-
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.
Unpopular opinions
- Thread starter antemortem
- Start date
It doesn't really matter much cuz for Pikachu, Raichu literally was there
Ivysaur was admittedly not introduced till ep 47 (which is mostly Chansey oriented), but Venusaur was generally more commonly seen (already in Ep 20 for the illusion, alongside Blastoise). Attack pose wise, there isn't too much a difference between Bulba and later lines, besides I guess drawing the flower
It also is weird cuz Charmander evolved, same for Caterpie. Misty also double mained Staryu/Starmie, so using multiple mons in the same line was already not really a rule
Like if it's for animation optimization they did a terrible job...being restrictive. They made model sheets for all 151 mons at the time, regardless of errors from interpreting art (Golduck having 5 horns, Fearow's tail which later GF canonized, Clefairy's eyes, Eevee's tail, etc)
Ivysaur was admittedly not introduced till ep 47 (which is mostly Chansey oriented), but Venusaur was generally more commonly seen (already in Ep 20 for the illusion, alongside Blastoise). Attack pose wise, there isn't too much a difference between Bulba and later lines, besides I guess drawing the flower
It also is weird cuz Charmander evolved, same for Caterpie. Misty also double mained Staryu/Starmie, so using multiple mons in the same line was already not really a rule
Like if it's for animation optimization they did a terrible job...being restrictive. They made model sheets for all 151 mons at the time, regardless of errors from interpreting art (Golduck having 5 horns, Fearow's tail which later GF canonized, Clefairy's eyes, Eevee's tail, etc)
The Pseudo Legendaries are somewhat overrated and not well-designed, but not for the reasons you might think. It’s not necessarily because most of them are dragon type, as since using the same typing repeatedly is annoying, they’re supposed to be divine creatures, and therefore expected to be strong. No, it’s because all of them are mechanically repetitive: most of them are physical attackers, with just a Dragon Dance + Sweep (or in Garchomp’s case, Scale Shot + Sweep). Sure, there might be exceptions, like Dragonite being bulky with Roost + Multiscale, Garchomp having Spikes + Stealth Rock as entry hazards, Salamence has Intimidate, and Baxcalibur having unique bulkness with Thermal Body + Ice Body & Aurora Veil. But when you look at it, all of them are the same. Some of them could run mixed coverage like Flamethrower, but that’s not their main bread and butter, and even when they do, it’s just to catch Steel-types like Skarmory or Ferrothorn off guard.
However, having them share the same typing can be fine if they can work in different ways. For example, when you have Chesnaught and Hisui-Decidueye, you can’t reasonably compare the two as the same thing. This is because Chesnaught is more of a defensive mon, with Spikes to set up hazards, Synthesis and Leech Seed to improve its bulk, and Bulletproof to dodge bullet moves like Shadow Ball and Sludge Bomb, whereas Hisui-D is designed as an offensive mon with Triple Arrows, U-Turn and Close Combat (Chesnaught has to use Body Press to avoid defense drops). This incomparability can also be applied to Lucario and Cobalion (one’s a frail lightning bruiser and the other is a utility mon) or Haxorus & Druddigon (Glass cannon vs. utility mon) or Gen 1 Rhydon vs Golem. Even Emboar shouldn’t be compared to other fire-fighting Pokémon like Infernape, Blaziken, or even Cinderace (not a fighting type but like the rest it's also a fire physical mon), because at least GF tried to make it a bulky fire-fighting Pokémon, which was unique (even though it wasn’t successful).
Now look at Garchomp. You think it's unique because of its design, but the main problem is that it's just a better Flygon. Cause it has a higher attack stat, is slightly faster, has Spikes, and a more usable ability in Rough Skin. The only things Flygon has are Levitate, Dragon Dance (which isn’t much, given its mediocre attack), Roost, and Defog (which, even then, he lost in SV). It doesn’t help that Flygon never got a Mega Evolution, but Garchomp did. You could even argue Garchomp is a better Salamence because of its slightly faster speed, and Ground fits better with Dragon than flying due to being super effective against Steels (the only type to resist Dragon at the time).
That’s not to say that all pseudo-dragons weren’t designed carefully, because some are unique and broke the mold:
Unfortunately, none of them that I just listed will be as popular or have a high-meta-defining history as the other dragon pseudo-legendaries, except Tyranitar.
And that trend would likely continue, considering that Dragonite got a mega evolution, whilst the other pseudo-dragons would be left in the dust. It would be one thing if Mega Dragonite acted differently from its standard form, like Venusaur, but I don’t think that’s likely.
However, having them share the same typing can be fine if they can work in different ways. For example, when you have Chesnaught and Hisui-Decidueye, you can’t reasonably compare the two as the same thing. This is because Chesnaught is more of a defensive mon, with Spikes to set up hazards, Synthesis and Leech Seed to improve its bulk, and Bulletproof to dodge bullet moves like Shadow Ball and Sludge Bomb, whereas Hisui-D is designed as an offensive mon with Triple Arrows, U-Turn and Close Combat (Chesnaught has to use Body Press to avoid defense drops). This incomparability can also be applied to Lucario and Cobalion (one’s a frail lightning bruiser and the other is a utility mon) or Haxorus & Druddigon (Glass cannon vs. utility mon) or Gen 1 Rhydon vs Golem. Even Emboar shouldn’t be compared to other fire-fighting Pokémon like Infernape, Blaziken, or even Cinderace (not a fighting type but like the rest it's also a fire physical mon), because at least GF tried to make it a bulky fire-fighting Pokémon, which was unique (even though it wasn’t successful).
Now look at Garchomp. You think it's unique because of its design, but the main problem is that it's just a better Flygon. Cause it has a higher attack stat, is slightly faster, has Spikes, and a more usable ability in Rough Skin. The only things Flygon has are Levitate, Dragon Dance (which isn’t much, given its mediocre attack), Roost, and Defog (which, even then, he lost in SV). It doesn’t help that Flygon never got a Mega Evolution, but Garchomp did. You could even argue Garchomp is a better Salamence because of its slightly faster speed, and Ground fits better with Dragon than flying due to being super effective against Steels (the only type to resist Dragon at the time).
That’s not to say that all pseudo-dragons weren’t designed carefully, because some are unique and broke the mold:
- Hydregion - Stands out by being more focused as a Dark-Type, due to its brutal and wicked nature. Whilst it's not as fast and initially powerful as the other dragons, it stands out because of its unique typing, U-turn, Taunt, and defensive uses in being immune to Pranksters, Psychic, and Ground attacks.
- Dragapult - Stands out by being incredibly fast and has a variety of moves that include Dragon Darts, U-Turn, Shadow Force, Thunder Wave, Will-O-Wisp, etc. It also differentiates itself by initially being weaker, as it has a high attack but less reliable physical moves, and a variety of special attack moves, but only a decent special attack stat.
- Kommo-o - Another mixed attacker that stands out for its mixed utility with Stealth Rock, Taunt, Drain Punch, Soundproof, and Bulletproof, and has a balanced stat spread of 110 Attack / 100 Sp. Atk / 125 Defense / 105 Sp. Def. It even has two signature moves: Clanging Scales, A powerful Dragon-type special move, and Clangorous Soul, which boosts all stats at the cost of HP.
- Even Goodra counts because at least it tries to work as a defensive Dragon special wall, with Hydration. It doesn’t get praise as much, tho, because it’s not as viable as the other dragons due to its mono typing, lack of reliable recovery, and no offensive power.
Unfortunately, none of them that I just listed will be as popular or have a high-meta-defining history as the other dragon pseudo-legendaries, except Tyranitar.
And that trend would likely continue, considering that Dragonite got a mega evolution, whilst the other pseudo-dragons would be left in the dust. It would be one thing if Mega Dragonite acted differently from its standard form, like Venusaur, but I don’t think that’s likely.
Last edited:
Hydreigon to me has always felt incredibly underpowered; I've never really liked using it or felt like I was getting the best out of it. Dragonite, Tyranitar, Salamence, and Garchomp all have Attack stats of 130 or over, but Hydreigon's corresponding 125 Special Attack just feels a smidge too low - there's a whole bunch of Pokemon who can boast higher scores than that. Compounding this is the fact that most Special moves tend to have slightly lower base power, so it's one of those attackers which often seems to fall short of an OHKO with non-STABed hits.
And this would be fine, as Gen V is where they started mixing the typical stat spread of these Pokemon up a bit more, but unlike Kommo-o or Goodra or Dragapult, Hydreigon doesn't really get much of a tradeoff in terms of its other stats, either. It's not quite as fast as it wants to be and while its defensive stats are great, its Dark typing means it's vulnerable to a LOT of common attacks so it doesn't really get the benefit of this. Sure it's got the Attack to be a physical or mixed sweeper but so do all the other Dragons, and it didn't get Dragon Dance until Gen VIII anyway.
Granted, I've mainly only used it in Gen V & VII's battle facilities and I'm sure gaining access to Nasty Plot and Dragon Dance made it a whole lot better than it was. But it would be even better if its stats were actually built around making it a truly powerful special sweeper.
Conversely, I used Kommo-o quite a bit in the Battle Tree (Multis) and found it great, but that's only because it's basically dependent on Clangorous Soulblaze; it was basically always used at the first opportunity. And Kommo-o has kind of the perfect stat spread for an omniboost; it could use slightly better HP, but most non-Fairy attacks will fail to OHKO it anyway.
Not used it beyond Gen VII so can't really comment on how it plays outside of that.
My issue with Goodra has always been that they were going for a more defensive bent with this one which is cool - but they seemingly didn't want to nerf its offensive presence too hard, so they crippled its physical Defence stat instead which really hobbles it as a wall. Tyranitar has better overall bulk (even discounting the boost sandy weather gives it). Goodra's physical Attack feels like such a waste to me, it doesn't even get Dragon Dance.
So you end up with a regional form that utterly outclasses it because it has a stat spread more in line with what Kalosian Goodra should have originally had (and a better typing to boot).
I think I can understand where you are coming from regarding Hydregion, Kommo-o and Goodra.
However, what I am arguing is not on how they are supposed to be strong like the other pseudo dragons (Garchomp, Dragonite, Baxcalibur and Salamence) and rehasing their playstyle, but rather breaking the mold and having a unique kit and playstyle.
If people are dissapointed, it can be on how player expected it to be the same mechanically as the other popular psuedo-dragons.
What I'm saying is for not all psuedo-legendaries have to be equally viable or even dominant: it would be a tall task and it might face in harsher powercreep. What I am asking is for the pseudo-legendaries to be different in not just their stats and how they're distributed, but the main role they perform. I would prefer that over being highly viable.
However, what I am arguing is not on how they are supposed to be strong like the other pseudo dragons (Garchomp, Dragonite, Baxcalibur and Salamence) and rehasing their playstyle, but rather breaking the mold and having a unique kit and playstyle.
You mentioned that Hydregion's special attack isn't high enough, but that's what sets it apart from the other psuedo-dragons, it's not trying to be a dominant sweeper, but rather on how different it is by being a special utility mon, like with Taunt, U-turn, Tailwind and immune to Psychic and Ground attacks and Spikes. Its Dark typing gives it immunity to Prankster status moves like Taunt or Thunder Wave. It even has useful spread coverage like Heat Wave and Snarl.
If people are dissapointed, it can be on how player expected it to be the same mechanically as the other popular psuedo-dragons.
The fact that Kommo-o has a signature move already makes it stand out from others; and since it boosts both special attack and the attack stat, it can run both physical, special or even a mixed set. Kommo's design gives it a lot flexibility through that and utility moves that makes it stand out.
Whilst yes sadly it's not a really good dragon wall, at least it's still unique. The fact that it's unviable is less on its design (which I noted on how they tried to make one) and more on its execution. At least they made it up with Hisuian Goodra, who is part Steel type and makes it stand out from the rest.
What I'm saying is for not all psuedo-legendaries have to be equally viable or even dominant: it would be a tall task and it might face in harsher powercreep. What I am asking is for the pseudo-legendaries to be different in not just their stats and how they're distributed, but the main role they perform. I would prefer that over being highly viable.
I would say that the pseudo-legendaries actually feel more distinct when you start to look at them more from a Doubles perspective, especially given VGC, the official competitive format, is a Doubles oriented metagame. Now Dragonite, Tyranitar, Salamence, and Metagross were from before VGC actually took off in Gen 4, but all of them do feel a bit different from one another when you account for a Doubles environment. Granted, not all of them are necessarily viable in VGC, but many of them have seen use in VGC in at least their debut gens.
Dragonite has Inner Focus. A Fake Out immunity is cool. Also Extreme Speed, which in tandem with Tera Normal has actually given it some niches in the current generation's VGC, combined with good overall bulk.
Tyranitar has Sand Stream, and weather even post-nerf is still a powerful force in Doubles. Not to mention a good spread attack in Rock Slide.
Salamence has Intimidate, one of the best abilities out there in Doubles. This gave it some good VGC uses every now and then, and Mega Salamence was cool in VGC in tandem with base, even though Incineroar, Hitmontop, and Arcanine have historically been more iconic as Intimidate users.
Metagross is a good tank overall, and it's been a pretty prominent force in VGC historically.
Garchomp is fairly straightforward, hits hard and fast. Has a spread attack STAB in Earthquake.
Hydreigon has Snarl for spread utility, and hard hitting Draco Meteor and coverage. Its all-around, specially oriented statline is a bit eh in Singles but gives it some interesting use in Doubles with a partner, especially with a Prankster immunity, Tailwind, and U-turn to top it off as extra tools.
Goodra is actually pretty interesting. It has weather resistances, Sap Sipper for Sun, Hydration for Rain, and Gooey to slow a sweeper down, and can blanket check a lot of Special Attackers in Doubles. Feint is also a tool in its arsenal to break Protect.
Kommo-o has Soundproof, an ability that can make it immune to partners' sound-based moves like Boomburst or Sparkling Aria in Doubles, and Hyper Voice from opponents. It also has a spread attack in Clanging Scales.
Dragapult is fast, has Clear Body to be immune to Intimidate, is immune to Fake Out, and has Dragon Darts (hits both targets, will hit one twice if one Protects) and Phantom Force (a fast Phantom Force both hits hard in Doubles and bypasses+breaks Protect).
Baxcalibur is also a bit straightforward but can be good in Doubles with alternation of Glaive Rush+Protect and priority in Ice Shard, plus good bulk.
They all do have some distinct qualities, but in some cases they're not immediately obvious. Many of them feel a tad more geared towards shining in a Doubles environment than a Singles environment.
Dragonite has Inner Focus. A Fake Out immunity is cool. Also Extreme Speed, which in tandem with Tera Normal has actually given it some niches in the current generation's VGC, combined with good overall bulk.
Tyranitar has Sand Stream, and weather even post-nerf is still a powerful force in Doubles. Not to mention a good spread attack in Rock Slide.
Salamence has Intimidate, one of the best abilities out there in Doubles. This gave it some good VGC uses every now and then, and Mega Salamence was cool in VGC in tandem with base, even though Incineroar, Hitmontop, and Arcanine have historically been more iconic as Intimidate users.
Metagross is a good tank overall, and it's been a pretty prominent force in VGC historically.
Garchomp is fairly straightforward, hits hard and fast. Has a spread attack STAB in Earthquake.
Hydreigon has Snarl for spread utility, and hard hitting Draco Meteor and coverage. Its all-around, specially oriented statline is a bit eh in Singles but gives it some interesting use in Doubles with a partner, especially with a Prankster immunity, Tailwind, and U-turn to top it off as extra tools.
Goodra is actually pretty interesting. It has weather resistances, Sap Sipper for Sun, Hydration for Rain, and Gooey to slow a sweeper down, and can blanket check a lot of Special Attackers in Doubles. Feint is also a tool in its arsenal to break Protect.
Kommo-o has Soundproof, an ability that can make it immune to partners' sound-based moves like Boomburst or Sparkling Aria in Doubles, and Hyper Voice from opponents. It also has a spread attack in Clanging Scales.
Dragapult is fast, has Clear Body to be immune to Intimidate, is immune to Fake Out, and has Dragon Darts (hits both targets, will hit one twice if one Protects) and Phantom Force (a fast Phantom Force both hits hard in Doubles and bypasses+breaks Protect).
Baxcalibur is also a bit straightforward but can be good in Doubles with alternation of Glaive Rush+Protect and priority in Ice Shard, plus good bulk.
They all do have some distinct qualities, but in some cases they're not immediately obvious. Many of them feel a tad more geared towards shining in a Doubles environment than a Singles environment.
I know y'all said Hydreigon felt weak, but honestly Salamence is worse in comp originality. It's literally Rayquaza 2.0, Mega being its only distinction cuz aerilate stab spam. Intimidate is great for doubles, but it's specially quad weak to Ice regardless
Seriously, the DP Ubers description on Smogon straight up is calling it Ray Quay 2.0, needing to partner with Ray
Seriously, the DP Ubers description on Smogon straight up is calling it Ray Quay 2.0, needing to partner with Ray
That's interesting; I suppose Doubles does allow Pokémon to be more diverse, like Hydregion with Tailwind and Snarl. It helps that some pseudo-mons, like Tyranitar and Garchomp, have STAB spread moves, which overall make them more like a teammate rather than a stand-alone mon. Plus, some mons do stand out and work better in doubles compared to singles and vice versa, like how Skarmory is great in singles but not in Doubles.
Granted, it doesn't really solve the overuse of them being designed as physical-oriented sweepers in singles, especially as in early generations doubles wasn't really a thing, but I do guess when you have the little things that can be more useful in doubles like Tailwind, it could make them more unique.
Which led me to wonder, when GF designs a Pokémon in terms of its typing, abilities, and move pool, is it from a singles or a doubles perspective? I know there are Pokémon like Indeedee & Clefairy (both have Follow Me), and Incineroar that work in doubles, but then you have Amoonguss, which can work in both. I assumed that Pokémon are designed with singles in mind, especially since mainline games mostly feature single battles.
Both, but predominantly Doubles.
Singles exist as official format, but it's a 3v3 format with bring 3 out of 6. Which is VERY different from "bring 6" as it lets you carry niche mons you'd only pull once in a while and don't mind being deadweight the other time. Also why things like Supreme Overlord or Last Respects arent problematic: when there's at most 3 or 4 pokemon, they don't remotely stack to the absurd power they can stack to in a 6v6 scenario.
We do not talk of the Urshifu incident though. That time when they made 3 pokemon mainly to counter Dynamax then forgot to nerf one of them after Dynamax was removed
There's a difference between "Model sheet and shows up on one enemy team" vs "member of Ash's team", though. The Ash/Misty/Brock mons have to be animated eating, walking, playing, etc, while a Venomoth or Feraligatr just shows up, uses 2 attacks, and faints to a NVE attack. Charmeleon and Caterpie are good examples, actually. Charmander spends 1 whole episode as a Charmeleon before evolving again, minimizing the amount of animations needed. Caterpie goes all the way to Butterfree over the course of 2 episodes.
I'm not saying evolution was banned or anything. I'm saying that protagonist pokemon are essentially unique characters, and changing their designs took enough effort that it wasn't done without good reason.
If it's predominantly doubles, it's a bit of a shame. I get that vgc is the official tournament for pokemon, so doubles would get popular but it ends up creating an imbalance of mons. Like how Palafin is broken in singles because but kinda tame in doubles, due to how long singles matches take.
Plus, there's no tiering system for Doubles in Smogon like for Singles (OU, UU, RU and so on), so we can't play with lower tiered mons if we wanted to.
Or how there's no official tournament for singles like doubles has for VGC, for those that prefer playing singles but wanna win big like VGC.
If I am wrong, please let me know, I'm not very knowledgeable when it comes to pokemon competitive.
There is a lower tier system for doubles, its a lot less popular and only goes down to UU and below UU (basically RU, but without the builder). Doubles UU even has a ladder, so while it isnt active, I'm sure you could find some games there.
I hate and reject the notion which has become widespread in the community that regional forms/variants count in the generation of the original Pokemon’s appearance. Nowadays, most consider Pokemon like Exeggutor-A or Arcanine-H to be “gen 1” Pokemon. THIS IS WRONG. It goes completely against the point of “generations” as a category of organization. It needs to cease. By force, if necessary….
this comes from the things that annoy you thread, but i feel like there's a pretty """simple""" way to bridge pokemons main game with pvp without needing to move most of it to champions*, its to make pokemon a fully 2v2 game and remove singles as a real battle mode, and honestly? i do think that would improve the games a lot.
Im putting this in the unpopular opinions thread because this is the competitive singles forum, but while i do not believe comp singles is better or worse than comp doubles, ive come around the doubles only format for a mainline game and i find it that it just does anything singles does better. It has way more opportunities for interesting boss design and strategy and fight scaling
i think singles runs the issue that with npcs, even with good ai, its easy to fall into the extremes of a fight being super trivial or insanely hard. And i think the former is happening more because a lot of singles "best showings" werent exactly about super well constructed teams or npcs with great strategies, but the denial of tools to deal with them — modern games give you all the tools, so now they just have nothing to stand on. And in response to that theres a desire to bump up difficulty by just... making really silly game design decisions. Ultra necrozma is a joke of a boss and i do not respect it at all
and this isnt me saying that doubles would solve every problem. look at colosseum and xd: they got plenty of dogshit fights (though a lot of them are more so about the fucked up gen 3 design philosophy of "evasion accuracy cheese forever we hate you and hope you die"). but the entire concept of having two pokemon on the field just has so much more potential for simple but effective boss design. it doesnt even have to be hard! tate and liza arent hard, you can pretty consistently beat the shit outta them with swampert, but theyre interesting because theyre using a pretty synergetic doubles strategy!! you have to use your brain a biiiit more when dealing with them even compared to someone like steven or wallace, whos strategy is "spam fire moves/spam grass moves until something that isnt weak to it shows up, switch to new stab and spam it" despite being the end bosses of the game.
and yeah back to pvp, itd make the devs job much easier if they didnt have to deal with the usefulness of a pokemon in the main game being almost detached to their competitive mode AND the complete lack of knowledge of how doubles work in anything beyond using your single strategies on double battles because the only double battles are stupid random npcs that pose no threat.
hell, i think sv solidified to me that this change would be better because pokemon clearly isnt as interested in shoving a bunch of worthless npc fights in your way anymore. if we kept the density of trainers, doubles would be much harder to justify because it does take longer to deal with double chuds vs single chuds, but how many npc trainers exist in sv and how many times have people even gone out of their way to fight them lmfao.
they could keep singles as a gimmick nostalgia pvp mode with no ranked ladder or anything, thats all showdown really cares for to justify its existence tbh. and keep it around for legends. thatd be fun and make the two series feel even more unique from each other
*which wont change much because, like people were discussing, theyre still gonna need to balance pokemon both for the mainline but also pvp, and this hypothetical removal of pvp isnt going to like... make the stories better lol
Im putting this in the unpopular opinions thread because this is the competitive singles forum, but while i do not believe comp singles is better or worse than comp doubles, ive come around the doubles only format for a mainline game and i find it that it just does anything singles does better. It has way more opportunities for interesting boss design and strategy and fight scaling
i think singles runs the issue that with npcs, even with good ai, its easy to fall into the extremes of a fight being super trivial or insanely hard. And i think the former is happening more because a lot of singles "best showings" werent exactly about super well constructed teams or npcs with great strategies, but the denial of tools to deal with them — modern games give you all the tools, so now they just have nothing to stand on. And in response to that theres a desire to bump up difficulty by just... making really silly game design decisions. Ultra necrozma is a joke of a boss and i do not respect it at all
and this isnt me saying that doubles would solve every problem. look at colosseum and xd: they got plenty of dogshit fights (though a lot of them are more so about the fucked up gen 3 design philosophy of "evasion accuracy cheese forever we hate you and hope you die"). but the entire concept of having two pokemon on the field just has so much more potential for simple but effective boss design. it doesnt even have to be hard! tate and liza arent hard, you can pretty consistently beat the shit outta them with swampert, but theyre interesting because theyre using a pretty synergetic doubles strategy!! you have to use your brain a biiiit more when dealing with them even compared to someone like steven or wallace, whos strategy is "spam fire moves/spam grass moves until something that isnt weak to it shows up, switch to new stab and spam it" despite being the end bosses of the game.
and yeah back to pvp, itd make the devs job much easier if they didnt have to deal with the usefulness of a pokemon in the main game being almost detached to their competitive mode AND the complete lack of knowledge of how doubles work in anything beyond using your single strategies on double battles because the only double battles are stupid random npcs that pose no threat.
hell, i think sv solidified to me that this change would be better because pokemon clearly isnt as interested in shoving a bunch of worthless npc fights in your way anymore. if we kept the density of trainers, doubles would be much harder to justify because it does take longer to deal with double chuds vs single chuds, but how many npc trainers exist in sv and how many times have people even gone out of their way to fight them lmfao.
they could keep singles as a gimmick nostalgia pvp mode with no ranked ladder or anything, thats all showdown really cares for to justify its existence tbh. and keep it around for legends. thatd be fun and make the two series feel even more unique from each other
*which wont change much because, like people were discussing, theyre still gonna need to balance pokemon both for the mainline but also pvp, and this hypothetical removal of pvp isnt going to like... make the stories better lol
I’m always down for more doubles stuff, but think the best way to approach this as a mainline title would be to start with singles for the first leg of the game - maybe until badge 3 or 4? - then transition to doubles only. That way, new players can get a handle of the very basic mechanics of the game before being expected to learn about doubles interactions and navigating gameplay with two decisions to make per turn.
But overall, yeah, I agree this would be the ideal direction for mainline titles to go.
i think thats fair, though i will say that beastieball has shown to me a game can just open up in a doubles state and show you the ropes like that without much problem: the skill floor for doubles is pretty low and you dont have to overload people with doubles synergy. you can just start with a glorified singles experience where the only thing that changes is that you, well, have two pokemon attacking instead of two.
the way pokemon naturally progress does help this: most starting moves are simple and intuitive, they tend to be single targetting, and some are very simple spread moves that a kid can pick up on (i.e growl hitting both targets) without having to think of team synergy. as the game progresses, the complexity gets higher, but youre never expected to idk ally switch beat up strategies early game LMFAO. also kids participate in worlds i think theyre smart little freaks and would be able to pick up things faster if you just let them fiddle with it early game than transition it only mid game
I wouldn't go that long. My method is:
Singles tutorial battle vs Aiden, who picked the most passive of the 2 starters remaining after your pick. You fight his rodent, level to 6, then fight his starter.
Route of single wild mons, you must catch at least one before continuing.
Doubles battle, you and Aiden teaming up against Aggro, who picked the most offensive available starter. Aiden spams Growl and similar spread support moves.
Route of double battles vs wild mons. All wild battles will be doubles from now on. Free heals are common on this route in case something goes down so you aren't double-teamed.
Following that: Gyms are entirely doubles, just you. Evil team fights are you partnered with Aiden or Aggro depending on story and to teach the player to adapt to their styles. Route Boss trainers are a demonstration of a particular gimmick that the player wouldn't know was possible(Beat Up an ally etc). We occasionally bring in other battle styles(horde, triples) for a change of pace. The final rival battle is Aiden and Aggro putting their differences aside to oppose you.
There's no reason to have the player doing Singles once they understand the interface, it will just teach bad habits that need to be unlearned when we swap to doubles.
This is particularly annoying in Pokedoku, where Megas and gigantamax count as the generation the Pokemon is originally from, but regional forms count as the region their form was introduced in.
SV also strained the categorization by having Kitikami and Blueberry academy in different regions from the main game. Not just in Pokedoku, but also Pokemon Masters, where all of the DLC characters have the Paldea theme skill despite not being based there in lore.
It’s especially tortured considering that the Loyal Three, Ogerpon, and Pecharunt aren’t even from Kitakami (each hailing instead from unknown regions), while Gouging Fire, Raging Bolt, Iron Boulder, Iron Crown, and Terapagos actually are from Paldea, even though a differentiated Paldea/Kitakami/Blueberry system like the in-game Pokédex would probably file them under Blueberry.
I mean, Ogerpon's trainer was probably from Paldea given he brought the tera crystal in the lake/were used to make Ogerpon's masks with him.
to be fair we did have this since gen 1 right? mew is not from kanto (even if the south america mention is retconned to just be from somewhere else) and has never been assigned a real place its from beyond faraway island.
Most likely, yeah, but just on balance, if they’re already presented as travelers, then we can’t really say for sure that they were from Paldea to begin with, and didn’t just obtain that crystal while passing through Paldea from somewhere else.
(Come to think of it, Paldea’s other Legendary Pokémon are similarly unrooted — the Treasures of Ruin likely originate from China, and Koraidon and Miraidon are from other timelines. It’s interesting to me that aside from Terapagos, none of Gen 9’s Legendary Pokémon are originally from the place they first appear in.)
Indeed, and there’s even other minor cases like Corphish and Yungoos, which from the beginning were characterized as being invasive species in their Pokédex entries. I just think it’s funny that even if they were to specify that the Kitakami legends are from Kitakami and not Paldea, it still wouldn’t actually be correct — it’d just be slightly more accurate to the context in which they were introduced.
Really though, this all just stems from TPC preferring the more immersive framing of “this Pokémon was first discovered in the Hoenn region” over “this Pokémon is from Gen 3.” And from that perspective, I guess it’s like, if they’re already using “Paldea” as an obfuscation for saying “Gen 9,” then there’s not much point in distinguishing further between Paldea, Kitakami, and Blueberry.
Actually it just occurred to me that Pecharunt and the Loyal Three are also not from Kitakami, the lore says Pecharunt traveled there from somewhere else and recruited them along the way after all.
I do agree that Tate and Liza are such an underrated boss that would require more strategy than just spamming super effective moves. Doubles would also deter players from using spread moves like Surf, Earthquake, Boomburst and Discharge carelessely, since it can hit their own teammates as well. There are also more likely useful moves that can be useful in doubles like Helping Hand, Rage Powder, Fake Out and Follow Me.
I guess one thing that can stop pokemon from having mainly double matches is that it could be more complicated, because you would have much more options to choose from. I found a video from Wolfe Glick mentioning in his video "Why Double Battles are Harder than Single Battles" that in double matches there can be 37,636 possible game states whereas singles would have 81. Granted, it's from a vgc perspective, so it wouldn't be the exact same as the double matches in a pokemon game, but I thought it would be worth mentioning.
Why haven't we been to South America yet*? Just in Peru, you have rainforest, mountains, oceans, ancient ruins from a variety of cultures...actually Peru is kind of legit. The shape is even long enough to let them do Open World while still having an expected path. Gen 10 location confirmed?
*We know why