- 895
- Posts
- 10
- Years
- Seen Apr 22, 2018
A lot of times when I read threads like this, most of the type changes I see suggested are more in the lines of "I think this would be cool!" logic than something that makes sense to what the Pokemon is based on. Yanmega being a Dragon-type would be cool I'll admit, but I don't like the logic I normally see used that it's a dragonfly, because I can just as easily use that italicization logic to justify its current type by saying it's a dragonfly.
I think some of it has to do with wanting to see more diversity in certain types. Do you know how many non-Legendary, non-Mega Evolution Dragon types aren't Dragon, Dragon/Flying, or Dragon/Ground? A whopping four--Kingdra, Hydreigon, Tyrantrum, and Dragalge. Half of those are only from the the most recent generation, and one of those two is only part-Rock because it's a fossil.
And, while you could argue that Dragon has bad diversity because it's a rare type, more common types also have similar issues. There are a total of 8 non-Legendary, non-Mega Electric types that aren't mono-Electric--Magnezone, Lanturn, Rotom, Emolga, Galvantua, Stunfisk, Heliolisk, and Dedenne. And, only two of those, the magnets and Lanturn, existed before Gen 4. (And, the magnets, themselves, were originally mono-Electric.)
And, then, there's Grass, which has very few non-Legendary, non-Mega dual types outside of Grass/Poison, and even outside of that, also has a tendency to get paired with Bug, Flying, and Dark often.
And, speaking of Bugs, you'd be hard-pressed to find dual-type Bugs that aren't Bug/Poison, Bug/Flying, or Bug/Steel. I could go on and on. A lot of people are simply tired of seeing the same type combos over and over again, especially if it's on a Pokémon that could've just as easily been something else.