Pokemon Scarlet & Violet - 18th Nov 2022! **OFFICIAL INFO ONLY**

You can't compare Pokemon to Cyber/Steam/etc Punk, the franchise is too pro-authority for that. The -punk suffix isn't just for show.

That said, the pokemon universe is basically Hopepunk/Solarpunk. Communities, living essentially in harmony with nature, minimal police presence with community enforcement of safety rules, free healthcare and cheap food because they set up systems to provide those things with minimal impact on the world...the later gens have brought in large cities and major corporations, but early on, the pokemon universe is basically a post-apocalyptic hopepunk society.
 
Clawizer looks like an interesting Terastal user for lower Tiers because it has offensive options that look just as good as Water. Mega Launcher's 1.5x boost makes it so Aura Sphere and Dark Pulse are like secondary STAB moves, so why not boost them more by making them STAB too? There's also Dragon Pulse if you want it for the defense. The downside to not picking Water is you lose Water STAB and going with Tera Water doesn't weaken Drak Pulse or Aura Sphere.

For the sake of asking an interesting question, who seems like terrible users of Terastal? Scizor gaining two weaknesses looks like a pretty annoying problem but it could still work if you really need the resistances to Flying and Rock or if you're going for a sweep and haven't used Terastal yet. I know Forretress should be one of the worst users because it doesn't gain much, if anything, from becoming stronger and loses a lot more than it gains from changing its type. Sableye also looks like it might not be the best because it'd lose out on what makes Dark/Ghost so good. You'd gain weaknesses and lose immunities. Going for Super STAB is a bad idea, but it gives cruel choice in the team builder. You'd have to pick between gaining the weaknesses of a Dark type or a Ghost type. (It's probably not a hard choice though because of Knock Off.) Sableye isn't terrible though. It's a defensive Pokemon that isn't a Steel type that could have fun with gaining Steel's resistances.
I think Scizor might be one of the better users actually depending on how good the Super STAB is. At this time, there is no reason to assume that Tera will get rid of moves helpful effects like Dynamax and Z-Moves did, so Scizor can still use its trusty priority Bullet Punches while Tera'd. Assuming that the boost is only x2, then it would have 120 BP bullet punches w/o other modifiers, which is about a 1.33 increase from its usual power. This does actually let it do a couple of notable things like...

0 Atk Technician Scizor Bullet Punch vs. 252 HP / 200 Def Clefable: 168-198 (42.6 - 50.2%) -- guaranteed 3HKO after Leftovers recovery
0 Atk Tera Scizor Bullet Punch vs. 252 HP / 200 Def Clefable: 218-260 (55.3 - 65.9%) -- guaranteed 2HKO after Leftovers recovery
0 Atk Technician Scizor Bullet Punch vs. 0 HP / 0 Def Weavile: 230-272 (81.8 - 96.7%) -- guaranteed 2HKO
0 Atk Tera Scizor Bullet Punch vs. 0 HP / 0 Def Weavile: 306-362 (108.8 - 128.8%) -- guaranteed OHKO
0 Atk Technician Scizor Bullet Punch vs. 0 HP / 0 Def Dragapult: 103-123 (32.4 - 38.8%) -- guaranteed 3HKO after Stealth Rock
0 Atk Scizor Bullet Punch vs. 0 HP / 0 Def Dragapult: 136-162 (42.9 - 51.1%) -- 96.9% chance to 2HKO after Stealth Rock

Also no longer being 4x weak to Fire-type moves is huge since that lets it survive some otherwise lethal blows.

0 SpA Zapdos Heat Wave vs. 252 HP / 88 SpD Scizor: 360-424 (104.6 - 123.2%) -- guaranteed OHKO
0 SpA Zapdos Heat Wave vs. 252 HP / 88 SpD Tera Scizor: 180-212 (52.3 - 61.6%) -- 97.7% chance to 2HKO after Leftovers recovery
252 SpA Choice Specs Dragapult Flamethrower vs. 252 HP / 88 SpD Scizor: 532-628 (154.6 - 182.5%) -- guaranteed OHKO
252 SpA Choice Specs Dragapult Flamethrower vs. 252 HP / 88 SpD Scizor: 266-314 (77.3 - 91.2%) -- guaranteed 2HKO after Leftovers recovery

I think some other types like Rock and Ground will be pretty good for Scizor too since it'll let it get the leg up against its usual counters like Zapdos, Toxapex, and Heatran.

RN the main "bad" users of Tera seem to be defensive Pokemon since their usual defensive attributes will completely shift, which isn't exactly ideial since there are large portions of the match where their defensive attributes will be coming into play since they tend to stick around for a while. Like Toxapex is a pretty good answer to Fighting-types generally speaking (outside of Guts users) but Tera'ing into a Ground type will remove that advantage. At the same time, I could see Tera'ing still being great for these Pokemon since the utility of their defensive profile may diminish as a match goes on (i.e. if the opponent has only Electric, Psychic, and Ground types remaining in Toxapex's case) so Tera'ing would give them the upper hand by letting them check what they normally can't.
 
This was bothering me for a while so I did some digging to find out where these came from, basically just using reverse image search and finding a vg247 article with these same screenshots with the original filename "Scarlet_Violet_Screenshot_84_EN.jpg" and looking that up. It turns out there's another press site to host all the screenshot assets that serebii has, or so I thought at first.
https://pokemon.gamespress.com/Pokemon-Scarlet-and-Pokemon-Violet#?tab=screenshots-2

Going to the home page reveals that this is pretty much the exact same press site with all the same articles, but with a twist: the language says United Kingdom. For whatever reason, it seems like this UK version of the press site just has more screenshots than the US version, and since serebii is from England I guess he managed to use this version in the first place.
https://pokemon.gamespress.com/NEW-...POKEMON-SCARLET-AND-POKEMON-VIOLET-INCLUDING-

Another difference I noted at this point was that Arven's art was labeled the more generic yet specific "V Friend" in the US version, similarly to Clavell's two versions being specified, though the US version has both Clavells while the UK version only has Purple Clavell, and they all have slightly different naming schemes in general. I guess the US people only knew 2 of the 3 names for the friends and figured they just drew him in his purple form, so I'm not going to read too much into this.

1659930556623.png
1659930563281.png

This made me realize that there's symmetry with the official art of these friends/rivals in that you have Nemona in orange, Arven in purple, and Penny in neither school's colour, which is pretty neat. Maybe it says something about following the story of the traditional gym challenge, or exploring the unknown future, or finding your own path in the present, or that they just wanted to balance everyone out and ended up with 2 Clavells to do it.

Speaking of Arven, this may be stepping into the rumour zone but one of the riddlers pointed out something interesting about who Arven looks like using official art. I'm spoilering this because the source has the context from playing the game to confirm that it means something, but I feel like you could also make the connection just with what we know anyway if you look at him hard enough.
1659932358298.png

Somehow he looks like both professors.

For more miscellaneous observations, I saw a twitter post comparing the protagonist models from the first and the latest trailers. Unfortunately it seems to be deleted so I can't say what was specifically noted but at first glance I can still tell that the blush is pretty toned down.
1659930932416.png
1659930961044.png
1659931084427.png


A good point about SV model improvements being carried over with Gastly and yet still changing to match the usual art style.

The website has a news section on the Floral-print Sport Backpack preorder bonus that I don't remember being there before, but it now has an official English name.
1659928162152.png

https://scarletviolet.pokemon.com/en-us/news/pcenter_backpack/
 
Last edited:
RN the main "bad" users of Tera seem to be defensive Pokemon since their usual defensive attributes will completely shift, which isn't exactly ideial since there are large portions of the match where their defensive attributes will be coming into play since they tend to stick around for a while. Like Toxapex is a pretty good answer to Fighting-types generally speaking (outside of Guts users) but Tera'ing into a Ground type will remove that advantage. At the same time, I could see Tera'ing still being great for these Pokemon since the utility of their defensive profile may diminish as a match goes on (i.e. if the opponent has only Electric, Psychic, and Ground types remaining in Toxapex's case) so Tera'ing would give them the upper hand by letting them check what they normally can't.
I disagree.
You have cases like Avalugg where they go from Untiered to OU viable because it lets Avalugg fix its main problem.
But you also have cases like defensive Heatran sets that would use Grass to great effect, which is the best example to illustrate why Defensive Pokemon will benefit a lot from this mechanic. Heatran in most cases is great against most of the metagame because of its unique type, but not against everything and entire teams. As an example, Heatran is nearly deadweight against Rain teams, with the only niche of being able to possibly beat Ferrothorn against Rain teams. With Tera Grass, it flips the match-up on its head as now Heatran is now a Grass type likely with Grass STAB too if there is a Hidden Power replacement. This similarly applies to Sand Offense
Best part is that Tera is option in game by game basis. You can have all the benefits of Fire/Steel Heatran while also having the benefits of Grass Heatran.

And honestly, I think Super STAB users would be the “bad” users imo from the 4 archetypes.
Changing a Pokemon from a good type to a bad type being best, followed by good type Pokemon covering weaknesses, then Pokemon using it to dodge attacks (Salamemce becoming Water, Doexys-Attack becoming Ghost, ect), and Pokemon using it for STAB being the worst. It just seems like you give up too much defensive utility and even other STAB to make one of your STABs stronger by 4/3rd. Like Scizor is now Fighting and Ground weak so that it can hit harder against opponents that can Tera type into Steel, Fire, or Water.
 
You have cases like Avalugg where they go from Untiered to OU viable because it lets Avalugg fix its main problem.
That is true, but remember, that means you are committing your Teralize to the defensive poke instead of... any of the potentially scary superStab user or "This would be a strong attacker if it had a better type".

I think defensive Tera will not be enough to actually make a pokemon viable due to requiring the commitment of the mechanic to it pretty much killing the main draw, the versatility, outside of potential outliers that are so good that they are worth carrying a otherwise deadweight mon (think MegaBeedrill).

This however is different in VGC/BSS where you have a "bring X out of Y" format, in which case there are structures that can afford the team slot. Es, Lando-T in the current format being notably only viable if you commit the Dynamax to it.
 
And honestly, I think Super STAB users would be the “bad” users imo from the 4 archetypes.
Changing a Pokemon from a good type to a bad type being best, followed by good type Pokemon covering weaknesses, then Pokemon using it to dodge attacks (Salamemce becoming Water, Doexys-Attack becoming Ghost, ect), and Pokemon using it for STAB being the worst. It just seems like you give up too much defensive utility and even other STAB to make one of your STABs stronger by 4/3rd. Like Scizor is now Fighting and Ground weak so that it can hit harder against opponents that can Tera type into Steel, Fire, or Water.
The same is true if you Tera into a type that you didn't originally have. It's a bit less predictable but if your opponent is changing type after you, they'll still be able to pick to beat whatever type you chose to change to. Plus, while you can gain weaknesses, you can also gain resists (Scizor now resists Heat Wave and Hurricane from Torn-T/Zapdos ). Having the Adaptability boost has the benefit of letting you straight up break through resists with sheer power, which you don't get to do if you don't pick one of your original STABs.
252+ Atk Choice Band Barraskewda (Tera Water) Liquidation vs. 252 HP / 252+ Def Toxapex in Rain: 118-139 (38.8 - 45.7%) -- 17.6% chance to 2HKO after Stealth Rock
252+ Atk Choice Band Barraskewda (Tera Water) Liquidation vs. 252 HP / 0 Def Heatran (Tera Grass) in Rain: 209-247 (54.1 - 63.9%) -- guaranteed 2HKO after Leftovers recovery
+2 252+ Atk Life Orb Scizor (Tera Steel) Bullet Punch vs. 0 HP / 0 Def Salamence (Tera Water): 226-266 (68.2 - 80.3%) -- guaranteed 2HKO
While choosing to suddenly gain a 1.5x boost to a coverage move definitely seems viable, I still think the pressure of a possible sudden Adaptability is still higher.

While type-swapped Avalugg might work on stallier teams, the fact that you're forced to use the Tera on it means that your opponent doesn't have to worry about surprise defensive type swaps and can safely use their Tera on something that looks threatening to your team. It also means that you can't exert the same pressure on your opponent, which is why it'll probably be stall-only.
 
Can someone explain the concept of Super STAB to me?
TLDR: we know from the site that if you Teralize in a type that was also one of your base types, you will get a damage bonus on your Tera type attacks on top of other already present modifier.

We don't know how much this accounts for nor if it will stack with Adaptability, but since functionally it works the same as a STAB bonus, people are just calling it "super stab".

(Es: if you Teralize your Magnezone into a Electric type, since it was one of its original types, it will gain super-STAB on its Electric attacks)
 
I'm not aware of how it positively impacted any competitive format. VGC changed mostly due to the replacement of Megas with Dynamax and the removal of restricted legends (at first). The mons that were good before who survived Dexit are still good. Same with singles. Cutting the dex doesn't increase potential viable mons, it reduces counterplay and centralizes a meta around fewer Pokemon. For example gen 7 OU had 56 Pokemon with 3%+ usage while gen 8 has 46 (1825 stats). Pre DLC gen 8 had only 36 Pokemon with 3%+ usage. In addition gen 8 has 7 Pokemon with 20%+ usage while gen 7 has 4. Early gen 8 pre-DLC was absolutely awful. Just Clefable / Toxapex / Corviknight on every team.

Dexit "freshened" things by cutting options but in a random way, not in a targeted specific balance kind of way. Come on, you aren't telling me Meganium was cut for balance reasons while Toxapex and Incineroar stayed. And if the idea is to get away from the overused Pokemon in Smogon and VGC metas you can just play UU, or Gamefreak can host VGC events where previous top mons are rotated out of the format. There are ways to have your cake and eat it but Dexit is not that.

Since BDSP, Home, and Pokemon Go have shown that the models exist for modern HD games it seems only light texture work is done to update them for SwSh and S/V. My theory is Dexit was originally done due to incompetence on Gamefreak's part when the games moved from handhelds to the Switch. There's no other excuse for why the Pokemon series first major console RPG could look and play so bad when it has so little content compared to its predecessor. They're probably keeping Dexit because the SwSh DLC proved they can easily pad low effort DLC with "100 returning Pokemon" and generate excitement for a 30 minute fetch quest that should have been included in the game for free.

Sorry to say but Pokemon is gradually adopting worse and worse business practices. I hope S/V is better but I'm really not convinced that this isn't just going to be another reskinned SwSh abomination.
Personally I feel the DLC was less scummy than an extremely extraneous third version like USUM. I'll take paying half the price of a Pokemon game for two expansive areas and their own quests over spending the price of a new game for essentially the same game over again with a few extra things. I never felt cheated about the SwSh DLC but USUM felt so unnecessary I couldn't bring myself to finish them.
 
Personally I feel the DLC was less scummy than an extremely extraneous third version like USUM. I'll take paying half the price of a Pokemon game for two expansive areas and their own quests over spending the price of a new game for essentially the same game over again with a few extra things. I never felt cheated about the SwSh DLC but USUM felt so unnecessary I couldn't bring myself to finish them.
SM base price at launch (40 USD) + USUM base price at launch (40 USD) = 80 USD

SwSh base price at launch (60 USD) + SwSh DLC base price (30 USD) = 90 USD

There was also an option to purchase SwSh with the DLC pre-installed, but I don't know how much that package deal cost. Though, knowing Nintendo, I lean towards it just being the full price.

But, that's not all. Ignoring the hardware cost difference, there's also the additional costs associated with reaching feature parity for WiFi. The Switch's online service costs 20 USD per year. This price can theoretically be distributed across the number of games the player actively plays, but it will never beat the 3DS' wifi cost. Which, you know, is still zero.

Not only that, but GTS access was removed from SwSh and remanded to the Home software - but not the Switch program, mind you, but exclusively the mobile version. Which means you'll need to download and keep a separate program on your mobile device if you want GTS access. Not to mention Home "Premium" itself is three times the price of Bank, just to add features that were already in the base game for Gen 6-7 - though I won't add it to the overall calculation since it is "technically" optional (unless you're one of our illustrious Smogon WiFi hoarders :P).

In terms of content, USUM/SwSh DLC do about the same. Brings back move tutors? Check. New Pokemon? Check (New UBs/New Legendaries). More gameplay? Check (Rainbow Rocket + Ultra Wormhole Legendaries + Mantine Surfing/whatever the SwSh DLC has). More gimmicks? Check (New Z moves/New Gigantamax forms). They both add more or less the same things, with minor variations. The main difference is that USUM has mostly the same SM gameplay loop to play/replay, while the SwSh DLC has two-three hours of story to complete.

I do agree that, with the probable exception of BW2, the "improved" version of each base Gen title was/is incredibly scummy. They're an obvious attempt to milk customers for additional money with minimal effort. But the SwSh's monetization practices are ethically no better, and cost far more than past-Gen's. The price + hike + minimal content change is just masked better, that's all.

To bring this back around to Gen 9, we all know GF/TPC/Nintendo won't stop with the extra monetization. It makes them too much money, and there's zero incentive for them to stop. But, hopefully they won't make it any worse (such as microtransactions for cosmetics/items), and maybe if we're lucky we can get the GTS rolled back into the base game?
 
I'd point that comparing "40" with "60" base price is a wrong start.

If SwSh was a 3ds game, it'd cost 40. If SM was a Switch game, it'd have cost 60.
60 is the price tag for current gen (in fact, past gen, as current gen easily go for 80 now).

You don't see people compare 3ds games with gameboy games which costed the equivalent of 20 bucks and say they are a theft, do you.

So realistically it's "2X" for SM+USUM, with "1.5X" for SwSh + DLC.
No matter what, this model is less expensive, and if they're essentially providing the same content, much better. On top of tecnically not requiring to buy the DLCs nor Switch online/home sub if you have friends, want to use GTS, (or you know, just use smogon's wifi) to provide the "missing mons", meanwhile you actually had no way to obtain Naganadel or Duskmane in SM, actually forcing you to buy them if you wanted to partecipate to competitive.

On top of honestly... having to go through what's essentially the same story with minor differences was just boring in first place. At least DLCs added smaller unique new storylines.
 
I'd point that comparing "40" with "60" base price is a wrong start.

If SwSh was a 3ds game, it'd cost 40. If SM was a Switch game, it'd have cost 60.
60 is the price tag for current gen (in fact, past gen, as current gen easily go for 80 now).

You don't see people compare 3ds games with gameboy games which costed the equivalent of 20 bucks and say they are a theft, do you.
Thats... not how inflation works.

In 1998, Pokemon Red/Blue cost 30 USD at launch. Adjusted for inflation, that's about 55 USD today.

In 2016, Pokemon SM cost 40 USD at launch. Adjusted for inflation, that's about 50 USD today.

In 2017, Pokemon USUM cost 40 USD at launch. Adjusted for inflation, that's about 49 USD today.

In 2019, Pokemon SwSh cost 60 USD at launch. Adjusted for inflation, that's about 70 USD today (+ the DLC, which would still be about 30 USD. 2020 was a bad year for inflation lol).

Inflation adjusted, getting all titles/versions/dlc stuff per gen would cost 100 USD each. If only talking about getting the base game (SM and SwSh), SwSh is very obviously more expensive then past Pokemon titles. If there was price equivalency, then SwSh would have had to have cost ~42 USD at launch in 2019.

The major price discrepancy really comes with WiFi service. It's disingenuous to discount the stripping of said service and making it into a subscription model as optional - if they're "optional" in Gen 9, then you'd have to cut out their cost from past Gens - whatever value that is. As that's not easily doable, you can only really count that as what it is - at 20 USD per year subscription service compounding. If you've had that service since 2019 when SwSh first released, then you've paid at least 60 USD - and this number will always continue to grow.
 
Thats... not how inflation works.

In 1998, Pokemon Red/Blue cost 30 USD at launch. Adjusted for inflation, that's about 55 USD today.

In 2016, Pokemon SM cost 40 USD at launch. Adjusted for inflation, that's about 50 USD today.

In 2017, Pokemon USUM cost 40 USD at launch. Adjusted for inflation, that's about 49 USD today.

In 2019, Pokemon SwSh cost 60 USD at launch. Adjusted for inflation, that's about 70 USD today (+ the DLC, which would still be about 30 USD. 2020 was a bad year for inflation lol).

Inflation adjusted, getting all titles/versions/dlc stuff per gen would cost 100 USD each. If only talking about getting the base game (SM and SwSh), SwSh is very obviously more expensive then past Pokemon titles. If there was price equivalency, then SwSh would have had to have cost ~42 USD at launch in 2019.

The major price discrepancy really comes with WiFi service. It's disingenuous to discount the stripping of said service and making it into a subscription model as optional - if they're "optional" in Gen 9, then you'd have to cut out their cost from past Gens - whatever value that is. As that's not easily doable, you can only really count that as what it is - at 20 USD per year subscription service compounding. If you've had that service since 2019 when SwSh first released, then you've paid at least 60 USD - and this number will always continue to grow.
Worldie's point has nothing to do with inflation, they are pointing out that you are making a misleading comparison between the costs of 3DS games and Switch games. The 3DS price was the standard 3DS price, and the Switch price is the standard Switch price. Worldie is saying that if SM and USUM had been on the Switch instead of the 3DS, they both would have been $60 and the total for a copy of each would be $120, compared to the SwSh + DLC's $90.

==========

Anyways, since this line of discussion is only going to get the thread locked until next news drop (please give us something at Worlds...), something back on topic:

One of the things I like about the prerelease period is the detective-esque analysis videos people do of the trailers. Austin John usually does a pretty good job, e.g. in the linked mapped analysis he's reasonably thorough and does correlate features on the map with views seen in the trailers.

One thing that people have noticed is the number of gyms (8) + number of flags (5?) + lighthouses (4) is suspiciously close to the number of types, and the colors of the racing flags certainly seem to indicate that whatever they are they have associated types. So while we might not get the dream of "pick 8 out of 18 gyms" we might get something like a type expert for every type.

It's not clear though if the 4 lighthouses have anything to do with, say, the elite four, or perhaps a tapu-like quartet of legendaries, or both. (The lighthouses remind me of Golden Sun, and I will be mildly disappointed if I do not have to fight a tera-fire hydreigon at the northern-most lighthouse)
 
Last edited:
Thats... not how inflation works.
Worldie's point has nothing to do with inflation, they are pointing out that you are making a misleading comparison between the costs of 3DS games and Switch games.
Echoing pretty much what RocketSurgery .

Note that I do agree with you that the increase in price overally of games is honestly unjustified (even aside from GF, similar quality games went from 60 to 70 and now 80 for no real reason, in fact with so much of the market being on digital thus less production cost than phisical, it should have gone down).
However fact is, price tag increased, and you always have to factor it. I have no doubt that if SM or even XY released today, they would cost 60€.
Case in point, BDSP.
 
Last edited:
I think ultimately it's going to come down to "how much does losing the "other stab" matter when your one stab will now kill better" and "how much does losing the "defensive extras" matter hwne your one stab will now kill better"
Yeah Steel Avalugg is cool and all but so is Tera Steel Scizor spamming an even strongererer bullet punch or Landorus spamming even strongerer earthquakes

Honestly think that while, having known about this for less than a week in practice, it's easy to overstate either way I think overall the overstatements on offense are going to be more relevant than defense, if you catch my drift.



I honestly expect the offensive side to be significantly more popular & relevant in smogon but randos, ranked and vgc will probably see the chance (though no guarantee) at more defensive play just because the formats will be forced to play around it with 3v3 singles or 4v4 doubles and those have very different ethos, especially in randoms
Or maybe VGC jsut spams Rock Landorus using Rock Slide. Either or.
 

Samtendo09

Ability: Light Power
is a Pre-Contributor
I think ultimately it's going to come down to "how much does losing the "other stab" matter when your one stab will now kill better" and "how much does losing the "defensive extras" matter hwne your one stab will now kill better"
Yeah Steel Avalugg is cool and all but so is Tera Steel Scizor spamming an even strongererer bullet punch or Landorus spamming even strongerer earthquakes

Honestly think that while, having known about this for less than a week in practice, it's easy to overstate either way I think overall the overstatements on offense are going to be more relevant than defense, if you catch my drift.



I honestly expect the offensive side to be significantly more popular & relevant in smogon but randos, ranked and vgc will probably see the chance (though no guarantee) at more defensive play just because the formats will be forced to play around it with 3v3 singles or 4v4 doubles and those have very different ethos, especially in randoms
Or maybe VGC jsut spams Rock Landorus using Rock Slide. Either or.
Considering the Super STAB, Tera-Type offensive is much more likely than coverage Tera or defensive Tera.

It might makes the Tera Coverage or Defensive Tera a surprise pick when the opponent least expect, which I will certainly see about multiple Showdown sweeper videos about unexpected but still niche / good picks.
 
Wondering:

how practical will it be to do something like make your Avalugg steel type over just giving your Landorus Earthquake 2
About as much as Blissey would provide since Avalugg is nearly as bulky on the physical as Blissey is on the special side, but also has better offfensive capabilities and moves like Rapid Spin and Roar.
So yeah, going from one of the worst types to one of the best types or a type that compliments your weakness is loads better than x1.333 boost to 1 of your STABs while losing the other. Especially for things like Scizor where that Clefable could just become Fire or Steel. That’s just something I think people forget.
While you’re getting an adaptability tier boost from Super STAB, it’s entirely counteracted by resistances, something you may have at least gone neutral with having your other STAB or using an entire new STAB.
Also in general, typing’s defensive utililty is vastily more important than STAB. And yes, I’ll even say this for Pokemon like Weavile and that Weavile could have been Ubers if it had a type to replace Ice with the equivalent of Triple Axel for another type. I’d even argue it for just making Weavile pure Dark.
 
Speaking of terastalising. I wonder if Dragonite would make good use of it. Most of his best gen 8 sets don't even use Stab moves. And changing it's type profile could improve the use of multiscale
It's possible, but consider that flying type has been quite instrumental for providing immunity to spikes / toxic spikes as well as free entry onto some ground types that dont run rock coverage. Losing it would also end up meaning limiting its switchin potential or forcing it to use HDB over stuff like Lum or lefties.
 

BIG ASHLEY

Formerly Total Clefairy
It's possible, but consider that flying type has been quite instrumental for providing immunity to spikes / toxic spikes as well as free entry onto some ground types that dont run rock coverage. Losing it would also end up meaning limiting its switchin potential or forcing it to use HDB over stuff like Lum or lefties.
tbf dragonite already quite likes boots to keep multiscale intact
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 1, Guests: 6)

Top