The PokéCommunity Forums

The PokéCommunity Forums (https://www.pokecommunity.com/index.php)
-   Previous Generations (https://www.pokecommunity.com/forumdisplay.php?f=200)
-   -   5th Gen New Types? (https://www.pokecommunity.com/showthread.php?t=218894)

ChrisTom May 16th, 2010 3:31 PM

New Types?
 
Alright, so I'm going to say something that I think might be on some people's mind.

It seems these games are highly focusing on Yin and Yang, White and Black, Light and Dark. This theme is shown throughout the current advertising and through Zoruak. Has anybody else realized that this would be the perfect oppurtunity to add the fan demanded Light type? I personally think that due to this theme they are exhibiting that there will be a Light type. Does anybody else agree?

Thank you for your time.

With all regards,

-ChrisTom



EDIT: PART 2


*clears throat*

Hello everybody. Sorry for not being on this thread for a bit. I swear, Pokemon Black and White Threads are spreading faster than a Bellsprout using Growth.

I want to clear a few things up and tell you my points of view on an implementation of the Light Type. But there is one thing I want to make note of first.

Quote:

Originally posted by .EJ
Adding a light type is unnecessary and will probably cause imbalance in the game. That's the reason the dark and steel types were added; to balance it out. I'm sure we all remember when we played RBY and we all knew that having a Psychic type in your team meant utter obliteration to everybody else. I don't know about christom since he was around 1-2 years old when those games were out and couldn't play them haha.
Firstly, it is written as ChrisTom as I enjoy using capitalization to show professionalism. Secondly, I find that comment to be completely ageist. You're implying that due to my age I lack the ability to comprehend and understand the complex "Type Mathematics" that go into the game, as well as a lack of nostalgia for the original series. You fail to realize that I've been playing the games for quite some time(albeit not as long as you): 7 years. I've been into the grandiose wonder that is Pokemon since I was 4 and I first played at 6. My first and second Pokemon games were Gold and Red respectively. I've beaten Pokemon Red 4 times, Gold 5 times, FireRed once, Both Sapphire and Emerald once, Both Diamond and Pearl twice, and Heartgold once. I know these games back and front inside and out, so I do NOT take kindly to your comment.

Now moving on...

THE LIGHT TYPE

Keep in mind the following is entirely hypothetical.

I see several fans of the wonderous world of Pokemon intrigued about the concept of Light Type Pokemon. Most think that when I said what I did I implyed that I think that there MUST be a Light Type. I don't think that whatsoever. About 10 posters said the same thing: "I don't think a light type is neccesary". I agree. It ISN'T neccesarry, but it would be nice. I think it would be a great way to get rid of the rediculous power Dragon Types have (Ice being their only weakness is rather irritating) and to give Poison and Bug Types the power they deserve. It would obviously be effective on Dark Types.

Alot of you seem to not like the Steel type and hope that Light will destory it. Honestly, I don't see anything wrong with Steel whatsoever. The type does have it's weaknesses and due to the minimal amount of Steel types I think it's ok. As Fighting Types have high Attack, and Electric Types have high Speed; Steel type has high Special Defense which is fine. Most Types work like that.

Now most of you seem concerned that the Light Type would be complicated/overpowering. This is not neccesarily true. The aforemention Poison and Bug Types as well as the Grass and Rock types would be Super-Effective, while Dark, Ghost and Water would be crippled. A very small amount of Pokemon would need to be changed (Lanturn and Ampharos specifically).

Here is what I think is the most important part of this debate: Will they even do it? I think absolutely yes. Considering the vast amount of themes involving Yin and Yang, and Light and Dark (For God's sake the games are called Black and White) that they will do it. I don't see a reason why not. It would be the perfect moment for GameFreak to add it. Fans have been wanting a new Type and have been speculating a "Light Type" since Generation II and my guess is that Satoshi Tajiri-Sensei will pull through and give the fans what they want.

If you have anymore questions about my theories and ideas about how the Light-Type would be implemented into the carefully thought out Type-Mathematics, please ask and I will get to you as soon as possible. I am looking forward to the new games and your opinions on what I have said. I wish you all good luck.


With all regards,

-ChrisTom

KaiVii May 16th, 2010 3:35 PM

I certainly hope so! I would love to FINALLY see the dark counterpart

JP May 16th, 2010 3:37 PM

Although it would be a perfect time to add this "light" type, I just don't see it as being needed. I'm not a huge fan of the idea myself.

colcolstyles May 16th, 2010 3:40 PM

I doubt that Game Freak would add a new type this far into the series. There wouldn't be many pokémon of that type unless they went back and changed the types of older pokémon (like with Magnemite & Magneton in G/S/C). Plus, a new type is a pretty major addition. Don't you think that we'd have heard about it by now if they were going to add it?

Still, I wouldn't rule out the possibility altogether.

Kirbychu May 16th, 2010 3:42 PM

Light-type?

No.

I'm against the Light-type, because it just doesn't seem necessary, and it's already represented by other types such as electric, psychic, steel, even fire. It could really mix things up, and not in a good way. We don't need anymore types.

Pityflame May 16th, 2010 3:42 PM

They only reason they even made steel and dark type was to balance psychic, so there is no need for a 'light' type.

Plus, it's a dumb idea.

ChrisTom May 16th, 2010 3:51 PM

It's not a dumb idea. It makes sense first off, and secondly it would be the perfect time to add this type. I don't care if it's "Far in the series" Pokemon is a constantly changing thing.

In fact, the Pokemon series in general is constantly Evolving...

Heh heh...

True though.

Aureol May 16th, 2010 3:57 PM

I think the "Light" type is already manifest in the other types, mostly Psychic, Electric and Fire. I admit, I don't really see a point either. The whole point of Dark-type was to balance Psychic, anyways.

Pityflame May 16th, 2010 3:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChrisTom (Post 5805358)
It's not a dumb idea. It makes sense first off

Yes it is, and no it does not.

Kirbychu May 16th, 2010 4:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChrisTom (Post 5805358)
It's not a dumb idea. It makes sense first off, and secondly it would be the perfect time to add this type. I don't care if it's "Far in the series" Pokemon is a constantly changing thing.

In fact, the Pokemon series in general is constantly Evolving...

Heh heh...

True though.

Light-based Pokemon could easily be made Fire, Psychic, or Electric type. It's just not necessary and will get in the way. We're fine as it is.

EJ May 16th, 2010 4:05 PM

Adding a light type is unnecessary and will probably cause imbalance in the game. That's the reason the dark and steel types were added; to balance it out. I'm sure we all remember when we played RBY and we all knew that having a Psychic type in your team meant utter obliteration to everybody else. I don't know about christom since he was around 1-2 years old when those games were out and couldn't play them haha.

Volroc May 16th, 2010 4:06 PM

i think its a must, it would balance out dark, dragon,& steel which have become horribly imbalanced

everyone with disagree cuz they all use only pseudo-legends, and if they dont theyll give it some thought before blowin it off like its unneeded :P

after all pokemon is constantly changin, you didnt go awal when they made dark& steel, and steel is horrible over powered, it resists all but 3types, and only 2-3 types is neutral against it.

so we need at least 1new type that can even out things with steel.

so light here we come :3 lol

EJ May 16th, 2010 4:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Volroc (Post 5805423)
i think its a must, it would balance out dark, dragon,& steel which have become horribly imbalanced

everyone with disagree cuz they all use only pseudo-legends, and if they dont theyll give it some thought before blowin it off like its unneeded :P

after all pokemon is constantly changin, you didnt go awal when they made dark& steel, and steel is horrible over powered, it resists all but 3types, and only 2-3 types is neutral against it.

so we need at least 1new type that can even out things with steel.

so light here we come :3 lol

And why would a LIGHT type be super-effective against steel? Do you realize that most steel types are not in the OU tier?

That's like saying the electric type should be super-effective against bug. That doesn't make any sense now does it?

Kirbychu May 16th, 2010 4:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Volroc (Post 5805423)
steel is horrible over powered, it resists all but 3types, and only 2-3 types is neutral against it.

You forget to mention how it's not that great of an offensive type and how its candidates more than often are decimated by the most common move in the metagame; Earthquake.

EJ May 16th, 2010 4:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kirbychu (Post 5805442)
You forget to mention how it's not that great of an offensive type and how its candidates can be decimated by the most common move in the metagame; Earthquake.

Not to mention the ever-common fire attacks, and the occasional fighting move.

Haza May 16th, 2010 4:13 PM

I bet if there was a Light-Type, all the haters would use it all the time...

Pityflame May 16th, 2010 4:15 PM

People who think steel types are unbalanced/overpowered has never used a steel type.

Kirbychu May 16th, 2010 4:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Haza (Post 5805446)
I bet if there was a Light-Type, all the haters would use it all the time...

We're not haters, we're realists! :D

If a Light-type did appear though what would it's weaknesses even be? Poison instantly comes to mind because that type just isn't the greatest...

EJ May 16th, 2010 4:19 PM

^Yep yep. Poison is among the worst types...

IF a light-type were to appear, wouldn't it have been revealed already?

Instead they gave us a new dark type family and the starters...

A Pixy May 16th, 2010 4:22 PM

Yeah, why aren't there new types?

There was nothing wrong when GEN II introduced Steel and Dark types. Why aren't there more? Maybe they're trying to keep the system as simple as possible. Even I have problem sometimes. >_>

But, yeah. It would be nice. But would Light be SE on Dark or vice versa? o.O

Kirbychu May 16th, 2010 4:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by THAT WONDERFUL PIXY GUY! (Post 5805487)
But would Light be SE on Dark or vice versa? o.O

If I were to decide, I'd have both be super-effective with each other.

Samme! May 16th, 2010 4:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aureol (Post 5805383)
I think the "Light" type is already manifest in the other types, mostly Psychic, Electric and Fire. I admit, I don't really see a point either. The whole point of Dark-type was to balance Psychic, anyways.

My thoughts exactly. Whenever people mention their want for a "Light" type, I immediately think about Psychic, which definitely has 'light' characteristics, in my opinion. And whenever people say that they want a Wood type, I just think of Grass Types.

Overall, I really don't think that there is a need for a new type of Pokemon this late in span of the series.

Haza May 16th, 2010 4:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kirbychu (Post 5805462)
We're not haters, we're realists! :D

If a Light-type did appear though what would it's weaknesses even be? Poison instantly comes to mind because that type just isn't the greatest...

There would be the obvious Yin-Yang effect with Dark. Poison would be also, taking away purity and giving Poison an edge since as of now it does not do much damage in the Meta Game.

Also, how does Psychic come to mind when it is based on Mind Control and Magic... :/

coconutberry May 16th, 2010 4:59 PM

Haha... I don't really care about a light type either way. It might be cool, but I don't even know what a light type would even be... I've always seen dark Pokemon as emo normal types, so... LOL.

Kirbychu May 16th, 2010 4:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Haza (Post 5805618)

Also, how does Psychic come to mind when it is based on Mind Control and Magic... :/

There's moves like Light Screen and Lunar Dance, plus most of the moves are displayed as flashes of light and light beams. At least, that's what I think of when someone mentions Light-type. :I

roccomont329 May 16th, 2010 5:00 PM

i was wondering if maybe they didnt give you the classic fire grass and water pokemon

Legendofall May 16th, 2010 5:06 PM

definetly
 
just to hate on spiritomb, i think it should beat both ghost and dark types. and be weak to dark and bug. why bug? why bug on a dark type, who knows!

Haza May 16th, 2010 5:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kirbychu (Post 5805654)
There's moves like Light Screen and Lunar Dance, plus most of the moves are displayed as flashes of light and light beams. At least, that's what I think of when someone mentions Light-type. :I

Yeah, only Light Screen conflicts. Lunar Dance does not because the sun and Moon are very connected to Psychics and Magic. But as I recall, Light Screen was portrayed as Mr. Mimes gimmick signature in the anime and was very magic like besides the simple word light being in the name.

Esper May 16th, 2010 5:17 PM

No. No. No. Light wouldn't even be the opposite of Dark. Dark isn't dark. It's called aku あく in the Japanese games and it means 'bad' or 'evil' NOT 'dark' or 'shadow' or anything like that. That's why the Fighting types work against it since they're the 'good' types that fight fair.

Guy May 16th, 2010 5:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Samme! (Post 5805602)
My thoughts exactly. Whenever people mention their want for a "Light" type, I immediately think about Psychic, which definitely has 'light' characteristics, in my opinion. And whenever people say that they want a Wood type, I just think of Grass Types.

Overall, I really don't think that there is a need for a new type of Pokemon this late in span of the series.

This, exactly.

If a Light Type was going to be introduced into the series, then it would have been done since the second generation along with the inclusion of Dark and Steel types. I think just the thought of Umbreon and Espeon counterparting each other kind of proves how Psychic represents the Light type we think about.

I personally wouldn't mind one more type, especially a Light type. However, the thought of it unbalancing the system we have now and Psychic types in a way just representing it as a whole kind of makes me think it unecessary.

Ωmega May 16th, 2010 5:59 PM

A Light-Type isn't necessary. First off, Psychic was overpowered in Gen. I (nothing could beat it) so in Gen II they introduced Dark and Steel (something super-effective against Dark and something Psychic-types can't take out in one hit like Gen I). I think the system we have now is fine. I was initially for the Light-type addition to games, but then I realized that there is no need for it.

IF there were to be a Light-type, it would have to counter Dark and they would both need to be super-effective against each other and Light would have to do normal damage to all other types in order for the game to remain balanced. Also, Light would need to have at least 2 resistances. That would keep the game balanced, in my opinion.

Bloothump May 16th, 2010 6:13 PM

Light type would only discredit Espeon and the Fighting Type advantage on Dark Types (fighting like, superhero imo)
I'm not against a new type, I'm against something that will mess up balance with the type system. Besides, we have a saying for this: if it ain't broke, don't fix it. This applies here, if nowhere else at all.

Nohr May 16th, 2010 6:18 PM

No, there is no NEED for a light type. The game is balanced. The ONLY reason Dark and Steel were made in Gen 2 was to balance out the crazily overpowered Psychic type. Now, all the types are generally balanced, or, atleast nothing's OVER powered.

Besides, can you even TRY to make up a "Light" type pokemon that couldn't be classified as Fire, Psychic, Lightening, or even Flying?

Go ahead; try, I dare you.

Aureol May 16th, 2010 6:23 PM

If they made a Light type, good for them, I would use it, but I just don't see how they could. Light-type MOVES are conceivable, true, but Light-type Pokemon? What, are we going to introduce a dozen variations of sun-warriors? I can't even think of a Pokemon now that would fall under a Light category... maybe Espeon, and that doesn't really make sense other than the fact that it's Umbreon's counterpart.

BleuVII May 16th, 2010 6:47 PM

First, I am fully in support of some new types. Otherwise it will just be the same game as the last three. And there are two ideas that I have heard of that I think would be great:

Light and Sound

Sound seems like a type that should have been introduced in Gen III (Whimsur's line in specific). There are also tons of moves that could easily be switched to sound-type, like Uproar. Sound could have some sort of relationship with Bug and Poison.

Light is something that's needed specifically for Legendary Pokemon. We're always stuck with strange combinations for legendaries like Steel/Dragon and Water/Dragon (Dialga and Palkia) or Psychic/Flying and Fire/Flying (Lugia and Ho-Oh) so that version-exclusive legendaries don't have a type advantage over one another. Since it's likely that Zorua and Zoruark are going to be legendaries, it would be great to have a type that is just as strong and balanced as dark.

The real question would be what the strengths and weaknesses of these types would be. Maybe later tonight, I'll try to look at the existing type charts and come up with a good balance for these two new types.

BeachBoy May 16th, 2010 6:59 PM

I pray to kyogre that we don't see any more types, it's perfect as is. :(

shortdan1998 May 16th, 2010 7:08 PM

I personally think that to balance the metagame for future players that there should be a new type, but perhaps not "light" for the love of psychic types. I actually think that there should be something that would make a new type triangle that would be each super effective against each other and the one that is weak to another would resist a secondary typing that would impact the games. That is what I think should be done just because of a sort of imbalance to certain Pokemon, and the fact that in a Battle Arcade run with me and my cousin, the opponent was a water-type, yet when it was paralyzed, Ice Beam was super effective.

HaloSonic May 16th, 2010 7:16 PM

past experience tells me there won't be a light type (despite how much I wanted it since Gen II), but then again, Colosseum and XD had the shadow type, albeit only a temporary type.

Vrai May 16th, 2010 7:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BeachBoy (Post 5806094)
I pray to kyogre that we don't see any more types, it's perfect as is. :(

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

^^^^^

^

I find myself quoting other people more and more because my opinions are so much like theirs. Anyway, if there's anything that will turn me away from B&W, it would be the inclusion of a light type. Why, why, WHY would they throw off something that I've known perfectly (albeit almost perfectly - who knew Rock was neutral to Rock? D:) for the last ten years or so? That just doesn't make sense at all.

I'd imply more about why Light-type would be retarded and not make sense but everyone else's posts seem to have covered that so I'll let it go.

Waffle-San May 16th, 2010 7:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChrisTom (Post 5805358)
It's not a dumb idea. It makes sense first off, and secondly it would be the perfect time to add this type. I don't care if it's "Far in the series" Pokemon is a constantly changing thing.

In fact, the Pokemon series in general is constantly Evolving...

Heh heh...

True though.

How does it make sense?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kirbychu (Post 5805322)
Light-type?

No.

I'm against the Light-type, because it just doesn't seem necessary, and it's already represented by other types such as electric, psychic, steel, even fire. It could really mix things up, and not in a good way. We don't need anymore types.

Quote:

Originally Posted by .EJ (Post 5805419)
Adding a light type is unnecessary and will probably cause imbalance in the game. That's the reason the dark and steel types were added; to balance it out. I'm sure we all remember when we played RBY and we all knew that having a Psychic type in your team meant utter obliteration to everybody else. I don't know about christom since he was around 1-2 years old when those games were out and couldn't play them haha.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nohr (Post 5805950)
No, there is no NEED for a light type. The game is balanced. The ONLY reason Dark and Steel were made in Gen 2 was to balance out the crazily overpowered Psychic type. Now, all the types are generally balanced, or, atleast nothing's OVER powered.

Besides, can you even TRY to make up a "Light" type pokemon that couldn't be classified as Fire, Psychic, Lightening, or even Flying?

Go ahead; try, I dare you.

Quote:

Originally Posted by BeachBoy (Post 5806094)
I pray to kyogre that we don't see any more types, it's perfect as is. :(

A bunch of intelligent people with intelligent posts.

And sound? Really? Think about it please. How do you categorize that? Every Pokemon that can make a noise (All of them) can make sound. It could maybe possibly work for a move but that's what we have normal for, to categorize the few things that can be seen as exceptions to other types or things that are just plain normal like sound.

colcolstyles May 16th, 2010 7:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Waffle-San (Post 5806182)
And sound? Really? Think about it please. How do you categorize that? Every Pokemon that can make a noise (All of them) can make sound. It could maybe possibly work for a move but that's what we have normal for, to categorize the few things that can be seen as exceptions to other types or things that are just plain normal like sound.

Well, Coolyboyman did it. And he won Hack of the Year for it, too.

Euonymus May 16th, 2010 7:34 PM

I agree with the waffle loving dude. More types would just throw a wrench in things. I feel the game is balanced as is.

Waffle-San May 16th, 2010 7:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by colcolstyles (Post 5806191)
Well, Coolyboyman did it. And he won Hack of the Year for it, too.

He also added Wood (Grass...), Gas (Posion...), Abnormal (not really a type it's a classification in my opinion) and Wind (Flying though Flying is inupropriately named in my opinion).

And based on his post he won it because of the fact he created something more than just a hack of another game and he had something to sepperate him from his opponents. I haven't played his hack so I don't know how he incorporated it but in the Pokemon that I know I see absolutely no need for it.

Redrup May 16th, 2010 7:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pityflame (Post 5805457)
People who think steel types are unbalanced/overpowered has never used a steel type.

This. ^

The majority of steel types can be found in the UU tier of competitive battling, which goes to show just how 'overpowered' they are considered by those outside of the single-player game.

OmegaRuby and AlphaSapphire May 16th, 2010 7:55 PM

I like the Idea of a light type but it's true that there is little reason for this other than to make the type capable to slay those pesky dragons... Yeah light slays dragon makes sense since most dragons in western legends live in caves... and should be weak against the light when you think about it... much like bats are...

DXrobots May 16th, 2010 7:56 PM

I wanted a light type way back in Generation II I don't think I'd want anymore types

BleuVII May 16th, 2010 7:57 PM

Well, "sound" could be classified better as "Sonic" type, but that would sound like copyright infringement. As Colcolstyles said,

Quote:

Well, Coolyboyman did it. And he won Hack of the Year for it, too.
Coolboyman gave me the idea, and I started thinking about how it could be a really interesting "abstract" type to throw in that could be whatever you wanted it to be.

As for Light type, I still stand behind it. Dark needs a parallel, because with its super-effectiveness against Ghost and its immunity to Psychic, it is really strong. The only reason it's not superpowered is because there are so few pure Dark types. Now, people are thinking of "Light" as in physical light, but maybe it would be helpful to throw in a distinguishing factor. The Japanese for "Dark" is "aku" (あく - 悪), which means "evil" when translated. I am thinking of light as a Nintendo-censorship-standards-safe way of saying "holy", which in Japanese is "Sei" (せい - 聖). That should help to distinguish it from Fire, Electric, and Psychic in peoples' minds.

The type chart could be as follows:
Spoiler:
-=Super Effective (x2) Against
Fighting
Steel

-=Not Very Affective (x1/2) Against:
Psychic
Light
Rock

-=Immune to (x0)
Steel

-=Weak to (x2):
Ghost
Poison

-=Resistant to (x1/2):
Fighting
Light

Could non-haters check that out and see if you spot any imbalances? :)

There are only a few pokemon which I could see being re-typed as Light-types:
Blissey (and possibly Chancey)
Mawile (to make it an appropriate parallel to Sabeleye)

Hopefully that helps clarify why some of us want Light type.

Vrai May 16th, 2010 8:05 PM

Dark is not superpowered. It's checked by all sorts of things; you only mentioned it's strengths, which also happen to be its only ones. Sure, it has pretty good neutral coverage but that's about it. Dark doesn't need a parallel, especially when you consider why it was in there in the first place... to combat Psychic superiority, right?

Now, see, the real dominant type right now happens to be Steel. Look at any competitive battling team, and if it doesn't have a Steel-type, it's basically screwed to no end, if not for the 11 or so resistances, but for the only resistance to Dragon in the game.

Light doesn't have a reason to exist.

Waffle-San May 16th, 2010 8:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BleuVII (Post 5806268)
Well, "sound" could be classified better as "Sonic" type, but that would sound like copyright infringement. As Colcolstyles said,

Coolboyman gave me the idea, and I started thinking about how it could be a really interesting "abstract" type to throw in that could be whatever you wanted it to be.

As for Light type, I still stand behind it. Dark needs a parallel, because with its super-effectiveness against Ghost and its immunity to Psychic, it is really strong. The only reason it's not superpowered is because there are so few pure Dark types. Now, people are thinking of "Light" as in physical light, but maybe it would be helpful to throw in a distinguishing factor. The Japanese for "Dark" is "aku" (あく - 悪), which means "evil" when translated. I am thinking of light as a Nintendo-censorship-standards-safe way of saying "holy", which in Japanese is "Sei" (せい - 聖). That should help to distinguish it from Fire, Electric, and Psychic in peoples' minds.

The type chart could be as follows:
Spoiler:
-=Super Effective (x2) Against
Fighting
Steel

-=Not Very Affective (x1/2) Against:
Psychic
Light
Rock

-=Immune to (x0)
Steel

-=Weak to (x2):
Ghost
Poison

-=Resistant to (x1/2):
Fighting
Light

Could non-haters check that out and see if you spot any imbalances? :)

There are only a few pokemon which I could see being re-typed as Light-types:
Blissey (and possibly Chancey)
Mawile (to make it an appropriate parallel to Sabeleye)

Hopefully that helps clarify why some of us want Light type.

If Light is to "balance out" Dark than why isn't it super effective or resistant to Dark? And how is Light super effective on steel? I'm confused. =x

BleuVII May 16th, 2010 8:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vrai (Post 5806291)
Light doesn't have a reason to exist.

Except to combat stagnancy and add something NEW to the game. It's not that the game is BROKEN right now; far from it. Pokemon is one of the most-balanced games in existence, possibly losing only to Starcraft. It's just that the game hasn't really changed in a decade. People here act like adding a new type would break the game. Well, it doesn't, and Coolboyman proved that in his Pokemon Brown hack.

I made the type-chart for Light because I would honestly want a pokemon like that in my team. I don't think it's overpowered, and I think it would add something interesting for those of us who are looking for something new. The rest can just ignore it. I mean, heck, I've been ignoring Poison, Bug, and Rock types since Gen I (except for knowing how to kill them) just because they don't interest me.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Waffle-San (Post 5806300)
If Light is to "balance out" Dark than why isn't it super effective or resistant to Dark? And how is Light super effective on steel? I'm confused. =x

It's more of a parallel to Dark. I believe I said in an earlier post that it would be nice to have two legendaries that were not effective against each other, but not have one of them be a lame type (like Ho-oh/Lugia and Dialga/Palkia). I thought about making Light/Dark MUTUALLY effective against each other... Anyway, forgive me for creating confusion. Dark doesn't need to be balanced out. It's just a really strong type that could use a parallel.

Anyway, about Light being super-effective on Steel... how is Fighting super-effective on Dark? Or how is Steel NOT weak to Psychic (especially when the Psychic-enhancing held item is a TWISTED SPOON?!) No real reason, they just needed to balance out the types. The reason Light is super-effective against steel is:
1. Because it needed to be in order to make Light an effective parallel to Dark
and
2. If you REALLY need to search, in the Japanese mindset, the "Spiritual" (light/holy type) is seen as being at odds with the "Industrial" (Steel). Just watch Princess Mononoke and you'll understand what I mean.

Waffle-San May 16th, 2010 8:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BleuVII (Post 5806308)
Except to combat stagnancy and add something NEW to the game. It's not that the game is BROKEN right now; far from it. Pokemon is one of the most-balanced games in existence, possibly losing only to Starcraft. It's just that the game hasn't really changed in a decade. People here act like adding a new type would break the game. Well, it doesn't, and Coolboyman proved that in his Pokemon Brown hack.

I made the type-chart for Light because I would honestly want a pokemon like that in my team. I don't think it's overpowered, and I think it would add something interesting for those of us who are looking for something new. The rest can just ignore it. I mean, heck, I've been ignoring Poison, Bug, and Rock types since Gen I (except for knowing how to kill them) just because they don't interest me.

Your type chart doesn't make sense unfortunately. I mean we'd all love our perfect pokemon but grass isn't super effective on Fire for a reason. They could possibly spice up types like Poison, give it something more to attack with (make it super effective on water? just an example by the way) or just keep adding type combinations. There are other more creative ways to spice up the game than adding types. I mean a Light type would probably be super effective on Dark and be weak to Dark as well. It might have some other uses and resistances. I'd argue that it'd be weak to rock though cause even if you mean in a "holy" sense people would still refer to it as the light that we see colour with. And rocks block out that light. Being super effective on steel would be nice for competitive purposes but doesn't make any sense. If you're thinking heat than that's covered by Fire.

And Coolboyman added alot of other types too, if you're going to use him as proof you have to refer to all the types and come on, wood? Grass could be renamed (as should be flying) to be plant or something but really Grass covers all flora and fauna.

Edit: You've got a point, psychic could be super effective on steel but that has more to do with the strength of the psychic attack and steel. It could go either way in my opinion.

I think having Dark and Light mutually effective against eachother makes more sense. And Fighting is seen as the "good guy" counter to Dark as its typing is associated with honour and dependability while Dark is associated with trickery and decete.

From a spiritual mindset that's true but with a name like light that will rarely be anyones first impression. If anything they'll imagine light and mirrors. =/ And while it's seen as spiritual being I guess above that of the industrial, the industrial is slowly taking over around the world. So in a sense, the spiritual is losing out to Steel.

Vrai May 16th, 2010 8:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BleuVII (Post 5806308)
Except to combat stagnancy and add something NEW to the game. It's not that the game is BROKEN right now; far from it. Pokemon is one of the most-balanced games in existence, possibly losing only to Starcraft. It's just that the game hasn't really changed in a decade. People here act like adding a new type would break the game. Well, it doesn't, and Coolboyman proved that in his Pokemon Brown hack.

I made the type-chart for Light because I would honestly want a pokemon like that in my team. I don't think it's overpowered, and I think it would add something interesting for those of us who are looking for something new. The rest can just ignore it. I mean, heck, I've been ignoring Poison, Bug, and Rock types since Gen I (except for knowing how to kill them) just because they don't interest me.

Yeah, I see your point, but I'm still not going to agree because I don't. :3 I can potentially see Sound becoming a type someday because there's sort of a basis for existence of it (soundproof, whismur, etc.) but I don't really see anything that Light can portray besides angels from the heavens, which really limits the quality of the Pokémon that can be Light type. I suppose that's one of my biggest problems with the consideration of new types; what kinds of Pokémon do you propose could actually be a Light type? There's only so many spoofs of angel-like creatures that you can get before it gets old.

Also, Bug's one of my favorite types. <3

Evee dude86 May 16th, 2010 8:49 PM

Space types? I mean Rayquaza, Deoxys, Mew, Arceus, etc all live in space, and that's where Pkmn originally came from.

Yesh? No?

assasinn May 16th, 2010 8:49 PM

I wouldn't like to see a "light" type, but I would pay for a gravity type. They would look like asteroids, or suns, and be super affective against rock and ground type, but weak against types such as dragon or flying.

BleuVII May 16th, 2010 10:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vrai (Post 5806331)
Yeah, I see your point, but I'm still not going to agree because I don't. :3 I can potentially see Sound becoming a type someday because there's sort of a basis for existence of it (soundproof, whismur, etc.) but I don't really see anything that Light can portray besides angels from the heavens, which really limits the quality of the Pokémon that can be Light type. I suppose that's one of my biggest problems with the consideration of new types; what kinds of Pokémon do you propose could actually be a Light type? There's only so many spoofs of angel-like creatures that you can get before it gets old.

Also, Bug's one of my favorite types. <3

Fair enough. You don't need to agree. Thanks for not flaming.

I can see a lot more possibilities than just angel stuff though. That's a pretty western idea, and it's quite limited. The concept of "spiritual" or "divine" in Japanese mythos opens up a realm of creatures, from stuff made to resemble some of the bigger gods (Amaterasu - Fire/Light, for example) to the rabbit-making-mochi-in-the-moon (Rock/Light or some such thing). It could even cover a pokemon that is somewhat based off of a warrior monk, since the same kanji is used in that. Granted, Meditite/Medicham kind of already do that, but I'm just throwing out examples.

blue May 17th, 2010 12:23 AM

I don't know, if they did introduce a new type then surely the previous pokemon would get some of this, and to do that would take ALOT of time considering there is 493 currently then the new Pokemon for Gen V (Black & White)

curiousnathan May 17th, 2010 12:38 AM

I light type would be unnecissary, considering they have already released to much information at the moment and the announcement of a new type would be going over the top. However, in one case I do agree with having a 'light' type and like previous posters said; it would create a ying - yang effect which Black and White are aiming for. So there are positive and negative points of each side of discussion.
But for me it would be a no, for now at least. :cer_no:

JAK3 May 17th, 2010 1:49 AM

I couldn't see A new type being added, all of it is already balanced, so it really doesn't need a new type. In the first Generation their was the Psychic type that had no weaknesses and nothing was good against it, but then Generation Two came, and that balanced everything out.

Storm Parakaitz May 17th, 2010 2:00 AM

I have supported and wanted a Light type since Dark was released.

Psychic is not Light. They're not even closely related. The only reason anyone even claims they are is Espeon. If anything, Electric is pretty close to Light.

I've thought of potential strengths and weaknesses Light can have. My own concept of a Light type in my head was weak to Poison, simply to balance out the poison type, and was resistant [but not strong against] Fighting, again to balance out the type. I don't have an opinion on its power against Dark, but I am liking the "they're supereffective against each other" concept the most. For strength, I think it could be resistant or strong against Ground to level the playing field when Earthquake is brought in. For logical strengths and weaknesses, it would be strong against Flying, but not very effective against Ice. Also, some Light type abilities could give them effectiveness during Sunny Day, perhaps?

As far as previous Pokemon being Light types are concerned, the only Pokemon that jumps out to me is Ampharos and perhaps Togepi's line. But a Light type opens up some new creative ideas, like a candle-based monster [fire/light] or an anthropomorphic strobelight that confuses foes and lowers their speed. Also, who wouldn't want a raver Pokemon?

Nintendo seems to be running low on ideas, as they're reusing concepts they've made before. A new type would open up some of these ideas and keep the games fresh.

vibratingcat May 17th, 2010 2:05 AM

i guess it would b cool. as long as they are both super effective to eachother im fine. light legendary would also b pretty cool.

bobandbill May 17th, 2010 5:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChrisTom (Post 5805358)
It's not a dumb idea. It makes sense first off, and secondly it would be the perfect time to add this type. I don't care if it's "Far in the series" Pokemon is a constantly changing thing.

In fact, the Pokemon series in general is constantly Evolving...

Heh heh...

True though.

It's not exactly smart though in my mind, and far from necessarily (along with every other new type suggested). Firstly the system is balanced as it is - new types were only added in 2nd gen because psychic was way overpowered - there is no such problem here though nowadays, and adding a new type is rather likely to imbalance things - which is something I wouldn't want to see tbh. It's not just a matter of tossing something new in like that... Claims that it'd show that they haven't run out of ideas seems rather silly as well to me tbqh - them reusing concepts is less them out of ideas than them knowing making similar games that still sell millions of copies every few years is easier and less risky for them from a marketing sense to try something completely new with the main series (the 'new' stuff is by other companies in spin-off games).

That and it could result in a change in mechanics (like Hidden Power which relies on types and all) and potentially a change to IVs and hence the game mechanics. Last time the game mechanics changed was from 2nd to 3rd gen, and that meant one couldn't trade between 2nd and 3rd gen. Not exactly a good thing.

NA3LKER May 17th, 2010 8:18 AM

the psychic type is sort of the opposite to dark already. and also, if they put in a light type,
what would be strong against it? the only reason they added the dark and steel types in 2nd gen was to balance out the types.

Sammuthegreat May 17th, 2010 8:26 AM

I'm with the OP here. I think Light (and to a lesser extent Sound) would be great new types.

To those that are saying the game is balanced, so there's no need to change it - that's clearly not true, otherwise types like Bug, or Poison (Toxic aside), or Normal wouldn't be so scorned and underused. The only reason you're saying the game is "balanced" is because the commonly conceived "strong" types, like Ice or Fire or Dragon, are balanced against each other. But for there to be such stronger and weaker types, the game can't be totally balanced in the first place, by definition.

And to those that say the number of possibilities for Light-type Pokemon is limited - what a load of rubbish. How many fire-breathing pigs have you seen in real life? How many seals have you heard of that can spit beams of solid ice? How many creatures of ANY kind do you know of that have psychic powers?! You can't say that the Light type would be limited to only angels or candles, or else you'd have to say that Fire types would be limited to dragons - which don't even exist in the first place - and Electric types would have to be limited to lampshade- and toaster-shaped Pokemon.

Bring on Light- and Sound-type Pokemon, I say. It'll be a great way to shake up the series, and a great way to level the playing field by forcing metagamers and competitive players out of their comfort zones.

Sage Harpuia May 17th, 2010 8:48 AM

I think that the type chart is fine and it doesent need anything.
And for the ones saying that we need light to opposite dark I think is covered by psychic:
since genII psychic pokemon were gentle/pure looking: espeon, gardevoir line, chimeco, jirachi...So I say it is unecessary.

Omicron May 17th, 2010 9:57 AM

Light type would be fine.
The type chart can be arranged to put one or two new types without unbalancing the game. If you are talking about light and dark as good vs. bad, then they would be super-effective against each other, but if you are taking them as day vs. night, light should super-effective against dark, and dark not very effective against light. Darknessis the absence of light :).

Another thing I've been thinking of is that some attacks should be super effective against some pokemon, just because of what they do.
It would be like:


Bellsprout fell apart!!!
Farfetch'd used Cut ----- OR
Tangela lost half of its vines!!!

EJ May 17th, 2010 10:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sage Harpuia (Post 5807267)
I think that the type chart is fine and it doesent need anything.
And for the ones saying that we need light to opposite dark I think is covered by psychic:
since genII psychic pokemon were gentle/pure looking: espeon, gardevoir line, chimeco, jirachi...So I say it is unecessary.

I agree but Gardevoir, chimecho, and jirachi are all Gen III.

: P

GlitchCity May 17th, 2010 12:39 PM

Unlike the 2nd generation, new types for this generation isnt needed. They could toss in some new types, but that will kinda throw off the entire balance.

Evee dude86 May 17th, 2010 12:55 PM

Light types cud b very cool and boss IF DUN RIGHT! I can't stress that enough. Like make light super effective against dark and poison, and dark/poison average against light. Angel type light Pkmn cud b win only if....again....DUN RIGHT!

I also reiterate my space type suggestion....

JAK3 May 17th, 2010 12:58 PM

I could see a couple older Pokemon being upgraded to a light type, such as those fire types that could be Light types, such as Ninetales, or Solrock, any of them.

Omicron May 17th, 2010 4:00 PM

Quote:

I could see a couple older Pokemon being upgraded to a light type, such as those fire types that could be Light types, such as Ninetales, or Solrock, any of them.
Yeah, also the Togepi and Chancey lines

BeachBoy May 17th, 2010 4:08 PM

Is there an over-powered, broken-like type now? You could argue that dragons need another check, perhaps an immunity, thanks to the sheer power and ferocity they bring to the table with extremely powerful moves like Outrage and Draco Meteor. However, competitive players can keep dragons in check with ice beams and steel-types, so they don't reach the "I got my Alakazam out first, game over" calamity of Gen I. Besides, there are so many other items that help shutter down overpowered things anyway. Would it be interesting to see another type that scares or stuffs dragons? Not going to lie, yeah, but I don't think it's necessary is all.

When people saw the dark-type, they immediately jumped to assumptions like "they'll add more types!" Light-type was born, and we've been going on about this for years. I doubt we'll see it this time too. Also wow, people are even plugging in the overused and dried-up "running out of ideas" excuse for this topic as well? ... Sad.

Quote:

Originally Posted by BleuVII
The only reason it's not superpowered is because there are so few pure Dark types.

Though Vrai did address this, I'd like to expand. The reason it's not super-powered is because of all of our powerful fighting-types. They'd all love the introduction of more pure dark-types, they'd close combat them to the grave before they got a chance.

What hits dark-types in the gut is their piss-poor power attacks. Best one is 80 base, not that amazing in comparison to a Draco Meteor, huh? Although pursuit and sucker punch do have great effects, I'll give them that.

Tyranitar is arguably the mascot for dark-types, since it's the most powerful pokemon with that type. However, many other facts make it great, it's the movepool, brilliant stats, sp. def boost from the sand storm, etc.

Is light-type or anything else possible? Anything is.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sammuthegreat
To those that are saying the game is balanced, so there's no need to change it - that's clearly not true, otherwise types like Bug, or Poison (Toxic aside), or Normal wouldn't be so scorned and underused. The only reason you're saying the game is "balanced" is because the commonly conceived "strong" types, like Ice or Fire or Dragon, are balanced against each other.

I agree that this game can't be balanced, but it can reach a point or form of stability.

Not every type or pokemon is meant to have a strong or even place in the metagame either, some things in this game aren't even meant for competitive play. (see Dunsparce) Normal-type has delivered in cuteness; bug-types are usually weak and our game-starting types, and poison-types have a home with evil teams.

Although, to be fair: Normal does have Blissey, Snorlax, and is a pretty good defensive type. Bug-types like Yanmega, Heracross, Forretress, and the popular Scizor..., Poison-types like Roserade suck up Toxic Spikes (despite you putting toxic off, poison does have an effective entry hazard) So underused, I can give you that, but they have their highlights and bright spots, for sure.

I'd rather not see new types as I'm satisfied with our current batch, but hey, I'm not in control of what those guys do. If they add some, I'll adapt.

Waffle-San May 17th, 2010 4:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sammuthegreat (Post 5807215)
I'm with the OP here. I think Light (and to a lesser extent Sound) would be great new types.

To those that are saying the game is balanced, so there's no need to change it - that's clearly not true, otherwise types like Bug, or Poison (Toxic aside), or Normal wouldn't be so scorned and underused. The only reason you're saying the game is "balanced" is because the commonly conceived "strong" types, like Ice or Fire or Dragon, are balanced against each other. But for there to be such stronger and weaker types, the game can't be totally balanced in the first place, by definition.

And to those that say the number of possibilities for Light-type Pokemon is limited - what a load of rubbish. How many fire-breathing pigs have you seen in real life? How many seals have you heard of that can spit beams of solid ice? How many creatures of ANY kind do you know of that have psychic powers?! You can't say that the Light type would be limited to only angels or candles, or else you'd have to say that Fire types would be limited to dragons - which don't even exist in the first place - and Electric types would have to be limited to lampshade- and toaster-shaped Pokemon.

Bring on Light- and Sound-type Pokemon, I say. It'll be a great way to shake up the series, and a great way to level the playing field by forcing metagamers and competitive players out of their comfort zones.

Either you didn't play RBY or you haven't thought about what types mean enough...first of all Bug? Bug is a great typing! Bug type pokemon generally suck but that has more to do with stats and their type combinations (flying). The biggest thing that hurts Bug is Stealth Rock. Bug also happens to resist Grass, Fighting and Ground, two of which are fantastic resistances. Not to mention Steel is the only real reason it isn't a great attacking type. I mean it's super effective on Psychic, Grass and Dark and isn't resisted by anything that note worthy (besides Fighting) that isn't named Steel. It's pretty balanced. Steel just throws alot of things out of whack.

On first generation. The only Pokemon that could tackle Alakazam was Gengar but because of it's poison typing and inferiour speed it was also destroyed like every other pokemon as nothing, I repeat nothing resisted it. That's way more broken than anything we have now.

Now Normal, Normal is meant to be an average typing. It categorizes everything that can't categorize itself. It also has other ways of dealing with it's lack of super effective coverage.

~With 152 moves, the Normal-type has the most moves.
~There are 10 Normal-type moves with a power of 100 or more, more than any other elemental type.

This is normals purpose, to be the essence of diversity. It's lack of weaknesses and few resistances means that you can pair it with pretty much anything. Normal typed moves are often used in movesets to add ultimate coverage. It was never meant to be a high powered, or noticable typing.

And finally Poison, you have a very valid point. It's actually a fine defensive typing with only two weaknesses and four resists. The only problem is the ground weakness and the fact it has virtually nothing going for it offensively hurt it, and hurt it bad. I agree with you in the sense that Poison needs a face lift, but I'd suggest reworking the type chart to make it more effective on other things (Water maybe?) but not using a new type to fix it. Also on the quick note of Dragons, Ice types could gain a resistacne to them...

That being said as much as I'm against a light type I could live with it even though it's not prefferable. Sound on the other hand...seriously? Really? Every Pokemon can emit sound, the few moves that are sound wave focused are covered by Normal, the type that covers everything that can't be or doesn't have enough substance to cover itself. I.e. Sound.

Omicron May 17th, 2010 4:23 PM

A new type is not needed, and the game isn't getting boring nor old, but you've gotta admit that new types, not necessarily light type, could be a grat addition to the game.

Bloothump May 17th, 2010 4:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sammuthegreat (Post 5807215)
I'm with the OP here. I think Light (and to a lesser extent Sound) would be great new types.

To those that are saying the game is balanced, so there's no need to change it - that's clearly not true, otherwise types like Bug, or Poison (Toxic aside), or Normal wouldn't be so scorned and underused. The only reason you're saying the game is "balanced" is because the commonly conceived "strong" types, like Ice or Fire or Dragon, are balanced against each other. But for there to be such stronger and weaker types, the game can't be totally balanced in the first place, by definition.

And to those that say the number of possibilities for Light-type Pokemon is limited - what a load of rubbish. How many fire-breathing pigs have you seen in real life? How many seals have you heard of that can spit beams of solid ice? How many creatures of ANY kind do you know of that have psychic powers?! You can't say that the Light type would be limited to only angels or candles, or else you'd have to say that Fire types would be limited to dragons - which don't even exist in the first place - and Electric types would have to be limited to lampshade- and toaster-shaped Pokemon.

Bring on Light- and Sound-type Pokemon, I say. It'll be a great way to shake up the series, and a great way to level the playing field by forcing metagamers and competitive players out of their comfort zones.

The game is balanced. Just because types are rare does not mean they're bad. And everyone saying that poison types are underrated, well, they are, but that's not going to be fixed by adding a light type. If you want poison to be stronger, give it a few more advantages, like over water, steel(maybe its already se to steel), and fighting. But again, just because you add a light type does not mean poison's getting better. Also, bug types rock. You say they're not used because they aren't good pokemon, but I think they're not used because most don't take the time to really realize their strength. I had a Yanmega, and it was one of my strongest. And no, seals don't spit out icebeams, but they live in cold climates. Fire pigs, no, but boars are very hot-blooded and aggressive, things that are associated with fire. No, pokemon is not a realistic game, but every connection, from types, to moves, to the pokemon themselves makes a fantasy connection to our current world, which is one of the ways pokemon differs from other games. Granted, they have to compromise some, so not every single pokemon has an obvious connection to its type, but if you want our friends over at game freak to sit there and go "OMGZES GAIZ I HAD THE BEST IDEA, WHUT IF WE MICKSED A COW WITH LITE THATD B SO KEWL OMG" you're realling just asking for a drop in creativity.

MistahDude May 17th, 2010 5:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChrisTom (Post 5805288)
Alright, so I'm going to say something that I think might be on some people's mind.

It seems these games are highly focusing on Yin and Yang, White and Black, Light and Dark. This theme is shown throughout the current advertising and through Zoruak. Has anybody else realized that this would be the perfect oppurtunity to add the fan demanded Light type? I personally think that due to this theme they are exhibiting that there will be a Light type. Does anybody else agree?

Thank you for your time.

With all regards,

-ChrisTom

Sound would make a lot of sense to add, as would the Light Type.

Bunny69 May 17th, 2010 5:02 PM

Quote:

i think its a must, it would balance out dark, dragon,& steel which have become horribly imbalanced
1: Steel is hit by Fighting, Fire, and Ground type, some of the most common attacking types.
2: How is Dark out of balance?
3: Dragon types I can agree with you somewhat; But the huge prescence of Ice type attacks kind of limits dragon.




Oh yeah, Physchic is already the opposite of the Dark type, as evidenced in Umbreon and Espeon..

EJ May 17th, 2010 5:22 PM

Just to add with the other guys.

The bug type, though underrated, is a fantastic type to use. They are one of the only two that hit a dark type for super-effectiveness. They also get to combat psychics nicely. Usually they're considered as garbage because of poor typing (Bug/Flying = rock overkill) but they are interesting and worth training. Every type has a crappy pokemon so don't bash the bugs for some crappy pokemon.

I still think there's no need for light types.

Evee dude86 May 17th, 2010 5:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by .EJ (Post 5808162)
Just to add with the other guys.

The bug type, though underrated, is a fantastic type to use. They are one of the only two that hit a dark type for super-effectiveness. They also get to combat psychics nicely. Usually they're considered as garbage because of poor typing (Bug/Flying = rock overkill) but they are interesting and worth training. Every type has a crappy pokemon so don't bash the bugs for some crappy pokemon.

I still think there's no need for light types.

Whoa whoa, since when is bug effective against dark?

Bunny69 May 17th, 2010 6:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evee dude86 (Post 5808190)
Whoa whoa, since when is bug effective against dark?

Since Dark types were made, you can look It up.

I do agree that the Bug type is a good type, and it is very good offensivley. Though compared to every other type, the Bug type has the lowest stats, which is kind of disappointing...

ChrisTom May 17th, 2010 6:13 PM

*clears throat*

Hello everybody. Sorry for not being on this thread for a bit. I swear, Pokemon Black and White Threads are spreading faster than a Bellsprout using Growth.

I want to clear a few things up and tell you my points of view on an implementation of the Light Type. But there is one thing I want to make note of first.

Quote:

Originally posted by .EJ
Adding a light type is unnecessary and will probably cause imbalance in the game. That's the reason the dark and steel types were added; to balance it out. I'm sure we all remember when we played RBY and we all knew that having a Psychic type in your team meant utter obliteration to everybody else. I don't know about christom since he was around 1-2 years old when those games were out and couldn't play them haha.
Firstly, it is written as ChrisTom as I enjoy using capitalization to show professionalism. Secondly, I find that comment to be completely ageist. You're implying that due to my age I lack the ability to comprehend and understand the complex "Type Mathematics" that go into the game, as well as a lack of nostalgia for the original series. You fail to realize that I've been playing the games for quite some time(albeit not as long as you): 7 years. I've been into the grandiose wonder that is Pokemon since I was 4 and I first played at 6. My first and second Pokemon games were Gold and Red respectively. I've beaten Pokemon Red 4 times, Gold 5 times, FireRed once, Both Sapphire and Emerald once, Both Diamond and Pearl twice, and Heartgold once. I know these games back and front inside and out, so I do NOT take kindly to your comment.

Now moving on...

THE LIGHT TYPE

Keep in mind the following is entirely hypothetical.

I see several fans of the wonderous world of Pokemon intrigued about the concept of Light Type Pokemon. Most think that when I said what I did I implyed that I think that there MUST be a Light Type. I don't think that whatsoever. About 10 posters said the same thing: "I don't think a light type is neccesary". I agree. It ISN'T neccesarry, but it would be nice. I think it would be a great way to get rid of the rediculous power Dragon Types have (Ice being their only weakness is rather irritating) and to give Poison and Bug Types the power they deserve. It would obviously be effective on Dark Types.

Alot of you seem to not like the Steel type and hope that Light will destory it. Honestly, I don't see anything wrong with Steel whatsoever. The type does have it's weaknesses and due to the minimal amount of Steel types I think it's ok. As Fighting Types have high Attack, and Electric Types have high Speed; Steel type has high Special Defense which is fine. Most Types work like that.

Now most of you seem concerned that the Light Type would be complicated/overpowering. This is not neccesarily true. The aforemention Poison and Bug Types as well as the Grass and Rock types would be Super-Effective, while Dark, Ghost and Water would be crippled. A very small amount of Pokemon would need to be changed (Lanturn and Ampharos specifically).

Here is what I think is the most important part of this debate: Will they even do it? I think absolutely yes. Considering the vast amount of themes involving Yin and Yang, and Light and Dark (For God's sake the games are called Black and White) that they will do it. I don't see a reason why not. It would be the perfect moment for GameFreak to add it. Fans have been wanting a new Type and have been speculating a "Light Type" since Generation II and my guess is that Satoshi Tajiri-Sensei will pull through and give the fans what they want.

If you have anymore questions about my theories and ideas about how the Light-Type would be implemented into the carefully thought out Type-Mathematics, please ask and I will get to you as soon as possible. I am looking forward to the new games and your opinions on what I have said. I wish you all good luck.


With all regards,

-ChrisTom

EJ May 17th, 2010 6:24 PM

Yo, not like I wanna be a grammar nazi or anything, but if you want me to capitalize your name at least make the effort to spell correctly...just sayin' since you pointed out that you like professionalism...

Also, let me go ahead and point out what I meant exactly by that post. Light types are completely unnecessary. You also said it makes sense to add a new type; no it doesn't. If they were to add new types they'd be messing with a classic formula set up as far back as Generation II. The reason I mentioned your age was to make sure you completely understand what I mean.

The only reason dark and steel types were implemented into the series were to balance out a broken system.

Hence, therefore, as a result of, ergo, consequently, <insert another> light types or any other types for that matter won't be added because there is nothing to fix or adjust. Things are fine the way they are right now.

kthxbai.

Bunny69 May 17th, 2010 6:34 PM

Quote:

Steel type has high Special Defense
o_0
Quote:

Steel type has high Special Defense
o_0
Quote:

Steel type has high Special Defense
*FACEPALM*
(lol try saying that about a Forretress)


I see where your getting at ChrisTom, and I see your reasoning. Black and White don't neccissarily reffering to Light and Dark; futhermore, the Light type would have the least amount of pokemon, even if they did change some of the previous pokemon types. In Gen.5 they are going to make a maximum of 135 pokemon(compared to other gens) and not every pokemon there will be Light type. Plus, I think we would've head something by now about a new type(s); because that's pretty big news, but so far; nothing. In Generation 2, it was okay to start 2 new types, there were less pokemon, and starting a new type is much more managable. When Steel types were introduced, there were only 6 pokemon of that type, or 6/252 ; Hypothetically; let's say the Steel type was introduced in gen. 5. That's 6/500+ . Yeah. That's MORE than triple the amount of pokemon in Gen. 2. Do you see where I'm going here?

ChrisTom May 17th, 2010 6:42 PM

Again I KNOW they are unnecessary, but they would be NICE. That's it, end of story.

EJ May 17th, 2010 6:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChrisTom (Post 5808374)
Again I KNOW they are unnecessary, but they would be NICE. That's it, end of story.

Just as long as we understand each other bro.

Appreciate it =]

X75flames May 17th, 2010 6:51 PM

Light, super effective against: Dark, Ghost.
Is uneffective against: Fire, Grass, Normal
Uneffective by: Ghost, Fire, Psychic.
Super effective by: Dark.

Seems the most logical to me. Poison could be thrown anywhere in to give it a bit bigger of a role.

Cyberglass May 17th, 2010 7:10 PM

One thing I only saw mentioned only once here, in an aside, is the fact that there are currently two pokemon, Sableye and Spiritomb, with no weaknesses at all. I think that the fact that there is such a combination alone warrants the introduction of a new type: based on types alone, the weakness chart is still unbalanced. It would make the most sense for Light to be effective against Dark, with Dark also being effective against Light to reinforce the yin-yang symbolism. Also, Poison really does deserve another type weak to it, and adding a new type would make more sense than changing an existing one.

EJ May 17th, 2010 7:18 PM

While that may be true, why is it that neither of those are OU pokemon?

Ah yes....mediocre stats...

bobandbill May 18th, 2010 2:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cyberglass (Post 5808436)
One thing I only saw mentioned only once here, in an aside, is the fact that there are currently two pokemon, Sableye and Spiritomb, with no weaknesses at all. I think that the fact that there is such a combination alone warrants the introduction of a new type: based on types alone, the weakness chart is still unbalanced. It would make the most sense for Light to be effective against Dark, with Dark also being effective against Light to reinforce the yin-yang symbolism. Also, Poison really does deserve another type weak to it, and adding a new type would make more sense than changing an existing one.

As said, those two Pokemon are not much or a problem at all, for their typing is balanced (although tbh on the whole they are not strong at all, particularly Sableye =P) due to their stats and maybe movepool to a degree as well, but more so the stats. That's the more telling thing about Pokemon individually - you can have the best typing but if you're barely stronger than Sunkern it's not going to help you much.

Never mind that Dark being weak to Light would likely cause it to be nerfed way too much - it's not easy to tell the effect a new type might have on the whole game, really.

Quote:

Hello everybody. Sorry for not being on this thread for a bit. I swear, Pokemon Black and White Threads are spreading faster than a Bellsprout using Growth.
You expected any differently? =P
Quote:

I see several fans of the wonderous world of Pokemon intrigued about the concept of Light Type Pokemon. Most think that when I said what I did I implyed that I think that there MUST be a Light Type. I don't think that whatsoever. About 10 posters said the same thing: "I don't think a light type is neccesary". I agree. It ISN'T neccesarry, but it would be nice. I think it would be a great way to get rid of the rediculous power Dragon Types have (Ice being their only weakness is rather irritating) and to give Poison and Bug Types the power they deserve. It would obviously be effective on Dark Types.
Dragon are also weak to themselves, you know. =P And since were dark types overpowered? And as my previous post stated, there is many a reason why I don't think it's nice or necessary, simply due to the negative impacts it would likely/will carry.

Furthermore the 'fans think it intriguing' part doesn't make it necessarily good... when you look at a huge range of fan ideas, many of them are actually not that good in practise. I just feel that a new type lies near that point. =P
Quote:

Alot of you seem to not like the Steel type and hope that Light will destory it. Honestly, I don't see anything wrong with Steel whatsoever. The type does have it's weaknesses and due to the minimal amount of Steel types I think it's ok. As Fighting Types have high Attack, and Electric Types have high Speed; Steel type has high Special Defense which is fine. Most Types work like that.
As stated - Steel types have high sp defense wut? Can't say I'm convinced by your claim that you've played all of those games and know everything about Pokemon tbh, just saying. =/ Some mistake here and there and all...

Quote:

Now most of you seem concerned that the Light Type would be complicated/overpowering. This is not neccesarily true. The aforemention Poison and Bug Types as well as the Grass and Rock types would be Super-Effective, while Dark, Ghost and Water would be crippled. A very small amount of Pokemon would need to be changed (Lanturn and Ampharos specifically).
I'm not convinced that would be the problem - my qualm is that it would, whether it is overpowered/underpowered itself or not, would cause other types to be imbalanced (as well as other stuff in my previous post). And tbh... that system there sounds complicated to me simply because it doesn't make much sense to me. =/ Why are those types strong against a light type? Rock strong against Light types...why? Or Water types? =//

The way you're advertising isn't convincing me, have to admit.

And onto another point - changing previous pokemon's types, which;d be just odd and throw people into a loop. Lanturn is no longer Water/Electric but... Water/Light? But it's been established for over 10 years that it's Water Electric! Does this mean every other electric type (seeing electricity gives off light) becomes a Light type as well? As said, it was ok to change a few into Steel types (namely Magnemite) in 2nd gen because the games were relatively new, but now it's more a problem of 'it's too late without screwing up the well-established canon'.

Quote:

Here is what I think is the most important part of this debate: Will they even do it? I think absolutely yes. Considering the vast amount of themes involving Yin and Yang, and Light and Dark (For God's sake the games are called Black and White) that they will do it. I don't see a reason why not. It would be the perfect moment for GameFreak to add it. Fans have been wanting a new Type and have been speculating a "Light Type" since Generation II and my guess is that Satoshi Tajiri-Sensei will pull through and give the fans what they want.
Nope, doesn't mean they will by a long shot. Black and White can just refer to good and evil, or ying and yang, and doesn't 'need' a new type to have such themes. Believe me, people were saying that they would for 4th gen as well, and it didn't happen - vague title names don't make it far more likely now either.

Storm Parakaitz May 18th, 2010 4:25 AM

Some of you guys are crazy. Pokemon? Balanced? It never has been, it never will be. Try picking up another game and you'll see what balance is.

In order to balance out Pokemon, creatures would have to be removed, and others would need serious tweaking. And I'm not even started on the typing system yet. That would need a complete overhaul.

Don't say things like "the game is perfectly balanced" because it's not.

That's all I'm gonna say on that subject, don't try to get a tl;dr out of me.

Thorns May 18th, 2010 4:32 AM

I'm pretty sure Game Freak said some time back that they ARE NOT considering new types in any new games as it would mess up the types that already exist and make the game more confusing type wise.

Ketchumall May 18th, 2010 5:10 AM

A light type makes plenty of sense and it's a great idea, they don't have to go back and fix old Pokemon, just give them separate evolution chains that can be activated via certain actions, like Eevee. Just take the Magnemite and give it the ability to evolve into something with a light type instead of electric. (to use somebodies example earlier). Though there could be some balancing issues (ChrisTom seems to have a pretty good hypothetical on this) I think it could work well. If the Pokemon in the game evolve why is it the game cant? lat (laugh at that).

Note to some of you just being plain obsessive with the word "need" Chris never said that they NEED a new type, in fact he states in his update that your right, they don't NEED a new type, but being good vs evil, Yin vs Yang, what two elements do those correspond to? Dark and LIGHT, for all we know the light type could include only one Pokemon, a legendary.

Quote:

Originally Posted by bobandbill
Dragon are also weak to themselves, you know.

who says you can not do that with light. . . or even better make dark effective against light AND vice versa, xD sorry just had to throw that in there.

but I did some research, so far the light type entering in does not seem like it is gonna happen.

LordDarkrai May 18th, 2010 5:17 AM

I'm very interested and want to see a new type like Light type that others said.

EJ May 18th, 2010 5:20 AM

@ketchumail: that sounds absurd man. I'm not gonna argue how unnecessary that is since I already did so. I interpret it more as what bobandbill said, good and evil...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Storm Parakaitz (Post 5809163)
Some of you guys are crazy. Pokemon? Balanced? It never has been, it never will be. Try picking up another game and you'll see what balance is.

In order to balance out Pokemon, creatures would have to be removed, and others would need serious tweaking. And I'm not even started on the typing system yet. That would need a complete overhaul.

Don't say things like "the game is perfectly balanced" because it's not.

That's all I'm gonna say on that subject, don't try to get a tl;dr out of me.

In my case when I mentioned balance I was referring to stability. Just clarifying =]

bobandbill May 18th, 2010 5:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Storm Parakaitz (Post 5809163)
Some of you guys are crazy. Pokemon? Balanced? It never has been, it never will be. Try picking up another game and you'll see what balance is.

In order to balance out Pokemon, creatures would have to be removed, and others would need serious tweaking. And I'm not even started on the typing system yet. That would need a complete overhaul.

Don't say things like "the game is perfectly balanced" because it's not.

That's all I'm gonna say on that subject, don't try to get a tl;dr out of me.

Obviously it's not perfectly balenced, and it's rare to ver see a system that is (and potentially such ones would run the risk of being somewhat boring). But certainly it's more or less stable and certainly far more than in 1st gen.

EJ May 18th, 2010 6:05 AM

The only thing I can't comprehend is the idea that it would make sense for new additions. We've already established that they are unnecessary and that it would ruin the stability of the canon already set up in Generation II.

We also explained WHY they would add a new type by using the Psychic type of Gen 1 as an example. It's only necessary and sensible to add one to make it fairer. I understand complete balance is impossible to achieve but we can get relatively close (scratch that...we are close.)

TheNewRocketMovement May 18th, 2010 7:28 AM

I'd love to see a light type, it'd be a great chance to have light and dark type legendaries as the "mascot" legends for black and white.

Storm Parakaitz May 18th, 2010 7:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by .EJ (Post 5809220)
In my case when I mentioned balance I was referring to stability. Just clarifying =]

Good thing I didn't mention any names. XD

However, I don't see a problem with trying out a new type. If GameFreak can bring in a new type, they can remove it if it doesn't work.

Quote:

Originally Posted by bobandbill (Post 5809222)
Obviously it's not perfectly balenced, and it's rare to ver see a system that is (and potentially such ones would run the risk of being somewhat boring). But certainly it's more or less stable and certainly far more than in 1st gen.

Of course, of course. 1st gen had terrible balance, and with each generation it's been getting better.

Sage Harpuia May 18th, 2010 8:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by .EJ (Post 5807483)
I agree but Gardevoir, chimecho, and jirachi are all Gen III.

: P

Ah, sorry maybe I expressed myself wrong(I'm not English).
I was tryng to say that only genI, when Dark-type didn't exist, Psichic pokemon were "evil" (mewtwo isnt capable of have feelings except rage, Hypno *cough*rape child*chough*) but he became more "gentle" in the others.
Also Light type is also covered by fight and fire-type.

Evee dude86 May 18th, 2010 8:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bunny69 (Post 5808308)
Since Dark types were made, you can look It up.

I do agree that the Bug type is a good type, and it is very good offensivley. Though compared to every other type, the Bug type has the lowest stats, which is kind of disappointing...

Damn lol how'd I miss that?

EJ May 18th, 2010 9:07 AM

^Its all good bro. I didn't know rock is neutral against rock. Lol

@Sage harpuia: Oh don't worry about it; I was just correcting what you said. You mentioned them as part of Gen II. =]


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 8:02 AM.


Like our Facebook Page Follow us on Twitter © 2002 - 2018 The PokéCommunity™, pokecommunity.com.
Pokémon characters and images belong to The Pokémon Company International and Nintendo. This website is in no way affiliated with or endorsed by Nintendo, Creatures, GAMEFREAK, The Pokémon Company or The Pokémon Company International. We just love Pokémon.
All forum styles, their images (unless noted otherwise) and site designs are © 2002 - 2016 The PokéCommunity / PokéCommunity.com.
PokéCommunity™ is a trademark of The PokéCommunity. All rights reserved. Sponsor advertisements do not imply our endorsement of that product or service. User generated content remains the property of its creator.

Acknowledgements
Use of PokéCommunity Assets
vB Optimise by DragonByte Technologies Ltd © 2023.