We may be on the verge of eventually finding at least one tree in all 8 colors.
What makes you think that?
I'm not trying to be pedantic, but I don't want people to be any more confused than it seems they already are.
(The following is not directed at you, URS, I've been wanting to do this since Topher's recent posts.)
For those besides URS and myself who are interested, there's basically only 1 way to
predict if a sculpt exists in a certain color, and there is only 1 way to
confirm that a sculpt exists in a certain color, but there are several intermediate ways of predicting and confirming figures, which makes things more confusing than this run-on sentence.
First, some terminology I've been wanting to address:
Sculpt -- basic figure design
Color -- 1 of 10 possible MUSCLE colors
Figure -- a sculpt of a particular color
How to Predict if a MUSCLE is available in a certain color:1) Choose a Kinnikuman Part. Let's say part one.
2) Determine which MUSCLE figures are in part one.
3) Group all MUSCLEs from part one together.
4) Go to the MUSCLE DB.
5) Gather all the statistics on the MUSCLEs from Kinnikuman part one.
6) Break into groups those MUSCLEs with similar statistics. These groups are known as trees.
7) Once groups are established, their physical images can be arranged in accordance to the patterns discoved via the MDB information.
8) URS has found that these groups/trees come in 4, 5, 6, and 7 colors, no more and no less.
8) There are several instances where images of all the sculpt/color combinations of a particular group/tree are available, except for one or two.
9) Since several other sculpts belonging to the same group/tree have been found in that color -- say Red -- we can
predict that the missing Red sculpt does indeed exist. (The prediction is also strengthened by the fact that several people will most likely have reported having said figure on the MDB.)
10) On the same hand, if no sculpts from a group/tree have been reported as found in a particular color, it is possible to
predict that no sculpts from said group/tree will ever be found in said color.
The reason I believe this to be true is because of the overall reliability of the MDB data. For instance, if you were to compile the statistics for a particular kinnikuman part, you would be amazed out how clearly the patterns present themselves.
For instance, many groups/trees consisting of 5-10 sculpts are represented by numbers like this:
Salmon | Purple | Dark Blue | Light Blue | Red | Magenta | Orange | Green
#001 -- 0 | 33 | 25 | 0 | 0 | 30 | 45 | 0
#056 -- 0 | 30 | 23 | 0 | 0 | 31 | 43 | 0
#345 -- 0 | 29 | 24 | 0 | 0 | 34 | 42 | 0
#121 -- 0 | 30 | 25 | 0 | 0 | 31 | 43 | 0
#321 -- Etc., etc.
Lets say that 7 sculpts from a particular part share this pattern.
When you see consistent numbers like that for a groups of 7 figures, and have a collection like Arforbes' that mirrors those numbers exactly, you can feel pretty confident that the above group/tree:
1) Comes in Purple, Dark Blue, Magenta, and Orange
2) Does not come in Salmon, Light Blue, Red, and Green
What happens if I don't have an image of, say, one of the 7 sculpts in Purple? Well, considering that I do have images of the other 6 and that sculpt has been reported as found in Purple on the MDB, it is safe, as I said above, to
predict that it is indeed available in Purple.
Is it possible that the group/tree does indeed come in Green? Yes. But the fact that of the 7 sculpts in the group/tree, not one has been reported as found in Green, I think it is safe to predict that those 7 sculpts were not made in Green.
There is strength in numbers and patterns when it comes to making predictions.
Other ways to predict figure availabilty.Lets say the statistics for a group/tree consisting of 4 figures look like this:
Salmon | Purple | Dark Blue | Light Blue | Red | Magenta | Orange | Green
#001 -- 0 | 33 | 25 | 0 | 0 | 30 | 45 | 1
#056 -- 0 | 30 | 23 | 0 | 0 | 31 | 43 | 0
#345 -- 0 | 29 | 24 | 0 | 0 | 34 | 42 | 1
#121 -- 0 | 30 | 25 | 0 | 0 | 31 | 43 | 0
You'll notice that only two people report finding sculpts from this tree in Green! However, let's say it just so happens that Arforbes has an image of #345 in Green. Great! No problem, it is now safe to assume these four figures come in Green, albeit they are apparently extremely rare.
However, if no image is available of any of these four sculpts in Green, we have a problem! It then becomes very likely that they are mistakes:
1) Because there are no corraborating images.
2) Because only two people have reported having them.
3) Because they don't match the otherwise perfect group/tree pattern.
In such cases, I have labeled these colors "Uncertain."
Furthermore, the more sculpts in a group/tree, the more likely the pattern is correct, and the out-lying reported find is an error. In other words, imagine if the above group/tree consisted of 10 sculpts, all of which match up perfectly statistically, except for 1 or 2 reported finds in Green. It's a tough sell without an image.
Amazingly, the statistics, and thus the patterns, of the MDB or so consistent, that of the 45 total groups/trees, there are currently only 4 uncertain colors! (Three of which are Orange.) This fact along strengthens the case for the accuracy of the tree code's ability to predict sculpt color availability!
Now, concerning the real colored MUSCLE scenarios. As I said, all of the recent finds have been predicted, though one sculpt -- Salmon #109 -- did belong to a tree that was considered "Uncertain" in Salmon.
Even so, there are no groups/trees to my knowledge that are predicated to be found in 8 colors, let alone any that have been found in 6 or 7 colors, and are "Uncertain" in the remaining 2 or 1 colors.
For each group/tree there is at least one color that is all 0's for each sculpt belonging to it, if not 2 or 3.
