After looking the list that Deck Knight compiled I think that probably the most interesting dual typing we can explore is the Bug-Psychic typing because not only has this typing have never been used before in pokemon but it also gives us an opportunity to look at a pokemon that can potentially be able to sweep dangerous threats like Terrakion and still not be threatened by Tyranitar or other dark types because of the second typing. These types together are good in that they can cover another weakness while still being vulnerable in some way. Mainly, Rock and Ghost still give it trouble but it manages to still potentially be able to take care of probably some of the biggest threats in OU right now. Basically on paper this looks like one of the more interesting typings we can explore especially since it hasn't been explored before.
-
The moderators of this forum can be found in the CAP forum staff directory.
-
Welcome to Smogon! Take a moment to read the Introduction to Smogon for a run-down on everything Smogon, and make sure you take some time to read the global rules.
-
Congrats to the winners of the 2023 Smog Awards!
CAP 14 CAP 3 - Concept Assessment
- Thread starter capefeather
- Start date
- Status
My vote has at this point become 2CTD, and I'm especially in favor of a part Fire-type for this role. A look at the defensive-typing list shows the interesting concept of a Fire/Electric or Fire/Water type that would otherwise be very hard to do outside of this CAP's concept.
First, not even counting NFEs, there are more NU and RU Fire types than there are Uber, OU, BL, and UU Fire-types combined, which of itself brings attention to how bad Fire-typing is considered in general when put on a Pokemon's typing. Any Fire-types that try to emphasize bulk that can't compete in Ubers or otherwise immediately hit hard all fall into NU category. If our CAP goes with a Fire-typing, we can really explore both the potential of the Fire-type and bad defensive-typings used defensively in general.
Second, all the existing Fire-types in OU and Uber either have a Stealth Rock resistance; An ability that, without having, would be make it drop an entire tier or two; And/or is named Arceus. The only exception to this is Volcarona, but even then, take away Quiver Dance, its BST being higher than every other Bug-type, and sun-support, and it instantly becomes another fodder-mon. I'd like to see a Fire-type that doesn't have all those traits, and I think it's very possible with part Electric or Water typing, especially if we're given an ability that benefits the pokemon itself well rather than an overall brilliant ability in the first place. Abilities like Levitate and Water-Absorb are excellent examples of this. We don't need Speed Boost or Drought to make a Fire-type usable, and we don't need a Rock-type resistance/Uber-stat combo to give it a chance to switching in.
Finally, even if a defensive Fire-type doesn't get extremely powerful Fire-type moves to use, the combination of Fire-moves along with its secondary STAB give it a sheer amount of Super-Effective types, 7 for Fire/Water and 6 for Fire/Electric respectively. This allows us to give it a more bulky role, being able to absorb attacks while still dishing out damage with use of type advantages.
Through the combination of these, a Fire/Electric or Fire/Water type would be able to perform its role in OU without necessarily needing an ocean of a movepool or a final frontier of stats. It'd be safely behind Ho-Oh in terms of sheer potential while miles ahead of where Victini fell flat. I'm extremely confident that our CAP's likelihood to give us our very answers of how to make bad-typing work is maximized with a dual-typed defensive Fire Pokemon. The epitome of this very CAP's concept lies here.
tl;dr Part Fire-typing is the best "bad" defensive type we can make without relying on everything else about it the CAP to be Pseudo-Legendary in capability.
First, not even counting NFEs, there are more NU and RU Fire types than there are Uber, OU, BL, and UU Fire-types combined, which of itself brings attention to how bad Fire-typing is considered in general when put on a Pokemon's typing. Any Fire-types that try to emphasize bulk that can't compete in Ubers or otherwise immediately hit hard all fall into NU category. If our CAP goes with a Fire-typing, we can really explore both the potential of the Fire-type and bad defensive-typings used defensively in general.
Second, all the existing Fire-types in OU and Uber either have a Stealth Rock resistance; An ability that, without having, would be make it drop an entire tier or two; And/or is named Arceus. The only exception to this is Volcarona, but even then, take away Quiver Dance, its BST being higher than every other Bug-type, and sun-support, and it instantly becomes another fodder-mon. I'd like to see a Fire-type that doesn't have all those traits, and I think it's very possible with part Electric or Water typing, especially if we're given an ability that benefits the pokemon itself well rather than an overall brilliant ability in the first place. Abilities like Levitate and Water-Absorb are excellent examples of this. We don't need Speed Boost or Drought to make a Fire-type usable, and we don't need a Rock-type resistance/Uber-stat combo to give it a chance to switching in.
Finally, even if a defensive Fire-type doesn't get extremely powerful Fire-type moves to use, the combination of Fire-moves along with its secondary STAB give it a sheer amount of Super-Effective types, 7 for Fire/Water and 6 for Fire/Electric respectively. This allows us to give it a more bulky role, being able to absorb attacks while still dishing out damage with use of type advantages.
Through the combination of these, a Fire/Electric or Fire/Water type would be able to perform its role in OU without necessarily needing an ocean of a movepool or a final frontier of stats. It'd be safely behind Ho-Oh in terms of sheer potential while miles ahead of where Victini fell flat. I'm extremely confident that our CAP's likelihood to give us our very answers of how to make bad-typing work is maximized with a dual-typed defensive Fire Pokemon. The epitome of this very CAP's concept lies here.
tl;dr Part Fire-typing is the best "bad" defensive type we can make without relying on everything else about it the CAP to be Pseudo-Legendary in capability.
Of the list Deck posted, I'd say the best would be fire/water and ground/electric, because both of them have (at least half) underwhelming or underused typing in some regard, and also both have two types that can compliment each other's strategies (by which I mean the examples I've chosen have fairly good offensive types as both of their types).
In my opinion, the mono-typing is generally the safer of the two ideas, as we don't need to worry about how the types can synergize, but it somewhat lacks the learning experience, challenge, and fun present in the dual-typing option. I'd much prefer seeing us go for 2CTD because of the greater opportunity of where to go with this, especially since there's already at least one of each pure type, so we'd get to test out how two previously unrelated types (such as the fire/water example above) can handle the metagame.
In my opinion, the mono-typing is generally the safer of the two ideas, as we don't need to worry about how the types can synergize, but it somewhat lacks the learning experience, challenge, and fun present in the dual-typing option. I'd much prefer seeing us go for 2CTD because of the greater opportunity of where to go with this, especially since there's already at least one of each pure type, so we'd get to test out how two previously unrelated types (such as the fire/water example above) can handle the metagame.
I wanted to raise a question... to which degree we can explore the option of creating a move designated to fulfill the concept?
if i'm not mistaken, signature moves have been created before for other CAPs, but this time, it would be a little different, to the point of the move help redefining the typing itself (and since it would be a signature move of cap, cap itself would redefine the typing)
for example, the move i was thiking was something on the lines of an 70-80 BP special poison attack involving acid which as a special effect hit steels for SE damage. it somehow makes sense, and since CAP3 in this case would be poison, not only it would have a reason to use its stab, but it's poison stab would give it an offensive pressence capable of threatening skarmory, scizor and heathran at the same time (not much pokes can), and since poison really isnt a good offensive type, it won't probably end broken... i guess...
I believe that something similar happened with psychic this gen, with psyshock redefining the offensive pressence of the typing.
on a less extreme way, an acid based "Poison lavaplume" much like scald helped strenghten bulky waters, could help strenghten this cap as an bulky poison.
i belive that this way it would be interesting exploring a monotype, otherwise i feel more inclined to a 2CTD
if i'm not mistaken, signature moves have been created before for other CAPs, but this time, it would be a little different, to the point of the move help redefining the typing itself (and since it would be a signature move of cap, cap itself would redefine the typing)
for example, the move i was thiking was something on the lines of an 70-80 BP special poison attack involving acid which as a special effect hit steels for SE damage. it somehow makes sense, and since CAP3 in this case would be poison, not only it would have a reason to use its stab, but it's poison stab would give it an offensive pressence capable of threatening skarmory, scizor and heathran at the same time (not much pokes can), and since poison really isnt a good offensive type, it won't probably end broken... i guess...
I believe that something similar happened with psychic this gen, with psyshock redefining the offensive pressence of the typing.
on a less extreme way, an acid based "Poison lavaplume" much like scald helped strenghten bulky waters, could help strenghten this cap as an bulky poison.
i belive that this way it would be interesting exploring a monotype, otherwise i feel more inclined to a 2CTD
Perhaps I've missed the boat completely with understanding this concept, but if the aim is to make one purely defensive type into an offensive threat (1DTO), why are fire and grass the best candidates? Surely these types have both managed to demonstrate their offensive and defensive ability, particularly when you look at our own Grass/Fire Pokemon (who is perhaps also a perfect example of 2CTD, but then again maybe I'm weakening my argument by providing a dual-type example).
I can relate to BMB's concern that the project will become a "balancing act", but that's not quite how i see the problem. I think we should be worried that we will overshadow the typing with the other stages of the process. We don't want to turn this into Deoxys, Blissey, or Reuiniclus, mons that are made by exaggerated stats, abilities, and movepools. We also don't want to create something like Nidoking, who uses the coverage provided by limited STAB + every Special move along with a boost to all of them with Sheer Force. However, I think the term "balancing act" applies to just about everything we can do here, which is why I don't want to condemn the idea of balancing our type altogether.
I think the first thing we should do after the typing stage is figure out what its implied strengths are. Something like "Mono-Grass resists Water and Ground and hits them super effectively" would be pair of strengths of the Grass type. Since we are taking advantage of the typing, we would want to focus on these strengths in the later stages. The balancing act comes in when we consider the metagame and how we best take advantage of these strong points. When we do this, we will come up against problems that could prevent cap3 from actually taking advantage of this strength. These are the things we need to balance against. For instance, to make use of Water resistance, it might be important to not to be raped by random Ice beams. A solution might be high special defense or Thick Fat. Finding these solutions without changing the type creates a great comparison between the monotyping of our CAPmon and the existing dual types which have competing solutions to our problem.
What we should not do is solve generic weaknesses of Grass in ways that allow us to counter something that most members of the type would never dream of. For instance, an ability like Flash Fire or the strength to pound Skarmory into the ground with Wood Hammer might be advantages over other Grass-types but all they really show is whether the typing is better with fewer disadvantages or worse, some great yet irrelevant boon. There are probably shades of grey between the examples but I think we need to come at this project with a deliberate focus towards emphasizing the strengths of the type. High stats and cool abilities shouldn't be off the table, they need to be tailored to particular goals that we want to accomplish, which should be informed by the typing we choose.
I think the first thing we should do after the typing stage is figure out what its implied strengths are. Something like "Mono-Grass resists Water and Ground and hits them super effectively" would be pair of strengths of the Grass type. Since we are taking advantage of the typing, we would want to focus on these strengths in the later stages. The balancing act comes in when we consider the metagame and how we best take advantage of these strong points. When we do this, we will come up against problems that could prevent cap3 from actually taking advantage of this strength. These are the things we need to balance against. For instance, to make use of Water resistance, it might be important to not to be raped by random Ice beams. A solution might be high special defense or Thick Fat. Finding these solutions without changing the type creates a great comparison between the monotyping of our CAPmon and the existing dual types which have competing solutions to our problem.
What we should not do is solve generic weaknesses of Grass in ways that allow us to counter something that most members of the type would never dream of. For instance, an ability like Flash Fire or the strength to pound Skarmory into the ground with Wood Hammer might be advantages over other Grass-types but all they really show is whether the typing is better with fewer disadvantages or worse, some great yet irrelevant boon. There are probably shades of grey between the examples but I think we need to come at this project with a deliberate focus towards emphasizing the strengths of the type. High stats and cool abilities shouldn't be off the table, they need to be tailored to particular goals that we want to accomplish, which should be informed by the typing we choose.
We have many pokemon similar to this, to name one not listed, Drapion. And what is really fun about using Pokemon like this is that they are so eccentric. Drapion's good defensive typing (only ground weakness) and good defenses (70-HP/110-DEF/75-SDEF) make him bulky enough for survival, and even to set up Toxic Spikes, or Swords Dance, and even an effective user of roar. Diverse attacks make him able to hit multiple things, and overall it's just a fun, weird pokemon to use.
This leaves us open for numerous weird combos like the a fore mentioned fire/electric with levitate or bug/steel with heat proof and so on an so forth. Thinking waaaaay ahead, character designs for pokemon like these will be even more unique as a result of their unique typing and such.
While I understand where you are coming from, I have to say that I very much disagree with what you are saying in this paragraph. While giving any Pokemon the power to break Skarmory with Wood Hammer is absurd, giving a grass type flash fire does nothing to really go against this concept at all. The point of the concept is to take a bad type and patch it up so it can shine due to the type. While Flash Fire might help a grass type, the majority of its resists will still be coming from its type, and that one ability is not enough to take away the spotlight. In fact I think this is the kind of Pokemon where immunity abilities should be encouraged, as they have a major effect on the Pokemon by removing a weakness, but still keep the normal features of a typing mostly in tact.
That being said, I really think we are putting way to much into this discussion. We have a full CAP process for a reason, and not too much really needs to be decided right now. Honestly, I feel like we just need to choose a typing that is indeed "bad," and let the rest of the process do its work. We have the skill and ability to make almost any typing work, but if we are too cautious and pick something that is borderline rather than truly awful, we will end up no different than if we had chosen a good typing to begin with.
It is for this reason that I feel that choosing any mono-type is a bad idea for this Pokemon. Sure, Poison is a bad offensive type, but it is not a bad type in and of itself. Putting a typing in a role it is not normally in would be Break the Mold, not the concept that we chose. Indeed, I feel like any typing or type combination that is considered bad for purely offensive reasons is no better. If you don't have good offensive STABs, that is unfortunate, but with high enough stats and a good enough movepool you won't really care. However, when a type is crippled defensively, it can have a hard time functioning in any role.
The prime example that I, among other people, have been using on #cap has been Rock/Ice. Rock and Ice are both fantastic types offensively, but highly undesirable defensively. And, while it is obvious that such a combination could not really work well as a defensive Pokemon, one might assume that with awesome STABs, an offensive role is perfectly fine for it. However, being weak to almost all the most common offensive types in OU means most things it doesn't outspeed threaten it, and double weaknesses to Steel and Fighting mean that it is destroyed by the most common priority moves. It is because of these defensive weaknesses that it would have a hard time as an offensive Pokemon. Simply boosting its stats and giving it a few coverage moves would not fix this problem, unless these improvements bring it up to the level of a cover legend, and maybe not even then (I'm looking at you Kyurem). This is the kind of typing that I really feel this project should be focusing on, because if a typing can be fixed that simply, then it was never actually bad to begin with.
Now I'm not suggesting that we necessarily go with Rock/Ice. That typing may indeed be the worst of the worst, and I don't think we need to go that far to fulfill the concept. However, if we are not going to be choosing something that will provide that kind of challenge, then I don't think we are really going after what this concept this about.
If we really have to choose between monotype and dual-type in this stage, before the actual typing stage, dual-type is the clear winner to me. Simply put, there are more options, most of which don't even exist among the real Pokémon. 136 options > 17 options. Simple.
I agree with most of this post, but this part really stood out to me.
As jas has pointed out, Rock and Ice are both quite excellent attacking types. But this means it wouldn't really fit the concept to use them offensively as it is not a makeover to use a type for a purpose it is naturally good at. It would, on the contrary, be quite a makeover to see an ice type successfully performing defensively. Although this would be a challenge, I am quite confident the CAP community could manage it. It is what we voted for, anyway.
I just want to briefly respond because it sounds to me like you slightly misinterpreted what I was trying to say. My main point is that a type can only be bad at all if it is bad defensively. Rock/Ice is a prime example of that. However, defensive weakness can hamper offensive effectiveness just as much as defensive effectiveness. In the example I provided, it was the defensive problems that made an offensive role impossible. I feel like in this situation making an offensive Pokemon would fit the concept perfectly fine, because while the types may be good offensively, we still need to overcome major problems inherent to the typing to make it work.
That's a gross oversimplification, cape, since in the dual-type option not even close to every dual-type option is feasible. Deck, I'm assuming, put in quite a bit of thought into his post http://www.smogon.com/forums/showpost.php?p=4195292&postcount=75 and he still managed to come up with only 8 that fit the theme at least somewhat well (though of course there are more options than that.)
If you want I can go into detail and actually sit down and calculate how many dual-types fit the 2CTD concept of having one type offensively covering the weakness(es) of the other.
You know what? I think I'm going to do that because I actually want to see a full list. (duplicates removed and mentioned later) (also typings removed if second type actually removes the weakness to the relevant previous weakness anyways) (nothing with primary typing Ghost or Dragon can work either, as being weak to itself is an insurmountable problem in this task)
Obviously... I might miss something. Apologies if I do.
Types that work both ways (again apologies if I miss things) are Water/Ice (Ice covers Grass and Water covers Rock), Grass/Ice (Ice covers Flying and Grass covers Rock), Ice/Ground (Ground covers Fire and Steel and Ice covers Grass), and Ice/Fighting (Fighting covers Steel and Ice covers Flying.)
Note that in all of these examples, Ice is present. It really is vital to making a project along the scale of 2CTD working.
Of those, Grass/Ice, Water/Ice and Ice/Ground already exist in the real Pokemon universe.
To me that leaves Ice/Fighting as the main option that best fits the bill should the dual-typed option be taken. Ice/Fighting however fails the smell test since it sure seems like it should be a fantastic typing...
...
tl;dr If dual-type option is taken, I just don't know what works best. Several options, but nothing revolutionary in my opinion.
Still this serves as proof that the dual-type option is full of many ok-ish possibilities but very few options that truly push the boundaries in fully exploring the concept of Theorymon.
If you want I can go into detail and actually sit down and calculate how many dual-types fit the 2CTD concept of having one type offensively covering the weakness(es) of the other.
You know what? I think I'm going to do that because I actually want to see a full list. (duplicates removed and mentioned later) (also typings removed if second type actually removes the weakness to the relevant previous weakness anyways) (nothing with primary typing Ghost or Dragon can work either, as being weak to itself is an insurmountable problem in this task)
Obviously... I might miss something. Apologies if I do.
Fire/Electric, Fire/Water, Fire/Ice, Fire/Fighting, Fire/Ground
Water/Ground, Water/Ice
Electric/Water, Electric/Ice
Grass/Ground, Grass/Rock, Grass/Fighting, Grass/Psychic, Grass/Ice
Ice/Ground, Ice/Fighting
Fighting/Ghost, Fighting/Bug
Poison/Water, Poison/Ice, Poison/Bug, Poison/Ghost
Ground/Electric, Ground/Rock, Ground/Fighting
Flying/Rock, Flying/Water, Flying/Grass
Psychic/Rock, Psychic/Bug
Bug/Water, Bug/Grass, Bug/Ice, Bug/Ground
Rock/Electric, Rock/Ice, Rock/Water, Rock/Fighting
Dark/Rock
Steel/Ground, Steel/Water, Steel/Ice
Nothing with Ghost or Dragon
Water/Ground, Water/Ice
Electric/Water, Electric/Ice
Grass/Ground, Grass/Rock, Grass/Fighting, Grass/Psychic, Grass/Ice
Ice/Ground, Ice/Fighting
Fighting/Ghost, Fighting/Bug
Poison/Water, Poison/Ice, Poison/Bug, Poison/Ghost
Ground/Electric, Ground/Rock, Ground/Fighting
Flying/Rock, Flying/Water, Flying/Grass
Psychic/Rock, Psychic/Bug
Bug/Water, Bug/Grass, Bug/Ice, Bug/Ground
Rock/Electric, Rock/Ice, Rock/Water, Rock/Fighting
Dark/Rock
Steel/Ground, Steel/Water, Steel/Ice
Nothing with Ghost or Dragon
Types that work both ways (again apologies if I miss things) are Water/Ice (Ice covers Grass and Water covers Rock), Grass/Ice (Ice covers Flying and Grass covers Rock), Ice/Ground (Ground covers Fire and Steel and Ice covers Grass), and Ice/Fighting (Fighting covers Steel and Ice covers Flying.)
Note that in all of these examples, Ice is present. It really is vital to making a project along the scale of 2CTD working.
Of those, Grass/Ice, Water/Ice and Ice/Ground already exist in the real Pokemon universe.
To me that leaves Ice/Fighting as the main option that best fits the bill should the dual-typed option be taken. Ice/Fighting however fails the smell test since it sure seems like it should be a fantastic typing...
...
tl;dr If dual-type option is taken, I just don't know what works best. Several options, but nothing revolutionary in my opinion.
Still this serves as proof that the dual-type option is full of many ok-ish possibilities but very few options that truly push the boundaries in fully exploring the concept of Theorymon.
I ninja-corrected myself, bluemon, before you could catch me ;p
But yes, apologies for any potential mistakes I made. I tried to be completely exhaustive and ended up messing up on the easy part of failing to recognize ice/grass already existed.
I hope my long post trying to rationalize how 2CTD would work is actually productive in showing that it wouldn't be easy or clear at all how to proceed.
...Which is why I do still support the monotype.
But yes, apologies for any potential mistakes I made. I tried to be completely exhaustive and ended up messing up on the easy part of failing to recognize ice/grass already existed.
I hope my long post trying to rationalize how 2CTD would work is actually productive in showing that it wouldn't be easy or clear at all how to proceed.
...Which is why I do still support the monotype.
To be honest I would absolutely love it if Water/Ice were the typing we chose in a 2CTD scenario. Sure we have a lot of these already, but they all suck, some despite having very nice stats. I think it would be an interesting and worthy challenge to "solve" the typing and make a defensive Water/Ice-type that not only doesn't suck but also uses its Ice type in a way that distinguishes it (positively) from waters with "better" defensive typing. In fact, I would urge us to consider any of the non-unique type combos that fit our standards; we may actually learn more from these familiar combos, and can view their bad representatives as failed attempts to learn from.
Asylum_Rhapsody
Guest
jas61292, while I agree with most of what you said, there are some key things that I don't think that we're quite on the same page on.
For a Pokemon attempting to cover an offensive role and not a defensive role, Poison typing could surely be said to be bad, because it has so little to offer offensively (can't hit Steel, on SE vs Grass, etc.). On the other hand, for a Pokemon attempting to cover a defensive role and not an offensive role, then Poison typing wouldn't be considered bad, because it does offer defensive assets (resists Fighting, can't be poisoned, etc.). That's the thing about this concept that I think is so interesting. It's not just about the typing itself but rather what's being done with it.
A reverse example, one that would fulfill this concept but would not fulfill Break the Mold, would be a successful defensive mono-Rock Pokemon. That's not breaking any flavor stereotypes (or stat stereotypes) about Rock types, so it doesn't fit Break the Mold, but it does break from the typical as far as typing mechanics are concerned, where Rock is not considered a good type defensively, so it does fit this concept that we have here now. Are there examples that would fit both this concept and Break the Mold? Very likely so! I definitely don't think, though, that we should dismiss any ideas that do fit this concept just because they happen to also fit Break the Mold.
This is why, as cool as it would be to actually do, I'm not in favor of the offensive Ice/Rock Pokemon that's getting discussed, because I don't think it fits the concept. Ice and Rock STAB are already fantastic assets to an offensive Pokemon, so no Extreme Typing Makeover is required to make those types assets for what the Pokemon is trying to do. We would just be making Volcarona again. The actual Extreme (and I do mean Extreme here) Typing Makeover would come with trying to create a defensive Ice/Rock Pokemon, trying to turn the typing's defensive hindrances into defensive assets.
I don't think there is any type that's simply bad "in and of itself". Whether a Pokemon's type is good or bad for it is going to depend on what roles that Pokemon is trying to accomplish and then how that typing meshes with that role.
For a Pokemon attempting to cover an offensive role and not a defensive role, Poison typing could surely be said to be bad, because it has so little to offer offensively (can't hit Steel, on SE vs Grass, etc.). On the other hand, for a Pokemon attempting to cover a defensive role and not an offensive role, then Poison typing wouldn't be considered bad, because it does offer defensive assets (resists Fighting, can't be poisoned, etc.). That's the thing about this concept that I think is so interesting. It's not just about the typing itself but rather what's being done with it.
I don't think that's true at all, I don't think that there's any better evidence of that than the result of Break the Mold: Strategem. Strategem would not be a good example of this concept at all, because it put a Rock-type Pokemon in an offensive role and not a defensive role, when Rock-type Pokemon are good at being in offensive roles and not good at being in defensive role. What Break the Mold did was on the level of flavor and stereotypes (perhaps on the level of mechanics as for as typical stats were concerned), while this concept that we have now can be said to be similar but is actually on the level of mechanics instead (as in, typing mechanics themselves).
A reverse example, one that would fulfill this concept but would not fulfill Break the Mold, would be a successful defensive mono-Rock Pokemon. That's not breaking any flavor stereotypes (or stat stereotypes) about Rock types, so it doesn't fit Break the Mold, but it does break from the typical as far as typing mechanics are concerned, where Rock is not considered a good type defensively, so it does fit this concept that we have here now. Are there examples that would fit both this concept and Break the Mold? Very likely so! I definitely don't think, though, that we should dismiss any ideas that do fit this concept just because they happen to also fit Break the Mold.
This is why, as cool as it would be to actually do, I'm not in favor of the offensive Ice/Rock Pokemon that's getting discussed, because I don't think it fits the concept. Ice and Rock STAB are already fantastic assets to an offensive Pokemon, so no Extreme Typing Makeover is required to make those types assets for what the Pokemon is trying to do. We would just be making Volcarona again. The actual Extreme (and I do mean Extreme here) Typing Makeover would come with trying to create a defensive Ice/Rock Pokemon, trying to turn the typing's defensive hindrances into defensive assets.
I don't want to post too many times, but I really would like to respond to this.
However, with a typing that is very weak defensively, you can't even run many offensive sets well, because it dies too easily. When anything that is outspeeding you can kill you, if you are not fast as hell then you have a hard time fitting in, no matter how good your offensive prowess is. Types like this are really the only thing that can come even close to being called "bad".
First and foremost, I would like to say I agree that no type is truly bad. Every type has both upsides and downsides. However, some are clearly better than others, and since this concept is supposed to involve "bad" typings, it is important that we can at least decide which types are comparatively bad.
I would tend to disagree with this. See, poison is not a bad typing at all. And one of my points I was trying to make is that a typing can only be bad if it is bad defensively. Sure poison might not have a great STAB, but its good defensive typing lets it get in, take a hit, and boost or sweep perfectly fine. It might not have good STAB coverage, but that is about the only problem it has. And, when you realize it has respectable neutral coverage which can be easily helped by just a single coverage move, you realize that poison is not bad offensively at all, its just that such a Pokemon doesn't exist yet.
However, with a typing that is very weak defensively, you can't even run many offensive sets well, because it dies too easily. When anything that is outspeeding you can kill you, if you are not fast as hell then you have a hard time fitting in, no matter how good your offensive prowess is. Types like this are really the only thing that can come even close to being called "bad".
Ok, now when I was referring to Break the Mold, I was referring to it being done on a proper competitive scale, not to a flavor based concept. If you think the actual Break the Mold concept is purely flavor, then that is your opinion, but that is not what I am referring to. I cant speak to how it was actually decided on with Stratagem, but honestly that doesn't matter. Strata fits both ways. It was not about offensive vs defensive, it is the fact that it was a Special Attacking Rock type that broke the mold. The fact is, Break the Mold was putting a typing in a role it was not used to. That didn't make it bad at it, just made it different. That is exactly the case with mono types for this concept. No mono type is "bad", and all we would be doing with it would be "breaking the mold." We don't have to put a type in a role it is not familiar with for this concept. What we have to do is take a type with glaring flaws and make it like its typing anyways. Nowhere in that concept does that say anything about trying to make a type work in a way it is not good at.
And, for the reasons stated above, this is why I think you have the exact opposite idea of what we should be doing. Ice/Rock has glaring flaws that prevent it from working on any level, offensive or defensive. However, if we can patch them up and have it work in an offensive role, then we would have made a crappy typed Pokemon successful, and have it love its great STABs, which is exactly what this concept is trying to achieve. Now, if we did want to make such a Pokemon defensive, that could fit this concept as well, but that would be taking a much more difficult, if not impossible route, that is completely unnecessary. We don't need to break the mold of theses typings to make the concept work, we just need to fix them up a bit.
That's technically accurate. What I've been trying to do throughout the thread is pare down the options we might consider in the typing discussion, such that when we finally have the typing vote, we all have one unified idea of what we're trying to accomplish. I may even decide to hard-code a list of types that can be discussed, and include both monotypes and dual types.
That does seem a bit ham-handed, though its still more leeway than just mono or dual-types.
I still think it'd be wise to go through it, just to see if anyone has ideas in regards to it being too limiting. To test that, I declare that the two following listings will be the boundaries of Typing Discussion unless I can be convinced to expand it:
Acceptable Mono-types:
Bug
Dark
Electric
Fire (No Weather Starting)
Grass
Ground (No Weather Starting)
Ice
Normal
Poison
Psychic (No Magic Guard)
Rock
Steel
Disqualified Monotypes:
Dragon (Haxorus)
Fighting (Too awesome)
Flying (Tornadus)
Ghost (Too awesome)
Water (Politoed / Too awesome)
Dark
Electric
Fire (No Weather Starting)
Grass
Ground (No Weather Starting)
Ice
Normal
Poison
Psychic (No Magic Guard)
Rock
Steel
Disqualified Monotypes:
Dragon (Haxorus)
Fighting (Too awesome)
Flying (Tornadus)
Ghost (Too awesome)
Water (Politoed / Too awesome)
Acceptable 2CTD Dual-Types (with duplication):
Bug / Ghost
Bug / Poison
Bug / Psychic
Bug / Water
Dragon / Rock
Electric / Fire
Fighting / Ice
Fire / Electric
Fire / Grass
Fire / Ice
Fire / Water
Flying / Rock
Ghost / Bug
Grass / Bug
Grass / Fire
Grass / Ice
Grass / Ground
Grass / Rock
Ground / Grass
Ground / Rock
Ice / Fighting
Ice / Fire
Ice / Grass
Ice / Poison
Ice / Rock
Ice / Steel
Ice / Water
Poison / Bug
Poison / Ice
Psychic / Bug
Rock / Dragon
Rock / Flying
Rock / Grass
Rock / Ground
Rock / Ice
Steel / Ice
Water / Bug
Water / Fire
Water / Ice
Disqualified Dual-types that fit description:
Dark / Rock (Tyranitar)
Dragon / Fighting (Way too awesome)
Electric / Water (Rotom-W, anyone?)
Flying / Fighting (Too awesome / Tomohawk did this.)
Flying / Water (Gyarados)
Fighting / Rock (Terrakion)
Ice / Ground (Mamoswine)
Poison / Ghost (Gengar)
Poison / Water (Tentacruel)
Steel / Water (Too awesome / Empoleon)
Bug / Poison
Bug / Psychic
Bug / Water
Dragon / Rock
Electric / Fire
Fighting / Ice
Fire / Electric
Fire / Grass
Fire / Ice
Fire / Water
Flying / Rock
Ghost / Bug
Grass / Bug
Grass / Fire
Grass / Ice
Grass / Ground
Grass / Rock
Ground / Grass
Ground / Rock
Ice / Fighting
Ice / Fire
Ice / Grass
Ice / Poison
Ice / Rock
Ice / Steel
Ice / Water
Poison / Bug
Poison / Ice
Psychic / Bug
Rock / Dragon
Rock / Flying
Rock / Grass
Rock / Ground
Rock / Ice
Steel / Ice
Water / Bug
Water / Fire
Water / Ice
Disqualified Dual-types that fit description:
Dark / Rock (Tyranitar)
Dragon / Fighting (Way too awesome)
Electric / Water (Rotom-W, anyone?)
Flying / Fighting (Too awesome / Tomohawk did this.)
Flying / Water (Gyarados)
Fighting / Rock (Terrakion)
Ice / Ground (Mamoswine)
Poison / Ghost (Gengar)
Poison / Water (Tentacruel)
Steel / Water (Too awesome / Empoleon)
This list does disqualify a few types we've been talking about in the abstract, like Fire / Rock, but you can tell from the list that while some types are undoubtedly easier to work with than others, none of them feature presently in OU and each has a significant flaw because of the mismatch.
EDIT: It appears skr beat me to the punch on this (bar the restrictions I mention), but if we want to move forward I think allowed 2CTD and Mono-type concepts into the discussion would be the most prudent to gauge the community while ensuring the project would be unique and novel in OU. Also there is an allowable Ghost combination that works and a Dragon combination that works (since it covers the *other* weakness without being perfect offensive coverage): Ghost/Bug and Dragon/Rock.
That'd be an accurate interpretation. The point is to use a resistance it has to switch in, then ward off certain switchin's that would normally hamper a Pokemon with that resistance. This diffuses Volt-turn for those types resistant (or immune) to it by limiting the options the Volt-turner can rely on, e.g. a Fire/Water switching into U-turn (or even better, Bullet Punch) can make Gliscor a completely nonviable swap, they'd instead have to switch in something like Rotom, and ideally the Fire/Water Pokemon would have a coverage move to deal with it (say Hidden Power Grass or Seed Bomb, for example, or even Solarbeam if it's on a Sun team, which it should be considering it 4x resists Fire, has Fire STAB, is immune to burn, and neutral to Solarbeam)
Asylum_Rhapsody
Guest
Might I ask what the criteria was for compiling this list? I understand compiling a list of types that are disqualified, but I'm not sure exactly how this list was compiled. Wouldn't it allow us to be more flexible to simply disallow some, like the ones that you disallowed, but then otherwise still keep the rest open to proposal and justification? Because it seems to me that anything not on this list is otherwise disallowed anyway, yes? That seems odd just because, especially with abilities like Lightning Rod, Flash Fire, Water Absorb, and so on explicitly being fair game for this CAP, this list looks very small. I was looking, for example, at Bug/Rock as a possibility for 2CTD that I think covers both of our interpretations of the concept, but I'm not seeing that as a possibility on the list. I'm also pretty sure that I saw Fire/Ground discussed at some point, and Bug/Ground looks like it could fit your vision of the concept as well.
The specific criterion for the limited list was a literalist "combined type hits weakness still existing in the type brought on by the other type for super-effective damage."
So starting with Bug Ghost (or Bug Psychic) you have "Bug hits Dark Super-effectively, type is still weak to Dark." The Bug Poison "Bug hits Psychic Super-effectively, Type is still weak to Psychic."
Grass/Ground still works since "Ground hits Fire Super-effectively, type is still weak to Fire." But Bug / Rock and Fire / Ground wouldn't, since no similar statement could be made (Bug / Rock is no longer weak to Flying or Grass) (Fire/Ground is no longer weak to Grass, Ice, or Rock). Incidentally I missed that type, and have added it to the list. Much as I love Torterra, it's never really broken into OU.
Does a 2CTD really fit the concept though? If you have two STAB attacking types that cover each other, doesn't it make that a good rather than a bad type combination? At the very least, then, making a 'poor' 2CTD into a good pokemon is just a matter of giving it higher stats and a decent movepool (perhaps ala Metagross). When you pick a monotype or unequivocally bad combination, at least, the focus is on improving the way those types actually function, rather than just giving the 'mon the raw stats and power it needs to wall, tank or sweep.
Just my 2 cents, but with regards to 1DTO... some of the justification that "only X amount of mono-types are in OU!" isn't good enough, IMO; we've already seen how Pokemon are capable of using their stats/abilities/movepool to good effect even though they are single-typed through these members.
Forgive me if this sounds bold, but we're here to explore the effects of how a supposedly "bad" typing can be saved through these factors, but we've already seen how it is somewhat possible (Ninetales).
Forgive me if this sounds bold, but we're here to explore the effects of how a supposedly "bad" typing can be saved through these factors, but we've already seen how it is somewhat possible (Ninetales).
Are we just not mentioning 2MTO now? I think that would be the most challenging and fun! Finding a type that is weak defensively, but uses its key resistances and immunities to switch in and proceed to wreck things would be an interesting concept. Even though Gengar used to do this well, he's been delegated to Sub-Disable, the only set I see him use now a days. This would let us explore why 5th gen has been dominated by bulky offense and see what it would take make other forms of offense viable in the current metagame.
- Status