The Energon Pub

I wouldn't necessarily agree with that. Though it is true that in comic books, death is not always permanent, whether you're a robot or Human, but that ususally comes down to the popularity of the character. In the case of TransFormers, it was based upon what toys were coming out.

Tramp wrote:I wouldn't necessarily agree with that. Though it is true that in comic books, death is not always permanent, whether you're a robot or Human, but that ususally comes down to the popularity of the character. In the case of TransFormers, it was based upon what toys were coming out.

I see what your sayin but there were a few Characters that died in the Underbase saga that the toys series got a remold of later on.Who know how they would have proseeded with the books counterpart of that figure.....would he have been a new charactor or would he have been rebuilt?We'll never know.

Unfortunately you're right, we won't. Even then though, if they were, it could still be chalked up to stasis lock, not true death. Even dramatic system damage is not usually truely fatal and can eventually be repaired. And that is what we see in the Marvel comics. Most of these characters had dramatic system damage, and were, for all int3ents and purposes "destroyed", but they could be repaired eventually. It really takes sustained and immence amounts of damage, severe damage to their neuro-circuitry, or destruction of their brain cases to permanently kill a TransFormer.

Tramp wrote:Unfortunately you're right, we won't. Even then though, if they were, it could still be chalked up to stasis lock, not true death. Even dramatic system damage is not usually truely fatal and can eventually be repaired. And that is what we see in the Marvel comics. Most of these characters had dramatic system damage, and were, for all int3ents and purposes "destroyed", but they could be repaired eventually. It really takes sustained and immence amounts of damage, severe damage to their neuro-circuitry, or destruction of their brain cases to permanently kill a TransFormer.

I know of one that would have blowen your theroy out of the water.Scoponok was planed to return as a Action Master if that line had continued.To bring him back with your thinking would have been imposible.Not only was his Transformer body destroyed but his human partner was also killed in the battle with Unicron.And even if that failed his first mold was rerleased as Black Zarak.Most likely they would have had him as the same person if the book continued.And the fact is adding the term "stasis lock" to the Marvel G1 universe is as you called it a "retcon" and we as fan can not retcon some one elses work on a offical level.The fact is that when the writers wrote the stories it was there intent that they stayed dead.As it stands in the Marvel G1 almost every TF that died left a good amount of remains.And it seems that all they have to do is leave somthing behind so it can be repaired.The concept of a spark in the Marvel G1 is almost imposible to beleave.Do you remember when Optimus dies and was copyed onto a floppy dick?Are you going to tell me that all the info that must be stored in Primes brain could fil on a floppy?Or that a floppy could contail a spark for such a long time?

sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote:

Tramp wrote:Unfortunately you're right, we won't. Even then though, if they were, it could still be chalked up to stasis lock, not true death. Even dramatic system damage is not usually truely fatal and can eventually be repaired. And that is what we see in the Marvel comics. Most of these characters had dramatic system damage, and were, for all int3ents and purposes "destroyed", but they could be repaired eventually. It really takes sustained and immence amounts of damage, severe damage to their neuro-circuitry, or destruction of their brain cases to permanently kill a TransFormer.

I know of one that would have blowen your theroy out of the water.Scoponok was planed to return as a Action Master if that line had continued.To bring him back with your thinking would have been imposible.Not only was his Transformer body destroyed but his human partner was also killed in the battle with Unicron.And even if that failed his first mold was rerleased as Black Zarak.Most likely they would have had him as the same person if the book continued.And the fact is adding the term "stasis lock" to the Marvel G1 universe is as you called it a "retcon" and we as fan can not retcon some one elses work on a offical level.The fact is that when the writers wrote the stories it was there intent that they stayed dead.As it stands in the Marvel G1 almost every TF that died left a good amount of remains.And it seems that all they have to do is leave somthing behind so it can be repaired.The concept of a spark in the Marvel G1 is almost imposible to beleave.Do you remember when Optimus dies and was copyed onto a floppy dick?Are you going to tell me that all the info that must be stored in Primes brain could fil on a floppy?Or that a floppy could contail a spark for such a long time?

In all actuallity, according to the story, yes, his entire mind was indeed stored on that disk which is why he was able to be reborn. Skorponok is a little different. His body was heavily damaged, and yes, Lord Zarak was killed. But remember, Fortress Maximus' original headmaster partner, Galen, was also killed earlier, only to be replaced by Spike Witwicky. The latent engrams of Fortress Maximus still remained in the body where the headmaster linkage was, which is why he could survive the loss of Galen. The same is true of Skorponok, his body could still be repaired, and a new head built, or a new headmaster partner chosen, because his latent engrams, which were no longer part of the head itself, were still intact. That is how he could survive and be reborn. As for general TF resurrection, no, it isn't a matter of any part of them surviving. Their minds need to survive. Their brains need to survive.

OK, Tramp, can you make your mind up on ANYTHING? First you say they have to have the "Spark" now they have to have the "Brain?" Once again, you're backpeddling and changing your mind. It's your OPINION that that's how they need to survive, not fact. The fact is, Transformers are machines, and Starscream has a mutant indestructable spark ONLY IN THE CARTOON. Not the comics, because he never comes back as a ghost in the comics. Again, it's your ASSUMPTION that his spark is indestructable in the comics, based on your OPINION, not fact. Why is it that you seem to be the only one who's come up with any of these ludicrous theories? I mean, half of these bullcrap half-truthed born theories of yours I've only ever heard of FROM YOU.

Gah, double post. Goddamn crappy Opera browser...

Damolisher wrote:OK, Tramp, can you make your mind up on ANYTHING? First you say they have to have the "Spark" now they have to have the "Brain?" Once again, you're backpeddling and changing your mind. It's your OPINION that that's how they need to survive, not fact. The fact is, Transformers are machines, and Starscream has a mutant indestructable spark ONLY IN THE CARTOON. Not the comics, because he never comes back as a ghost in the comics. Again, it's your ASSUMPTION that his spark is indestructable in the comics, based on your OPINION, not fact. Why is it that you seem to be the only one who's come up with any of these ludicrous theories? I mean, half of these bullcrap half-truthed born theories of yours I've only ever heard of FROM YOU.

No, Marvel just never addressed the issue, and The DW comice do say that Starscream has and Inderstuctible spark. Not only that, but it has been shown in the later series as well that his spark is indestructible, namely AEC. So, no, there is no backpedalling.

I have a theory that coincides with G1/BW continuity. As we discovered in the g1 episode when the Decepticons find SkyFire in the ice (cant remember the episode name) before the war Starscream was a scientist. Who knows what kind of things he was researching or what experiments he might have developed? Maybe he was obsessed with eternal life and developed a way to make one's spark survive beyond death?

Just a thought....

Tramp wrote:

Damolisher wrote:OK, Tramp, can you make your mind up on ANYTHING? First you say they have to have the "Spark" now they have to have the "Brain?" Once again, you're backpeddling and changing your mind. It's your OPINION that that's how they need to survive, not fact. The fact is, Transformers are machines, and Starscream has a mutant indestructable spark ONLY IN THE CARTOON. Not the comics, because he never comes back as a ghost in the comics. Again, it's your ASSUMPTION that his spark is indestructable in the comics, based on your OPINION, not fact. Why is it that you seem to be the only one who's come up with any of these ludicrous theories? I mean, half of these bullcrap half-truthed born theories of yours I've only ever heard of FROM YOU.

No, Marvel just never addressed the issue, and The DW comice do say that Starscream has and Inderstuctible spark. Not only that, but it has been shown in the later series as well that his spark is indestructible, namely AEC. So, no, there is no backpedalling.

They're basing SS's spark off the cartoon. Dreamwave have their own continuity BUT base elements on the cartoon. However you can't use Dreamwave's comics to fill in gaps in the cartoon, because it;'s not officially the cartoon canon.They borrow elements, but it's like an alternate universe. And no, it wasn't addressed in A/E/C, because Cybertron is a series on it's own in Japan, and Cybertron can't override the original story, and in Energon, he was brought back from death by Unicron. You can't just claim that one Japanese story (Your manga) which over rides something we're gotten over here in our comics is canon, and yet our version of a Japanese cartoon, which alters the original story is canon. You can't do one and not the other.

And if you;'re addressing the end of the series, Starscream was in hell. Otherwise, he was bought back by Unicron/Alpha Q from the dead, just like Megatron was in Energon. Starscream was never seen as a ghost in Armada, and I believe Nightscream was a new character in Superlink, however, I may be wrong on that.

Damolisher wrote:They're basing SS's spark off the cartoon. Dreamwave have their own continuity BUT base elements on the cartoon. However you can't use Dreamwave's comics to fill in gaps in the cartoon, because it;'s not officially the cartoon canon.They borrow elements, but it's like an alternate universe. And no, it wasn't addressed in A/E/C, because Cybertron is a series on it's own in Japan, and Cybertron can't override the original story, and in Energon, he was brought back from death by Unicron. You can't just claim that one Japanese story (Your manga) which over rides something we're gotten over here in our comics is canon, and yet our version of a Japanese cartoon, which alters the original story is canon. You can't do one and not the other.

And if you;'re addressing the end of the series, Starscream was in hell. Otherwise, he was bought back by Unicron/Alpha Q from the dead, just like Megatron was in Energon. Starscream was never seen as a ghost in Armada, and I believe Nightscream was a new character in Superlink, however, I may be wrong on that.

Regardless, we are still talking aobut something that spans multiple continuities, and this is a discussion about multiple continuities. The very fact that both the cartoon and DW comics address this issue, (and yes, the cartoon was the originator of it) as does Beast Wars, which has also been tied into the DW series, shows that the issue of Starscream's indestructible spark is not isolated to just the G1 cartoon like you are trying to claim. On top of that, as far as AEC is concerned I am limited only to my knowledge of the US series, not the Japanese versions since I have not seen them, Regardless, we see Starscream completely obliterated at the end of Armada and come back as a spectre in Energon, and at the end of Cybertron Landmine goes in search of Starscream after getting information that he mighr still be alive.

Beast Wars was a bloody continuation of the G1 cartoon, for crying out loud, stop trying to imply it's seperate. And that's great, but that's the story the English Scriptwriters came up with, and as far as I'm concerned, it doesn't count, because it's not the real story. Micron Legend and Superlink are continuations of each other, Galaxy Force is NOT, the only time it's related is when you're referring to Cybertron, which is only linked by a few dubbing alterations. And as you are only knowledgable of the English versions, that makes your argument in those cases irrelevant, since you're treading into unfamiliar territory. And in any case, we're not talking all continuities anyway. Take this post from Loki120 on the first page:

Loki120 wrote:Ummmm, the only place that was mentioned was Beast Wars, at which point we're talking about cartoon continuity here, not comics...so not the Underbase.

Therefore, once again, WRONG.[/quote]

Tramp wrote:

Damolisher wrote:OK, Tramp, can you make your mind up on ANYTHING? First you say they have to have the "Spark" now they have to have the "Brain?" Once again, you're backpeddling and changing your mind. It's your OPINION that that's how they need to survive, not fact. The fact is, Transformers are machines, and Starscream has a mutant indestructable spark ONLY IN THE CARTOON. Not the comics, because he never comes back as a ghost in the comics. Again, it's your ASSUMPTION that his spark is indestructable in the comics, based on your OPINION, not fact. Why is it that you seem to be the only one who's come up with any of these ludicrous theories? I mean, half of these bullcrap half-truthed born theories of yours I've only ever heard of FROM YOU.

No, Marvel just never addressed the issue, and The DW comice do say that Starscream has and Inderstuctible spark. Not only that, but it has been shown in the later series as well that his spark is indestructible, namely AEC. So, no, there is no backpedalling.

You just proved our point.Marvel never addressed the issue of an indestructible spark nor did the explore the differences of wether or not the brain unit need to be intack for a TF to be rebuilt.What your doing is trying to make sence of the evidence at your disposal and sell it as fact to others.It was never said wether or not that their brain units needed to be mostly intack for them to survive.

Backtracking slightly, being completely drained of energy or (in Beast Wars) high, sustained levels of energon radiation can also kill a transformer permanently, as it did with Dinobot.

Damolisher wrote:Beast Wars was a bloody continuation of the G1 cartoon, for crying out loud, stop trying to imply it's seperate. And that's great, but that's the story the English Scriptwriters came up with, and as far as I'm concerned, it doesn't count, because it's not the real story. Micron Legend and Superlink are continuations of each other, Galaxy Force is NOT, the only time it's related is when you're referring to Cybertron, which is only linked by a few dubbing alterations. And as you are only knowledgable of the English versions, that makes your argument in those cases irrelevant, since you're treading into unfamiliar territory. And in any case, we're not talking all continuities anyway. Take this post from Loki120 on the first page:

Loki120 wrote:Ummmm, the only place that was mentioned was Beast Wars, at which point we're talking about cartoon continuity here, not comics...so not the Underbase.

Therefore, once again, WRONG.

[/quote]

To be 100% correct Beast Wars was not a direct continuation of the G1 cartoon.There are many references to the Marvel G1 and G2 stories as being part of the BW history.It would be safe to say that the BW happened in their own Universe.

Tramp wrote:

sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote:

Tramp wrote:Unfortunately you're right, we won't. Even then though, if they were, it could still be chalked up to stasis lock, not true death. Even dramatic system damage is not usually truely fatal and can eventually be repaired. And that is what we see in the Marvel comics. Most of these characters had dramatic system damage, and were, for all int3ents and purposes "destroyed", but they could be repaired eventually. It really takes sustained and immence amounts of damage, severe damage to their neuro-circuitry, or destruction of their brain cases to permanently kill a TransFormer.

I know of one that would have blowen your theroy out of the water.Scoponok was planed to return as a Action Master if that line had continued.To bring him back with your thinking would have been imposible.Not only was his Transformer body destroyed but his human partner was also killed in the battle with Unicron.And even if that failed his first mold was rerleased as Black Zarak.Most likely they would have had him as the same person if the book continued.And the fact is adding the term "stasis lock" to the Marvel G1 universe is as you called it a "retcon" and we as fan can not retcon some one elses work on a offical level.The fact is that when the writers wrote the stories it was there intent that they stayed dead.As it stands in the Marvel G1 almost every TF that died left a good amount of remains.And it seems that all they have to do is leave somthing behind so it can be repaired.The concept of a spark in the Marvel G1 is almost imposible to beleave.Do you remember when Optimus dies and was copyed onto a floppy dick?Are you going to tell me that all the info that must be stored in Primes brain could fil on a floppy?Or that a floppy could contail a spark for such a long time?

In all actuallity, according to the story, yes, his entire mind was indeed stored on that disk which is why he was able to be reborn. Skorponok is a little different. His body was heavily damaged, and yes, Lord Zarak was killed. But remember, Fortress Maximus' original headmaster partner, Galen, was also killed earlier, only to be replaced by Spike Witwicky. The latent engrams of Fortress Maximus still remained in the body where the headmaster linkage was, which is why he could survive the loss of Galen. The same is true of Skorponok, his body could still be repaired, and a new head built, or a new headmaster partner chosen, because his latent engrams, which were no longer part of the head itself, were still intact. That is how he could survive and be reborn. As for general TF resurrection, no, it isn't a matter of any part of them surviving. Their minds need to survive. Their brains need to survive.

I know that his brain was stored on a flopy in that soory,it just dosnt make much sence.If you remember in Beast wars it looked like Primal was having troble containing Prime's spark.He must have more room in his mainframe then a floppy dic.Also how are we to know that their wasnt enough of Starscreams Brain left after the Underbase saga to rebuild him.Look at the photo again there's plenty of room for somthing as small as their brains must be .....after all like you said the Throtalbot brains were placed into little rc toy cars to keep them alive.

Most R/C cars aren't that little. They're pretty big, and then Throttlebots aren't exactly the largest TransFormers out there either. As far as the neuro circuitry goes, Any amount of damage to the neuro-circuitry can be potentially fatal. Brain case destruction is fatal.

sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote:I know that his brain was stored on a flopy in that soory,it just dosnt make much sence.If you remember in Beast wars it looked like Primal was having troble containing Prime's spark.

They couldve used .zip files.

Tramp wrote:Most R/C cars aren't that little. They're pretty big, and then Throttlebots aren't exactly the largest TransFormers out there either. As far as the neuro circuitry goes, Any amount of damage to the neuro-circuitry can be potentially fatal. Brain case destruction is fatal.

I'll say this for you tramp....you stick to your guns but you have a bit of tunnel vision.The point your failing to see is that the writers of the MG1 never intention that brain case destruction be the only way to determin whats fatal or not.I'll admit that theres evidence to sorport your theroy but you cant say its fact.
P.S.I've been reviewing most of the MG1 storys and you know what I found out.....most of the TF's that died none of them had all that much damage to their brain units.Funny dont you think

sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote:

Tramp wrote:Most R/C cars aren't that little. They're pretty big, and then Throttlebots aren't exactly the largest TransFormers out there either. As far as the neuro circuitry goes, Any amount of damage to the neuro-circuitry can be potentially fatal. Brain case destruction is fatal.

I'll say this for you tramp....you stick to your guns but you have a bit of tunnel vision.The point your failing to see is that the writers of the MG1 never intention that brain case destruction be the only way to determin whats fatal or not.I'll admit that theres evidence to sorport your theroy but you cant say its fact.
P.S.I've been reviewing most of the MG1 storys and you know what I found out.....most of the TF's that died none of them had all that much damage to their brain units.Funny dont you think

I never said brain case destruction is the only way. It is just the most definate. Brain case destruction is universally fatal, except in Starscream's case. Even damaging the Neuro circuitry is potentially fatal, as well as sustained immence amounts of damage. However, In most cases, even dramatic system damage can eventually be repaired, which is why, in most cases of TransFormer "death", they are really just in severe stasis lock, and that is really what we can say is what most of the other TransFormers were in. Given that there was the possibility of bringing most of these characters back after the Underbase incident, then they weren't really "destroyed". They weren't "really" dead.

Sto_vo_kor, give it up, bro. We could have every member of the board arguing against him and he'd still think he's right. He doesn't understand logic, and arguing with him is a futile exercise.

sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote:To be 100% correct Beast Wars was not a direct continuation of the G1 cartoon.There are many references to the Marvel G1 and G2 stories as being part of the BW history.It would be safe to say that the BW happened in their own Universe.

We all could go on and on about this. In the end, it's up to the individual to decide where Beast Wars lay. To me, there is just too much stuff from the cartoon over the comic to say that this takes place in anything other than the cartoon continuity. There are actually very little concrete connections to any comic G1 and no cannon G2 stuff at all. But, to each their own.

Loki120 wrote:

sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote:To be 100% correct Beast Wars was not a direct continuation of the G1 cartoon.There are many references to the Marvel G1 and G2 stories as being part of the BW history.It would be safe to say that the BW happened in their own Universe.

We all could go on and on about this. In the end, it's up to the individual to decide where Beast Wars lay. To me, there is just too much stuff from the cartoon over the comic to say that this takes place in anything other than the cartoon continuity. There are actually very little concrete connections to any comic G1 and no cannon G2 stuff at all. But, to each their own.

But thats my point.....even if there's only one point of refance to the MG1 book its one too many to say its a direct continuation to the G1 toon.The way I see it its a univers built from parts of both MG1 and G1toon.Witch I'm sure Tramp will say is like the DW universe

IT's exactly like the DW comics, which is why DW incorpprtated [b]Beast Wars[/i] into its G1 continuity through its BW references in More Than Meets the Eye.

Called it