View Poll Results: Would you change typing chart?

Voters
158. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    32 20.25%
  • No

    126 79.75%
Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst 12345
Results 101 to 125 of 125

Thread: Do you think that some pokemon types are unnecessary?

  1. #101
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Florida, Land of.... Sunshine?
    Posts
    37

    Default

    I personally don't see any reason that a current typing should be removed. I also don't see the need at all for a renaming, nor for two or more types to be merged.... Rock and ground are far from the same, Ice and water are far from the same, etc...

    I wouldn't mind however, if new types were added.. not saying there SHOULD be new types, but i wouldn't argue against it... IMO, the only new typings that would fit and be different enough are Cosmic/Spacial (i don't like the "Alien" naming, but thats just me) and Light (Psychic, Electric, etc. are FAR from fitting under light in most cases if it were to be made).

    So I don't think there should be any removals, merges, or renaming. If anything, there should be a new typing, but I don't think that is NECESSARY, imo. But i would fit.
    3DS Friend Code: 2750-1183-1943

  2. #102
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    United States, East Coast
    Posts
    662

    Default

    I generally love the Ground-type.
    I generally dislike the Rock-type.
    Fact of the matter is, that they both could have been combined into a singular "Earth-type" originally.

    Strangely enough, despite their existence, many people use the argument that certain types could NEVER exist because they are too similar to current types.
    I have seen arguments that a "Light" type would be too similar to Psychic, Electric, or Fire.
    Or that a "Magic" type would be too similar to Psychic.

    Honestly, there are better reasons why these types shouldn't exist, but the argument that they are too similar to other types is not a valid one.
    Check out my band's new EP! ... And like us on Facebook while you're at it!
    [IMG]http://oi49.*******.com/21mzpmr.jpg[/IMG]
    Hat by wolfy.

  3. #103
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    46

    Default

    The only changes I would add to the type chart would be to give Poison a second super-effective hit (even though I still use it for its decent neutral coverage on stuff that gets STAB with it), and add one more SE hit to both Ghost and Dark to differentiate those attacking types further than just their resistances and STAB chances.

    Not sure where I'd put them, though.

  4. #104
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Crazy Town, Land of Insanity
    Posts
    4,291

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Darryl View Post
    The only changes I would add to the type chart would be to give Poison a second super-effective hit (even though I still use it for its decent neutral coverage on stuff that gets STAB with it), and add one more SE hit to both Ghost and Dark to differentiate those attacking types further than just their resistances and STAB chances.

    Not sure where I'd put them, though.
    Poison huh... Well, I would give it SE against Dark, Ighting and Normal, considering those three types are all "living-like" and since living creatures are suspectible to Poison, it would make sense.

    And, I want a Move that makes Posion SE against Steel. Poison eats away at Steel anway, the immunity makes no sense.

  5. #105
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Twinleaf Town
    Posts
    646

    Default

    I like the type chart. It gives a nice diversity to the game.
    Within my lifetime, I've done a lot of walking. I started my journey walking on a little path called Route 1. Little did I know that walking down that route would lead me onwards to a road that went by the name of Victory. Just west of Victory Road, I walked up an entire mountain where atop stood a silent trainer who was one of the mightiest I had ever faced. I've walked, through sandstorms, across the hard desert of Hoenn. I've walked through pelting hail, across the snow covered terrains of Sinnoh. And now as I look back on all my travels I find myself walking across the Skyarrow Bridge of Unova. It took a lot of walking through tall grass patches to get where I am today...But it was worth the walk.

  6. #106

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dirkac View Post
    Poison huh... Well, I would give it SE against Dark, Ighting and Normal, considering those three types are all "living-like" and since living creatures are suspectible to Poison, it would make sense.

    And, I want a Move that makes Posion SE against Steel. Poison eats away at Steel anway, the immunity makes no sense.
    I've always thought poison should be SE against water, personally. Water already has so few weaknesses (the least of the three starter types), and the logic would be that poison pollutes or taints water. But that's just me wishing water types' lives would be a little bit harder.

    As for the original question of types being unnecessary... no. I think the type chart is fine. There's enough balance, and there isn't any single type that you could get rid of without drastically affecting the way the game plays.
    Competitive/IGRMT Mod and one of the writers for the PotW.

    I make no claim of being perfect or always right. Take everything I say with a grain of salt.

  7. #107
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    The Old West
    Posts
    1,377

    Default

    And, I want a Move that makes Posion SE against Steel. Poison eats away at Steel anway, the immunity makes no sense.
    Acid eats away at steel. Not poison; that only hurts organisms. That's why ghost resist it, most likely.

    I've heard of an idea of a poison type attack called "acid" whatever that does double damage against steel types. I think that would be an okay idea, if it were implemented.

  8. #108
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Santa Clara, CA
    Posts
    500

    Default

    I think that the Type charts are pretty much good as they are. Sure, Poison is vastly underpowered in its offense because it's only SE against Grass, but a lot of Poison types have good diversity in their movepools or, at least, have a second type combination to take advantage of. If I could, then yeah, Poison SE against Bug would make sense, or something like that, but honestly, the move chart is for the most part really set in stone.

    Messing with even one type - whether its resistance, effectiveness, immunity - or obviously, making or deleting an entire move type; that would really complicate and possibly make a mess of what is a pretty balanced type chart relatively.
    Current Black 2 Team



    The final team member wanders yet...

  9. #109
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Crazy Town, Land of Insanity
    Posts
    4,291

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zachmac View Post
    Acid eats away at steel. Not poison; that only hurts organisms. That's why ghost resist it, most likely.

    I've heard of an idea of a poison type attack called "acid" whatever that does double damage against steel types. I think that would be an okay idea, if it were implemented.
    Acid is already a move :P

    And Posion combines the two, thus why I said Poison.

  10. #110
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Hell de Janeiro
    Posts
    36

    Default

    I'd rework the type chart according to the japanese 5 elements and their respective synergy / mix with little or no modification:

    Gogyo.35890226_std.jpg

    ps.: Sometimes you can find Void (or even Metal) instead of Lightning, therefore it may.

    • Gengar would be a Void poke
    • Charizard would be a Fire+Wind
    • Dragonite: Wind+Fire or Wind+Earth or Wind+Whatever but Water
    • Crygonal: Wind+Water
    • Gliscor: Earth+Wind
    • Garchomp: Earth
    • Infernape: Fire+Earth
    • Galvantula: Earth or Earth+Wind (or lightning/Void - and yes, i know about the last one...)
    • Metagross: Metal (Void, for that matter...)

    although the above is just a sketch, you've got the idea, so need to argue about "omg, Metagross Metal? Galvantula Earth+Wind?!" and so on...

    As it is a game and you wouldn't need to follow Godai or Gogyo by the book, allowing to expand the above typing chart to include Lightning, Void, Metal and even Wood, in their own category...
    Last edited by bloodnmetal; 20th February 2013 at 6:01 PM.

    Who am I now?

  11. #111
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    168

    Default

    Do I think some types are unnecessary? No, however, I feel like if they included a bug type, they should have included a bird type as well.
    I can smell u

  12. #112

    Default

    The type chart is pretty well balanced, in my opinion. There are always going to be some typings that are weaker than others, but the fact is, getting rid of any types would be more trouble than it was worth, as Game Freak would have to reclassify loads of pokemon. I'd rather things stayed the same with the type chart, but if they really, really wanted to change something, it would be changing some of the less logical matchups, e.g Bug/Dark.

    My fave Pokemon ^.^

    Don't click this. Really.

  13. #113
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    0

    Default

    For me each pokemon type serves a purpose. Even if they are useless, they are still cute.

  14. #114
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    72

    Default

    I used to think the same way, but now my views have changed.
    Even though two types might seem very similar, they are all unique and different from each other.

  15. #115
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    It doesn't matter.
    Posts
    738

    Default

    The only useless types are light,sound,etc. They serve no real purpose and are already covered by what we already have.

  16. #116
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Good ol England.
    Posts
    49

    Default

    I don't think any Pokémon types are useless at all. Fighting type does make sense after all, it harnesses the Pokémon psychical strength instead of elemental power. Ice and water wouldn't be a smart thing to group together, Ice beating Fire? That would be weird. Ghost is more of supernatural creatures or beings whereas Dark is all sorts of stuff, illusion, night time or dirty tactics. But not necessarily evil. Bug type is more unique I guess in some ways, if it fell under the grass type then it just seems to have something to do with plants.

  17. #117
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    somewhere...
    Posts
    103

    Default

    i think all types are necessary, but i think they need to even out the types a little more. for example, types such as ice and steel have way too many weaknesses compared to other types, while types like poison and dark are only weak to a couple types. and i also think dragon should be super effective against normal. it just sounds right.
    PM me if you want to battle! i'm always looking for a good battle!

    "strong pokemon. weak pokemon. that is only the selfish perception of people. real trainers try to win with their favorites." - karen

    black 2 national pokedex: 649/649

  18. #118
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Tennessee, US
    Posts
    635

    Default

    I think that several of the types are unnecessary. Two of them because they aren't types at all but kinds of creatures (Bug, Dragon). I find Normal to be unnecessary because a single normal typing would basically render the Pokemon just a plain animal and it would actually be weak to almost all types (I don't see many animals in the real world surviving against flames and electrocutions and poisoning). Fighting I find unnecessary because it is no different than the Normal type. Fighting types are strong creatures. Great. So why is Strength a Normal type move? Why are certain punches and kicks typed Normal? Fighting and Normal should be one. Ground and Rock should be one. An Earth type would make more sense because sand (associated with Ground) is essentially broken up rock. The Earth (the ground) is rock. Flying should have been named Air or Wind because of Flying types' control of the wind. Not all Flying types can fly which is a major flaw. The argument that Ice and Water are similar to counter the Ground/Rock argument is ridiculous because Ice is the opposite of Fire. Water is a neutral. Ice might need water but the cold is what defines it. Dark fits with Fighting and Normal for the most part because Dark type moves are as necessary as they are elemental.

    My basic judgment is that all types should be elemental. The fact that a Pokemon is a kind of creature or fights a certain way should not define its power because, in the end, in reality (for lack of a better word), elements such as fire, electricity, extreme cold, large masses of water or earth being dropped or thrown at something, or being poisoned would kill any creature regardless of how it fights.
    LOOKING FOR A SHINY ONIX/STEELIX and SHINY SCYTHER/SCIZOR and SHINY SLOWPOKE. I HAVE POKEBANK CELEBI FOR TRADE AND SOME OTHER SHINIES. PM IF INTERESTED.

  19. #119
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    77

    Default

    @Shadorai: Where the heck did you get the idea that Steel has too many weaknesses? Firstly; Steel has three weaknesses (Fire, Fighting, Ground) compared to Grass having five weaknesses (Fire, Ice, Poison, Flying, Bug). Secondly; Steel is single-handedly the best mono-defensive type in the game because it resists everything other than the three aforementioned weakness and Water and Electric (which are the only types that are neutral to it). Also, Dragon is powerful enough as it is already. We don't want to give it another SE hit just because it 'feels right'.

    @SlowPokeBroKing: One of the ways that Pokemon distinguishes itself from other RPGs is the amount of types there are and that they are all balanced mechanically. Most RPGs have up to five or six elements, which works because you get much fewer playable characters to choose from. This simplified list of elements doesn't work in Pokemon because of the amount of different species of pokemon, all of which are 'playable' but must be 'unlocked' first, just wouldn't fit into them properly and they become less distinguishable (and memorable) as a result. Also, do you have any idea how valuable each type is in the competitive environment? Say we removed Bug? We lose a good counter to Psychic and Dark types, making foes like Latios and Hydregion much more threatening because then top threats like Scizor or Volcarona won't be able to stop them (not like that Scizor can stop Hydregion well anyway) and a valuable resist to Fighting, making it easier for Breloom and Conkledurr to smash holes through teams.
    My other argument is that I believe that Normal is supposed to be the Neutral type, but giving it no weaknesses or resistances would leave it unbalanced. Considering that almost all Normal types are either birds or mammals, it made sense to give the type the weaknesses/resistances it got.
    Current IV hunt:
    - Perfect IV w/ Anticipation. Current progress: 31/31/31/??/31/31 IV w/ Anticipation.

    Previous hunts:
    - 31/31/31/??/31/31 IV w/ Huge Power and Adamant Nature.




  20. #120
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Watatsumi Clan
    Posts
    1,570

    Default

    Ok, ever since gen 2, everyone wanted to know about the ??? type. It's kinda sad that they wasted a possible new type and make it ghost
    FC: 1332-8918-6873
    Credit: AstralShadow (userbar) & Kida-Ookami (badge) & SwornMetalhead (symbol)


  21. #121
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Slovenia
    Posts
    1,386

    Default

    Every of the 17 types is justified and combined they cover anything one can imagine quite nicely.

    I used to think 17 was such a weird and random number.. but actually, if you look at normal as the "default" type, you're left with a nice 16 (4+4+4+4, 2*2*2*2)

    Anyhow. In my view, right now the type chart consists of 3 categories:
    -Elements
    -Techniques
    -Species

    The first are the basic stuff anyone would come up with when they think of types, attributes, elements etc.
    Fire, Water, Electric, Ice, Grass, Ground

    Furthermore, I see 2 groups here, ones being processes/reactions and the others plain aspects of nature
    Energy:
    -Fire
    -Electric
    -Ice
    Nature:
    -Water
    -Grass
    -Ground

    Techniques are about the actual approach to the battle, kinds of strategies or special abilities that give you an edge.
    -Fighting
    -Poison
    -Flying
    -Psychic
    -Dark

    And species actually relates to the organism itself (also, if the type is merely secondary, its usually employed as armor)
    -Bug
    -Rock
    -Ghost
    -Dragon
    -Steel

    The most redundant at first seem the whole species group, after all, simplified, they make as much sense as a Fish, Mammal, Monster, Bird...types.
    But they are the more unique ones. For example, including Bug is justified even simply as a homage to "bug collecting", which is what inspired pokemon alltogether. Dragon, is THE mythologic creature known to all humanity even before there was actual contact between different cultures, yet seems to have no real world basis. Ghost covers everything "abnormal", while Rock and Steel are THE concepts for all sorts of armors and more mineral based creatures, while steel also adds an artificial aspect.



    I couldn't imagine taking away anything else than those 5, but I don't think that would work nicely either.

  22. #122
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    77

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SuperDaikenki View Post
    Ok, ever since gen 2, everyone wanted to know about the ??? type. It's kinda sad that they wasted a possible new type and make it ghost
    The ??? type is what I call the Curse type, because it is only used by the move 'Curse' in the main games. However, there is a ???-typed Arceus coded into the games, suggesting that GF is planning to expand on it and possibly turn it into a proper type at some stage
    Current IV hunt:
    - Perfect IV w/ Anticipation. Current progress: 31/31/31/??/31/31 IV w/ Anticipation.

    Previous hunts:
    - 31/31/31/??/31/31 IV w/ Huge Power and Adamant Nature.




  23. #123
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    That way
    Posts
    6,776

    Default

    If Gamefreak wants to implement a new type, they can, I mean its a great company, I'm pretty sure they will find some way to make it balanced. But as for my answer no.

    And as for people saying Poison and Ice needs revamping because of there issues, think this: most games will have a "best and worst" for example; Ground is the best offensively while Poison is the worse and Ice is the weakest defensively where Steel takes the cake. Besides all types have there niche in gameplay and types aren't the only thing that determines how balanced Pokemon is since there are a myriad of moves, abilities, items, and almost complete different stat distributions.

  24. #124
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    6,271

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Orithan View Post
    The ??? type is what I call the Curse type, because it is only used by the move 'Curse' in the main games. However, there is a ???-typed Arceus coded into the games, suggesting that GF is planning to expand on it and possibly turn it into a proper type at some stage
    I doubt it, since they got rid of the Curse-type entirely in Gen V. Curse itself was reclassified as a proper Ghost-type move, and the Arceus beta-sprite (which was only implemented in order to cover for a potential hack (just like Reshiram, Zekrom, and Victini's Shiny sprites), and there was still no Curse-type Plate) was taken out.
    Last edited by Endolise; 26th February 2013 at 4:35 AM.
    My 3DS XL Friend Code:
    0748 - 4304 - 0124
    Friend Safari: Steel-type


    My 3DS Friend Code:

    3797 - 8023 - 1467
    Friend Safari: Fighting-type

    Vivillon Pattern: Modern

    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Zoroark View Post
    Listen, you gotta remember these things; always avoid claims of Fennekin being (or becoming) part Fighting-type, don't tick off mods, and NEVER (and I mean NEVER!) suggest that Arceus is the God of Pokemon when Endolise is online. If you somehow make this mistake, run for the hills before he attempts to murder you via tongue lashing.

  25. #125
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    SE asia, Phiippines.
    Posts
    698

    Default

    In truth, I'll be commenting on everyone who responded to this topic. Including the original creator of this thread itself.

    First and foremost, I'll focus on the respondents who say that:

    "The typing chart has to be changed for there are certain types being under powered and forgotten in the competitive environment, and that some of those certain types can be combined to the other similar type."
    While it is true on how some of you pointed out the similarities of, lets say Rock and Ground or Ice and Water, It makes sense in some pedigree. Its true that pokemon has too much types for us to handle. But I wanna ask this? Is there any other monster catching franchise that has more than 17 types on its type chart? Plus, the aforementioned type similarities can be separated with logical terms. Think of a compound atom. Compound atoms are atoms combining 2 or more different elements. Elemental atoms however are their original forms. That phrase is just basic chemistry. So for those wanted to change the name of the types and combine two similar types into one, you wanted compound types instead of separating the "Earth" element into a much more logical Rock type and Ground type.

    "Type A should have more/less resistances/super effectiveness against types B/C/D in order to have a fair spotlight with other dominant types like dragon/fighting/steel/water."
    I know that it terribly sucks to be a poison/ice type thanks to their terrible/lackluster coverages. While most of us understand the sense of making poison also super effective to water, fighting, steel, and bug types thanks to the references for environmental pollution, I ask you this? Does EVERY kind of chemical acid destroy stainless steel? The others are theoretically logical. But steel? That is quite impossible.
    The Ice types. Oh how we wish that they have resistance to water, and get rid of the hated rock type weakness. But about the weakness to rock, which of the two types will be higher o the mos Scale of Hardnesss? A block of Ice or many kinds of rocks and stones? That is up to you to research if you wanted to know.
    Final Chapter: 38: Mountain's Edge(Click the Banner above)

Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst 12345

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •