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)

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.


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.