Virzion, CB scizor, uh... heracross? Oh, and leafstorm serperior, wait that's not out yet.But which Pokemon are these significant against?
Yeah, that's all I can think of.
Virzion, CB scizor, uh... heracross? Oh, and leafstorm serperior, wait that's not out yet.But which Pokemon are these significant against?
I really don't think I agree with this sentiment. Yes, they commonly pack Rock moves, but doesn't that make them more predictable? Say, for the sake of argument, we made CAP1 Flying/Poison. Your opponent switches in Terrakion. You know he's not about to X-Scissor or Close Combat you. This leaves two options - Stone Edge, or Rock Polish. Your prediction just got a whole lot easier.rock neutrality is pretty important for a flying type to be successful in the current metagame considering that all it's key switch-ins against fighting and ground pokemon are also commonly packing rock moves.
My primary reason for supporting Flying/Poison over Flying/Steel is that Flying/Steel turns CAP1's Fighting resistance into a Fighting neutrality. The Fighting resistance was one of the main selling points of Flying being the primary type in the first place (along with Ground immunity), from what I gathered, so turning around and removing that with the secondary typing seems rather silly.I'm seeing a lot of support in this thread for Flying/Poison, but I'm not at all clear on what the actual advantages are for Flying/Poison over Flying/Steel or Flying/Fighting. Which specific Pokemon would Flying/Poison allow CAP1 to switch in on and force out better than Steel, or Fighting, or even pure Flying? Flying/Poison has three 4x resistances, certainly. But which Pokemon are these significant against?
First of all, Gliscor does not resist rock. Second of all, this is invalid since Gliscor is basically always a safe switch into Terakion (although SD might pose a problem if Gliscor is at low health). Third, CAP 1 being dependent on Gliscor is silly.Say, for the sake of argument, we made CAP1 Flying/Poison. Your opponent switches in Terrakion. You know he's not about to X-Scissor or Close Combat you. This leaves two options - Stone Edge, or Rock Polish. Your prediction just got a whole lot easier.
You are now free to switch in something that resists Rock - say, Gliscor
My fault on the Gliscor thing. Edited accordingly.First of all, Gliscor does not resist rock. Second of all, this is invalid since Gliscor is basically always a safe switch into Terakion (although SD might pose a problem if Gliscor is at low health). Third, CAP 1 being dependent on Gliscor is silly.
it's not about knowing when to switch out, it's about being able to switch in. if our momentum mon can't switch in frequently how can we gain momentum with it?. you generally switch out to keep from losing momentum and you switch in to gain it. I think this was covered in the momentum discussion; forcing your opponent to react rather than act.I really don't think I agree with this sentiment. Yes, they commonly pack Rock moves, but doesn't that make them more predictable? Say, for the sake of argument, we made CAP1 Flying/Poison. Your opponent switches in Terrakion. You know he's not about to X-Scissor or Close Combat you. This leaves two options - Stone Edge, or Rock Polish. Your prediction just got a whole lot easier.
this is a good point.My reasoning against Flying/Fighting is simple. I don't like that it is weak to itself. That encourages running more offensive spreads, which is not what we are going for.
Is it that difficult to carry a spinner for SR? I haven't seen an argument yet that convinces me that CAP1 needs to be resistant to Rock. Salamence and Dragonite do just fine, and they're 2x weak to Rock. Why is the Rock weakness so crippling to our CAP?it's not about knowing when to switch out, it's about being able to switch in. if our momentum mon can't switch in frequently how can we gain momentum with it?. you generally switch out to keep from losing momentum and you switch in to gain it. I think this was covered in the momentum discussion; forcing your opponent to react rather than act.
My reasoning against Flying/Fighting is simple. I don't like that it is weak to itself. That encourages running more offensive spreads, which is not what we are going for.
Lurk more. The consensus was defensive momentum. Flying/Fighting does not encourage a defensive playstyle at all to me. In the CAP playtesting period when presumably everyone will be using CAP 1, an offensive CAP 1 would likely be successful since it would beat defensive variants of itself most likely. This is not the goal. Therefore I do not prefer Flying/Fighting (although I do prefer it to many other alternatives).we arent running offensive spreads ... ?
why does momentum have to be defensive.
You guys are thinking gliscor, when we could just as easliy be sizor
We won't want this to be anything that already exists.we arent running offensive spreads ... ?
why does momentum have to be defensive.
You guys are thinking gliscor, when we could just as easliy be sizor
i agree. i was only making examples about what momentum pokes are, on both the offensive and more balanced routeWe won't want this to be anything that already exists.
I agree with this completely. Both Flying/Steel and Flying/Fighting share the 4x Bug resistance, and Grass attacks aren't too common (Shaymin is good, but not seen much, and Ferrothorn's Power Whip won't be too dangerous with a x2 resist anyways). The bonus Fighting resistance is quite nice, but Flying/Poison lacks resistances to common fighting coverage moves –*Rock, Dark, and Ice. Rock hits neutral against /Steel and /Fighting, Ice hits neutral against /Steel, and Dark is resisted by both. And while Flying/Poison may be better for switching-in to attacks due to these 4x resistances, it's weakness to SR won't be helping there. Overall, the largest advantage of Flying/Steel and Flying/Fighting are the resistances to attack combinations that allow it to stay in and maintain momentum, which Flying/Poison sorely lacks.I'm seeing a lot of support in this thread for Flying/Poison, but I'm not at all clear on what the actual advantages are for Flying/Poison over Flying/Steel or Flying/Fighting. Which specific Pokemon would Flying/Poison allow CAP1 to switch in on and force out better than Steel, or Fighting, or even pure Flying? Flying/Poison has three 4x resistances, certainly. But which Pokemon are these significant against?
You made some very good points in this post (though I can't see Landorus countering Flying/Fighting). However, it seems to me that Gliscor is pretty arbitrary to bring up as something that could beat Flying/Fighting instead of Flying/Water. First you assume that it would be physical, then you ignore that just like Gliscor can take the neutral attacks from Flying/Fighting, many walls could take the neutral attacks from Water/Flying (and in the same sense, many offensive pokemon can switch in on resisted water attacks and set up like Reuniclus on /Fighting). So just as much as Gliscor is a counter to Flying/Fighting, Skarmory, Gyarados, Suicune, Dragons, etc can counter or take advantage of Flying/Water. And don't give me that Gliscor is a far better momentum gainer than they are, because that's not true. It almost seems as if you want to reduce CAP 1's viable switch-ins to 2 pokemon...Zarator said:Now, I'll explain why I support Water. Many of these Pokémon will have trouble switching into a Water/Flying CAP (think of Gliscor/Excadrill/Landorus switching into Gyarados, for example). Also, there's probably only two defined switch-in to this mon among the most used Pokémon: Ferrothorn and Rotom-A. While certainly threatening, both the pokes create much less momentum than the aforementioned Ground or Psychic shenanigans, and allow the CAP user to control the flow of the match more reliably.
For these reasons, I support Water as a top choice for a secondary type for CAP.
Sorry to be rude, but... "lurk more" (and don't criticize so readily). reachzero made one post in the CA that suggested a more defensive bias, but there hasn't been any overruling of a more offensive biased spread. In fact a lot of talk has been going on (especially on IRC, and especially instigated by reach) supporting offensive bias. And don't forget that stat bias has yet to be decided (the reason for that ordering is because we shouldn't assume stats before we select typing). Obviously it wouldn't be a sweeper, but there's nothing wrong with using solid offense to maintain momentum.Lurk more. The consensus was defensive momentum. Flying/Fighting does not encourage a defensive playstyle at all to me. In the CAP playtesting period when presumably everyone will be using CAP 1, an offensive CAP 1 would likely be successful since it would beat defensive variants of itself most likely. This is not the goal. Therefore I do not prefer Flying/Fighting (although I do prefer it to many other alternatives).
...I believe that either a defensive typing like steel or rock would mke it good for reversing momentum in-game, or an offensive typing like Ground, Ghost or Fighting.
If we choose Rock or Steel, we will lose the ability to avoid full damage from a STAB fighting move. However, Excadrill, with good prediction, will just simply Rock Slide the shi- out of any flying-type, especially in the sandstorm enviroment with it's insane speed
First of all, thanks for the appreciation^^ I'll try to answer some of your points.You made some very good points in this post (though I can't see Landorus countering Flying/Fighting). However, it seems to me that Gliscor is pretty arbitrary to bring up as something that could beat Flying/Fighting instead of Flying/Water. First you assume that it would be physical, then you ignore that just like Gliscor can take the neutral attacks from Flying/Fighting, many walls could take the neutral attacks from Water/Flying (and in the same sense, many offensive pokemon can switch in on resisted water attacks and set up like Reuniclus on /Fighting). So just as much as Gliscor is a counter to Flying/Fighting, Skarmory, Gyarados, Suicune, Dragons, etc can counter or take advantage of Flying/Water. And don't give me that Gliscor is a far better momentum gainer than they are, because that's not true. It almost seems as if you want to reduce CAP 1's viable switch-ins to 2 pokemon...
Still, your arguments in favour of Water/Flying are certainly valid, and I agree that it is a legitimate typing. It is important to consider how switch-ins can be limited, though this doesn't necessarily have to be solved entirely in typing (stats, status, substitute, WW, Abilities, etc could go a long way in dealing with a lot of the problems you brought up)
And it does what against Excadrill? To have to switch against Excadrill is huge.Flying has neutral coverage against Ferrothorn, Scizor, Forretress, Excavalier, Durant, and Lucario. Ghost adds Metagross, Jirachi, and Bronzong to that list, and unlike Flying/Fighting, doesn't open up a weakness to Psychic.