What type of Pokemon player are you?

What type of Pokemon player are you?

  • Timmy

    Votes: 22 12.9%

  • Johnny

    Votes: 95 55.9%

  • Spike

    Votes: 94 55.3%
  • Total voters
    170
Status
Not open for further replies.
I'd like to consider myself to be a Johnny / Spike mix (leaning towards Johnny moreso), mainly because I'm a very competitive person who is willing to do whatever it takes to get the job done, as long as it is within my interests. I'm not gonna play Ubers just to be ranked #1.
 
I'm easily a spike, although I will often use less popular (but still competitively viable sets/pokes). Although if they fit in my team, I will use favourites but if they don't then I won't try and force them onto it.

It is of my opinion that everyone on this site should be a spike player to at least some degree.
 
I'm a Johnny of course, I'm not a Timmy since I look at every stat to decide what Pokemon I use and like Pokemon with quite even stats(eg, the 100 in all stats Pokemon). I'm more of a thinker than an actual battler but I do battle, of course but not as much as some.
 
Hmm, this is probably me:

70% Spike
20% Timmy
10% Johnny

I usually play to win and hate to lose, even if it's after a winning streak and the ratio is 8:1. I sometimes fuse Timmy with Spike (yikes!) and build teams based on a threat that can tip the metagame in my favour, if it's a Belly Drummer team or anything else. I rarely use Trick Room teams and other niches because I just plain stink at building teams like those.
That's me.
 
um at the verybottom ofthe page there shouldbe an add poll button... just fill in the question and responces.

P.S. I like the descriptions of the categories better now. Nice job. : )
 
I am a spike, and I was a spike in MTG as well when I played that competitively.

I like winning, and I play competitive games to challenge myself, and a very clear and unambiguous way to tell that I'm improving is to look at how often I win.
 
My playstyle actually depends on what tier I'm using.
While playing UU, I'm pretty much a spike, and that's because everything in UU (including standards) are fresh and interesting. In OU, I'm more of a Johnny and Timmy mix. I'll go out of my way in the team building process to make something awful be able to sweep.
I don't know why this is.
 
Spike. Even if I do use non standard set (Boah, Defensive Gyara, etc.), I use them because they give me a better chance of winning with my current team.
 
I'd say 80% Johnny 20% Timmy. I don't use noob pokémon like Electivire or Rampardos however. More I do stuff like try to set up my Regirock or Azelf for an entire teamsweep, which I've actually managed to pull off from time to time. I never use standard sets, either, and am pretty good at designing VGC teams or other teams with a great deal of custom tailoring to a specific purpose. Out of the 2 teams I made entirely myself and the 1 that I helped a lot in the making of, 2 made the top 16 and the other got second. I've designed Shoe's San Diego team also, and I'm using a varient of it next year. I suck at making 6v6 teams, though. But then again I never really design teams as such, rather I have a couple of boxes of EVeds which I pick and choose from when preparing to battle.
 
I am definitely Spike.

I think anyone who is on Smogon probably has the most bit of Spike in them, whether or not you realize it, because we are a competitive gaming site and we strive to win.
 
I like the idea behind this thread ;). Anyway, for me it depends on tier.

In Ubers I'm 50% Johnny, 40% Spike, 10% Timmy. I'm always playing to win, however I'm trying to do with non-standard set in Ubers and with all those powerfull attackers it's hard to not feel like a Timmy in some moments. Ubers is quite easy for being Johny, as many sets are really deadly and almost not used. The same goes for some pokemon. Specs Palkia is so rare and still sickly powefull. If you don't have a Blissey, something will die for sure on the switch, easily OHKOeing with Draco Meteor for example Lugia and most Kyogres. Just to give it example, Rayquaza is still OHKOed even after special attack drop and there's a little chance for the same after... two special attack drops with Stealth Rock counted in. It's predict or die. Also many pokemon fills some niche, which can be really deadly if played right. SDKabutops under Rain sweeps so many unprepared teams, Ludicolo or Quagsire are great supporting pokemon, Weavile has great STAB combination for Ubers. Even Primeape has some uses.

I'm bored a bit of OU, but I guess I'm 50% Johnny, 50% Spike. Some sets like Rock Polish Rhyperior or Specs Shaymin are competetive, but not used to often. It's probably the most boring tier for me, as it's the most 'Spiky' tier on Smogon server for sure and seeing non-stop all those standard sets sometimes is annoying. Next example Mix Metagross is really good with almost everyone switching Swampert on it and it's really surprisingly rare. But using all gimmick or creative movesets is not the best way to go, as winning is still great. But really, using one or two un-standard sets really helps in keeping winning streak, as some surprise factor may give you that crucial win. And if you put those sets right, you may still be a Spiker ;).

In UU and NU it looks a bit different. I'm 80% Spiker, 20% Johnny, as everything here for me is quite new and even if used often, it's not that boring. But of course it may change later, but still using some rare competetive sets is nice idea. Also in UU and NU I found for example Trick Room working much better then in higher tiers (however in Ubers it may still be deadly).

In Overall, I'm Johny/Spiker player with Johnny being more dominating option ;).
 
I'm the kind of player you'd call 'the best' :P.

In all seriousness, I don't see what discussion is promoted by this topic. I mean there are of course instances where you can goof around and use stuff you normally wouldn't use, but competitively there is always the 'spike' attitude. In tournaments you wouldn't just use whatever rags / favorites you can think of an expect to get far. Even when using favorites there is a tendency to promote the winning approach. Everyone is a spike to a certain degree.
 
I'm a spike I use hyper offense and use strong top tier pokemon (30 or above on the ladder) however i was scepticle about using some of the top of the top pokemon such as gyrados or scizor, but in the end I used scizor, but i also use some lower poke's such as togekiss no. 28, but prediction isn't my thing so i only use one choice user and the rest are set-uper's my team is slightly towards special 1:2 ratio i also use half and half of bulky offense (scizor, togekiss, latias) and frail offense (gengar, salamence (maybe?), infernape) I was also once a timmy using cresselia, electivire, and dugtrio.
 
Definitely a Johnny-Timmy combo. I like to find a pokemon that's both sturdy and hard-hitting and then base the team around that pokemon, regardless of what the standards are. In fact, in OU, I try to avoid using standards because I believe there are other ways of winning.
 
Twist of Fate said:
I'm the kind of player you'd call 'the best' :P.

In all seriousness, I don't see what discussion is promoted by this topic. I mean there are of course instances where you can goof around and use stuff you normally wouldn't use, but competitively there is always the 'spike' attitude. In tournaments you wouldn't just use whatever rags / favorites you can think of an expect to get far. Even when using favorites there is a tendency to promote the winning approach. Everyone is a spike to a certain degree.
Click to expand...
This is what I was getting at last night in my previous post, but was too tired to articulate it to my satisfaction.

Heres the deal:
JohnnySpike is the kind of player to strive to be in this game as far as being competitive goes. Why?

Timmy-
Hes got this stigma against anything other than teams centered around massive damage dealing. He will never mess with Stall, and might even often find himself losing to it often or always. He comes off as a bit of a noob player. Not diverse in his selection of pokemon or in his making of teams once you get past some of his favorites pokemon's novelty value. He may be the most fun person to play with casually, but when thrown into a competitive environment of sink or swim he is up a creek w/o a paddle because he refuses to adapt his playstyle and will not deviate from his favorite hard hitters of the tier he is in.

Johnny-
Johnny is a bit better off than Timmy. Timmy will use the Smogon set cookie cutter sweeper while Johnny will net himself the element of surprise. That is the part of Johnny everyone should strive for, being creative with your spread/ sets. Just because Smogon says that a pokemons best set is "x", it does not take into considereation what a person may need it to do/ counter for the team.
Great Johnnys are out there. Jak3 was the first impressive UU Johnny that I ever met. He uses some uncommon pokes in ways that fit his playstyle (he loves Substitute) and was #2 in UU the last time I checked. However, Jak3 doesn't make a team that doesn't take into consideration the metagame in which he plays. He has counters to top threats and prepares to face status quo teams (making him a JohnnySpike). You have to make sure a team functions in that meta or no matter how ornate a team is, it will fail to be effective. This is a problem that many Johnnys and Timmys have competitivly in that they both will make their teams without much regard as to what everyone else is doing. If a Johnny makes an intricate team that HAS to use a certain set of pokemon, then he will. He will sacrifice countering threats to potentially get off some combo that may not even be consistant.

Spike-
Pure spikes are not much better than either of the others tbh. Spikes may steal teams from RMT's, or they will just simply copy and paste the top threats from the StratDex. Thats not really the best aproach either. While bog standard works for some pokemon that have a specific role on any team, often times solid teams are the ones that were made by players who take time to seperate their pokemon from the pack(JohnnySpike again). That doesn't mean reinvinting the wheel, but slight changes to a pokemons standard StratDex set can dramitically affect what that pokemon does. Spike loses because his strategies are overdone. People know how to beat him, because they know what he is using.
Another draw back to Spike is that he doesn't experiment, and by extension doesn't learn that much. He only uses the same pokemon in the same way, and never branches out. This restricts his knowledge of the game to a select group of pokemon. Also, due to lack of experimentation he never learns any new synergies until someone else publishes a successful RMT or he faces a team that impresses him... but by then it is old news (players will look for ways around that paticular combo or synergy). A pure spike is a JohnnySpike with learning to do.
----------

If you look at all of those you notice something-
All of those styles are bad styles of play in their purest form. You need to have a mixture of these things to be successful competitivly.(spike HAS to be present really)

JohnnySpike is really the ideal mixture of these categories (Timmy isn't really needed because Johnny makes teams that Timmy makes, but he wont restrict himself to offense but they can be interchanged). They play around the meta, but because they do this they SHAPE the meta. They are the top players in the game because they use standard pokemon in a way that is innovative(if ever so slightly). The Johnny in them focuses on synergy and team work, while the spike in them says "I need a counter to so and so" and is constantly trying to patch holes to cover the top threats in the tier while making it as versatile as possible.

This was what I wanted to say, but was too tired to do so. Again, no attacks on people who claim to be only one category and are offended, but chances are you AREN'T just one of these styes. Again, I think JohnnySpike is the ideal player, but you need to at least listen to your inner Spike or you really wont ever get far competitivly.
 
I don't seem to fit in any of the categories you listed, but I believe I am a Spike player. Johnny would be a good choice too, but when I try to create new sets or develop a completelly new style of play, I always end up leading with Azelf, walling with Blissey... so yeah.
 
If the Magic community really pays attention to stuff like this, I'd be shocked. However, considering certain articles I've read about competition, I'm inclined to believe that TC simply misquoted something.

These so-called classifications say virtually nothing about the player. "I like using raw power." ... So what? That might mean anything and the meaning may vary violently between people who succeed and people who don't. Additionally, the classifications are just woefully incomplete. I'm not sure how anyone could describe himself/herself satisfactorily as any combination of the three.

Another thing is that it seems to encourage "scrub" and/or "anti-competitive" sentiments. This is especially the case with the Johnny/Spike distinction. The Pokémon community already has problems staving off self-proclaimed "Johnnys" who fight the "Spikes" for no real reason. It especially seems to reinforce the false belief that "playing for fun" and "playing to win" are mutually exclusive.

As for me, I'm not really any of these three. I don't feel that I'm nearly good enough to do well in a tournament (other than maybe those chat tournaments people make from time to time), though I have beaten leaderboarders in all three permanent ladders. Thus, I play to learn, through and through. Sometimes, for example, I'll leave a Registeel in on a Fire-type Pokémon just to make sure it won't survive. When I started out in each ladder, I took the Pokémon with the most extreme stats and put them together, synergy be damned, just to see why they may not work. Of course, in a tournament situation, I consider it a courtesy toward my opponent to play to win.

I've said it many times on the chat server and I'll say it here: Use what's best for your team, period. By imposing arbitrary "rules" on your team, you are merely limiting yourself, not just from success in itself but from learning more about the game. You could say, "Oh, I want to build a team around Lucario," or, "Hey, I want to build a Trick Room team." That's fine because you're just thinking of a place to start using a viable strategy. But I see things like no-weathers Uber teams and GSC-only teams and I have to wonder what they're thinking.

If it matters, I like offensive and balanced teams. My current UU team is based around tanks, my current OU team is based around offense and using resistances to switch in, and my current Uber team revolves around finding and statusing the opponent's biggest threats so my sweepers can do their thing. But there's already another topic about that, isn't there?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top