Talk:Cosmic Blazar Dragon (anime)

This is the talk page for discussing the page, Cosmic Blazar Dragon (anime).
This page is for discussing how to improve the page. For general discussion and comments, use the general discussion forum. To ask about rulings or how cards work, use the ruling queries forum. To get help with building a Deck, use the Deck help forum. Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~). Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.	Please try to Be polite Assume good faith Be welcoming

Source

Where did this info come from? Are there any sources?--82.40.50.167 (talk) 20:07, February 24, 2011 (UTC)

It was mentioned as being Yusei's Delta Accel Synchro Monster on the Z-one's profile of Yusei Fudo. -- Deltaneos (talk) 23:09, February 27, 2011 (UTC)

Isn't this thing "Shooting Quasar Dragon"? --109.93.23.17 (talk) 23:16, February 27, 2011 (UTC)

Yes, the reality Delta Accel Synchro Monster that Yusei will using. --FredCat 23:18, February 27, 2011 (UTC)

Seeing as how "Shooting Quasar Dragon" (aka this card) already has a page, I guess this page can be deleted.Golden Key (talk • contribs) 00:47, March 1, 2011 (UTC)

Supposedly, from what I've heard, they are separate. Cosmic Blazar Dragon is supposed to be Yusei's Delta Accel Synchro of Stardust Dragon, however Z-One traveling to the past changed history, causing Yusei to summon Shooting Quasar Dragon using the Signer Dragons instead. All of this seems kinda sketchy and hasn't really been confirmed anywhere, though. :/ We should probably just wait until next week when episode 151 comes out, then we'll have the answers to everything anyway. --Colaya (talk • contribs) 03:24, March 1, 2011 (UTC)

What episode is "Cosmic Blazar Dragon" mentioned in? I never heard it mentioned except on here.

NOT FrogtheJam (talk • contribs) 21:57, March 7, 2011 (UTC)

Nevermind I read the episode 149 transcript of Z-One's computer readout

NOT FrogtheJam (talk • contribs) 22:22, March 7, 2011 (UTC)

Do you guys think konami wil produce this card, The is very intriguing and I do want to see how this card will look like. Personally I think shooting quasar dragon doesn't look that awesome, but the effect is good. — This unsigned comment was made by 65.34.94.121 (talk • contribs) 00:44, March 8, 2011

Too early to tell. This card hasn't even appeared in the anime yet (and we don't even know if it will). Plus we aren't even completely sure they'll release Shooting Quasar Dragon, although it wouldn't be surprising... --Colaya (talk • contribs) 03:46, March 8, 2011 (UTC)

I do not think this card really exists just as people said Number C102: ??? does not which will. If C102 does not exist would mean Konami did not have enough space in series to put the card and/or were too lazy to show it at least in anime. Anyway, this card and time of 5D's must have changed, making no proof of this card's existing.--Shadowdarkone1 (talk • contribs) 22:43, August 28, 2013 (UTC)

Yes it does exist in the anime, it was actually mentioned in Z-ones readout as Yusei's Delta Accel Synchro monster in the original future (we do not need to see what the monster looks like to prove it exists when the anime clearly talked about it even though we don't see the monster). There's a difference between this and C102 (C102 hasn't had mention yet). Shardsilver (talk • contribs) 23:31, August 28, 2013 (UTC)

Is it that unknown Dragon from the future colors ending theme?

Does anyone else think that the unknown Dragon from the future colors ending theme is Yusei Delta Accel Synchro version of Stardust Dragon since it did not turn out to be Shooting Quasar Dragon?http://yugioh.wikia.com/wiki/User:Kokou2 22:40 March 10, 2011 (UTC)

The staff stated that the monster in the future colors ending is just an alternate form of Shooting Star Dragon... I'm starting to doubt that we will ever see what Cosmic Blazar Dragon looks like... --Colaya (talk • contribs) 03:56, March 11, 2011 (UTC)

Of course they would say that, it makes people doubt that we'll see a cool new monster and makes a better surprise for the end! --Dark Star X(talk) 17:04, March 11, 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, except that we already were surprised with a cool new monster, Shooting Quasar Dragon... <_< And I'm doubting that Yusei is going to pull another new monster out for his final duel with Jack. --Colaya (talk • contribs) 20:27, March 11, 2011 (UTC)

Level

Why does this card's page have the level posted as 12? How does anyone know the level of the card if the card itself doesn't exist?--DoitForTheLulZ! (talk • contribs) 00:21, April 8, 2011 (UTC)

Someone is assuming the material are "Stardust Dragon" and 2 Synchro Monsters. Since the lowest Level a Synchro Monster can have is 2, the minimum Level this could have is 12 and no card has an original Level higher than 12, so 12 is the only possible Level. However I'm not sure that it's safe to assume "Stardust Dragon" will be a Synchro Material, especially since it wasn't for "Shooting Quasar Dragon". -- Deltaneos (talk) 00:45, April 8, 2011 (UTC)

I thought the whole point of Shooting Quasar Dragon was to show that instead of relying on himself, he used the power of bonds and friendship to surpass his alternate self and Cosmic Blazar Dragon, which is why it(SQD) doesn't require Stardust Dragon as a material. Anyway, I don't think it'd make much sense if the Delta Accel Synchro of Stardust Dragon was a lower level than Shooting Star Dragon...--Colaya (talk • contribs) 07:30, April 8, 2011 (UTC)

Picture

i think i have found cosmic blazar dragon pic: [1].

It doesn't look like shooting star dragon, look at the chest, the knees and the jaw, it isn't the same and it isn't quasar either.--Shiker the Phoenix King and the King Emperor(Talk) 17:14, December 28, 2011 (UTC)

I think that's just fanart of on artist's interpretation of what CBD might look like.--PoirotH (talk • contribs) 17:18, December 28, 2011 (UTC)

I took it from here [2]--Shiker the Phoenix King and the King Emperor(Talk) 17:23, December 28, 2011 (UTC)

The katakana on the page are "シューティング・スター・ドラゴン", meaning "Shooting Star Dragon". I'd say it's just early concept art for "Shooting Star Dragon". -- Deltaneos (talk) 19:12, December 28, 2011 (UTC)

I looked at the picture, and while it does look different from "Shooting Star Dragon", I would have to agree with Deltaneos (I'm still not completely writing off the possibility that it might be "Cosmic Blazer Dragon" though. You would think the writers would at least had it drawn, just so we could see what it looks like). Shardsilver (talk • contribs) 19:38, December 28, 2011 (UTC)

I don't think there is any drawing in existence of what CBD might look like; when I made my earlier statement I didn't actually look at the picture because I am quite certain CBD does not have any official art.--PoirotH (talk • contribs) 19:49, December 28, 2011 (UTC)

Minor edits

Uhm, shouldn't we add "Unofficial English name" and a Card backing to the page? So that it is not almost completely blank? --XBrain130™「Ｘ頭脳１３０」 20:03, February 25, 2014 (UTC)

Edit request

Add archrelated2 = Stardust (archetype) --SnorlaxMonster 07:57, April 17, 2014 (UTC)

Being printed

https://ygorganization.com/cosmicblazarbecausereasonsalsokattobingu100000atk/ Their source states "Yusei’s secret ace Synchro Monster whose existence was revealed in Yu-Gi-Oh! 5D’s, but was never called to action in our timeline.", and it's about Duelist Saga, it will probably be printed for that and 20th Anniversary Pack 1st Wave.--Cyber Dragon (Talk) (Contributions) 20:15, November 25, 2016 (UTC)

A) Wait for it to be named. Otherwise, just speculation and not gonna get put down.

B) Why are you suggesting a card not from DM or GX is going to be printed in a set that is confirmed to include only DM or GX. Regardless, still speculation so shouldn't be put down.

PhotonLegion95 (talk • contribs) 20:19, November 25, 2016 (UTC)

Well, I was only saying what is on there so it was known here. Anything I said was said on YGOrg's site that suggests it, not me; I'm only repeating what they said first. As for your second point, explain why Stardust Dragon is the cover card of this image, if that's the case (File:DuelistSaga.png See the previous upload)

And I'll assume you didn't check their source (http://www.blackfire.eu/product.php?id=14334), which I quoted originally, specifically states "Yusei’s secret ace Synchro Monster whose existence was revealed in Yu-Gi-Oh! 5D’s, but was never called to action in our timeline."

Furthermore, the source also states "Because these new cards come from every era of Yu-Gi-Oh! they work with other cards from every era of Yu-Gi-Oh! as well. They also enhance Fusion, Synchro, Xyz, and Pendulum Summoning strategies, so these cards go great with High-Speed Riders, Wing Raiders, Dragons of Legend -Unleashed-, Destiny Soldiers, and Fusion Enforcers." just below that. (Assuming you were talking about Duelist Saga. If not, then never mind.)--Cyber Dragon (Talk) (Contributions) 20:28, November 25, 2016 (UTC)

What they're source says is irrelevant. The OFFICIAL SITE says that that set is DM and GX only. So what you think based on information is completely worthless as the only thing that supersedes the official site is an actual reveal. And guess what, there's a second set releasing in the OCG in February. So, please, go ahead and explain why we should put this unconfirmed information concerning the 20th anniversary pack on this page, when it has nothing to do with it period.

As for your second point, explain why Stardust Dragon is the cover card of this image, if that's the case

Why is a monster relating to a TCG product on the cover of a TCG product that is an amalgamation of multiple OCG products, the second of which is likely going to feature 5D's cards? or;

Why is an iconic anime monster on the cover of a set being advertised as including cards used in every series?

Gee, I wonder.

I'll assume you didn't check their source

You know what they say about assuming. PhotonLegion95 (talk • contribs) 20:36, November 25, 2016 (UTC)

And I basically said "If you were talking about Duelist Saga anyway. If not, then never mind." after all that. No need to be so hostile. After what you said to Blankslate below this, which there was no call for that, especially considering you made it seem like you were talking about something else. Try being a little more clear next time so someone doesn't think you meant something else, instead of biting their head off. You need to calm down instead of blaming someone for a misunderstanding you caused with both of us. I was talking primarily about Duelist Saga to begin with, so you're the only one to blame for Blankslate thinking something else, and there was no need to bit is head off over it. Makes you wonder who is the one really using common sense here is.--Cyber Dragon (Talk) (Contributions) 20:55, November 25, 2016 (UTC)

@PhotonLegion95 Uh, the set contains cards from every era; where did you get the idea that it's only DM or GX? Yeeeeeah! Now it's a party! (talk • contribs) 20:33, November 25, 2016 (UTC)

Oh for christ sake. Duelist Saga is cards from every series, 20th Anniversary is DM and GX only. Why in any rhyme or reason would I suggest that a set that is confirmed to include cards from every series only has it from two of them. Is common sense just completely lost on this. PhotonLegion95 (talk • contribs) 20:39, November 25, 2016 (UTC)

whistles* You guys really don't like being challenged/corrected, do you? Yeeeeeah! Now it's a party! (talk • contribs) 21:02, November 25, 2016 (UTC)

I guess that's what people call defending/explaining yourself/trying to divert an argument now.--Cyber Dragon (Talk) (Contributions) 21:24, November 25, 2016 (UTC)

Cool it the lot of you, misunderstandings have been made, and Photon tends to be right about this stuff 99% of the time (even if his temper, however righteously it can be, is a little too short-fused.) Cosmic Blazar (under the assumption that it is what it is) is in Duelist Saga, that is all that has been confirmed. 20th Anniversary 1st Wave is confirmed to be GX and DM only, so I'd assume from there that this thing would be in the second wave. Though that fact is only stated on the Japanese site, not on the wiki or the org, so confusion is understandable. Sanokal K-T (talk • contribs) 21:41, November 25, 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for clearing that up, and I apologize for my previous remark. Yeeeeeah! Now it's a party! (talk • contribs) 21:51, November 25, 2016 (UTC)

All good, brother. Sanokal K-T (talk • contribs) 21:56, November 25, 2016 (UTC)