it comes with Sparkplug. If you saw 'Complete Minicon Wreckage' on ebay, you would only expect Wreckage, as it doesn't need Knock Out and Bonecrusher to complete it. Being part of a team or multi-pack doesn't require it to remain in that 'set combination' to be considered complete. Otherwise, by that logic, things like the Tiger Camo Combaticons (which were never released separately) could only ever be sold 'complete' as a set and only ever count as 1.
And how about the recent Universe Minicon 12-pack? If the individual Minicons can't be counted because they have to be with 11 other Minicons, you would have trouble counting the same toys being released soon individually?

[Golden Phoenix]

As per Item 3, any multi-pack item that can be (and sometimes is) sold separately, because no other item in the pack needs them to classify them as complete, they count as separate 'toys'. We are counting individual toys, not teams, so 'complete' relates to the individual toys, not the teams.
As mentioned in the last paragraph of the first post, this is a counting method for toys, not packaging. If you have a sealed multi-pack of 3 toys, you own 3 toys. Two just don't magically disappear. You have in your possession as part of your collection, 3 toys, so why not count them as 3 toys? And if you are counting teams as 1 toy, most TFs toys are part of teams, which would make your overall count rather small.
Each Minicon in a 3-pack is it's own playable toy. Just like the Gen1 cassette 2-packs, these would have been sold as 3-packs because it was the smallest price point at the time, and each team was planned to a theme or bonus combining feature. But just like Combiner Teams, these are three toys that combine *in addition* to their primary, individual playability.

As for reselling, if you are selling a Land Military 3-pack, you might describe the set as being 'complete', as a 3-pack, but if you were selling each Minicon separately, you certainly wouldn't be calling Wreckage as 'incomplete' just because it is on its own.
That's how it is easy to differentiate Minicon partners from Minicons in multi-packs - if you try to sell each toy, like on ebay, each multi-pack Minicon can be sold 'complete' on its own, but each partner Minicon is needed to 'complete' the larger figure. If you saw 'Complete Armada Optimus' on ebay, you would expect it comes with Sparkplug. If you saw 'Complete Minicon Wreckage' on ebay, you would only expect Wreckage, as it doesn't need Knock Out and Bonecrusher to complete it. Being part of a team or multi-pack doesn't require it to remain in that 'set combination' to be considered complete. Otherwise, by that logic, things like the Tiger Camo Combaticons (which were never released separately) could only ever be sold 'complete' as a set and only ever count as 1.
And how about the recent Universe Minicon 12-pack? If the individual Minicons can't be counted because they have to be with 11 other Minicons, you would have trouble counting the same toys being released soon individually?
So the mini-con teams count as multi packs where the minicons that come with larger figures count as accessories...right?

[Kyle]

It is still a playable toy, so it counts as one if you have one or both. If you have one figure, you have an incomplete, playable toy. If you have the second you have a complete playable toy(if you have all the accessories as well). Basically, if you are one of the few who doesn't get some Micromasters in their pairs, it counts as 1 with the first one, and getting the second just completes that 1. You list the pair on your roster/checklist as a single pair, and just note if it is complete or not, based on if you have both figures and their accessories.

I like this. Sounds very good to me!

[SofaMan]

I'm quite persuaded by some of the responses. I agree that ideally any criteria should to be clear, simple and few.

Bearing in mind however that when we poll on this, we only poll to the nearest 100, is using T3 rather than UCM going to skew the results significantly? Polling only to the nearest 100 already throws huge amounts of noise (around 5%) into the stats even for those of us with collections around or above the 1000 mark. Smaller collections of 200 or so could be looking at noise in the 25% range.

I guess I'm asking this: Is the margin of error generated by using pretty much whatever subjective (or quasi-objective) counting method seems best greater than the rounding error? Is it really statistically significant for comparison purposes?

If we're being entirely honest, any voluntary poll of this kind is only quasi-scientific anyway, since it's all self-assessed and reported. It would only be truly scientific if a disinterested 3rd party came to each of our homes and counted our collections using their own independent criteria.

[griffin]

So the mini-con teams count as multi packs where the minicons that come with larger figures count as accessories...right?

It's like the Blackout and Spaceshot example, they are listed as a pair, but neither is an accessory to the other. It's just more difficult to accept because the Minicon and partner robot aren't the same size. If you list the pair in words on a checklist, it makes it look a little more obvious, but as toys, it is a little more challanging to accept. Majority of people would get Sparkplug and Optimus together, and it would count as one toy because Optimus needs Sparkplug to be complete. If you got Optimus first, it is easier to see it as an incomplete toy, that counts as 1. If you got Sparkplug first, you would essentially have an incomplete Optimus-Sparkplug toy, but a playable incomplete toy still counts as 1. Getting the remaining figure in the pair is like getting missing accessories - it doesn't add to your score, it just lets you label the *toy* as 'complete'.

The Minicon issue was the hardest for me to reconcile, and I still would like to count Minicons separately, but if I did that, I would have to list all my large Armada toys in my records as 'incomplete'. This counting method purely aims to be able to classify EVERY item as 'complete' at the same time. Listing one toy separately as complete at the expense of another toy that needs it, leads to conflict and confusion among fans. Designating an objective measure is bound to meet resistance or rejection from subjective fans. After all, we are fans of the characters and the toys, not just the toys.

[Golden Phoenix]

It's like the Blackout and Spaceshot example, they are listed as a pair, but neither is an accessory to the other. It's just more difficult to accept because the Minicon and partner robot aren't the same size. If you list the pair in words on a checklist, it makes it look a little more obvious, but as toys, it is a little more challanging to accept. Majority of people would get Sparkplug and Optimus together, and it would count as one toy because Optimus needs Sparkplug to be complete. If you got Optimus first, it is easier to see it as an incomplete toy, that counts as 1. If you got Sparkplug first, you would essentially have an incomplete Optimus-Sparkplug toy, but a playable incomplete toy still counts as 1. Getting the remaining figure in the pair is like getting missing accessories - it doesn't add to your score, it just lets you label the *toy* as 'complete'.

The Minicon issue was the hardest for me to reconcile, and I still would like to count Minicons separately, but if I did that, I would have to list all my large Armada toys in my records as 'incomplete'. This counting method purely aims to be able to classify EVERY item as 'complete' at the same time. Listing one toy separately as complete at the expense of another toy that needs it, leads to conflict and confusion among fans. Designating an objective measure is bound to meet resistance or rejection from subjective fans. After all, we are fans of the characters and the toys, not just the toys.

Ahh. I get you now

[griffin]

I'm quite persuaded by some of the responses. I agree that ideally any criteria should to be clear, simple and few.

Bearing in mind however that when we poll on this, we only poll to the nearest 100, is using T3 rather than UCM going to skew the results significantly? Polling only to the nearest 100 already throws huge amounts of noise (around 5%) into the stats even for those of us with collections around or above the 1000 mark. Smaller collections of 200 or so could be looking at noise in the 25% range.

I guess I'm asking this: Is the margin of error generated by using pretty much whatever subjective (or quasi-objective) counting method seems best greater than the rounding error? Is it really statistically significant for comparison purposes?

If we're being entirely honest, any voluntary poll of this kind is only quasi-scientific anyway, since it's all self-assessed and reported. It would only be truly scientific if a disinterested 3rd party came to each of our homes and counted our collections using their own independent criteria.

I'm not advocating a replacement of the fan-based UCM method with this toy-based T3 method, because the previous poll data can't be cross-referenced with new data that is acquired by different means.

Your comment about count variance - I think it would be interesting to see how many people who posted in the recent UCM poll actually followed the UCM method EXACTLY, and how many just submitted their own count based on their own personal counting method, and see if it would have changed the results anyway. In other words, if it doesn't change anything significantly, it probably wouldn't matter what counting method people use when submitting their collection count to the polls.

[Golden Phoenix]

Just wondering if the Revoltech figures would count.
I know they were made by another company, but it would have been licensed. And they are toys

[liegeprime]

Just wondering if the Revoltech figures would count.
I know they were made by another company, but it would have been licensed. And they are toys

+1 on this and erm Mr potato head as Optimash counts, does he? But then Im a bit too lazy to recount my collection into this. Im gonna seriously loose a lot in the count - minicon, micromasters wise. :o

[GoktimusPrime]

liegeprime: I'd like to see what your collection count would be under the Substitution Rationale system, which is similar to the UCM only that multiples and 'substitutable variants' don't count. ;) :)

[griffin]

Easy one first - Optimash Prime.
1 - Is it an official Transformers(tm) product (produced by Hasbro, TakaraTomy, Kenner, Tonka, GiGi, etc)?
Yes, it was produced by Hasbro (Playskool is part of Hasbro, like Kenner was part of Hasbro during Beast Wars).

2 - Is it a toy product (it's intended purpose is for it to be played with)?
Yes. It isn't like a statue or clothing. It was intended for really young kids to play with it.

3 - If it is part of a mult-pack, is it intended to be a stand alone toy, or is required to complete another figure in the pack?
There are actually two items in the pack (Mr Head and the Truck), but Optimash would be considered incomplete without all the accessories, which includes the truck. So the entire pack counts as one toy.

4 - Is it in a playable condition (must be the primary 'named' figure)?
That depends on what you have, but based on the other three items, Optimash Prime counts in the T3 count.

Revoltech is a little trickier, because I'm not sure if TakaraTomy produces them for whoever distributes the Revoltech line, or if they just license the Revoltech producers to create Transformers-branded products.
But we'll put them to the test anyway:

1 - Is it an official Transformers(tm) product (produced by Hasbro, TakaraTomy, Kenner, Tonka, GiGi, etc)?
Revoltech Transformers characters are either produced by TakaraTomy on behalf of a third party (like BotCon toys, Minivehicle keychains, Korean TFs, and some fast food toys), OR, TakaraTomy have licensed a 3rd party to produce Transformers(tm) products on their behalf (like most fast food toys, and some Euro TFs). Either way, they are official Transformers products, because they are authorised directly or indirectly by either of the 2 owners of the Brand. So that's a yes.

2 - Is it a toy product (it's intended purpose is for it to be played with)?
Yes. As poseable and displayable as they may be, most would play with them otherwise the highly articulated limbs would be redundant.

3 - If it is part of a mult-pack, is it intended to be a stand alone toy, or is required to complete another figure in the pack?
They are all sold separately (that I'm aware of).

4 - Is it in a playable condition (must be the primary 'named' figure)?
Again, this depends on what you personally have in your possession. But based on the above testing, Revoltech counts.

For testing of certain types/series of items to see if they count according to the T3 method, you only really need to test it against the first 2 items. The 3rd item is only really necessary for testing individual items for a list, while the 4th item is only necessary for items in your possession.
How easy is that? :)

[griffin]

Im gonna seriously loose a lot in the count - minicon, micromasters wise. :o

I think it would be offset by all the non-convertable Toys that would now count in the 'toy collection'. For me, I lost about 150 with the Minicons and Micromasters, but gained about 250 with non-convertable toys.
This counting method wasn't aiming to find a way of increasing the 'quotable' count, so I was happy to only end up with a change of about 4.5% from my previous counting method.

[liegeprime]

liegeprime: I'd like to see what your collection count would be under the Substitution Rationale system, which is similar to the UCM only that multiples and 'substitutable variants' don't count. ;) :)

Well it (SRS) wouldn have that much impact on the multiples I do have. Being mostly are only Unicronians - Deluxe tank and Scrapmetal and a few terrorcons. Mebbe some of the G1 minibots. As these are the ones Im open to buy multiples of for my "in my head" neverending battle storyline and as youve mentioned different displaying logic.:D Um do you have a link to the SRS so I can take a gander on the so called differences with UCM? I know, Im lazy to use the search facility:D

I did some thinking T3 and initial counting ( like a skimming count) would prolly do not much damage counting wise after all since Ive got customized items which are mostly just repaints so should offset the count just fine. Also most of my minicons are from their own sets (of 3) and not partners of bigger bots since I really didnt like Armada and only got a handful of from this line, heck Ive even got more Beast machines stuff than Armada :o
But as Ive said Im a bit lazy to go about counting this now, would prolly do it on a day off ( with no housechores waiting on me :P) as Im a bit of a slow counter. Reminds me I havent updated my database, not that there's much to update it with though.

[GoktimusPrime]

Um do you have a link to the SRS so I can take a gander on the so called differences with UCM? I know, Im lazy to use the search facility
You wouldn't find it if you did - the SRS polls were done in 2005, long before this current incarnation of the OzFormers board came along. ;)

The SRS is basically the same as the UCM only that multiples don't count a "substitutable variants" don't count - e.g.: Universe Tankor and Henkei Octane count as 1 Transformer, not 2.

[liegeprime]

What of minicons, theyve had repaints - eg: the ones that form Starsaber and the ones that form dark saber - very same one but have different names in their "darkened forms" ?

[loophole]

Okay I've just read the last 3 pages in one sitting and i must say it makes alot of sense when you are counting your collection as toys which they are and probally should be counted as such anyway.
Minicons however seem to screw things up a little bit, but the way Griffin has decided to deal with them is probally the simplest way to do it otherwise you end up counting characters and not toys and you dont want to do that. Which must have been very hard to decide not to count minicon partners but thats what they are is partners just like target masters or headmasters (i think ive got that right my head is hurting a little :p).

[GoktimusPrime]

otherwise you end up counting characters and not toys and you dont want to do that.
I do. Hence why I would personally count Spyglass, Spectro and Viewfinder as 3 not 1, and likewise Blackout and Spaceshot as 2 not 1.

[griffin]

The problem with counting characters instead of toys, is that you get contradictions in what is elligible to be counted. Actionmaster partners and City-formers' partners like Scamper and Fasttrack would therefore count, as they are separately sentient characters and toys.

Combiners like Reflector and 2-in-1 Micromasters, are usually being processed in robot mode, instead of the only alt-mode, or purpose as a toy, they have. Each robot in Reflector is an incomplete toy if you process it as a 'Convertable Transformers Toy', because it can't turn into anything on its own. Reflector was one that I really wanted to find a way to count as 3, but only because I was looking at the toy as a Fan, and saw the characters instead of the 'mere toy'.
When doing a *toy count*, take a step back from the fan-focused character element, and process each toy as a toy.

One reason I wanted to take the bold step of taking the toy-perspective over the character-perspective in this counting method, is because it is easier to talk to non-fans about it that way. You have someone who doesn't know much about Transformers and the whole character/mythology side of things, and they ask, 'how many Transformers do you have?', they want to know how many toys you have in your collection, not how many characters. They see a shelf or room full of Transformers, and they see toys. Even if they don't mention the word 'toys' in their query of your collection count, it is inferred that they want to know how many toys you have. So do you say to those people, Robot Heroes aren't toys? Kicker isn't a toy? Roleplay weapons aren't toys? Robot Replicas aren't toys? Or even Decoys aren't toys? When they ask, 'if they aren't toys, what are they?', you're left with telling them that they are items sold as toys, but aren't actually toys. Ooookay...
Just because *some* fans say they aren't toys, doesn't mean it is true. Even if you let the consumers decide what a toy is, and not the producer of the actual products, we are looking at a couple hundred collectors in a country of 20million-ish. Can we really think that the general population would see any of those above listed Transformers products, and not refer to them as Transformers Toys? I think the collectors would be democratically outnumbered on their opinion of a toy if the masses classify anything intended to be played with (and mostly sold in the toy section of a store), as a toy.

Basically, I wanted to be able to show people my collection, or photos of it, and when they ask either:
How many do you have?
How many Transformers do you have?
How many Transformers Toys do you have?
The answer is the same, because the question, or what they want to know, is the same. And it's an answer I can now give to cover the entire collection of my toys.

Essentially, justification for this toy-based count was to satisfy the curiosity of the general masses, who just want to know how many toys I own.

[GoktimusPrime]

The problem with counting characters instead of toys, is that you get contradictions in what is elligible to be counted. Actionmaster partners and City-formers' partners like Scamper and Fasttrack would therefore count, as they are separately sentient characters and toys.
As a kid I would count City-formers, ActionMaster Partners and even Nebulans. It wasn't done with the intention to "cheat" and create a cheap way to inflate collection numbers - this was before the internet age so it wasn't as if I was interacting with other TF collectors to compare with. But it was simply because I was counting TF characters.

And this system appears to have created some contradictions too (e.g.: certain Mini-Cons)... I suppose at the end you need to just be aware which 'contradictions' you're willing to tolerate. ;)


Just because *some* fans say they aren't toys, doesn't mean it is true.
And the same could be said of City-formers, Action Master partners, Nebulans, Roller and even Pretender shells!! (I've never counted Pretender shells separately, but there are people out there who consider them as toys in their own right - Gunrunner's shell works autonomously as a toy car! :p).

[1orion2many]

:confused:I have tried to read all the posts but it gave me a headache, it was becoming to convoluted. I don't collect the non transforming toys so this has never been an issue for me. I count minicons as individual items as they are in their own right sentinent beings, Reflector I count as 3 for the same reason or any other combiner. I'm sure all this has already been covered in other posts but I thought I'd blow a bit of hot air around as well:p:D. At the end of the day as far as I'm concerned being an individual sentinent being and transforming(or part there of(yes Action Masters count due to their partner(feeling ill saying that lol))) and I do count multiples, this I have found has kept my counting method easy and simple as far as I'm concerned:D.

[jaydisc]

I like the concepts here but I gave up on a unified counting system ages ago. One of the goals of the iTFDB is to include a few default counting methods (e.g. the UCM) and then allow each collector to set THEIR OWN criteria of what counts and then any time spent browsing other's collections would always present the count in the choice of the beholder.

But, back on topic, I still think there is ambiguity as to what is a playable toy. Where would Robot Heroes or Robot Replicas fall in? I'm sure some consider them statues whereas some kids could happily "play" with them.

[Golden Phoenix]

But, back on topic, I still think there is ambiguity as to what is a playable toy. Where would Robot Heroes or Robot Replicas fall in? I'm sure some consider them statues whereas some kids could happily "play" with them.

They are poseable, all be it limited

[griffin]

This counting method came about when I started doing up a new checklist. I wanted to list everything as separately as I could but still be able to list each item as 'complete'. Things like partners to Minicons required the Minicon, in order for me to be able to tick them off as 'complete' on my new checklist. While things like the 2-in-1 Micromasters needed each other as a pair in the listing as well, for the description and accessory listings on the checklist.
The figurines, small Titaniums, Robot heroes and Robot Replicas may not be as easy to see as toys, but if people (kids mostly) get them to play with as toys, they can count as toys AND display pieces. After all, most of us don't play with our collections (much), so does that mean our 'displayed toys' are not toys if we no longer play with them?
But like I've said before, this isn't a counting method I think people should be adopting if you have your own preferred method as a fan. I just wanted to explain my new counting method, so that when people see me refer to it, they can find out what I am referring to. And people who aren't into TFs, are told how many *toys* I have when they ask.

[GoktimusPrime]

The word "toy" has a very broad meaning - as even static display pieces count as well (e.g.: statues, busts, inanimate porcelain dolls etc.). In the context of stuff like Transformers, when I say "toys" I'm really referring to "action figures." Semantically Mighty Muggs count as toys too.

I like how the Clerks toys, which shamelessly had no articulation or play value, were actually called "Inaction Figures (http://www.jpbenterprise.com/Pictures/D0086-ClerksBobIAFB.jpg)." :)

[griffin]

According the the Macquarie Dictionary, 'Toy' is - 'an object, often a small imitation of some familiar thing, for children or others to play with'. Statues, busts, inanimate porcelain dolls etc., are not intended to be played with, and rarely do, so 'static display pieces' doesn't come into the 'broad meaning' of what a toy is. And if you are counting 'action figures', an action figure would be any toy with articulation, and last I checked, Robot Heroes, Robot Replicas, and even small Titaniums have articulation. Often to the same level of articulation of a number of early Gen1 toys...
But when it comes down to including Actionmasters, the other non-convertable, articulated figures, should count. They were all part of the official toyline.

[GoktimusPrime]

And if you are counting 'action figures', an action figure would be any toy with articulation, and last I checked, Robot Heroes, Robot Replicas, and even small Titaniums have articulation. Often to the same level of articulation of a number of early Gen1 toys...
That's true... it makes me think about whether those toys count as action figures or miniatures, or are they a hybrid of both?

<Rantage Engine: ON>

History of Action Figures
Action figures evolved from dolls. In 1963 a toy designer (Stan Weston) saw the success of Barbie for girls and came up with the idea of making a military themed line of dolls for boys. He pitched the idea to Hasbro who accepted it and thus G.I. Joe was born, along with the term "action figure" for obvious marketing reasons. Takara later adapted G.I. Joe as Henshin Cyborg (http://www.microforever.com/henshinindex.htm), even using the same torso mould as G.I. Joe. Henshin Cyborg was then reduced to a 10cm scale and released as Microman Zone - and we all know the link between Microman and Transformers. ;)

History of Miniatures
Miniatures are basically toy soldiers. Military figurines date back to ancient times with tin soldiers dating back to 1730s Germany with the British introducing hollow-casting (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hollow_casting) in 1893 making them far cheaper and lighter, which in turn would lead to things like Army Men (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Army_men). The earliest example of a miniatures war game was Little Wars (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_Wars) by H.G. Wells. This image (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/e/e7/Hgwells.jpg) shows the English novelist playing miniature war games with his friends despite being a renowned pacifist (he argues that war gaming is cathartic).

"This Warhammer cost me 40k!" - Gryphon Rider (Warcraft III)

<Rantage Engine: OFF>

[Golden Phoenix]

"This Warhammer cost me 40k!" - Gryphon Rider (Warcraft III)

LOL

[Hot Rodimus]

LoL how true...... and this is coming from someone who only painted mini's that he liked and instead of building an army for game use.