Legacy Numbering

[ManofTheAtom]

If Alien used legacy numbering in their issues of VALIANT that began with the release of the first issue of the first volume of each of the original 18 series Voyager published in the '90s, next year would see the release of X-O Manowar #400. That would be cool.

[leonmallett]

How do you get to 400 issues of X-O Manowar?

[ManofTheAtom]

How do you get to 400 issues of X-O Manowar?

It debuted in February of 1992.

11 issues in 1992, plus 12 issues for each consecutive year to the present.

1993 to 2023 is 372 months = 372 issues + 11 from 1992 = 383.

Another 12 for 2024 = 395 issues.

Think Quantum & Woody #32.

[leonmallett]

How do you get to 400 issues of X-O Manowar?

It debuted in February of 1992.

11 issues in 1992, plus 12 issues for each consecutive year to the present.

1993 to 2023 is 372 months = 372 issues + 11 from 1992 = 383.

Another 12 for 2024 = 395 issues.

Think Quantum & Woody #32.

So not actual legacy numbering, but speculative numbering (since publishing could be biweekly, monthly, bimonthly, quarterly etc.).

[Chiclo]

How do you get to 400 issues of X-O Manowar?

A bunch of bad assumptions. 400 months is equal to 33 years, 4 months. It would be a pretty big deal for a comic to be consistently printed for 400 months. Several indy books have made a big deal about hitting 300 - Cerebus, Spawn, Gold Digger.

I’d think the stronger case for legacy numbering is where the issue number adds up all issues of previous volumes, which puts X-O closer to 150, which would still be a pretty good number for any indy book and certainly the longest of the Valiant titles.

But hey, they could do an issue 400 spectacular celebrating the 400th month of X-O in mid 2025. If it gets people talking and buying, that’s the goal. Better still if it was a good issue. Get some previous X-O creators to work on it, maybe written by V-ditti and drawn by Bart Sears?

[corey]

How do you get to 400 issues of X-O Manowar?

A bunch of bad assumptions. 400 months is equal to 33 years, 4 months. It would be a pretty big deal for a comic to be consistently printed for 400 months. Several indy books have made a big deal about hitting 300 - Cerebus, Spawn, Gold Digger.

I’d think the stronger case for legacy numbering is where the issue number adds up all issues of previous volumes, which puts X-O closer to 150, which would still be a pretty good number for any indy book and certainly the longest of the Valiant titles.

But hey, they could do an issue 400 spectacular celebrating the 400th month of X-O in mid 2025. If it gets people talking and buying, that’s the goal. Better still if it was a good issue. Get some previous X-O creators to work on it, maybe written by V-ditti and drawn by Bart Sears?

That would be very neat

[ManofTheAtom]

How do you get to 400 issues of X-O Manowar?

A bunch of bad assumptions. 400 months is equal to 33 years, 4 months. It would be a pretty big deal for a comic to be consistently printed for 400 months. Several indy books have made a big deal about hitting 300 - Cerebus, Spawn, Gold Digger.

I’d think the stronger case for legacy numbering is where the issue number adds up all issues of previous volumes, which puts X-O closer to 150, which would still be a pretty good number for any indy book and certainly the longest of the Valiant titles.

But hey, they could do an issue 400 spectacular celebrating the 400th month of X-O in mid 2025. If it gets people talking and buying, that’s the goal. Better still if it was a good issue. Get some previous X-O creators to work on it, maybe written by V-ditti and drawn by Bart Sears?

Exactly.

[ManofTheAtom]

How do you get to 400 issues of X-O Manowar?

It debuted in February of 1992.

11 issues in 1992, plus 12 issues for each consecutive year to the present.

1993 to 2023 is 372 months = 372 issues + 11 from 1992 = 383.

Another 12 for 2024 = 395 issues.

Think Quantum & Woody #32.

So not actual legacy numbering, but speculative numbering (since publishing could be biweekly, monthly, bimonthly, quarterly etc.).

Point.

[Ryan]

A bunch of bad assumptions. 400 months is equal to 33 years, 4 months. It would be a pretty big deal for a comic to be consistently printed for 400 months. Several indy books have made a big deal about hitting 300 - Cerebus, Spawn, Gold Digger.

I’d think the stronger case for legacy numbering is where the issue number adds up all issues of previous volumes, which puts X-O closer to 150, which would still be a pretty good number for any indy book and certainly the longest of the Valiant titles.

But hey, they could do an issue 400 spectacular celebrating the 400th month of X-O in mid 2025. If it gets people talking and buying, that’s the goal. Better still if it was a good issue. Get some previous X-O creators to work on it, maybe written by V-ditti and drawn by Bart Sears?

I agree doing a 400th issue of X-O wouldn't feel the earned achievement it was with Cerebus, Spawn, etc. Now doing a 35th year anniversary special or something like that would be cool.

[Cyberstrike]

I despise legacy numbering, it's what makes impossible to keep track of titles, in any format print or digital, single issue, trades, and hardcovers.

[ManofTheAtom]

I despise legacy numbering, it's what makes impossible to keep track of titles, in any format print or digital, single issue, trades, and hardcovers.

It can be preferable to multiple volumes, though. How many number ones does a character need?

[Chiclo]

I despise legacy numbering, it's what makes impossible to keep track of titles, in any format print or digital, single issue, trades, and hardcovers.

It can be preferable to multiple volumes, though. How many number ones does a character need?

All of them.

[Ryan]

I despise legacy numbering, it's what makes impossible to keep track of titles, in any format print or digital, single issue, trades, and hardcovers.

It can be preferable to multiple volumes, though. How many number ones does a character need?

I agree, except in the case of reboots that are in a new continuity. I'm glad that VH2 Donovan Wylie X-O was a new number one instead of being X-O #69.

In my mind, all the VEI X-O's should be Volume 3 since it's the same continuity. So X-O Unconquered #5 would be X-O #90 by my count. Almost to #100 with legacy numbering. The new format might throw this off though.

[Ryan]

I despise legacy numbering, it's what makes impossible to keep track of titles, in any format print or digital, single issue, trades, and hardcovers.

I think it's not the legacy numbering that makes it hard to keep track of, it's the constant flip-flopping between starting new volumes for number ones and then flipping back to legacy numbering when a milestone number comes up. It sucks, but it's how the comic book business is done now.

Ever since Mcfarlane Spm #1 and Jim Lee's X-Men #1 the publishers figured out they can always get a sales spike when they restart the numbering on their major characters. And when the titles are close to 500 or 600 or whatever they switch back to milk the milestone number sales spike. It sucks for the long-term readers and the fans, but it makes a little more money, so fck em right? Welcome to comics.

[ManofTheAtom]

I despise legacy numbering, it's what makes impossible to keep track of titles, in any format print or digital, single issue, trades, and hardcovers.

It can be preferable to multiple volumes, though. How many number ones does a character need?

I agree, except in the case of reboots that are in a new continuity. I'm glad that VH2 Donovan Wylie X-O was a new number one instead of being X-O #69.

In my mind, all the VEI X-O's should be Volume 3 since it's the same continuity. So X-O Unconquered #5 would be X-O #90 by my count. Almost to #100 with legacy numbering. The new format might throw this off though.

When DC rebooted Superman in the '80s, they renamed "Superman" to "Adventures of Superman" but kept the same numbering despite it being about a different version of the character.

When they rebooted again after Infinite Crisis, they restored the title's name but still kept the numbering despite it still being about a different version of the character.

Then when they rebooted again after Rebirth, they brought back the title and numbering despite it again being about yet another version of the character.

Keeping the title and numbering can work regardless of continuity/content.

[Chiclo]

I despise legacy numbering, it's what makes impossible to keep track of titles, in any format print or digital, single issue, trades, and hardcovers.

It can be preferable to multiple volumes, though. How many number ones does a character need?

I agree, except in the case of reboots that are in a new continuity. I'm glad that VH2 Donovan Wylie X-O was a new number one instead of being X-O #69.

In my mind, all the VEI X-O's should be Volume 3 since it's the same continuity. So X-O Unconquered #5 would be X-O #90 by my count. Almost to #100 with legacy numbering. The new format might throw this off though.

When DC rebooted Superman in the '80s, they renamed "Superman" to "Adventures of Superman" but kept the same numbering despite it being about a different version of the character.

When they rebooted again after Infinite Crisis, they restored the title's name but still kept the numbering despite it still being about a different version of the character.

Then when they rebooted again after Rebirth, they brought back the title and numbering despite it again being about yet another version of the character.

Keeping the title and numbering can work regardless of continuity/content.

You just want DC Lite. Great taste, less filling.

[Ryan]

I despise legacy numbering, it's what makes impossible to keep track of titles, in any format print or digital, single issue, trades, and hardcovers.

It can be preferable to multiple volumes, though. How many number ones does a character need?

I agree, except in the case of reboots that are in a new continuity. I'm glad that VH2 Donovan Wylie X-O was a new number one instead of being X-O #69.

In my mind, all the VEI X-O's should be Volume 3 since it's the same continuity. So X-O Unconquered #5 would be X-O #90 by my count. Almost to #100 with legacy numbering. The new format might throw this off though.

When DC rebooted Superman in the '80s, they renamed "Superman" to "Adventures of Superman" but kept the same numbering despite it being about a different version of the character.

When they rebooted again after Infinite Crisis, they restored the title's name but still kept the numbering despite it still being about a different version of the character.

Then when they rebooted again after Rebirth, they brought back the title and numbering despite it again being about yet another version of the character.

Keeping the title and numbering can work regardless of continuity/content.

Sure anything can be done in any number of ways. I'm just saying I generally don't like when ongoing series relaunch at a number 1, except in the case of a reboot that takes place in a new continuity. Then I don't mind a new volume starting. Just my preference, dude.

[daniellew61]

The need for #1s is because the ordering drops as series go on
You can have it labeled with legacy numbering and still have a new arc start at number 1, like Marvel just did..recently-ish. I can't remember.

[Ryan]

When DC rebooted Superman in the '80s, they renamed "Superman" to "Adventures of Superman" but kept the same numbering despite it being about a different version of the character.

A part of it is that the comics business has changed a lot since the 80s. Back then, a large number was desirable because it showed to the readers that the series/character must be good because it's been going for so long. At some point, people started to think that the large numbers were intimidating to new readers. Not sure which is more true, I think something is lost in either case.

I think it was Dark Horse in the early 90s that started to do some of their ongoing series as 'a series of mini-series'. I remember Nexus being like that. Then they added dual numbering, with the ongoing # on the inside in the indicia. There's pros and cons to both approaches. I like older comics though, so for me I usually prefer just sticking with one ongoing continuing number.

[ManofTheAtom]

The need for #1s is because the ordering drops as series go on
You can have it labeled with legacy numbering and still have a new arc start at number 1, like Marvel just did..recently-ish. I can't remember.

Yeah.

Just make the legacy number smaller and, essentially, make the number one bigger with the first issue of a new story arc. Arcs run for four to six issues, so that's between two and four number ones in a year, while retaining the overall legacy number on the cover.

[ManofTheAtom]

When DC rebooted Superman in the '80s, they renamed "Superman" to "Adventures of Superman" but kept the same numbering despite it being about a different version of the character.

A part of it is that the comics business has changed a lot since the 80s. Back then, a large number was desirable because it showed to the readers that the series/character must be good because it's been going for so long. At some point, people started to think that the large numbers were intimidating to new readers. Not sure which is more true, I think something is lost in either case.

I think it was Dark Horse in the early 90s that started to do some of their ongoing series as 'a series of mini-series'. I remember Nexus being like that. Then they added dual numbering, with the ongoing # on the inside in the indicia. There's pros and cons to both approaches. I like older comics though, so for me I usually prefer just sticking with one ongoing continuing number.

Top Cow did it too for a while, having dual numbers on the cover.

[ManofTheAtom]

I do think that VALIANT needs to embrace its legacy because it will make it stronger, not weaker.

As I see it, that is a two-prong process; first, having a robust collection of trades and hardcovers that collect everything VALIANT, Acclaim, and VEI ever published (with the understanding that it would be missing the single issues from the Solar, Turok, and Magnus series -- I'd be curious if that applies to the two-issues Chaos Effect Epilogue mini-series with Magnus in the present, though).

Second, whether it's legacy numbers that give X-O Manowar 150 issues or speculative numbers that give it 400. Either or, neither hurts, it only helps. It makes it clear that these are characters with a history, that they didn't just show up.

Within that history there's US, the fans who have been here from the start.

[ManofTheAtom]

Someone once said in reference to numbering something to the effect of "Dark Phoenix Saga didn't happen in 'X-Men #1, it happened in X-Men #129!'"

Ultimately, it's what's on the inside that matters, even if and when a lower issue number might be preferable for some.

As I mentioned above, that really can be achieved by simply putting more emphasis on the story arc numbering than on the overall issue numbering.

Every time a new arc begins, just make that the most important part of the cover in terms of numbering and title, but still keep the legacy/speculative number around below it, just smaller (though not unnoticeable).

[GammaJosh]

Legacy numbering would be a draw for me but only if it's done Marvel style summing up all the published issues. Assigning numbers for months when nothing was published actually offends me as a collector. If there's legacy numbering that means you should be able to put all the issues in a box in order with no gaps. I feel like part of my brain would be forever searching for non-existent issues.

[ManofTheAtom]

Legacy numbering would be a draw for me but only if it's done Marvel style summing up all the published issues. Assigning numbers for months when nothing was published actually offends me as a collector. If there's legacy numbering that means you should be able to put all the issues in a box in order with no gaps. I feel like part of my brain would be forever searching for non-existent issues.

Because of DC's New 52, we'll never have about five years-worth of issues of Action Comics, Detective Comics, and other titles they cancelled when they did that stunt.

When they brought those series back, they restarted the numbering from what would have been the regular issue of those series released that month. So, instead of continuing Action Comics from where it left off before The New 52 (#904 being the last issue and #905 being the one that should have followed) they restarted it with #957.