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)

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.


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.