Ignus
Copying deli meat to hard drive
Hi Everybody! I'm here with numbers! The original, super old, thread is here. You can think of this as an unofficial update on the analysis X-Act did there, as this uses the exact same formula he did. There should be no differences in the math and this should be almost entirely an update of that thread for ORAS. (Edit: this is true for the order of the types in that cool list down there. The charts themselves, however, don't use this. make sense?)
Furthermore, if you want to wade through the spreadsheet yourself, Here's a link:
LINK.
More edits because things keep changing: The charts below are using a slightly edited formula from X-Act's; if I change the formula any more, I'll update it below.
Changelog:
Bolded Numbers are below 72000. In other words, GOOD. The lower the number, the more effective the type combo. Normal + Normal is equivalent to having just a normal move.
Physical:
Special:
Mixed:
New type rankings:
Important: When it comes to weighting weaknesses, The below list is for single types. This list uses the original formula, Which means dealing 4x damage to an opponent is worth twice as much as dealing 2x damage. I kept this formula the same because it's more accurate for evaluating single type coverage.
Physical:
This is the real intent of a dual type effectiveness chart. If you've ever had issues deciding which coverage move to take, you can use this chart as a quick reference for which move, assuming each type has the same base power, will do the most damage when combined with your primary STAB! How cool is that? Oh, it's not? What are you, a plebeian? It's cool.
Physical
Special
Notes and Other Weird Stuff
You're damn right. The reason is because his uses every fully evolved pokemon as of 2008. I only used the 68 current OU pokemon. As these calculations are a SUM, Missing out on so many pokemon means the numbers are smaller. If someone wants to volunteer to fill out the other 300+ columns in the spreadsheet, volunteer and I'll put you to work. No problem.
I will still steal any volunteers willing to enter data, But the formula is currently "correcting" the scale of the math by dividing the usage of each the current pokemon entered by the sum of the usage of every pokemon entered so far. It works. You can trust Math.
Edit: I definitely enjoy stabbing myself in the brain. It makes me type the wrong things.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Big thanks to QxC4eva for coming up with the solid way to handle the weighting of type effectiveness. It works.
So that's that. Ready set discuss!
Approved by AM
Furthermore, if you want to wade through the spreadsheet yourself, Here's a link:
LINK.
More edits because things keep changing: The charts below are using a slightly edited formula from X-Act's; if I change the formula any more, I'll update it below.
Changelog:
- Fixed incorrectly implemented immunity abilities. Now it works.
- Gave chansey an eviolite.
- Added Dual type chart. More numbers!
- Dealing 4x super effective damage against a pokemon has been weighted differently. Now worth 2x instead of 4x
- More Changes to the type effectiveness weighting (for dual type stuff only. Why? because I said so.)! You can find a detailed explanation Here from QxC4eva. He did a butt ton of work to help figure out a solid way to apply the average (and entered the new formula in to the spreadsheet himself), so if you have the resources send a cute girl to go slap his butt.
- Added the "HEY WHICH COVERAGE MOVE SHOULD I TAKE GUYS" charts to the OP. Uses the most recent formula.
Bolded Numbers are below 72000. In other words, GOOD. The lower the number, the more effective the type combo. Normal + Normal is equivalent to having just a normal move.
Physical:
Special:
Mixed:
New type rankings:
Important: When it comes to weighting weaknesses, The below list is for single types. This list uses the original formula, Which means dealing 4x damage to an opponent is worth twice as much as dealing 2x damage. I kept this formula the same because it's more accurate for evaluating single type coverage.
Physical:
- Ice
- Ghost
- Fire
- Fairy
- Fighting
- Rock
- Dark
- Water
- Electric
- Flying
- Ground
- Bug
- Grass
- Steel
- Dragon
- Poison
- Psychic
- Normal
- Ice
- Fire
- Fighting
- Ghost
- Fairy
- Rock
- Water
- Dark
- Electric
- Flying
- Ground
- Grass
- Bug
- Dragon
- Steel
- Psychic
- Normal
- Poison
- Ice is still really, really good.
- Poison is still really, really mediocre.
- Flying's rank has gone down drastically in the past seven years.
Ground's rank has gone up considerably in the past seven years.I Apparently don't know how to use the "times" symbol instead of the "plus" symbol.
This is the real intent of a dual type effectiveness chart. If you've ever had issues deciding which coverage move to take, you can use this chart as a quick reference for which move, assuming each type has the same base power, will do the most damage when combined with your primary STAB! How cool is that? Oh, it's not? What are you, a plebeian? It's cool.
Physical
Special
Notes and Other Weird Stuff
Hey! These Numbers are way smaller then X-Act's! Surely the metagame hasn't changed THAT much!
I will still steal any volunteers willing to enter data, But the formula is currently "correcting" the scale of the math by dividing the usage of each the current pokemon entered by the sum of the usage of every pokemon entered so far. It works. You can trust Math.
- How did you do Mega Evolutions?
- How do you enjoy entering this much data?
Edit: I definitely enjoy stabbing myself in the brain. It makes me type the wrong things.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Big thanks to QxC4eva for coming up with the solid way to handle the weighting of type effectiveness. It works.
So that's that. Ready set discuss!
Approved by AM
Last edited: