Pokémon X and Y Discussion

[Brutaka]

Originally Posted by Fat Narutendo3

So then despite everything that's been said, you don't think ice is too bad as a pokemon type for example? (as opposed to a move type) And that light could fix that?

Ice. Has 4 Weaknesses, 1 Resistance. The rest are neutral.

The only thing that adding a Light type would do is give ice types one more resistance. Which it wouldn't worry about if the type didn't exist.

So no, Light wouldn't help. Makes no sense.

The only thing adding a type to the type chart would do is curb an OP type. That's the only thing it CAN do.

[Narutendo3]

Originally Posted by Fat Brutaka

Ice. Has 4 Weaknesses, 1 Resistance. The rest are neutral.

The only thing that adding a Light type would do is give ice types one more resistance. Which it wouldn't worry about if the type didn't exist.

So no, Light wouldn't help. Makes no sense.

The only thing adding a type to the type chart would do is curb an OP type. That's the only thing it CAN do.

Now this is why I feel that you didn't read everything. We spent at least the last page going through why it could make all the difference for ice. Let's say light is only resisted by steel and ice and becomes a fairly good, common attacking type. All of a sudden, ice would be much more viable to use because it would have a key, rare resistance. Not everyone wants to have a bunch of steel types. Right now, there is no reason to have an ice type pokemon on your team.

[kupo555]

Originally Posted by Fat Brutaka

Look, you Light-dorks, you can't begin to have a reason for Light if the only reason to add it would because "It wouldn't hurt" or "It would work".

If you can prove that adding it would "fix" a problem with the type chart, then go right ahead and keep blabbing. But other than that, stop.

And before you say anything, no, there ISN'T anything wrong with the chart. At all.

Why does a change have to fix a problem? Very few of the *big* changes these games make from generation to generation are done because they "fix" anything. In fact, some of the big changes they make are downright counterintuitive and require retconning or some fancy footwork to dance around logical flaws (as I mentioned earlier an example of this would be making baby pokemon for species of pokemon who we had already hatched from eggs. "Oops" says GameFreak. "Well, uh, you see, if you, um, hold this...incense, yeah, INCENSE--then all of a sudden you get the baby pokemon." "Suuuure," says everybody else).

Again--Steel and Dark may have been used to fix how powerful Psychic was, but there were plenty of options open to Game Freak outside of adding new types to do the same thing. It's not always about fixing problems. Sometimes it's about doing things simply to add new layers to an old system to keep things fresh. Like adding abilities in Gen III, for example. This wasn't a solution to a problem, it was a new mechanic added because they wanted to bring more elements into the game to keep it fresh and exciting. Abilities didn't hurt, and they could work, so why the hell not? Same with a possible new type. Again, a new type wouldn't necessarily need to be some sort of salve for some problem with the meta game, it could just be something meant to add new possibilities, and to keep pokemon designs varied and aesthetically inspired.

And, before you just dismiss the imbalances still in the chart, how about you try and make a case for how it's balanced, when the dispersion of pokemon of different types is grossly and obviously lopsided. That's pretty good empirical evidence that there are still some clear imbalances. At this point, I'd say the onus is on you to argue otherwise.

And I will stress, I'm NOT saying typing is the be-all end-all of what makes a pokemon competitively viable. It's always going to be a confluence of factors. But typing is definitely a big part of it, and it's definitely something that hinders many Ice and Bug types (I mean, if you just look at their weaknesses and resistances it's painfully obvious things could be better balanced).

Lol, I can't believe how much I'm arguing in defense of this, cuz I don't even think it's going to happen. But peoples resistance to it, and reasoning behind why it should never, is just sort of baffling to me.

[kickmeimirish]

Personally I am hoping that Ninfia is Flying or Normal. If they add an additional type then we have to waste a bunch of Pokemon on useless new-types that aren't even generally viable because they are now super rare.

No thanks. I'll pass.

[Brutaka]

Originally Posted by Fat Narutendo3

Now this is why I feel that you didn't read everything. We spent at least the last page going through why it could make all the difference for ice. Let's say light is only resisted by steel and ice and becomes a fairly good, common attacking type. All of a sudden, ice would be much more viable to use because it would have a key, rare resistance. Not everyone wants to have a bunch of steel types.

Oh, I read that bit too.

You basically want to create a replicate Dragon typing, with Ice being it's "Steel-typing".

How is that in any way a good idea?
And more importantly, is Ice's small number of resistances that big a deal?
It's already a brilliant offensive type. Why make a brilliant Defensive too? I mean, how is that fair, to say, Steel, which is a brilliant Defensive type but a horrid offensive type?

[kupo555]

Originally Posted by Fat Brutaka

Ice. Has 4 Weaknesses, 1 Resistance. The rest are neutral.

The only thing that adding a Light type would do is give ice types one more resistance. Which it wouldn't worry about if the type didn't exist.

So no, Light wouldn't help. Makes no sense.

The only thing adding a type to the type chart would do is curb an OP type. That's the only thing it CAN do.

You can't think about it only in terms of how it directly affects Ice. Again, as I mentioned in my long ass rant, any time you add a type, it interacts with EVERY OTHER TYPE. So, it's not only feasible that Ice having a key rare resistance alone could make it suddenly viable where it largely isn't now, it's also possible this hypothetical new type could check and scare away some of the key pokemon threatening certain Ice type pokemon. Ice wouldn't just gain a resistance. This hypothetical new type would also be super effective against several types--it has a ripple effect that could swing other factors in Ice-types' favor.

[SmashBrosBrawl]

If you want to buff ice so much just make it resistant to grass and ground. Something logical and that wouldnt require the creation of a whole new type.

[Narutendo3]

Originally Posted by Fat Brutaka

Oh, I read that bit too.

You basically want to create a replicate Dragon typing, with Ice being it's "Steel-typing".

How is that in any way a good idea?
And more importantly, is Ice's small number of resistances that big a deal?
It's already a brilliant offensive type. Why make a brilliant Defensive too? I mean, how is that fair, to say, Steel, which is a brilliant Defensive type but a horrid offensive type?

Well, that's not the same since steel is the only resistance to dragon (lol, horrible balance). And the offensive and defensive capabilites of a type aren't related by much. STAB isn't that big of a deal. Ice having one resistance is just terrible. And it's not even as good offensively as ground (5 SE, yet 2 resists, and an immunity).

Originally Posted by Fat SmashBrosBrawl

If you want to buff ice so much just make it resistant to grass and ground. Something logical and that wouldnt require the creation of a whole new type.

They added new types in gen 2 even though changed matchups alone could (and did) nerf psychic.

[BattleStar]

Just to play the Devil's Advocate, a light type could in fact help curb a type. In this case ice which is inferior defensively. Adding a resistance to it will only do good. In hypothetical terms a new type being introduced(one that ice resist) will most likely help it. We can mostly likely infers that a new type would covert some old moves and Pokemon to light type. This would further help ice types >.>

Just for the record I sure as hell don't want a new type. Though no need to be condescending to some ideas and arguments. Some decent points were made.

Offensively ice is great. However it's obvious we see a lot more usage of ice type moves than the ice Pokemon themselves. There defensive typing is at times enough to warrant them not to used. Steel also is great defensively, that is what makes the Pokemon of that type more relevant. Steel also has decent offensive typing, hitting ice,rock, and many types for neutral coverage:

[kupo555]

Originally Posted by Fat Brutaka

Oh, I read that bit too.

You basically want to create a replicate Dragon typing, with Ice being it's "Steel-typing".

How is that in any way a good idea?
And more importantly, is Ice's small number of resistances that big a deal?
It's already a brilliant offensive type. Why make a brilliant Defensive too? I mean, how is that fair, to say, Steel, which is a brilliant Defensive type but a horrid offensive type?

We can't say whether it would be brilliant or not, as we don't know how, precisely, this hypothetical new type would interact with other types. It's possible Ice would still be great offensively, and suddenly, would just be viable, without being "brilliant" because a few of these new types are super common, so it helps to have a resistant check.

But there are lots of ways to handle this problem. It's possible Ice could become more viable if Stealth Rock were simply nerfed. A lot of Ice types are crippled by the fact that they have a stealth rock weakness paired with the fact that they have few other defensive benefits. There are lots of ways GF could go about fixing any of the problems in the meta-game. I just think a new type would be a good way to address some of this imbalance while also just being fun because, really, it's been a decade since a new type of pokemon was introduced. Again, I'm as interested in the aesthetic variation this could provide/inspire as I am the practical in-game effects.

[Solsar]

Originally Posted by Fat kickmeimirish

Personally I am hoping that Ninfia is Flying or Normal. If they add an additional type then we have to waste a bunch of Pokemon on useless new-types that aren't even generally viable because they are now super rare.

No thanks. I'll pass.

I agree. I'm thinking that Ninfia will be either a Normal or Flying type as well. I think that it'll just evolve from Eevee through level up, but knowing the way Pokemon works they're probably going to make a Normal stone. A Flying type would be a great addition as well. Especially during in-game considering that it be physically inclined.

[Narutendo3]

@kupo555
It's a very good point that it would help with the variety of pokemon designs too. They've hardly scratched the surface of what light-type pokemon could look like.

[MofoAmbulance]

Originally Posted by Fat SmashBrosBrawl

Find me a bug or ghost that can switch in alakazam psyshock and hp fire.

Moot point, Alakazam had neither of these things in Gen 2. The point that should be made here is that nothing RESISTED Psychic (apart from other Psychic types lol) until Gen 2, when Dark and Steel were introduced. You could potentially beat Psychic with Bug and Ghost, but it hit everything for neutral or SE damage in Gen 1, except for itself - and there's no fun in a single type being glaringly OP. That's why Dark and Steel were added, because a type being unresisted except by itself doesn't make for a fun game, and because of this an immunity and a resistance to Psychic were necessary.

What would a new type contribute to Pokemon other than "We're adding this for diversity's sake"? It'd be a flavour thing, and would change a lot in the game, but the thing is a new type just isn't necessary - the current type chart works just fine. This isn't to say they won't add a new type, but using the Dark/Steel retconning as an argument isn't paticularly helpful to the discussion, as they were necessary to implement to counter Psychic. Also, each type respectively only retconned 1 thing each in Gen 2, Steel taking a dual typing on Magnemite and Bite being turned from Normal to Dark type - Magnemite being made Steel was a logical step because of Magnemite's design, and no idea about Bite. (If there were any other retcons from Gen 1 to 2, let me know and I'll correct myself)

Personally, I don't know about whether there'd be a new type or not - Honestly, I hope there is, I'd love a new type to spice things up, but it's simply just not a needed change like Dark/Steel were. However, it is quite suspicious that they hid the typing, and the flak they'd get for covering it all in mystery then revealing it as "just" a normal type or whatever seems to be too much effort on their part.

On that note, LOOK IT'S GOT AN AURA AND IT'S SPARKLING, LIGHT TYPE CONFIRMED GG NOOBS LOL

[SmashBrosBrawl]

Originally Posted by Fat Narutendo3

They added new types in gen 2 even though changed matchups alone could (and did) nerf psychic.

They wanted something to promote gen 2 too =P.

[Narutendo3]

Originally Posted by Fat MofoAmbulance

Moot point, Alakazam had neither of these things in Gen 2. The point that should be made here is that nothing RESISTED Psychic (apart from other Psychic types lol) until Gen 2, when Dark and Steel were introduced. You could potentially beat Psychic with Bug and Ghost, but it hit everything for neutral or SE damage in Gen 1, except for itself - and there's no fun in a single type being glaringly OP. That's why Dark and Steel were added, because a type being unresisted except by itself doesn't make for a fun game, and because of this an immunity and a resistance to Psychic were necessary.

What would a new type contribute to Pokemon other than "We're adding this for diversity's sake"? It'd be a flavour thing, and would change a lot in the game, but the thing is a new type just isn't necessary - the current type chart works just fine. This isn't to say they won't add a new type, but using the Dark/Steel retconning as an argument isn't paticularly helpful to the discussion, as they were necessary to implement to counter Psychic. Also, each type respectively only retconned 1 thing each in Gen 2, Steel taking a dual typing on Magnemite and Bite being turned from Normal to Dark type - Magnemite being made Steel was a logical step because of Magnemite's design, and no idea about Bite. (If there were any other retcons from Gen 1 to 2, let me know and I'll correct myself)

Personally, I don't know about whether there'd be a new type or not - Honestly, I hope there is, I'd love a new type to spice things up, but it's simply just not a needed change like Dark/Steel were. However, it is quite suspicious that they hid the typing, and the flak they'd get for covering it all in mystery then revealing it as "just" a normal type or whatever seems to be too much effort on their part.

On that note, LOOK IT'S GOT AN AURA AND IT'S SPARKLING, LIGHT TYPE CONFIRMED GG NOOBS LOL

So then abilities, breeding, and the physical/special split were also necessary? -_- Diversity is more than enough of a good reason.

Originally Posted by Fat SmashBrosBrawl

They wanted something to promote gen 2 too =P.

I would imagine GF wouldn't mind promoting gen 6.

[SmashBrosBrawl]

Originally Posted by Fat Narutendo3

So then abilities, breeding, and the physical/special split were also necessary? -_-

Yes, yes and yes.
Edit: And for MofoAmbulance, i dont think a new type is necessary either, you didnt read my previous posts.

[MofoAmbulance]

Originally Posted by Fat SmashBrosBrawl

Yes, yes and yes.
Edit: And for MofoAmbulance, i dont think a new type is necessary either, you didnt read my previous posts.

I did, and that part wasn't aimed at you haha, that was a general discussion point.

[Narutendo3]

Originally Posted by Fat SmashBrosBrawl

Yes, yes and yes.

lol, any credibility out the window

[SmashBrosBrawl]

Originally Posted by Fat Narutendo3

lol, any credibility out the window

Abilities: Make the metagame more diverse.
Breeding: Make easier to obtain pre-evos.
Physical/Splits: Making movepools actually useful instead of forcing mons to use random crap like hp flying or rock slide.

[Narutendo3]

Originally Posted by Fat SmashBrosBrawl

Abilities: Make the metagame more diverse.
Breeding: Make easier to obtain pre-evos.
Physical/Splits: Making movepools actually useful instead of forcing mons to use random crap like hp flying or rock slide.

New type: Make the whole game more diverse.

[Mario With Lasers]

Im going to expand on it later (Im on my phone right now), but STOP DISCUSSING THE LIGHT TYPE UNTIL THE DAY ITS ANNOUNCED.

It has been four generations since people started this shit, get a grip.

[Brutaka]

Originally Posted by Fat kupo555

Why does a change have to fix a problem? Very few of the *big* changes these games make from generation to generation are done because they "fix" anything. In fact, some of the big changes they make are downright counterintuitive and require retconning or some fancy footwork to dance around logical flaws (as I mentioned earlier an example of this would be making baby pokemon for species of pokemon who we had already hatched from eggs. "Oops" says GameFreak. "Well, uh, you see, if you, um, hold this...incense, yeah, INCENSE--then all of a sudden you get the baby pokemon." "Suuuure," says everybody else).

Again--Steel and Dark may have been used to fix how powerful Psychic was, but there were plenty of options open to Game Freak outside of adding new types to do the same thing. It's not always about fixing problems. Sometimes it's about doing things simply to add new layers to an old system to keep things fresh. Like adding abilities in Gen III, for example. This wasn't a solution to a problem, it was a new mechanic added because they wanted to bring more elements into the game to keep it fresh and exciting. Abilities didn't hurt, and they could work, so why the hell not? Same with a possible new type. Again, a new type wouldn't necessarily need to be some sort of salve for some problem with the meta game, it could just be something meant to add new possibilities, and to keep pokemon designs varied and aesthetically inspired.

Except baby Pokemon and abilities are new mechanics. Not an extension or addition to something that was already there in way new types are.
Just Double/Triple/Rotation are new mechanics. The change in the way EV's are handled, and even the Physical/Special Split.

And, before you just dismiss the imbalances still in the chart, how about you try and make a case for how it's balanced, when the dispersion of pokemon of different types is grossly and obviously lopsided. That's pretty good empirical evidence that there are still some clear imbalances. At this point, I'd say the onus is on you to argue otherwise.

Honestly, most of that is to do with the Pokemon in those group's BSTs.

Let's see...ill hit the ones people are talking about the most.
Ice: 1 Resistance, 4 Weaknesses.
Sure, Defensively, this is terrible. But the redeeming factor here is the ability to hit Dragons supeffectively AND the common Ground. That is Ice's purpose. It is meant as a offensive type and I see nothing wrong with that.

Dragon: 4 Resistances, 2 Weaknesses.
GF's whole point on this is mystical super-powered beings. It's supposed to be OP, and yet, it's still managed. (With Ice)

Steel: 11 Resistances, 3 Weaknesses, 1 Immunity.
Wow, thats a lot of Resists! But wait...it only hits two super-effectively? And those are Ice and Rock? Well gosh dang, thats down right horrid! But see, Lots of defense, not so much offense. Though honestly, its about the BST here too.

Bug: 3 Resistances, 3 Weaknesses.
It can defend against Grass, Fighting, and Ground (Ground being the important one here). It's weak to Fire, Flying, and Rock. I think Rock is the problem here, with Stone Edge and Rock Slide being so common. But it's resistant to the be-all, end-all move EQuake, so hey?


But besides all that, the metagame isn't dominated by a single type. Sure, there's a group of types that are in the lead, but it's all up to the pokemon, the moves effects, and so on.

Now, I'm not completely against a new type, I just dont like the idea of a Light type.

And I repeat, new types =/= new mechanics.

[MofoAmbulance]

Originally Posted by Fat Narutendo3

So then abilities, breeding, and the physical/special split were also necessary? -_- Diversity is more than enough of a good reason.

I would imagine GF wouldn't mind promoting gen 6.

Okay, Abilities, not necessary, you got me there. However, breeding isn't relevant to combat mechanics (which is the point I was trying to argue), and they needed to have the physical/special split since Gen 1 if only purely for the sake of clarity. Surprised it took them till Gen 4 to implement it, personally.

The point I'm trying to make here is that a new type isn't needed like Dark/Steel were - not that it can't/won't happen (and I would like it to), but it just seems unlikely at this point. I don't have any concrete proof that it won't happen, so that's why I'm not claiming this any further than my own opinion. Although, on that note, there's been something game-changing in each Generation of Pokemon (barring 5, which has the same mechanics as 4) - Gen 2 had Dark/Steel and the Sp. Atk/Def split, Gen 3 had abilities, Gen 4 had the Physical/Special attack split, and Gen 6 might have a new type or something entirely different - it's all speculation at this point.

[Infernis]

Wow, for a little bit this thread was gaining pages faster than I could read them. So, let me just point out a few things about this proposed 'light type'. (Which I think is silly, if anyone doubted my opinion.)

1. There is next to no reason for ice to resist light. Wow, high albedo. That's going to help so much. You know what preserves ice even more? Darkness. No, that's not saying that Ice should resist dark. That's saying that any amount of light will help melt ice. In no way is it helpful.

2. Why would Light be super effective against Dragon? Most mythological and fantasy dragonslayings are done with steel, magic, or shenanigans like trapping it underground. Nobody brings a flashlight to a dragon hunt. I've never even heard of dragons hating light.

3. Letting Light harm dragons as ice does would only steal ice's main appeal.

4. Look at some current moves: Solarbeam is grass type. Mirror coat is psychic type. Mirror move is flying type. All of these have their own explanations already. Solarbeam is a collection of solar energy within the creature using it. Mirror coat is a wall of psychic energy. Mirror move... doesn't actually have a description like that, but everything but Blaziken (who is based on a bird anyway) that learns it is flying type.

5. They've had so many opportunities to do light type already. Reshiram represented idealism (or truth, I forget), and wasn't light type. Porygon is CGI, and possibly a hologram, and is normal type. Exploud was all about sound, and they didn't add a sound type. (Though with abilities, they did add Soundproof.) Ampharos powers a lighthouse. It is not light type.

[Wishy]

Originally Posted by Fat The Diverman

Why do have to change the name of the Fairy egg group? There's non Dragon Pokemon in the Dragon egg group. I could see them changing Clefairy, Clefable, Audino, etc. into Fairy types or making them dual types. For the species names: Geodude's and Graveler's species is Rock, Electrabuzz's is Electric, and Horsea's and Seadra's is Dragon. Hasn't been confusing so far.

Touche. I just think it's been too long to go back and retcon a bunch of stuff to plug in Fairy type. At least Geodude and Electabuzz are named after their own type that exists (and wasn't Kingdra's index # in RBY, so it was planned for RBY but was cut and used later?). It would just be a bit of an ass pull to try and explain why the Fairy Pokemon wasn't a Fairy type until 10 years after. Is Prof. Oak just not good at his job? And how many Pokemon will have to be retconned?

Ultimately, I wouldn't care if they did retcon in a new type. All I'm saying is I don't see it happening (I don't think a new type is necessary!*) but Fairy is at least a much better flavour type than Light (what does Light mean? what kind of Pokemon represents Light? etc etc).

*There are different ways to spice up a new generation. Physical-special split (the smartest thing they've ever done for the series), different types of battles, dream world, different types of side-games and so on. Plus, again, what does any new type represent that isn't already represented in this game? Why become redundant and mix things up that don't need to be mixed up?

Originally Posted by Fat Zowayix

So...why would they ask such a specific question? Not even Xerneas and Yveltal had these questions there.

Because because Eevee changing types upon evolution is it's shtick, and they want to invoke speculate (re: the last few dozen pages).