5th Gen New Types? Page 22

Started by ChrisTom May 16th, 2010 3:31 PM
  • 35736 views
  • 802 replies

Xander Olivieri

Seen 1 Week Ago
Posted November 8th, 2022
5,616 posts
13 Years
Really, only way I can see a pure flying type would be a gust of wind Pokemon. Anything but that, would fall into another category based on its looks.

Cyberglass

the stuff Porygon are made of

Age 31
Male
Seen June 1st, 2022
Posted May 31st, 2018
156 posts
13.1 Years
Pure Flying doesn't work because Flying doesn't have a typing against Ghost. The reason Ghosts cannot hit flying types is because the normal subtype. Elec/Flying can be hit because it isn't normal. Flying purely doesn't know what to do when hit by Ghost.
I'm not sure if you were being serious, but by this same logic pure-normal type would confuse the game if hit by a ground move, since normal/flying wouldn't be hit... As a type, flying has a complete compliment of weaknesses and resistances, just like any other.

The reason there are so many normal/flying Pokemon is that they are based off birds, which are relatively "normal" compared to other Pokemon unless they have a specific elemental connection (e.g. Wingull and water). A flying type doesn't have to be a bird or a bug, or even something with wings; Drifloon and Drifblim could have worked equally well as pure flying as they do as ghost/flying. I think any non-animal thing that flies would be a good candidate for pure-flying, whether that be a kite, a cloud, or just a gust of wind.
Age 26
Male
Hell on Earth (Or Texas, if you must.)
Seen September 6th, 2011
Posted July 24th, 2011
320 posts
13 Years
i think rock type should NOT be super effective to bugs..i mean a lot of bugs live under rocks so yea
Water kills bugs, dont you think Water should be supereffective against Bug?
The Pokemon Factory Pokemon you showed us... eww. I think we've already decided that a Light type would be a 'good' type because Electric types already show luminescence, and thats just what you showed us. Please, I dont want to hear the debate over what the Light type would represent... It's a "Good" type.

Taio Cruz -- Dynamite


Age 34
Male
New York
Seen September 19th, 2011
Posted June 15th, 2011
76 posts
13.1 Years
Water kills bugs, dont you think Water should be supereffective against Bug?
The Pokemon Factory Pokemon you showed us... eww. I think we've already decided that a Light type would be a 'good' type because Electric types already show luminescence, and thats just what you showed us. Please, I dont want to hear the debate over what the Light type would represent... It's a "Good" type.
fighting type in japanese stands for the good type which is why dark is weak against it.

water is capable of killing everything. anyone and any pokemon could technically drown in water, but its not a definite thing. if i dump water on fire, that fire is goin out, if i dump water on a bug, it can still get up and walk around.


Age 28
Male
Texas!!
Seen May 21st, 2011
Posted May 21st, 2011
110 posts
13.1 Years
I think Ice should be super effective against bug and rock.

The cold and ice causes bugs to migrate/go underground because they can't adapt to the cold.

The cold and ice also causes rock to be eroded. Do you not see valleys carved by glaciers of ice?

Maybe the main reson they didn't make these super effective is because of balancing issues. If ice was super-effective on 6 types, then ice types would get overpowered. I can see that.

Credit goes to Anastasia.R for banner.
Male
Betwixt Hither and Thither
Seen November 26th, 2021
Posted November 30th, 2011
426 posts
13.2 Years
fighting type in japanese stands for the good type which is why dark is weak against it.
Actually not true. Fighting type is "kakutou" (かくとう).

挌闘 かくとう
(n,vs) hand-to-hand fighting; grappling; scuffling;
It's just that people have given it the connotation of "clean fighting." It just goes with what I said... oh... 15 pages ago. When Game Freak says something is "official," fans warp their own reality to explain away why it's true. When other fans suggest hypothetical new types, people jump down their throats to show them that they're ridiculous, whether or not their logic makes more sense than Game Freak's.

This discussion of ice and water could be exhibit B (exhibit A was "dark" and "fighting"). In real life, water could drown anything and fire could melt anything (even rocks). Ice could carve out valleys, and rocks would be impervious to fists. The type matchups are the way they are in order to balance things.
Currently Playing Pokémon White, and loving it

My showcase thread, featuring Fakemon (like a Pachirisu evolution and Legendary Unown), new types (Light
and Glass), and new items.

Seen December 14th, 2010
Posted December 9th, 2010
523 posts
13.3 Years
Water kills bugs, dont you think Water should be supereffective against Bug?
The Pokemon Factory Pokemon you showed us... eww. I think we've already decided that a Light type would be a 'good' type because Electric types already show luminescence, and thats just what you showed us. Please, I dont want to hear the debate over what the Light type would represent... It's a "Good" type.
ha that was just a joke i just randomly found it...im in no favor of a light type

and a lot of real bugs live in water. mosquitos, spiders, snails

and because of rock weakness bugs get crushed to easily most are bug/flying

and there are pokemon that can be pure flying, kecleon, arceus
orange Barney with wings is a prime example of exactly how bad the First Generation's designs really were
Soul Silver:3266 7916 5109
Male
New Bark Town, Johto
Seen April 29th, 2016
Posted October 14th, 2013
198 posts
16.1 Years
@ Twilight: Only way to get a pure flying-type.

So obviously flying type can be hit by ghost or at least it knows what it's hit by.

EDIT: Confirmed. Arceus equipped with 'Sky Plate' is hit by Ghost-type moves with 1x effectiveness.

I don't see why there couldn't be more pure flying types. I think giving normal to the birds was a bad idea, but that's Game Freaks call not mine.
Any images or works I post, are that of my own creation, or I have properly credited the artist/creator. If I am the creator, you may use my work in any way you see fit, provided you give credit. If it is someone else's work, please give them a message, asking if you can use it.

ShinyEeveeGirl

"Beat" Crystal in Under a Day

Age 32
Female
United States of America (please don't hold it against me)
Seen August 30th, 2010
Posted June 20th, 2010
8 posts
12.9 Years
I, for one, believe, the current system does need some work, a level 80 (i'm not even going max level here) Mighthyena with Earthquake, Crunch, and any other moves, has no problems crushing an entire team, even ten levels higher, by itself, and there needs to be a real counter to the Dragon types out there, with ice as their only weakness, they get far too much leeway as it is. A light type would be WELL deserved, and having well thought out weaknesses would be part of the process.
Yes, I know I look moe as my eevee-sonality, just don't let it blur your logic, trainer.

I don't calculate stat values, I don't breed my way to perfection, and I don't care about natures. I catch my Pokemon the way they are, and treat them like individuals instead of brainless drones. If you use this philosophy, copy & paste this into your signature.

If you believe that catching and training a well balanced team early on is better than spending months and weeks breeding and searching in the farthest-flung weirdest places in your region, copy and paste this into your signature.

VinceLevi

Do A Barrel Roll!

Male
Seen May 17th, 2015
Posted September 10th, 2014
196 posts
13.7 Years
I would appreciate not getting uber spammed here. Yes, some of you have made excellent points about why your type DOES indeed make sense.
Others have not however, creating my discomfort.

Almost all the posts with a debate for type seem to imply running into the type chart and saying, hmm, what needs a check here. Poison, Steel, Dragon, etc.

I don't quite understand why you think that these types need more weaknesses, beyond the fact that you're ONLY looking at basic type matchups. In this case, I plead that you take a trip to Smogon and read through the Stragety Dex. There is a counter for each of the Pokemon of each type, more so for those of the more powerful types and breeds.


And light type.. Just doesn't make a lot of sense to me...
Instead of HOW it would exsist.. Can someone explain, why it SHOULD exsist? Thank you.
I'm back with the Boast Bros. Check out our Randomlocke Versus, it's sure to please.
Age 34
Female
Australia
Seen December 29th, 2011
Posted November 3rd, 2010
352 posts
12.9 Years
I don't think there should be any more new types.
Light would be nice but its pretty close to electric (although it could be more like a support type... for instance a white mage in Final Fantasy games)
This signature has been disabled.
No spoilers allowed in signature.
Please review and fix the issues by reading the signature rules.

You must edit it to meet the limits set by the rules before you may remove the [sig-reason] code from your signature. Removing this tag will re-enable it.

Do not remove the tag until you fix the issues in your signature. You may be infracted for removing this tag if you do not fix the specified issues. Do not use this tag for decoration purposes.
Male
in the attic
Seen September 3rd, 2012
Posted January 11th, 2012
387 posts
12.9 Years
I don't think anyone would like a 'Light' type; as it represents good, and would be pwned by all the other Pokémon types.

I don't think there should be any new types, either.
Soul Silver FC; reset game, please delete fc
Platinum FC; reset game, please delete fc

EJ

everything is purple

Age 30
Male
FL
Seen March 19th, 2022
Posted November 25th, 2019
1,618 posts
14.2 Years
Yo, I'm simply confused as to why some of you guys are against/can't understand a pure flying type pokemon. Did you forget that the flying type is simply another type with set weaknesses and strengths. The fact that it gets paired up often with the normal type has no bearing on how it reacts separately. A ghost attack is neutral against a flying type....
Wrex. Shepard. Wrex.
Age 14
Female
Seen April 8th, 2012
Posted November 8th, 2011
234 posts
13 Years
Yo, I'm simply confused as to why some of you guys are against/can't understand a pure flying type pokemon. Did you forget that the flying type is simply another type with set weaknesses and strengths. The fact that it gets paired up often with the normal type has no bearing on how it reacts separately. A ghost attack is neutral against a flying type....

I've always felt like the Normal/Flying-typing was really, really lame and that honestly? I've always felt that most of the Normal/Flying-types could pass as a pure Flying-type as well. Idk why people are against a pure Flying-type, either.

But at some point, I just decided to stop arguing about it. *Shrugs.* A part of me feels the only reason people think a pure Flying-type won't work is because they're so used to it being paired with other types. >_>;

On topic:
Instead of HOW it would exsist.. Can someone explain, why it SHOULD exsist? Thank you.

I personally would like a new type simply because I feel it would add something new to the games.... It would be exciting to me. That's pretty much the only reason I want a new type, but others think it would balance out a few types they deem to be too powerful (like the Dragon-type?). Still others think there should be a Light-type because of Gen. V's yin& yang theme.



BLUE ✓ CRYSTAL ✓ EMERALD ✓ PLATINUM ✓ WHITE
Age 28
Male
Texas!!
Seen May 21st, 2011
Posted May 21st, 2011
110 posts
13.1 Years
i think steel should be super effective to dragons. swords are made from steel and used to kill them so why not
That is one way to defeat a dragon, you could do it all sorts of other ways like stone them to death, beat them in close combat, or outsmart them with your mindgames. Dragons take neutral damage from all those attacks.

But the most effective way is to battle with ice. Dragons hate the cold. They also are easier to beat if you have another dragon.

Credit goes to Anastasia.R for banner.
Age 26
Male
Hell on Earth (Or Texas, if you must.)
Seen September 6th, 2011
Posted July 24th, 2011
320 posts
13 Years
Yo, I'm simply confused as to why some of you guys are against/can't understand a pure flying type pokemon. Did you forget that the flying type is simply another type with set weaknesses and strengths. The fact that it gets paired up often with the normal type has no bearing on how it reacts separately. A ghost attack is neutral against a flying type....
Yeah, Xatu is Psychic/Flying, so ghost is actually supereffective against it.
I stink at creating new types, but Nintendo needs to create more types to strengthen up Poison and maybe Normal a little bit, because Poison is one of the worst types in terms of type effectiveness, and Normal isn't good against anything. That's why I suggested Poison be strong to Light type (when I supported it that is) and the Magnet type. Why created the Magnet type... Well anyway any new types should be weak to poison and maybe normal, thats what I think.

Taio Cruz -- Dynamite


Seen December 14th, 2010
Posted December 9th, 2010
523 posts
13.3 Years
That is one way to defeat a dragon, you could do it all sorts of other ways like stone them to death, beat them in close combat, or outsmart them with your mindgames. Dragons take neutral damage from all those attacks.

But the most effective way is to battle with ice. Dragons hate the cold. They also are easier to beat if you have another dragon.
yea but i'm basing my "logic" off mythology...you mostly see warriors slaying em with swords. but when it comes to making a new weakness for it, stoning them to death is too random.
orange Barney with wings is a prime example of exactly how bad the First Generation's designs really were
Soul Silver:3266 7916 5109
Female
Stevens Point, WI
Seen April 4th, 2011
Posted August 9th, 2010
44 posts
13 Years
=A very small amount of Pokemon would need to be changed (Lanturn and Ampharos specifically).
The light type would be nice, but I don't think Lanturn and Ampharos should be changed. It makes sense in a way, but they are perfectly fine the way they are. Lanturn and Ampharos are already really great Pokemon. Besides, when the Dark/Steel types were added after generation one, they did not CHANGE any old types, they simply ADDED the steel type to Magnemite/Magneton. And I don't think the light type should be added to Ampharos, since it light comes from the electricity within it's body.

...I'm not even sure if the light type would be practical to make. There are already moves like Doom Desire, Flash Cannon, and Mirror Shot that use light as an attack.
75% of Pokémon gamers use cheats and specially made codes to make their Pokémon battle-worthy. If you are one of the 25% percent that level their Pokémon up legally, put this in your signature.

98% of teens drop Pokemon after middle school. If you are part of the rare 2% who still like it after middle school, copy and paste this into your signature.



bobandbill

one more time

Male
A cape
Seen 3 Hours Ago
Posted 5 Hours Ago
16,794 posts
15.2 Years
It is pretty dumb, though. I mean, if they do add the type but not the type to them. D: They are the Light Pokemon. o-o;
And therein lies one of the already-mentioned problems - adding in a new type means that 'logically' other previous Pokemon should have a type change (like with steel and Magenmite). That was 'ok' in 2nd gen because 2 pokemon were affected and that was it - now though? Light types would share a lot in common with electric types and moves like Flash Cannon - so either you don't change them which begs the questions what is the point (and 5 gens in also prompts 'why a change now when barely any Pokemon would represent the type?') or you do change it which means suddenly doing a backflip and saying 'hey guys, these Pokemon we've used in our official games, anime, etc which are electric types/whatnot? They're LIGHT TYPES!' which is contridicting all that canon in a pretty big way - not something they'd want to do.

But I've said that before - and regardless of the lack of light type with the legendary pokes, guess the Light type speculation will never die. -_-

Staff Anime Villain Collab - Earl de Darkwood - Interstella 5555

Daily | Drabble Dex | A Change of the Season
The Retelling of Pokémon Colosseum
Paired to Sheep :>

EJ

everything is purple

Age 30
Male
FL
Seen March 19th, 2022
Posted November 25th, 2019
1,618 posts
14.2 Years
Yeah I know what you mean dithyrambos =/

Yeah, Xatu is Psychic/Flying, so ghost is actually supereffective against it.
I stink at creating new types, but Nintendo needs to create more types to strengthen up Poison and maybe Normal a little bit, because Poison is one of the worst types in terms of type effectiveness, and Normal isn't good against anything. That's why I suggested Poison be strong to Light type (when I supported it that is) and the Magnet type. Why created the Magnet type... Well anyway any new types should be weak to poison and maybe normal, thats what I think.
Dude....did you even understand what I was saying? The FLYING type gets hit for neutral damage by ghost. Xatu is part psychic so obviously ghost is super-effective but I honestly don't get your point. What are you even arguing man...?

As for the normal type....that type should remain as is. It's not a bad type by any means. The fact that it has no super-effective moves against anybody makes sense.
Wrex. Shepard. Wrex.