Prince_of_Light
wins.
- 284
- Posts
- 15
- Years
- Washington
- Seen Apr 14, 2011
According to bulbapedia...
So this brings me to my usual end of post question. Do you think it's a little ridiculous that about 100 pokemon are water types when a bunch of other types suffer, even taking into account dual-typing? Also, which types do you think deserve more pokemon? I would definitely say ghost and fire.
EDIT:
I just did a little more research, folks.
It turns out that 48 of the 92 water pokemon there are happen to be single-type!
That's OVER 50%. 92 / 2 = 46.
Not only do water pokemon overpopulate, they don't even have diversity in half the population!
Does anybody else think this is kinda stupid? Considering the relative rarity of many other types, among them fire and ghost, I think it's rather stupid to have an entire fifth of the near 500 pokemon to be water type, or part water type. It's much too common. I've had to pick the fire starter in 3 of the 4 regions because I happen to not like rapidash/arcanine/flareon as much as the starter. DXOf all seventeen types, the Water-type is the most abundant, with 92 Pokémon species being Water-type, nearly 19% of the entire known National Pokedex.
So this brings me to my usual end of post question. Do you think it's a little ridiculous that about 100 pokemon are water types when a bunch of other types suffer, even taking into account dual-typing? Also, which types do you think deserve more pokemon? I would definitely say ghost and fire.
EDIT:
I just did a little more research, folks.
It turns out that 48 of the 92 water pokemon there are happen to be single-type!
That's OVER 50%. 92 / 2 = 46.
Not only do water pokemon overpopulate, they don't even have diversity in half the population!
Last edited: