I'm also thinking Tackle, Stomp, Bounce, Jump Kick, Horn Attack, Megahorn....
As for special, could be Hyper Beam, Aurora Beam, and Power Gem.
Obviously it'll have new moves.
.: So, what's next? | Edit by me, do not steal. :.
.: IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS ABOUT THE GAMES, PLEASE CHECK THE [MAIN SITE] FIRST :.
well the there is a W chromeazone.....so the third once could be W but who knows
<-lvl.46 <-lvl.45 <-lvl.44 <-lvl.44 <-lvl.45 <-lvl.46
Pearl Team so far
<-lvl.82 <-lvl.83 <-lvl.81 <-lvl.82 <-lvl.81 <-lvl.78
The point being made was that whilst light type and other such speculation had very little reasoning besides some existing pokemon fall under the 'light' umbrella of white and fluffy or having something to do with light sources. Fairy meanwhile has the mysterious slyveon, heavy rumours and a broad range of possibilities for not only past but also future 'mons
Saying on topic of legendaries as well, Oberon is traditionally know as king of fairies, as seen in Shakespeare's work, and commonly depicted with antlers and a guardian of the forest similar to xerneas
Last edited by WNDR; 2nd May 2013 at 11:17 PM.
White FC: 0046-3335-5684
To be honest, while Steel is an interesting type to implement due to its inherent descriptive nature and relationship with many other types, I personally find Dark type to be rather redundant since Psychic's issue in Gen I could have been eventually fixed without introducing Dark type at all. Weak to Bug and Ghost, strong against Fighting and Poison, that sounds like a pretty balanced type effectiveness relationship if you ask me. And it looks to me like GF couldn't decide whether to portray Dark type as in "underhand, cunning, evil" or "darkness", and the line's been blurred with every generation of new moves.
And I don't think GF's introduction of those two types (along with other changes) make the type charts "well organized and balanced". Fighting went from having only 3 SEs to 5 SEs, and Poison's utility is heavily undermined. They just made it different, and the metagame adopted what it's provided with.
here with the rest of my theory that Xerneas and Yvetal are based on the Celtic deities the Dagda and the Morrigan, not the creatures from the Yggdrasil myth, along with several possible combinations for their typing that do NOT involve fairy and light.
To the former point: Do you remember what the type chart was like in Gen I? If you had a Dragonite, Alakazam and Mewtwo, you were unstoppable. The only Dragon attack was dragon rage, and the only ghost attack was night shade. The Gengar line was the only ghost type family, and they were crippled by their poison-type weakness to psychic attacks. Gamefreak introduced Steel and Dark types because the chart was in complete upheaval. Nowadays, there is no such disparity. If there was a gamebreaking type, we would be well aware of it by now. Which do you have in mind? There is a much larger distribution of dragon type moves now, same with dark, psychic and fighting attacks. Many pokemon outside those types know moves of those types, meaning that a Charizard with Dragon Pulse could do some major damage against a Garchomp. Alakazams usually run Focus Blast, which allows them to deal with dark types.
I won't complain if GF introduces a new type. But until they do, I'm going to resist that kind of speculation. There is no need for them to introduce it, and it bothers me that I have to wade through pages and pages of "OMG LIGHT TYPE! FAIRY TYPE! SYLVEON HAS TO BE A NEW TYPE!" to see any interesting speculation. Also, fairy has such a large umbrella of definition that it's easy to take something and slap the fairy label on it because it's hard to refute. Western society has used fairy as a blanket definition for supernatural creatures for centuries, so pretty much everything falls under it's scope. This doesn't mean that everything supernatural can or has to be tied back to fae, but it makes refuting the point harder because people clutch at the broad term.
And no, I have not found a single argument for new types that I cannot refute with the same basic arguments time and again.
Last edited by Firebrand; 3rd May 2013 at 12:17 AM.
I never said Shakespeare said he had horns please don't misquote me.
I said he is referred to as a king of the fairies and regularly depicted with horns both of which are true.
Also the argument that slyveon isn't fairy because it could be one of these multiple existing types is hardly a logical argument. I my self have personally been very closely swayed to dragon, and am well aware of the reasoning behind the different typing arguments for it. Not something I want to get into.
On the type chart, I do remember it, I loved my alakazam. The difference now is more pokemon. Their are certain pokemon way more OP than others, in gen 1 their was 150 available pokemon to pick from so 3/150 is 2%. 2% of 649 is 5 times as many its just numbers generating more selection of decent pokes which makes it feel like it is balanced. As new pokemon get introduced each gen then bring in new moves and their own abilities which aid types it is for ever evolving which is why competitive tiers change, the type chart would only be balanced if every type had and equal amount of SE, NE and Neutral coverage.
Like I said I'm not desperate for a fairy type just don't think there's any reason to approach anything with such a closed mind.
And finaly you haven't refuted anything I've said with your basic arguments....
Mearly asserted that you don't want it so it shouldn't happen attitude.
Last edited by WNDR; 3rd May 2013 at 12:30 AM.
White FC: 0046-3335-5684
Huon de Bordeaux that aids the hero of the story. Shakespeare appropriated the character for Midsummer, drawing upon a character people in his audience might be expected to know and expanding upon it. Because he is an elf/dwarf/fae (see, the various translations of HdB make it a little fuzzy), he's a creature of the forest. He does not have horns, never in any of his historical citations depicted with them. It just happens that people have lumped Oberon, king of the fae of the forest, with the archetypal Cernunnous, lord of all wild places, which is an erroneous assumption.
So yes, he is regularly depicted as a king of faeries. But he is not commonly depicted with horns, and if he is, it is because of a case of mistaken identity.
Onto Sylveon, yes? Arguments in favor of fairy type: We can't guess it's type from the name and appearance, ergo it must be something we don't know yet.
All right. Yeah, that makes a lot of sense and is a well reasoned conclusion /sarcasm
Now, onto dragon type: It is shown to have fangs, however small they are. Dragon types have become more proliferated in the past three gens, with many pokemon who aren't really too draconian gaining the type (I'm looking at you, Altaria and Flygon). It's color scheme doesn't immediately hint at it's typing, which could be strange. Grass types tend to have a lot of green, ground and rock types brown and gray, fire types red and yellow, water and ice types tend to have a lot of blue and white, and even flying types tend to have a lot of white and gray, along with pastel tones. The only type that doesn't really have color-coding is dragon. Dragon types come in all kinds of hues and have strange physiologies.
For flying: the flesh ribbons Sylveon has coming out of its body convey a sense of motion, and they certainly seem to blow in the wind. We have flying types like Tropius, the Hoppip line and Emolga that fly using flaps or sails. Sylveon's ribbons could function in a similar manner, allowing it to sail through the air. It's color scheme is, as I stated above, a blend of colors, though it does have muted pastel shades as I previously associated with flying types. There's also the issue of it's name. Sylveon sounds rather close to "sylph", an elemental spirit of the air, the equivalent of a Grecian nymph, though instead of being associated with trees and rivers, sylphs are associated with the air and the sky.
Bug: This one is a little more of a stretch, but hey, if we're just going to slap fairy/light type labels on it why not. A lot of the merchandising logos we have seen associated with Sylveon thus far draw special attention to its bow. Now, I wouldn't think too much of this if it weren't for a picture of a bit of merchandise floating around the Dex thread about a week ago. There seemed to be a lot of butterfly shapes, and it forced me to think that for that advertising for the Eevee film each Eeveelution had a bit of elementary association in the title, i.e. a moon for Umbreon, a water drop for Vaporeon, etc. Sylveon's is its bow. But maybe its not a bow. It could very well be a stylized butterfly. This would fit in with Sylveon's skin flaps, which would be like the gossamer wings of a bug.
As to your type chart remarks: No, that's not how it has to be. We have commonly agreed that the poison type continually gets shafted. I can concede that point. But all the other types match up rather well. Some types do better against more types than others, resisting more. But look at it this way. Steel doesn't score SE hits on too many types, but they have tons of resistances. Fire and fighting types can be hurt by a lot of common types and moves, but they have very powerful attacks and have great stats to make up for it.
It is widely agreed that Hydreigon and Terrakion are some of the heaviest hitters Gen V introduced, and work great on a lot of teams. And yeah, they're formidable. But that doesn't mean that between my Gallade and Weavile, we can't take them down. Back in Gen 1, Alakazam and Dragonite were Hydreigon and Terrakion on steroids. Just because there are some particularly strong pokemon in play right now, they can be beaten by plenty of combinations and odds are you're carrying a move that can land a super effective blow. Game Freak doesn't need to introduce more types to balance gameplay, they can add in other pokemon and moves to do the same thing a way that doesn't force them to reshuffle their type chart and try to figure out where a new one would go. Gen V introduced a lot of fast, hard hitting pokemon. I wouldn't be surprised if Gen VI introduced more walls to counter this, things in the vein of Ferrothorn and the pink blobs.
And I'm going to assume you didn't read my Celtic mythology post, or I wouldn't have had to explain Oberon to you...
Who wants a legendary croissant?
But what about Dark type? By Gen II they've already fixed the glitch with Ghost and Psychic type while adding Shadow Ball and Megahorn to the game, and without Dark type Psychic would have had two offensive SE and NVE, while being weak to two types and resist two types. Then there's the weird relationship Dark type shares with some of the types. I get the "cheaters are weaker than honorable fighters" concept, but why is Dark type immune to Psychic? If we consider Bug, Dark and Ghost to be the common fears of the mind, it makes no sense that Psychic deals neutral damage to one, NVE to another, and zero to this particular Dark type. Why is Bug SE against Dark? There's no other game or real life concept to explain this relationship at all.
And if you haven't realized, Fighting type is hyper offensive thanks to these two types. Of the four types that resist it, one has little utility in battle, one is coupled to a type that's weak to Fighting, one isn't exactly known for being great as a defensive type and is only worthy on the team if it's offensive enough, which leaves only Psychic to switch in. In fact, every single final stage Fighting Pokemon has had some usage in every tier of the metagame, and the frequency of their usage is somewhat determined by whether there's enough Psychic type in the same tier to keep them in check. Compare that to Ground type which has five super effectiveness as well, but is constantly kept in check by the three common Flying, Water and Grass types.
While I don't strongly advocate the addition of new types as well, you should at least agree that 1) the addition of new types allows the expansion of design concepts, 2) Normal type has lots of not-so-normal looking Pokemon, 3) the type effectiveness chart, applying the movepools and battle mechanics we have today, would have been equally functional with or without Dark type, 4) if they could pull it off with the abstract concept with Dark, albeit not very elegantly, I think they can do it as well (or as badly) with other ideas.
Last edited by Hidden Power; 3rd May 2013 at 9:23 AM.
Bug types are strong against dark types for, I think, two reasons. One is simply to add a little more balance to the type chart. But if you want a logical reason: many types of insects thrive in darkness. There's also the fact that insects perceive things differently than other creatures, their sensory picture is different. The tricks a dark type would use to confound another type are useless against a creature with compound eyes, or those who navigate by hearing.
Balance in the type chart is more than simply weaknesses and resistances. A Staraptor does not automatically defeat a Gallade, just because of it's type advantage. Types come with certain stat spreads, so fighting, fire and electric types generally have high attacks, while steel types tend to be more defensively minded. Rock types in general have low speeds, but high attack and defense. Some pokemon work best in certain situations. Some, if they have the disadvantage of bad typing (like, let's say, Scizor) have other advantages, like great stats or broad movepools. Charizard is murdered by Stone Edge, but it was given Focus Blast. Fighting types are powerful, but they are weak to psychic and flying type moves, all of which are common and generally powerful. That's pretty balanced.And if you haven't realized, Fighting type is hyper offensive thanks to these two types. Of the four types that resist it, one has little utility in battle, one is coupled to a type that's weak to Fighting, one isn't exactly known for being great as a defensive type and is only worthy on the team if it's offensive enough, which leaves only Psychic to switch in. In fact, every single final stage Fighting Pokemon has had some usage in every tier of the metagame, and the frequency of their usage is somewhat determined by whether there's enough Psychic type in the same tier to keep them in check. Compare that to Ground type which has five super effectiveness as well, but is constantly kept in check by the three common Flying, Water and Grass types.
1) I won't dispute that, but it also creates unnecessary headaches for developers who have to reshuffle the type chart and make sure no types are too under/overpowered in the new scheme.While I don't strongly advocate the addition of new types as well, you should at least agree that 1) the addition of new types allows the expansion of design concepts, 2) Normal type has lots of not-so-normal looking Pokemon, 3) the type effectiveness chart, applying the movepools and battle mechanics we have today, would have been equally functional with or without Dark type, 4) if they could pull it off with the abstract concept with Dark, albeit not very elegantly, I think they can do it as well (or as badly) with other ideas.
2) Normal exists as a catch-all, taking physically minded pokemon that don't really fit into another elemental affinity. It also provides something of a handicap to otherwise viable pokemon, like Staraptor, Braviary and Sawsbuck, hampering them against fighting types. But conversely, it adds a ghost type immunity, giving them a small edge.
3) No they wouldn't. There aren't many strong bug type moves, and only a handful of widely used ghost type moves, namely Shadow Ball. Dark types and their wide variety of moves provide plenty of cover on psychic types. Also, without Dark, Bug would be effective against incredibly few pokemon.
4) And there we have what all new type arguments boil down to.
Whatever. I don't think Eclair is in reference to the pastry, rather, it is a French word meaning lightning. It is probably a reference to the new Mewtwo's speed, like lightning fast. Genesect has it's extremely fast flying form in the movie, so the new Mewtwo will probably use this "lightning-fast" form to counter that.
I conceded that slyveon could be any type and also attempted to avoid its type discussion in the legendaries thread, also because slyveon could be one of those types does not mean it couldn't be a new type.
Your third point about there being a balance in the types you openly state isn't true in your first sentence.
And finaly I was making a joke about croissant and Eclairs, with somebody else on this thread, about the y'know legendary topic.
I do not appreciate your condescending tone and abrupt rudeness, if you have a issue with my speculation or me please in future keep it to your self or feel free to PM me about as I am trying to stay on topic on the thread. There is absolutely no need for your lack of respect, it almost feels as if your purposefully trying to draw me into an argument.
Let us agree to disagree and leave it at that.
White FC: 0046-3335-5684
I am in favor of a new type and really anything that helps to evolve the series in favor of better balance. I think the chart isn't quite balanced. As we've added new moves and new pokemon over the years, some types have shifted from favor while others have stepped into the spotlight. If I had to pick a type that is a bit lackluster compared to the others I would have to pick the Poison type. I can't remember the last time I've fought a team that used a poison type.
It seems like rock, ground, fighting, and dark have become the favorites that I see the most on opposing teams.
I would like to see some new variations in the movepool and abilities. For a quick example, an ability like Eartheater where ground (or maybe rock) moves are absorbed for either an increase in a stat or hp recovery. Maybe an ability that functions like intimidate but lowers accuracy 10-20% or so instead?
One of the reasons I look forward to each new generation is for the fact that it brings a lot of new things. That and hoping my favorite pokemon get new tricks to help them out.
I think people should stop thinking about each generation as a separate game and more like one game. Like a single piece of software that gets an update. Currently we will be getting the Pokemon 6.0 update.
If Xernias and Sylveon are fairy type, that would be okay with me. Although if that is true I would like another eeveelution. Perhaps a poison type (that would be super effective against fairy types). Plus it would make sense for the last legendary to be a legendary Poison/??? type.
And I can't remember where, but I read in a trivia that Dark was added both to weaken Psychic and to make Fighting type more useful, as GF thought it was underutilized in Gen I. Which is kind of crazy, from 3 to 5 SEs, especially when it wasn't very logical: you see martial artists breaking, ice, rock, being stronger than the average (Normal) people, and perhaps triumphing over those who fight with underhand means, but Steel? And you see Water being weak to Electric due to conductivity, but somehow it doesn't apply to Steel.
And you're actually agreeable that Dark could be added to give Bug greater utility despite the ambiguous relationship, which is the same reason some people apply for new types. And you wonder why people are asking for them...
My fundamental point is that regardless of whether we are getting a new type or not, the current type effectiveness is definitely not 'balanced' in terms of degree of skewing for each type in different category of battle mechanics. All that has happened was that we familiarized ourselves with the changes in Gen II and adapted to the same chart thereafter for 4 generations. You don't have to worry about how the chart would be upset if there ever was a new type (no matter how ridiculous it might be), as players (competitive ones in particular) would eventually go through the cycle of learning, familiarizing, and adapting again.
Last edited by Hidden Power; 3rd May 2013 at 7:22 PM.
#AlphaSapphireI am one of Jehovah's Witnesses.
If you have a question about my religion, or wish to discuss my religion, the Bible, or anything related to this topic, feel free to PM or VM me, take a look at the information in my profile or visit our official website.
Last edited by Hidden Power; 3rd May 2013 at 8:32 PM.
I was thinking maybe Xerneas will be able to change type because of those antlers with gemstones. Maybe reflect type or something?