This is the talk page for discussing the article, VWXYZ.
Please try to
just a question: on the Fusion monsters of this archetype, it says to remove from play monsters from your side of the field. if the Union monsters are still equipped, can they be used to summon the Fusions?--18.104.22.168 07:11, May 25, 2010 (UTC)
If it says that you need to remove from play monsters from your side of the field, then you can't remove from play Union monsters that are equipped because they are currently treated as spell cards, not monsters.--Hide Head Turtle 11:20, May 25, 2010 (UTC)
Support card Edit
"Hyper Coat" is the support card which makes this archetype, if it says "Select 1 face-up Machine-Type monster you control with "V", "W", "X", "Y", and/or "Z" in its name and equip this card to it." Doesn't that make it support the "Ｖ" archetype, "Ｗ" archetype, "Ｘ" archetype, "Ｙ" archetype, "Ｚ" archetype individually? -Falzar FZ- (talk page|useful stuff) 03:06, May 20, 2012 (UTC)
- Yes, but I chose to make an exception in this case. See this conversation. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 03:09, May 20, 2012 (UTC)
- I checked the forum and there wasn't anything about it. I forgot about searching through talk pages.
- Ah well, since I've already checked, might as well mention that, for the record, there is currently 62 "Ｖ", 16 "Ｗ", 51 "Ｘ", 10 "Ｙ" and 10 "Ｚ".
- But if we only count Machine Types, then it's just adding Geargiganto X, Victory Viper XX03, Victory Viper XX03, Debugger X, Satellite Laser Balsam, Debugger Y and Debugger Z to rest of the VWXYZ. -Falzar FZ- (talk page|useful stuff) 03:20, May 20, 2012 (UTC)
- Perhaps it'd be worth it now to break out separate archetype pages for each letter? This page should really cover the core "VWXYZ" group of cards, and just unloading everything here would only end up diluting said coverage.
- Falzar: you explained the "Ｖ" count, but what about the "Ｘ" count? "X-Sabers" account for some of them, but there aren't even 30 of them... 「ディノ奴千？！」? · ☎ Dinoguy1000 15:57, May 22, 2012 (UTC)
- Logic and consistency suggest that we document these as five new archetypes. I like and logic and consistency... but I feel I should point out that what we'd actually be doing is creating another five pages and adding information to over a hundred pages just to explain something trivial that's a result of someone being lazy about how they phrased an anime only card lore that nobody is going to use. -- Deltaneos (talk) 21:34, May 22, 2012 (UTC)
- I do agree with both those points, given that there are actually other valid targets. One downside of the way we've chosen to categorize archetypes is we occasionally get some very unintended connections like this or the absolute cluster**** that is "Knight" (or my new favorite - "Hero's Rule 2" is a "Rose" card). And I've flip-flopped on this before as well, but ulimately I do think the current system is the best we can do, given the circumstances.
- You know, all this makes me want to write a (presumably horrible, since I can't write) fan fiction where everyone uses contrived archetypes as per categorized here. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 00:02, May 23, 2012 (UTC)