Speculation Baseless Pokemon Conjecture

Leo33wii

Leo33wii

wink wink
Member
There is something about Pokemon that has been picking at me and that would be the dual typing many Pokemon. It doesn't really matter which type comes first, the damage will ultimately be made, sometimes even being 4 times total. There are much more things that come to mind outside of battle that I wish I could fix in Pokemon. So I plan to post periodically in this thread my thoughts and how to fix some things in Pokemon. I hope to hear about what you guys and gals think and discuss them.

To start off, I want the battle system to improve, and by this, I mean making dual types have more importance in battles. It's been said that the simplest answers are usually the most genius: The secondary typing of a pokemon will no longer be treated equally to it's main type when calculating damage. I mean that if your pokemon is Water and Fighting type, then a Psychic attack wouldn't do 2 times the damage. I propose that, instead, a 1.6 of the damage would be the result. This would only influence the secondary type and not the main type of a pokemon. So if the same water and fighting pokemon were struck with a grass type attack, it would take the usual 2 times damage. This would possibly keep Bug and Flying type pokemon to last slightly longer in battles, but would also allow more variations of Pokemon to be created.
A Steel and Rock pokemon would be different from a Rock and Steel Pokemon. Where complete immunity to poison will be reduced to .4 of the calculated poison damage. A fire type attack would do more damage to a Steel/Rock type versus a Rock/Steel type. And STABs should build on this as well. This could potentially allow weaker Base Stat pokemon more use in battles.

To further explain immunity, if a pokemon would naturally have immunity to a type and that type is its secondary type, it would lose the immunity. However, it wouldn't take complete damage but rather a drastically reduced totally damage. Again, let's say a Pokemon is Water and Steel type: Empoleon. This pokemon isn't entirely made of steel from looking at it. Empoleon resembles an organic creature. Poison moves would do normal damage to Empoleon's water typing then the damage would be reduced due to it's secondary typing of Steel. Becuase of it's typing of steel, Empoleon cannot be poisoned but can take slight poison damage.

I think this would open a lot of options and allow for a variety of new Pokemon. What are your thoughts over this?
 
I think that this has an exactly 0% chance to happen because you seem to be forgetting this is a children's game and making wacky-ass multipliers makes things a lot harder for kids to grasp.

There's no reason to make the damage formula even more complex.
 
That's all fine and well with your response. But I know children who don't understand IV's and EVs. Some adults don't understand either. While at the same time there are children who understand the pokemon battles far better than most adults who play competitively. You're using generalizations to make a claim assuming that all children fit your concept of them.
Also, with your statement, you're disregarding any adults who want a more engaging battle. Adding more pokemon won't improve the battle system. It makes more pokemon less accessible to be used. Changing how damage is calculated will shake the tiers system that too many people rely on. Sure it's lasting now, but how long can this structure go before there are even more ridiculous held items just for a single pokemon.

I did give reasons why to change the damage formula. Just because you don't like my suggestions isn't reason to discredit them. Yes it is conjecture, but from my past experience of 20 some odd years of playing Pokemon, I can say that battles have gotten stale. Too many held items and too many forme changes. Mega evolution is cool, but is quickly becoming a gimmick.

I don't know your experience so please elaborate on as to why you think the Pokemon Battle system is perfect. I'm assuming this because it seems that you're saying that no change is required-- that adding more pokemon will be enough to keep this franchise from going stale.
 
PMJ said:
I think that this has an exactly 0% chance to happen because you seem to be forgetting this is a children's game and making wacky-ass multipliers makes things a lot harder for kids to grasp.

There's no reason to make the damage formula even more complex.
Click to expand...

Do children even know about the multipliers or do they just know that type advantages do a lot of damage?
 
They may not know about the specific numbers involved, but telling a kid "fire beats grass" is easier to explain than "fire beats grass, but not if grass is a sub-type, except it kinda does, but not as well"

Just seems overly complex. I have faith in Gamefreak to keep things fresh. They mix it up every generation, so I have no doubt that gen 7 will have something crazy in store. I agree that hold items are getting a little excessive, but the total number of Pokemon is likewise getting excessive. Someday down the road they will have to make a big change (retire the first few generations?).
 
Well, I it could be explained that their main type is stronger than their second type. It's weaker simply because it's a second type. It's intuitive. People usually think that second is not as great as a first. I forget where I saw it, but they asked a bunch of children about silver spoons. All of them the same expect for one. One of them was "owned" by the Queen of England. All the children wanted that one spoon even though all the silver spoons were exactly the same. this type of intuition is found with something being first and second.
Than again, you're giving children less credit when Typing is more complicated than damage. Even to this day, I can't calculate exact damage based on my pokemon Attack versus the defense of an opponent after applying typing and STAB, EVs, and IVs from both sides. Making the concept that a secondary/sub type is weaker than the primary type of a Pokemon, from my thinking, would be a lot easier to explain.

Another point, I wouldn't retire any pokemon. Two reasons, main reason: bias. I grew up with Gen 1 and 2. I owned almost every version of pokemon and I know all 721 of them. Adding pokemon is fine, but eventually it isn't going to work and there will be too many. I actually came up of an idea as a solution, but I'll discuss that later. Second reason: Retiring Pokemon would create a reworking of the Pokedex and a lot of the games. This would greatly effect the game's meta and story. Kanto and Johto will always be there only because it's what started Pokemon. retiring those Pokemon would almost be a sin for GameFreak.
 
Changing Stats after breeding a Pokemon

Breeding itself is a complex mechanic for children. I think allowing the players to see IVs and EVs would allow trainers/players to understand the game.
Instead of calling it perfect IV pokemon, it should be called "Pedigree." Considering in real life, dog breeding follows genetics. A high pedigree means that a dog breed has good genetics and has a high potential in shows and other things dog related. I can say that sounds a lot like Pokemon breeding. I think the ribbons stat page should show a Pokemon's IVs Pedigree with the use of a graph system.
The graph should be a total of 4 stars for each stat. Each star counts for 8 numbers. So, for example, a pokemon with a high Pedigree (31 IV) in attack would represented as 4 Gold stars. While a weak Pedigree of... 7 IV would be represented by 1 silver star. 0 IV would be represented by no stars.
Allow me to clear up this system further by this:

there will be 4 place holders. A stars color changes as the IV number increases. A yellow color represents 1 or 2 units, Bronze means 3 or 4, Silver means 5 or 6, while Gold represents 7 or 8. So if a Pokemon has an IV of 25 it would be represented by 3 Gold stars followed by a Single Yellow star. so it would be like this:
★★★★

while a stat of 14 would resemble this:
★★

There could be a section within the game where a person in a daycare "unlocks" this and simply explains that the more stars means a better potential in that Pokemon. And from then on any pokemon you catch, their Pedigree is shown.
Also, I think that EVs should be represented by Numbers on this page as well.

Effort|Pedigree
[252]|[HP]★★★
[000]|[ATK]★★★★
[000]|[DEF]★★★★
[004]|[Sp.ATK]★★★★
[000]|[Sp.DEF]★★
[252]|[SPD]★★★★

It just came to me, what looks better, that above or what follows?

Effort|Pedigree
[252]|⚫[HP]★★★
[000]|▲[ATK]★★★★
[000]|■[DEF]★★★★
[004]|♥[Sp.ATK]★★★★
[000]|★[Sp.DEF]★★
[252]|♦[SPD]★★★★

Anyway, what are your thoughts of this if it were implemented into the game?
 
Last edited:
The proposed layout looks unnecessarily cluttered, but I like the idea for making breeding easier to track without taking out the skill or time investment.
 
Oh, hey, I'm not watching this thread so I didn't even see your reply until someone liked my post.
Leo33wii said:
Well, I it could be explained that their main type is stronger than their second type. It's weaker simply because it's a second type. It's intuitive. People usually think that second is not as great as a first. I forget where I saw it, but they asked a bunch of children about silver spoons. All of them the same expect for one. One of them was "owned" by the Queen of England. All the children wanted that one spoon even though all the silver spoons were exactly the same. this type of intuition is found with something being first and second.
Than again, you're giving children less credit when Typing is more complicated than damage. Even to this day, I can't calculate exact damage based on my pokemon Attack versus the defense of an opponent after applying typing and STAB, EVs, and IVs from both sides. Making the concept that a secondary/sub type is weaker than the primary type of a Pokemon, from my thinking, would be a lot easier to explain.

Another point, I wouldn't retire any pokemon. Two reasons, main reason: bias. I grew up with Gen 1 and 2. I owned almost every version of pokemon and I know all 721 of them. Adding pokemon is fine, but eventually it isn't going to work and there will be too many. I actually came up of an idea as a solution, but I'll discuss that later. Second reason: Retiring Pokemon would create a reworking of the Pokedex and a lot of the games. This would greatly effect the game's meta and story. Kanto and Johto will always be there only because it's what started Pokemon. retiring those Pokemon would almost be a sin for GameFreak.
Click to expand...
Why does the second type have to be considered weaker? Does canon ever refer to a second typing as a sub or inferior type? I'm not sure on that one.

Typing is not now nor has it ever been more complicated than calculating damage. I'm not sure what you meant by that.

I also grew up with gen 1. A lot of my favorite Pokemon are in gen 1 and I would be sad to see them go. Fortunately, retiring Pokemon will probably not realistically happen. Still, even just knowing the types and evolutions of 700+ Pokemon is a lot for a kid to take in. Eventually it will get to be too much and it'll be interesting to see what Gamefreak does about it.

Leo33wii said:
I think allowing the players to see IVs and EVs would allow trainers/players to understand the game.
Click to expand...

What Gamefreak needs to do is two things:

1. Do a better job of explaining what EVs are (specifically, what they are and how they affect your stats, and why you will only see greater changes at higher levels, aka information people new to EV training can actually use)
2. Ditch the "potential" IV crap and just tell me the numbers, and then explain or give me an in-game way to find out what the heck is an IV and why I want 31s across the board

Each generation, Gamefreak seems to get more open about EVs, letting the player monitor their progress more easily. They still do a terrible job of explaining exactly what EVs do for you, though. It would be wonderful for the postgame IV guy just quit with the riddles and give you specific numbers for your IVs.

In your explanation you use numbers for EVs but stars for IVs? What's the point? Why not just use numbers for both?
 
PMJ said:
Oh, hey, I'm not watching this thread so I didn't even see your reply until someone liked my post.

Why does the second type have to be considered weaker? Does canon ever refer to a second typing as a sub or inferior type? I'm not sure on that one.

Typing is not now nor has it ever been more complicated than calculating damage. I'm not sure what you meant by that.
Click to expand...

The first typing in the combination is usually the one that's more dominant in the Pokemon's design or concept. For example, compare Lanturn vs. Wash Rotom. Lanturn is Water/Electric because it's a fish that can generate light. The Pokemon is more defined by its aquatic nature than its ability to generate light, so Water comes first in the typing. Rotom is Electric/Water because it's a washing machine. In this case, Electric is the more defining type because it's defined more as a machine than a water based creature, so Electric comes first in the typing. There's a subtle difference between reverse typings, but it's there.
 
I meant in terms of abilities.
 
I mean, has any canon source openly admitted that a Pokemon with two types is less effective at doing a thing than a Pokemon of the same pure type?

Using your Lanturn example, Lanturn being less effective at Electric attacks because Electric is its second type.
 
PMJ said:
I mean, has any canon source openly admitted that a Pokemon with two types is less effective at doing a thing than a Pokemon of the same pure type?

Using your Lanturn example, Lanturn being less effective at Electric attacks because Electric is its second type.
Click to expand...

They've never done anything with the secondary type, that's why it's being suggested in the first place.
 
I've suggested this before, but mostly about STAB.

My idea was something like this:
Arcanine: 1.5x Fire STAB
Blaziken: 1.3x Fire STAB 1.2x Fighting STAB

because it felt unfair to me that dual types had STAB on 2 types of moves, which combined are often an amazing coverage compared to ANY type on its own.

PMJ said:
They may not know about the specific numbers involved, but telling a kid "fire beats grass" is easier to explain than "fire beats grass, but not if grass is a sub-type, except it kinda does, but not as well"
Click to expand...

It's as simple as making the primary type icon noticable bigger than the secondary.

It's not like this is more complex than explaining how defense stats play a role in determining damage.

And it's also not like those "kids" know the type chart by heart. They'll use Earthquake against Galvantula, throw Fire at Cradilys etc.

...heck by that logic, not showing the type of the opponents on the screen in battles is too complex then.

The "kids" are always guessing and doing trial and error, regardless of how complex it is.
 
Last edited:
There isn't anything canon. I'm just suggesting that GameFreak make the secondary typing do .6 of damage dealt and received. This would then change the battle system and allow a chance for pokemon that are not used often to be used more. This would then give GameFreak more design options for future Pokemon.


On the design of showing IVs and EVs, there isn't any real reason not to show the exact numbers other than aesthetics. The star system would simply separate IVs and EVs. Effort Points could be followed by exact numbers because of competitive play. IVs on the other hand can't really be influenced by training, so then, even though perfect IVs are wanted, it isn't really necessary to show the exact number. Knowing that it's perfect is all that is needed. The only real reason to know your exact IVs/Pedigree is for calculating the type for Hidden Power. Honestly, I don't think you need to see an exact number. My system of the Pedigree can be easily calculated if you want to know numbers.

I also want to suggest the Inventory system in Pokemon needs an upgrade. I want it to be a mix of both HeartGold/SoulSilver and the Inventory system of Resident Evil 4. You would have different pockets, but they would all be based on a grid. The purpose of this is simple. It makes it easier for the player to organize what they want readily and also make the player feel that they're on an adventure. Pokeballs and Potions would be considered small items and take the space of one square. While larger items, like the bicycle would take 3 or 4. Some could be longer or wider. Considering this is the generation of the touch screen, this would work well.

Also, return the options of storing items in the PC.

Inventory will all use a grid system, to include the PC storage. If you have maximum of 999 of an item, it would be represented on the top screen.
I'll make a picture later showing what I mean.
 
Last edited:
Mitja said:
I've suggested this before, but mostly about STAB.

My idea was something like this:
Arcanine: 1.5x Fire STAB
Blaziken: 1.3x Fire STAB 1.2x Fighting STAB

because it felt unfair to me that dual types had STAB on 2 types of moves, which combined are often an amazing coverage compared to ANY type on its own.
Click to expand...

I see your logic here but having only one type is not necessary bad. Suicune is one of the great example for that, being only Water type and weak to only 2 types. Eelectross is only Electric type and has only one weakness to Ground type but it's canceled thanks to its Levitate ability. Furthermore, by using your example, Blaziken has more weaknesses than Arcanine. (Same amount of resistance. )
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top