-
The moderators of this forum can be found in the CAP forum staff directory.
-
Welcome to Smogon! Take a moment to read the Introduction to Smogon for a run-down on everything Smogon, and make sure you take some time to read the global rules.
-
Congrats to the winners of the 2024 Smog Awards!
CAP 2 Smogon "Create a Pokemon" Part Deux
- Thread starter Hyra
- Start date
- Status
IMO, none of the current fully-evolved Pokémon (barring Luvdisc, Unown, and Farfetch'd) need to evolve. An all-new Pokémon seems like something we need.
And if we do wind up making a new evolution, we could evolve Luvdisc into a Water/Flying Pokémon called Cupidisc, it could be the Love Arrow Pokémon, obviously based off of the arrows that Cupid shoots into people to make them fall in love. It could have good Attack and Speed, and learn Drill Peck and stuff. But that's just my idea, don't let it influence you guys unless you really like it.
And if we do wind up making a new evolution, we could evolve Luvdisc into a Water/Flying Pokémon called Cupidisc, it could be the Love Arrow Pokémon, obviously based off of the arrows that Cupid shoots into people to make them fall in love. It could have good Attack and Speed, and learn Drill Peck and stuff. But that's just my idea, don't let it influence you guys unless you really like it.
Bolding votes helps ensure that only dedicated posters who read the first post's votes are counted
voting for new pokémon
Ignore this post please.
New Pokemon
It will allow more fun I think. Now while there are some combos I don't want to see (and no Levitate on any of them...that ability is too overused as is), there's plenty of cool combos that I would (especially with Electric. Way underused as a combo)
It will allow more fun I think. Now while there are some combos I don't want to see (and no Levitate on any of them...that ability is too overused as is), there's plenty of cool combos that I would (especially with Electric. Way underused as a combo)
I'm voting for a new pokemon. Besides for the reasons listed above, with an evolution, we aren't using our creative ability as much as a completely new pokemon.
With Syclant we created a pokemon similar to no other. Although a completely new pokemon would be more work, it would be worth it.
With Syclant we created a pokemon similar to no other. Although a completely new pokemon would be more work, it would be worth it.
Hmmm, I was reading the other posts and some people are saying that Nintendo will probably only accept fan-made NEW Pokemon. Well, I have a counter arguement for that. The next Gen will probably have Pre-Evos and some Evos of old Pokemon, but a lot more Pre-evos. So if we mak a new EVO, then that would save Nintendo the trouble of having to make one for the next Gen. Just an idea.
I don't why people are living in the fantasy world where you submit pokes in Nintendo and they use it.Maybe someday Nintendo makes a contest where you submit a poke and they use it game but thats about.I wish could find the article if i remember correctly the guy who designs the pokemon is basically sitting on like 500-1,000 poke designs and they just pull out couple for each game.
I vote New Poke
Which give us better chance to use type that is not game yet. Fire/Dragon, Fire/water, Dragon/Ice something different.A new poke give us chance to be a little more exotic.
I vote New Poke
Which give us better chance to use type that is not game yet. Fire/Dragon, Fire/water, Dragon/Ice something different.A new poke give us chance to be a little more exotic.
I vote for an entirely new pokemon
Evo's of old pokes don't give much room for originality or creativity
EDIT: I suppose if we had to do a new evo, i would probably like to see a Lumineon evo as it was one of my favs from the 4th gen...
Also, a Banette evo is rather unoriginal, its only being suggested as a result of Dusclops getting an evo. The only thing Banette really needs at the moment is a decent physical movepool (best STAB move is Shadow Claw, physical movepool consists entirely of Ghost, Dark and Normal moves)
Evo's of old pokes don't give much room for originality or creativity
EDIT: I suppose if we had to do a new evo, i would probably like to see a Lumineon evo as it was one of my favs from the 4th gen...
Also, a Banette evo is rather unoriginal, its only being suggested as a result of Dusclops getting an evo. The only thing Banette really needs at the moment is a decent physical movepool (best STAB move is Shadow Claw, physical movepool consists entirely of Ghost, Dark and Normal moves)
Completely new Pokemon.
It requires more creativity and thinking =D
It requires more creativity and thinking =D
i definately say a new evo of a pokemon.
like everyone else said bannette.
also, fucking farfetch'd needs an evo even worse than bannette.
like everyone else said bannette.
also, fucking farfetch'd needs an evo even worse than bannette.
What does it mean when someone says, "This pokemon NEEDS an evo"? I suspect most people are referring to evo's along the lines of the new DP evos. I think those evos could be split into two categories. First you have "natural" evolutions like Electivire, Magmortar, Rhyperior, and Porygon-Z (there are a lot more). These are pokemon that became more powerful versions of their previous forms. They have the same typing and same general purpose. The other evos were "unnatural" evolutions like Froslass and Gallade (that's all, I think). These pokemon are basically new pokemon. I don't know why they are called "evos" of their previous forms, because they really are different pokemon concepts entirely. They have different typing and different roles entirely.
Most of the "This pokemon NEEDS an evo" suggestions seem to be falling in the "unnatural" category -- because everyone is suggesting to alter the typing of the pokemon and their purpose. I'll point out that there were very few of these evos in DP, and most were of the "natural" variety.
I'll also mention that creating an evo of less-powerful pokemon can "ruin" them, in a way. Remember, outside the Smogon world of competitive battling -- Pokemon is a "collectors game". You collect as many pokemon as you can.
Farfetch'd is, and always has been, a "Collectible Pokemon". It's purpose is not to kick ass competitively, or in-game for that matter. You are supposed to do the necessary steps to find and acquire this rare and interesting pogeyman. It's stats, moveset, and battling usefulness is almost irrelevant. As cool as it seems to morph Farfetch'd into a badass Fighting/Flying machine -- it's really not the point. I suspect many true pokemon collectors LOVE Farfetch'd just the way it is. Making collectable pokemon into battle pokemon doesn't fit, IMO.
My statements about Farfetch'd apply to many of the pokemon being mentioned as "Needing an evo". The only popular suggestion that doesn't fit that mold is probably Banette. I don't think of it as a collectible pokemon (it has an NFE form). I think it's a pokemon that was intended to be decent for battle, but is just fail in too many little ways. A "natural" evo of Banette could be cool. But, if I really want a Ghost/Fighting pokemon (and I do want one badly), I'd rather just design one from scratch. If we want it to have "inspiration" from Banette, there's nothing to stop the designers from doing that.
Remember, Cyzir designed Syclant as a possible evo of Scyther.
Most of the "This pokemon NEEDS an evo" suggestions seem to be falling in the "unnatural" category -- because everyone is suggesting to alter the typing of the pokemon and their purpose. I'll point out that there were very few of these evos in DP, and most were of the "natural" variety.
I'll also mention that creating an evo of less-powerful pokemon can "ruin" them, in a way. Remember, outside the Smogon world of competitive battling -- Pokemon is a "collectors game". You collect as many pokemon as you can.
Farfetch'd is, and always has been, a "Collectible Pokemon". It's purpose is not to kick ass competitively, or in-game for that matter. You are supposed to do the necessary steps to find and acquire this rare and interesting pogeyman. It's stats, moveset, and battling usefulness is almost irrelevant. As cool as it seems to morph Farfetch'd into a badass Fighting/Flying machine -- it's really not the point. I suspect many true pokemon collectors LOVE Farfetch'd just the way it is. Making collectable pokemon into battle pokemon doesn't fit, IMO.
My statements about Farfetch'd apply to many of the pokemon being mentioned as "Needing an evo". The only popular suggestion that doesn't fit that mold is probably Banette. I don't think of it as a collectible pokemon (it has an NFE form). I think it's a pokemon that was intended to be decent for battle, but is just fail in too many little ways. A "natural" evo of Banette could be cool. But, if I really want a Ghost/Fighting pokemon (and I do want one badly), I'd rather just design one from scratch. If we want it to have "inspiration" from Banette, there's nothing to stop the designers from doing that.
Remember, Cyzir designed Syclant as a possible evo of Scyther.
So, what you are saying, is my idea of the Snorlax split evo, is a "NEW POKEMON"? 'Cause it has a different role. If so, Im totally changing my vote.
I'd say New Pokemon.
More creative, thinking, etc.
Yes.
More creative, thinking, etc.
Yes.
- Status