Talk:Strong Badia the Free Cave Girl Squad

From Homestar Runner Wiki

Jump to: navigation, search


[edit] Transcript

Am I safe to claim it here? Since this page (was) empty? That Game Dude 386 23:52, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

If you are in the middle of working on it, put
{{inprogress|That game dude386}}
on the transcript section in the article itself. If you are not actively working on it, you can't claim it.  Green Helmet 00:03, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
I know, but, as there was a half-finished part, I thought someone was working on it and forgot to put on the tag. Thank you. I'll fix this forrgotten TGS! I promise!!!!That Game Dude 386 00:41, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
Looks like you accidentally removed the {{Teen Girl Squad}} and {{SPCG4AP}} templates. I'd fix that but I don't want to create an edit conflict for you while your working on the page, just noting it so someone remembers to put them back.  Green Helmet 00:43, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
What?!? Gah!!! Sorry, I was too premature in removing the stub. Fix it; I don't want my claim to destoy the links: I can't write the WHOLE article alone! Look at the last TGS transcript!That Game Dude 386 00:59, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Don't panic. Just add the following lines right at the very bottom of the page:

 {{Teen Girl Squad}}

The first one marks the page as incomplete, letting other editors and casual visitors know that we're aware the page needs more work. The last two add those fancy boxes that make it easier to navigate to other TGS or game related pages at the bottom. (I'm still avoiding adding these back because I don't want to edit conflict your work — but don't worry, if you run into trouble, it'll be fixed soon enough).  Green Helmet 01:10, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

I gotta split now, so have at it! The tag's down until Wendsday, then, as long as no one else claims it, it'll go back on. See ya! That Game Dude 386 01:29, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Greenhelmet, you're using the wrong template; you want:
Your current one does nothing. That Game Dude 386 18:03, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
Oh, I didn't know about {{pageinprogress}}... but really as long as other people realize I'm editing the page, it gets the job done.  Green Helmet 18:11, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
Sadly, this is not true; as they only know you're editing a section (read the text completely). People will only REALLY stop editing with pageinprogress, otherwise, you're editing air. (P.S. Hurry up, willya? I'm hot on the trail of a good screenshot!)That Game Dude 386 18:21, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
Case in point: You read the template, and you knew that I meant the entire page even though I used the wrong template, and so you didn't edit the page. So it worked. :)
I'm done with my shuffling stuff, and I've added the summary and the transcripts of what SB says at the end, so I took of the cleanup tag, I think it's looking good. Thanks for the great work you did on the page That game dude!  Green Helmet 18:29, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
I only knew that that's what you meant because of this talk, but thanks for the compliment. That Game Dude 386 18:37, 28 September 2008 (UTC), signin' out!
Also, your item list is not in order. Please restore the order that I had, except move the Tablet and Chisle to the top, the Wheel below the Machine gun, and the Dog under the Cat. Thanks That Game Dude 386 18:33, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
Why? I think alphabetical order makes more sense here.  Green Helmet 18:37, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
Because this is my article (mainly), and because that's not alphabetical, ( C is after D?), and because the last one was done in order! That Game Dude 386 18:55, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
I made a mistake with Charles Darwin. Perhaps it would be better to put them in the order they are in the game though. Gimme a sec and I'll do that. By the way, I think you're missing out on the spirit of a wiki by being so possessive about your work here. I'm sorry to tell you, but this isn't your article. That's not how this wiki works.  Green Helmet 19:08, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
That was a joke! Sorry! Geez, so defensive! Anyways, sorry for the confusion, and thanks for reformatting. In the future, though, let's do this over e-mail, as this took a lot of space! That Game Dude 386 19:13, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Help, please!

This article is too big for me to do alone accurately! I need help, or this will never be successful! I need help!!! That Game Dude 386 22:03, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

I am now no longer fixing this article alone. Until I get some help, I will NEVER edit here again, so please contribute here!That Game Dude 386 01:44, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
Okay! Thanks to you guys, we're almost done! We just need an accuracy check, fill in the blank spots, and put some Fun Facts, and we can call it a true hrwiki article (and I still claim credit for this article). That Game Dude 386 14:26, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
And... DONE'D!!! It's over!!! It's finished! Now, we just need to check the spelling and accuracy, then we done! That Game Dude386-out. That Game Dude 386 16:46, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
Well, folks, I'd say this article is even better then the first one! Congradulations Strong Bad on your 100th 200th email!!! That Game Dude 386 21:09, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

[edit] 6000 points

Should it be mentioned here which deaths to use where, in order to get the full 6000 points? NoMayonnaise

Yes, I should think so. If this page doesn't already have a summary section like the last one, it should get one. --DorianGray 22:42, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
I never studied that area, so I don't know what it could be. You're more than welcome to put it up here, if you know it. If not, it's just another reason why this article needs cleanup. That Game Dude 386 16:42, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
By the way, Dorian Gray (no pun intended), the deaths this time are already categorized into major and minor deaths, so we only need an explanation & point transcripts, instead of the summary. That Game Dude 386 16:45, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
We should be consistent between both articles (and future sbcg4ap tgs's).  Green Helmet 19:18, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Images

Can we get someone to put an image/s up? I can't screenshoot at ALL, and this article looks... bare-bones. If someone could find/make a CGS screenshot, put it up on the wiki, and link to it here, I'd put it up immeadiaty (as soon as I see it). Thanks, That Game Dude 386 16:52, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Image uploaded and in the article. OptimisticFool 18:54, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
U rool! That Game Dude 386 18:56, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Suggested Improvements

(1) Currently the page says that if no girls die, it's -20 points. But I got this result when I gave a girl the ribbon during Scene 3, with no other girls dying along the way. (2) There's a Results category missing.. what about when there are less than four deaths, and one/some of those deaths are major? (3) How about using the Tablet/Chisel after the other is used on a different girl? (4) I think some things need to be indented for readability. OptimisticFool 18:53, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

1: Note this as "-20 points: If no girls or only 1 girl dies a minor death.
2: Try it out; mark it. 'Tis the way of HR Wiki.
3: "If used alone" is the exact same.
4:Edit the article if you must, but mark it as minor.
There you are, Viklaus. That Game Dude 386 19:02, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
OF: I think some of your comments were made prior to some recent additions to the article (1) looks like the article is inaccurate in that case — the cases of 1,2,3 and 4 major deaths I am certain are correct though (2) This is there now, (3) Tablet/Chisel now have independent sections, I think it's clear now (what happens is exactly what is on the transcript), (4) Yeah, same is true of the Homestar Ruiner one come to think of it. I think doing it the way the responses are done might help.  Green Helmet 19:16, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
I don't think enough research has been done in the Results category. I have now found that not all four have to die in order to get 18 or 41 points. I don't know what it takes and I'm sorry, but I ain't gonna be the one do the research, I can only stomach so much of the same exact thing over and over again. And as far as the tablet/chisel go, it's the word "before" that's inaccurate. Maybe "independent of" would work better? OptimisticFool 19:37, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
I changed the headings of the Results section to be less specific, and hopefully completely accurate now. I admit I didn't try every single possible combination of them (which is a lot of repetition), but all of the different responses need to be there, and they need something as headers...  Green Helmet 19:44, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
Okay, I'll do it. Give me some time and I'll get every combination of minor/major with/without Darwin, and I'll report back. Luckily, right clicking interrupts the dialogue. First, I need to eat something, though. OptimisticFool 20:03, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
Forget it. I thought I was almost done when I discovered that not all major deaths are equal in value. And it could be the same with minor deaths. And maybe certain non-deaths have point values, I dunno. Maybe if we tested all combinations of all cards with all Teen Girls in all scenes we could reach a solid conclusion. Does anyone think there's a chance of getting the info from the source? OptimisticFool 21:46, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
Don't feel bad. You'd need the super-geniuses who figured out Halloween Potion-ma-jig's order. At their IQ level, their brains probably A-SPLODE'D!. That Game Dude 386 21:59, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Linking

Shouldn't this article have links to the other SBCG4AP Teen Girl Squad like Strong Bad Emails and Teen Girl Squad articles do? I don't know how to do those yet... That Game Dude 386 21:49, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

With the SBCG4AP episodes, it was agreed not to do this until we had at least three episode pages (which we now do). We don't have three SBCG4AP TGS pages yet, so no "quicklinks". If we were to put them in now, both "forward" and "backward" would point to the same place! --Jay (Talk) 21:59, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
Oh. Didn't know that. All I knew was that is was WAY hard to write the body text without easily staying true to the first article. In fact, I couldn't. Kudos to Dorian Gray or Green Helmet (can't remember which) for doing that after I was done. As soon as the next one's out, though, even when it's as empty as it was before I came[1] it goes up. Owch. That Game Dude 386 22:24, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

[edit] NO ARROW'D!! (Ow! My lack of spine!)

Is it notable that this is the first (of two) SBCG4AP episodes not to include the Arrow'd Guy? I daresay it is NOT notable that it's the third TGS overall; first times are insteresting, but not seconds and thirds so much. --Jay (Talk) 21:55, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Yes, it is! Such is a rare event, and if he makes an appearence in Baddest of the Bands' TGS and any of the other urrealeased SBCG4AP TGSs, it is a first. That Game Dude 386 22:04, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
What I find particularly interesting is that the Arrow'd Guy carries no significance in either of these games. In Homestar Ruiner, he has a minor role for one item that doesn't even result in a death. And he doesn't even appear in Cave Girl Squad. This is different from the toons, where he usually is involved in a major death.
As to any notability... Sure. I'd include it. --DorianGray 22:04, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Thomas

In the thing it talks about how the card appears as Alien, not Thomas. However it's entirely possible that the alien isn't Thomas, just of the same species.

Yet the art design is unbelivably simmiler, it's hard to beleive otherwise. More than likely, it was labeled as 'alien' so as not to confuse those non-H* fans. Therefore, it is a remark rather than a goof.That Game Dude 386 00:06, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

[edit] The Little Prince

Ow! My iconic representation!

Could the drawing of an snake digesting a girl whole be modeled after the above novel's pilot's drawing of a snake digesting an elephant? BBG 01:18, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Could I get a link/image, please? That Game Dude 386 21:08, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
A picture. BBG 23:17, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
I have to admit, the thought crossed my mind as well.. but I'm not sure it looks similar enough. OptimisticFool 23:36, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
...I'm gonna say "no", as an anaconda eating a large animal is a common gag; I doubt that TBC intended to reference that. That Game Dude 386 00:21, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Point Scoring Arguments

Looking at the history of the article's page, and at this one, we clearly need to discuss the contradictions and discoveries of the CGS scoring system, without taking up too many minor edits. The more accurate this article is, the better. And besides, if some minor deaths have better scoring, we may be missing transcript. Time to do some research! That Game Dude 386 13:57, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

The first matter of business: the actual numerical score Strong Bad gives is irrelevant. The second: there are nine main deaths, plus the one with Darwin whenever the Egg is done. That's a lot of things to test, and when Strong Bad is giving scores that don't really reflect anything beyond "bigger numbers = better", it's going to take a long time to decipher. Do you even have any evidence that some minor deaths score higher than others? --Jay (Talk) 16:36, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
Forget it. I thought I was almost done when I discovered that not all major deaths are equal in value. And it could be the same with minor deaths. And maybe certain non-deaths have point values, I dunno. Maybe if we tested all combinations of all cards with all Teen Girls in all scenes we could reach a solid conclusion. Does anyone think there's a chance of getting the info from the source? OptimisticFool
These are Optimistic's theories. Let's look at them one by one, to start off. Here are the individual theories:
  • Not all major deaths are equal in value.
  • And it could be the same with minor deaths.
  • And maybe certain non-deaths have point values.
I think these are things we need to research a bit. Now, by "point values", we can, at time being, and NOT on the article yet, say there are, not 2, but 3 categories: Minor, Moderate, and Major deaths. Let's research each theory, now, shall we? That Game Dude 386 15:22, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
I don't know if some minor deaths/non-deaths score higher than others... that much is just a possibility. But some of what we've called "major deaths" do have a difference. That's not a theory; I've seen it with my own eyes. I used to have a bunch of results on paper but scrapped it when I realized my results were uesless. I started to notice a problem when I began getting to scene 4 but WITHOUT using the Darwin card. Depending on which major deaths I used to get there, I was getting different scores when using bad idea cards. (I doubt it depended on which bad idea I used.) Game dude, I don't think we can call anything a "moderate" death. I think that this page should just be generalized so it's accurate, until someone smarter than me comes up with a way to "score" these things. OptimisticFool 15:57, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
OK, I'm on board. I'm not bored. Still, I think this calls for more research. You continue to work hard on this matter, I will- er,- be taking a break, since Baddest of the Bands is coming out soon, and if it has a TGS minigame, guess who'll be writing transcript? Final note; give my regards to Game dude. That Game Dude 386 22:52, 19 October 2008 (UTC)


Being an Ancient Egypt fan ever since I started wacthing Yu-Gi-Oh, I feel an explanation to this is nessecary, so here goes: The ancient Egyptians believed that the heart did the person's thinking. They also didn't think much of the brain, so during the mummification process, they stuck a hook-like instrument up the deceased's nose, then swished it around so the brain would come out. Put it on the article, please. Now, I'm off to Newgrounds!!! but, a buttdanceNeox ONION BUBS!YOU WILL RESPECT MAH AUTHORI-TAH!!! 03:02, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

"Real-World References". It's not com- I mean, it's not rocket science. That Game Dude 386 15:08, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
Should it be put under Explanations? Or should I just do nothing 'cause if I DID add it it would probably be DELETED! DO NOT WANT! but, a buttdanceNeox ONION BUBS!YOU WILL RESPECT MAH AUTHORI-TAH!!! 18:42, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Real World Reference - Chuck D

Charles Darwin being referred to as Chuck D may be a reference to the Public Enemy rapper of the same name, and given Matt's documented love of hip-hop I'd assume it is.

EDIT - nobody's objected to this so I'm adding it. Sordyne 23:40, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Pyramids built by Thomas

Should it be explained that there are people who believe that aliens built the pyramids or would that be explaining the joke?

[edit] Glitches

I wasn't sure if this was worth noting on the main page. But at least in the PS3 version, it's possible to get two scenes to play simultaneously (i.e. both Scene 3 and Scene 1) by "resetting" the game during one of the later scenes. The voice clips, backgrounds, etc. are intermingled. In the same way, I've also gotten What's-Her-Face to show up twice in the same scene - replacing the Cheerleader.

[edit] Fourth scene goof

It makes sense to me that it would be a goof if the idea cards went under the lizard TGS's heads but over anything else. Also, if they were to go under the lizard TGS's heads but not over anything else, that would mean under the lizard TGS's heads but under anything else, which would just be an indirect way to say under everything. That was why I reverted the edit. The Knights Who Say Ni 02:32, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

Hey Knights, I don't own the game and unfortunately have never played it, so there's little context for me to fully understand what the statement is saying. So, as usual, I'll raise a few bullet points to try to organize my thoughts:
  • As mentioned in my summary, the sentence "In scene 4, idea cards will go under the lizard TGS's head but over anything else." is incomplete and grammatically incorrect, so a simply revert is bringing back that error.
  • I also mentioned that the adding the "not" fixes the sentence and also seems to be the original intent of the person who wrote the fun fact. Note that the "but" indicates that the statement following would contradict the first part of the sentence: "idea cards will go under the lizard TGS's head". So, logically you'd expect the sentence to say that the card don't go under something.
  • As mentioned above, I haven't played the game. So, from context this seems like some kind of clipping error. The context of the fact seems to imply that it's normaly for the cards to go under stuff? If so, the good would be the it doesn't go under other stuff. OTOH, it might be that going under stuff is the goof, and that it only happens w/ lizard TGS. Either way, the way the sentence is worded feels like the contrast is necessary and intended.
  • I also tried to glean information from the page itself, but other than transcripts, information on the scene seems sparse. It seems that the goal of the game is to engineer the worst possible deaths to all the TGS members? That doesn't seem to be explicitly explained in the article and I think more such details should be explained, including what the idea cards are and how they're supposed to behave. That would go a long way towards making sense of what the goof really is.
Unfortunately, fixing these issues is easier said than done since one would have to own the game (and have played it) in order to do so. As an aside: is the game even available for purchase anywhere? --Stux 11:09, 6 December 2022 (UTC)
I'm sorry, but I'm afraid you are entirely wrong. Read the sentence more carefully: They go under the heads, but over everything else, including the lizard TGS's bodies. Hence, they go between the bodies and the heads. Adding a "not" not only doesn't "fix" the sentence but turns it into a complete absurdity: if they went "not over" anything, they'd be completely invisible. Not that at matters at this point, since the second part of the sentence has been removed. --Jay (Talk) 13:23, 6 December 2022 (UTC)
To say that i'm entirely and completely 100% wrong seems a bit much, no? But parsing the sentence again I now get what you said, which somehow hadn't parsed in my head the first time. Still, complete absurdity? Anywho, I'm quite happy with DEIDATVM's fix which completely bypassed the issue and backed it up with Let's play information. So, many thanks! --Stux 09:59, 7 December 2022 (UTC)
Personal tools