XY Making Ice Types More Useful

[Blob55]

RE: Making Ice-types More Useful

Fairy should have been made like this:

Strong against: Electric, Dragon and Dark
Resists: Electric, Dark and Fighting
Immune to: Dragon
Weaknesses: Ice and Poison
What resists it: Poison and Fire
Doesn't affect: Ice

That way Bug doesn't get a pointless nerf and Fairy doesn't share a weakness with Ice.

 

[Their Goominess]

RE: Making Ice-types More Useful

Fairy should have been made like this:

Strong against: Electric, Dragon and Dark
Resists: Electric, Dark and Fighting
Immune to: Dragon
Weaknesses: Ice and Poison
What resists it: Poison and Fire
Doesn't affect: Ice

That way Bug doesn't get a pointless nerf and Fairy doesn't share a weakness with Ice.

Ice really doesn't need another thing its strong against... it already hits 4 types SE, as well as hitting all the Dragon/Flyings for 4x SE (as well as Garchomp, Flygon and Zygarde)
Steel sucks offensively as well... Fairy was partly introduced to give Steel (and Poison) an offensive boost, without being totally outclassed by Fighting.

Ice should definitely have resisted Fairy though (although an immunity may have been too much)

If I had to give Ice a few resistances I'd give it:
-Ground
-Fairy
-Dragon

this gives it something to actually work with

 

[bacon]

RE: Making Ice-types More Useful

As far as the type chart goes, the best thing that can happen to Ice is to reduce the number of things that resist it. If you increase the number of weaknesses, all that's going to happen is that sweepers use it for coverage even more than they do now. But if you reduce the number of resistances, the Ice STAB becomes much more exploitable.

A good analogy is the Dragon type in gen 4 and 5. Dragon hit only one type for SE damage (other Dragons), but it also had only one resistance (Steel). This made Outrage spam a viable playstyle, which is pretty impressive considering how bad a move Outrage is outside of its typing. And only Dragon types ran Dragon moves, you virtually never saw a non-Dragon type use Dragon for coverage.

So... I would remove Steel's resistance to Ice. Steel doesn't make much sense anyway as metals conduct heat, therefore offering low resistance to cold temperatures. I don't think you can wriggle your way out of the resistances of Water, Fire and Ice. But I think this would be enough to make Ice spam a playable strategy, if there were a few more solid Ice types to exploit it.

 

[Metalizard]

RE: Making Ice-types More Useful

Ice should resist Water... That's all I have to say... If Water resists Ice (which I don't get why), then the opposite should be true as I think it makes more sense...

 

[vraieesprit]

RE: Making Ice-types More Useful

I really want to tell the guys who come up with the type chart a way they can fix Ice types. I really wish they knew how useless they are!
As I said before, Ice should be resistant to Ground and Grass types.

Not Grass, that type is already too weak. It already has 5 weaknesses and is resisted by 7 types, it doesn't need to be made worse at all. In fact, Grass could be stand to made better as well. Ground and Dragon are better choices because they're strong types and could stand to be taken down a peg.

The irony of that statement being that grass types can oneshot ground and ice types can oneshot dragons. At least in my experience.

The reason this philosophy doesn't work for me is that it ignores the huge number of dual type pokemon now in the game. I know more about grass than ice, but I think it applies to both. Grass type pokemon are strong against ground, water, electric. These are very common primary or secondary types, especially ground. That makes a lot more pokemon vulnerable to grass type attacks. Then, of course, there's the fact not that many grass types are single type pokemon, either. So that adds another dimension to the strength/weakness battle. The only thing that grass types are universally weak against is fire - but there are some water types with a secondary ground or rock type (eg Seismatoad, Swampert, Whiscash and their evolutions) who are immune to electricity but are doubly weak to grass because of the dual typing.

If I remember right, ice types are naturally strong against types which are less common in the dual type or single type situation. But that said, Ice Beam is a very effective attack that can wipe out a whole dragon gym or Elite 4 member in a matter of moves.

Maybe the bigger problem with Ice types is that it is very easy to teach Ice attacks to non-Ice pokemon (usually water types, but not always). That means you can add ice to another pokemon without going down the line of raising an ice type. The first Ice type I raised was Vanillite in my White game, and I was really surprised at how effective she is because I always gave ice beam to a water pokemon before this.

I have only ever had the one ice pokemon, but in my experience with grass types, the real issue isn't the pokemon, but the fact there's a general belief that the type of pokemon is weak. This makes people avoid raising them, and therefore perpetuates the idea of their weakness. I've had a whole conversation with friends on another forum about this and all of the people who told me grass was weak have never actually raised one or had one in their team. Grass types take a long time to raise properly - but you can at least usually obtain one at a low level. With ice types, they usually enter the game late, so you have to either breed one, or you have the disadvantage of having lost the early levels which doesn't help their strength any in the long run.

If Ice pokemon appeared at a lower level earlier in the game, I imagine they'd be better adversaries. It takes actual dedication to the type to breed one and then raise it from scratch rather than catch it and throw it into the team at level 30 whatever. The higher the level you catch it, the weaker it can often be in the long run, so that's a key issue for me with ice types.

With Ice, too, I never understood why ice should be negative to fire but that fire should not also be weak to ice, since ice poured on a fire would put it out. I think that could be equalised better.

 

[professorlight]

RE: Making Ice-types More Useful

Grass type pokemon are strong against ground, water, electric. These are very common primary or secondary types, especially ground.

Rock. Grass is strong against rock. It only resists electric.

Then, of course, there's the fact not that many grass types are single type pokemon, either. So that adds another dimension to the strength/weakness battle.

Most grass types are part poison, save a few exceptions, who are more seen competitively (ludicolo, shaymin?).
Also, poison only recently became a desirable type, and most grass/poison pokemon don't have much to gain from it, save losing a weakness to a rarely used type, while gaining a weakness to a very common type (psychic) and losing resistance to another common type (ground)

Maybe the bigger problem with Ice types is that it is very easy to teach Ice attacks to non-Ice pokemon (usually water types, but not always). That means you can add ice to another pokemon without going down the line of raising an ice type.

That is very true, and it is something all discussions about the ice type lack, the fact that ice beam and blizzard are ubiquitous among non-ice types. It's economy, the easier something is to get, the lower value it will have; the fact that half the pokedex gets access to very powerful ice type moves, without the drawback of the ice type's weaknesses reduces the ice type's value.

I have only ever had the one ice pokemon, but in my experience with grass types, the real issue isn't the pokemon, but the fact there's a general belief that the type of pokemon is weak. This makes people avoid raising them, and therefore perpetuates the idea of their weakness.

That's true too. But grass types also have very little variety of moves, and by what I said up there, they become less valuable in an environment where coverage is a matter of life and death.

With Ice, too, I never understood why ice should be negative to fire but that fire should not also be weak to ice, since ice poured on a fire would put it out. I think that could be equalised better.

Go put out a fire by throwing buckets of ice to it; I'll wait with a hose for when you finally get tired.

 

[Blob55]

RE: Making Ice-types More Useful

I think there should be a powerful Physical Ice move which only Ice Types learn. That way they'd have a powerful exclusive move.

 

[Bolt the Cat]

RE: Making Ice-types More Useful

The irony of that statement being that grass types can oneshot ground and ice types can oneshot dragons. At least in my experience.

You say "one shot" as if it were set in stone. Go ahead and try using a Lv. 1 Snivy against a Lv. 100 Groudon and see what happens.

The reason this philosophy doesn't work for me is that it ignores the huge number of dual type pokemon now in the game. I know more about grass than ice, but I think it applies to both.

Dual type Pokemon don't always benefit from having extra types (in fact, sometimes they're actually hurt by having the extra types if it means more weaknesses). It's best to analyze them on a case by case basis.

These are very common primary or secondary types, especially ground. That makes a lot more pokemon vulnerable to grass type attacks.

2 of Grass' weaknesses are also very common, and one of them is rising in popularity. I'd say Grass has a lot of common weaknesses too.

The only thing that grass types are universally weak against is fire - but there are some water types with a secondary ground or rock type (eg Seismatoad, Swampert, Whiscash and their evolutions) who are immune to electricity but are doubly weak to grass because of the dual typing.

Again, case by case basis. Those Water/Ground types are fairly rare anyway, and we also now have Freeze Dry to use against them.

If I remember right, ice types are naturally strong against types which are less common in the dual type or single type situation.

You remember wrong, Grass, Ground and Flying have a lot of dual types, and Dragon is fairly common in competitive.

Maybe the bigger problem with Ice types is that it is very easy to teach Ice attacks to non-Ice pokemon (usually water types, but not always). That means you can add ice to another pokemon without going down the line of raising an ice type. The first Ice type I raised was Vanillite in my White game, and I was really surprised at how effective she is because I always gave ice beam to a water pokemon before this.

This is a huge problem, but how would they fix it? It's not like they can just take away moves from certain Pokemon.

I have only ever had the one ice pokemon, but in my experience with grass types, the real issue isn't the pokemon, but the fact there's a general belief that the type of pokemon is weak. This makes people avoid raising them, and therefore perpetuates the idea of their weakness. I've had a whole conversation with friends on another forum about this and all of the people who told me grass was weak have never actually raised one or had one in their team.

Because people are totally making up that it has a ton of weaknesses, and has terrible offensive coverage and their reasons for thinking Grass type is weak are completely baseless as opposed to, you know, being grounded in the type chart.

Grass types take a long time to raise properly - but you can at least usually obtain one at a low level. With ice types, they usually enter the game late, so you have to either breed one, or you have the disadvantage of having lost the early levels which doesn't help their strength any in the long run.

If Ice pokemon appeared at a lower level earlier in the game, I imagine they'd be better adversaries. It takes actual dedication to the type to breed one and then raise it from scratch rather than catch it and throw it into the team at level 30 whatever. The higher the level you catch it, the weaker it can often be in the long run, so that's a key issue for me with ice types.

Most of the discussion you'll see on this topic usually relates to competitive, not as much the main game. Although I do agree that Ice types should be made earlier in the game considering how crappy they are.

---

I think there should be a powerful Physical Ice move which only Ice Types learn. That way they'd have a powerful exclusive move.

It would still suck to be a special oriented Ice type like Articuno, Regice, Glaceon, or Vanilluxe.

 

[largellama123]

RE: Making Ice-types More Useful

I feel that Ice does need to have that resistance to Water because making it go one-way just doesn't work. Also, I noticed how nobody mentioned Sheer Cold in this thread, as it is a one-shot kill. Along with that, Lapras, a dual Water and Ice type, can learn both Sheer Cold and Perish Song, two moves that definitely provide a threat, as the Pokemon either dies or is forced to switch out. However, it's clear that Ice-types are pretty hard to actually use, as most of the time, people simply give water types Ice Beam and put them up against Dragons. By making them have more resistances or at least a type it's super effective to, preferably Fairy, you would see Ice types a lot more often.

 

[Blob55]

RE: Making Ice-types More Useful

It would still suck to be a special oriented Ice type like Articuno, Regice, Glaceon, or Vanilluxe.

True, but 7th gen could add an Ice/Fighting, Ice/Steel or Ice/Bug types.

---

I feel that Ice does need to have that resistance to Water because making it go one-way just doesn't work. Also, I noticed how nobody mentioned Sheer Cold in this thread, as it is a one-shot kill. Along with that, Lapras, a dual Water and Ice type, can learn both Sheer Cold and Perish Song, two moves that definitely provide a threat, as the Pokemon either dies or is forced to switch out. However, it's clear that Ice-types are pretty hard to actually use, as most of the time, people simply give water types Ice Beam and put them up against Dragons. By making them have more resistances or at least a type it's super effective to, preferably Fairy, you would see Ice types a lot more often.

Sheer Cold has awful accuracy and what's more, it's cheap.

 

[largellama123]

RE: Making Ice-types More Useful

It would still suck to be a special oriented Ice type like Articuno, Regice, Glaceon, or Vanilluxe.

True, but 7th gen could add an Ice/Fighting, Ice/Steel or Ice/Bug types.

---

I feel that Ice does need to have that resistance to Water because making it go one-way just doesn't work. Also, I noticed how nobody mentioned Sheer Cold in this thread, as it is a one-shot kill. Along with that, Lapras, a dual Water and Ice type, can learn both Sheer Cold and Perish Song, two moves that definitely provide a threat, as the Pokemon either dies or is forced to switch out. However, it's clear that Ice-types are pretty hard to actually use, as most of the time, people simply give water types Ice Beam and put them up against Dragons. By making them have more resistances or at least a type it's super effective to, preferably Fairy, you would see Ice types a lot more often.

Sheer Cold has awful accuracy and what's more, it's cheap.

---

Yeah, but if you manage to put a Pokemon to sleep, you can use it multiple times, but that's simply a reason why Ice type isn't complete crap. I still feel like it is a bad type since it's type match ups aren't very useful, and the only time you could guarantee a one-hit KO is if your up against Dragon-Flying in competitive play and it's not a bulky Pokemon. Otherwise, it's just a fragile type that you have to have luck on your side if you really wanna use it,

 

[Blob55]

RE: Making Ice-types More Useful

True, but 7th gen could add an Ice/Fighting, Ice/Steel or Ice/Bug types.

---

Sheer Cold has awful accuracy and what's more, it's cheap.

---

Yeah, but if you manage to put a Pokemon to sleep, you can use it multiple times, but that's simply a reason why Ice type isn't complete crap. I still feel like it is a bad type since it's type match ups aren't very useful, and the only time you could guarantee a one-hit KO is if your up against Dragon-Flying in competitive play and it's not a bulky Pokemon. Otherwise, it's just a fragile type that you have to have luck on your side if you really wanna use it,

---

Or just use it in PWT type master. Or you could use just Ice and Grass types against that Type reverse guy.

 

[professorlight]

RE: Making Ice-types More Useful

Maybe the bigger problem with Ice types is that it is very easy to teach Ice attacks to non-Ice pokemon (usually water types, but not always). That means you can add ice to another pokemon without going down the line of raising an ice type. The first Ice type I raised was Vanillite in my White game, and I was really surprised at how effective she is because I always gave ice beam to a water pokemon before this.

This is a huge problem, but how would they fix it? It's not like they can just take away moves from certain Pokemon.

Eliminate TMs. All of them. even hidden power. Especially hidden power. I've been thinking for a long time now that the extra coverage pokemon gain from TMs is what is lowering the usefulness of most pokemon while boosting immensely some others.

Since pokemon would only get coverage from their natural movepools, a greater amount of pokemon with more restricted movepools would be needed, getting much deserved attention and reducing the jack-of-all-trades-iness current competitive pokemon have.

 

[Mitja]

RE: Making Ice-types More Useful

Wind type please DD
(and if it means a wind-eeveelution so be it lol)

Flying, at its core is the technique of being able to fly, defying Gravity. Wind would be an elemental type.

What can I say about this? Keep Ice as it is.
I'm a Grass-type Trainer and I know how difficult it is to battle with these but instead of asking for new and updated type charts, I wait for another thing they can make: create new Pokémon with new type combinations - that way we'll see new creatures, which in my opinion is the best.
People should just stop trying to think of new ways to balance the types like this. By Arceus, this is applying to Pokémon that stupid idea that everyone can be a winner. There are strong people and weak people and so too stronger types and weaker types. The type chart was updated this generation, so if GF were to find that Ice-type Pokémon have problems that really need an answer, then they would have done it.

Life has challenges and so the games. It's no wonder the games are always released as a pair and so don't go thinking that having stronger and weaker types don't have a purpose or even a message. Have fun with your favorite Pokémon.

Did you look at the type chart?

If you tried to come up with any kind of rating system for how viable a type is in general, Ice will currently be off the chart no matter how you do it. It's not bad, it's ridiculously frail.

Even if they added 2 resistances to it out of the blue, it would only become reasonable, but still be the weakest type.

Take any Ice type pokemon that's currently viable, take away it's Ice type, and it would be much better off.
As for trying out new combos, you can add the toughest type to Ice, Steel, and it's only worse because it then 2 horrifying quadruple weaknesses of Fire and Fighting now. Heck we just saw a fancy new Rock/Ice combo with Aurorus, guess how it's doing with that Fighting/Steel quad weaknesses.

The reason why this isn't as blatantly obvious as "Dragons are OP", is because firstly, you don't see the pokemon who aren't OP much, and because there isn't that many casual Ice types to begin with.
But they've tried to finally fix the latter, by introducing a bunch of pure Ice types the last 2 gens...(Avalugg is especially interesting because it's trying to be the cliche defensive fortress, but fails miserably due to it's typing)


Giving the Ice type new resistances to Ground/Water is what I'd be satisfied with.
Ground moves are the best out there and really an obvious choice.
Water moves are amazing and deserve a nerf (especially with Scald everywhere..).
(Against Dragon would make sense too, but that would be overkill after Fairy...)


The "some are stronger some are weaker" argument is flawed, because
-there are already several layers of individual mechanics that produce such a range of pokemon (some have high stats some have low, some have big movepools some do not, some have amazing abilities some don't...)
-it's missing the point of why we're even discussing this! It's not that Ice is weak and needs to be strong, its not that "all types should be equal", it's about putting it closer to the other weak types because it's a joke as it is.

 

[largellama123]

RE: Making Ice-types More Useful

Yeah, but if you manage to put a Pokemon to sleep, you can use it multiple times, but that's simply a reason why Ice type isn't complete crap. I still feel like it is a bad type since it's type match ups aren't very useful, and the only time you could guarantee a one-hit KO is if your up against Dragon-Flying in competitive play and it's not a bulky Pokemon. Otherwise, it's just a fragile type that you have to have luck on your side if you really wanna use it,

Or just use it in PWT type master. Or you could use just Ice and Grass types against that Type reverse guy.

But I was referring to competitive play, not the main story, and in X & Y. Though you do have a point in those situations, there won't be a type reversal in competitive play. More likely than not, you'll see water types with ice type moves or a dual type ice type in play, as its weaknesses are very common, especially fire. And though dragons are usually a staple in every team, by adding Fairy, Ice basically just lost its big advantage against the other types, since people are now using fairy more often against dragon types since it is completely immune to Dragon. I personally believe Fairy should be nerfed a bit, as it's super-effectiveness to Dark is a little over the limit, but one thing that really doesn't make sense is their weaknesses. One of the two most under-used types, Poison and Steel, is its weakness.

---

Wind type please DD
(and if it means a wind-eeveelution so be it lol)

Flying, at its core is the technique of being able to fly, defying Gravity. Wind would be an elemental type.

What can I say about this? Keep Ice as it is.
I'm a Grass-type Trainer and I know how difficult it is to battle with these but instead of asking for new and updated type charts, I wait for another thing they can make: create new Pokémon with new type combinations - that way we'll see new creatures, which in my opinion is the best.
People should just stop trying to think of new ways to balance the types like this. By Arceus, this is applying to Pokémon that stupid idea that everyone can be a winner. There are strong people and weak people and so too stronger types and weaker types. The type chart was updated this generation, so if GF were to find that Ice-type Pokémon have problems that really need an answer, then they would have done it.

Life has challenges and so the games. It's no wonder the games are always released as a pair and so don't go thinking that having stronger and weaker types don't have a purpose or even a message. Have fun with your favorite Pokémon.

Did you look at the type chart?

If you tried to come up with any kind of rating system for how viable a type is in general, Ice will currently be off the chart no matter how you do it. It's not bad, it's ridiculously frail.

Even if they added 2 resistances to it out of the blue, it would only become reasonable, but still be the weakest type.

Take any Ice type pokemon that's currently viable, take away it's Ice type, and it would be much better off.
As for trying out new combos, you can add the toughest type to Ice, Steel, and it's only worse because it then 2 horrifying quadruple weaknesses of Fire and Fighting now. Heck we just saw a fancy new Rock/Ice combo with Aurorus, guess how it's doing with that Fighting/Steel quad weaknesses.

The reason why this isn't as blatantly obvious as "Dragons are OP", is because firstly, you don't see the pokemon who aren't OP much, and because there isn't that many casual Ice types to begin with.
But they've tried to finally fix the latter, by introducing a bunch of pure Ice types the last 2 gens...(Avalugg is especially interesting because it's trying to be the cliche defensive fortress, but fails miserably due to it's typing)


Giving the Ice type new resistances to Ground/Water is what I'd be satisfied with.
Ground moves are the best out there and really an obvious choice.
Water moves are amazing and deserve a nerf (especially with Scald everywhere..).
(Against Dragon would make sense too, but that would be overkill after Fairy...)


The "some are stronger some are weaker" argument is flawed, because
-there are already several layers of individual mechanics that produce such a range of pokemon (some have high stats some have low, some have big movepools some do not, some have amazing abilities some don't...)
-it's missing the point of why we're even discussing this! It's not that Ice is weak and needs to be strong, its not that "all types should be equal", it's about putting it closer to the other weak types because it's a joke as it is.

You basically put into words everything that I was thinking. Ice types have terrible type-matchups, and the one-way resistance to Ice is the stupidest thing I've heard. And it's main reason it's used for (against dragons) is nerfed now that Fairy was introduced and is a better type to use against it. Frankly, if the opponent has an ice type that isn't dual type with water, you can sweep through it with Drought-powered Fire type move like Flare Blitz or Blast Burn.

 

[Bolt the Cat]

RE: Making Ice-types More Useful

This is a huge problem, but how would they fix it? It's not like they can just take away moves from certain Pokemon.

Eliminate TMs. All of them. even hidden power. Especially hidden power. I've been thinking for a long time now that the extra coverage pokemon gain from TMs is what is lowering the usefulness of most pokemon while boosting immensely some others.

Since pokemon would only get coverage from their natural movepools, a greater amount of pokemon with more restricted movepools would be needed, getting much deserved attention and reducing the jack-of-all-trades-iness current competitive pokemon have.

IDK that I'd go that far, some Pokemon that have weaker movepools benefit from TMs and I think they should keep them. But maybe TMs could use a "reboot". Completely scrap the TM list and rebuild it from scratch. Rethink which Pokemon get what kinds of moves and don't give them to Pokemon that don't make sense or would be OP by having an overly large variety of moves (having a ton of Dragon types that can easily use Fire and Steel moves, for instance, neutralizes their weaknesses). And then reserve the higher powered moves for the types themselves, don't give out any move that's base 90 or higher so that the Pokemon themselves are still pretty strong. I think that would be a reasonable compromise.

 

[professorlight]

RE: Making Ice-types More Useful

I think reviewing it entirely would be too hard, and only a temporary solution; after all, every other generation brings a TM list change. The more reasonable compromise (if you don't want to outright lose TMs) would be:

-status and normal type moves: all types
-same type moves: same type pokemon.
-a select few pokemon would learn other type moves if they make sense, but on a restricted case-by-case basis (golurk with fly, etc)

But I still say that removing them outright is best; HMs could finally be replaced by field moves, egg moves could be learned by pokemon tutors in your team (as TMs work now) instead of having to be born with (thus giving a bit more of coverage to pokemon, but not the insane amount TMs give). It's just a much more sensible and elegant solution, and it would keep a lot of pokemon who don't have extensive coverage from being outclassed by the most powerful pokemon with best coverage.

 

[largellama123]

RE: Making Ice-types More Useful

I think reviewing it entirely would be too hard, and only a temporary solution; after all, every other generation brings a TM list change. The more reasonable compromise (if you don't want to outright lose TMs) would be:

-status and normal type moves: all types
-same type moves: same type pokemon.
-a select few pokemon would learn other type moves if they make sense, but on a restricted case-by-case basis (golurk with fly, etc)

But I still say that removing them outright is best; HMs could finally be replaced by field moves, egg moves could be learned by pokemon tutors in your team (as TMs work now) instead of having to be born with (thus giving a bit more of coverage to pokemon, but not the insane amount TMs give). It's just a much more sensible and elegant solution, and it would keep a lot of pokemon who don't have extensive coverage from being outclassed by the most powerful pokemon with best coverage.

TMs and HMs are perfectly fine the way they are. Your argument is that some pokemon can learn more moves than others, so that's not fair. That is simply a case of "one pokemon is better than the other." Protect is an important move in competitive play, and most pokemon learn it via TM. HMs are field moves! You use them outside of battle, there is no reason for that to change, unless they add more. Also, most rewards from Gym Leaders are TMs, so you would ahve to replace that too, and considering TMs are one of the most valuable items in the game, that isn't a good idea. Overall, just because some pokemmon have a wider move spread, that doesn't mean you can get rid of TMs.

---

Eliminate TMs. All of them. even hidden power. Especially hidden power. I've been thinking for a long time now that the extra coverage pokemon gain from TMs is what is lowering the usefulness of most pokemon while boosting immensely some others.

Since pokemon would only get coverage from their natural movepools, a greater amount of pokemon with more restricted movepools would be needed, getting much deserved attention and reducing the jack-of-all-trades-iness current competitive pokemon have.

IDK that I'd go that far, some Pokemon that have weaker movepools benefit from TMs and I think they should keep them. But maybe TMs could use a "reboot". Completely scrap the TM list and rebuild it from scratch. Rethink which Pokemon get what kinds of moves and don't give them to Pokemon that don't make sense or would be OP by having an overly large variety of moves (having a ton of Dragon types that can easily use Fire and Steel moves, for instance, neutralizes their weaknesses). And then reserve the higher powered moves for the types themselves, don't give out any move that's base 90 or higher so that the Pokemon themselves are still pretty strong. I think that would be a reasonable compromise.

Teaching Pokemon moves that take out weaknesses is a strategy. By arguing that only same-type pokemon can learn a TM, the game would very easy to predict, as you can send a pokemon that can easily take out the other one without worrying about being knocked out. Teaching Gravler Flamethrower, for example, gets rid of the Grass type threat. However, there are multiple types that can take him out, and that move only gets rid of one of them. Teaching Dragons Steel and Fire moves doesn't get rid of their dragon type weakness. You can argue that some pokemon are OP, but that doesn't mean it's impossible to fight back. I've been in situations where I'm up against a Water-Fairy, and I can't beat it because I didn't have an Electric or Steel type on me. That doesn't make it OP. That just means I didn't plan well enough. With strategy, any Pokemon can be taken out, no matter what it's move pool is.

 

[professorlight]

RE: Making Ice-types More Useful

My argument is basic supply and demand; if you grant a fistful of pokemon the ability to hit most types super effectively, and many of them are powerful on their own, it stands to reason people will use them more, leaving other pokemon outside, unable to compete, and narrowing the overall pool of viable choices. If you make 700 pokemon, of which roughly 3/5ths will be just a means to the end of fully evolved pokemon, do you really think making most of the remaining pokemon outclassed is fair?

FAKE EDIT: Nevermind, you clearly do.

But it's not only that it's not fair, it is also that it is cheap. It is easy. Having more coverage makes you more likely to handle whatever your opponent gets, but it also means the same pokemon will be used by everyone; doesn't it get boring? having to use THIS or you don't stand a chance? being in a last stand against hydreigon, with good chances, and having it use a super effective surf? or focus blast?

You say it's a strategy. That the pokemon don't lose weaknesses by gaining coverage. That's true. But it's also irrelevant. If you don't have coverage over your opponent, what do you do? fight without a clear cut advantage? or flight, and get another pokemon to handle it? Removing coverage won't change that at all, it would only move the strategy from "what coverage can I give to my pokemon to kill any type of opponent?" to "how can my pokemon hold their own against any type of opponent?". it's true that no team would get perfect coverage this way. Perfect. That's how it should be. You shouldn't get a sure victory anyway, because that's cheap. Unsporting.

That's why the pokemon games have gotten boring lately; there is barely any challenge, opponents don't switch, they repeat the same (weak) pokemon, and you're overleveled and have a ton of coverage to handle everything. The same principle applies to player battles, only with slightly more unpredictability and switches.

 

[largellama123]

RE: Making Ice-types More Useful

My argument is basic supply and demand; if you grant a fistful of pokemon the ability to hit most types super effectively, and many of them are powerful on their own, it stands to reason people will use them more, leaving other pokemon outside, unable to compete, and narrowing the overall pool of viable choices. If you make 700 pokemon, of which roughly 3/5ths will be just a means to the end of fully evolved pokemon, do you really think making most of the remaining pokemon outclassed is fair?

FAKE EDIT: Nevermind, you clearly do.

But it's not only that it's not fair, it is also that it is cheap. It is easy. Having more coverage makes you more likely to handle whatever your opponent gets, but it also means the same pokemon will be used by everyone; doesn't it get boring? having to use THIS or you don't stand a chance? being in a last stand against hydreigon, with good chances, and having it use a super effective surf? or focus blast?

You say it's a strategy. That the pokemon don't lose weaknesses by gaining coverage. That's true. But it's also irrelevant. If you don't have coverage over your opponent, what do you do? fight without a clear cut advantage? or flight, and get another pokemon to handle it? Removing coverage won't change that at all, it would only move the strategy from "what coverage can I give to my pokemon to kill any type of opponent?" to "how can my pokemon hold their own against any type of opponent?". it's true that no team would get perfect coverage this way. Perfect. That's how it should be. You shouldn't get a sure victory anyway, because that's cheap. Unsporting.

That's why the pokemon games have gotten boring lately; there is barely any challenge, opponents don't switch, they repeat the same (weak) pokemon, and you're overleveled and have a ton of coverage to handle everything. The same principle applies to player battles, only with slightly more unpredictability and switches.

You do have a basis for your argument when you say that seeing the same pokemon over and over again competitively is boring and it starts to repeat itself. However, the reason people use them is because it works. Your arguing that because a pokemon is really good and has a wide move pool, people will use it more often. Of course they'll use it more often because it's what works. I do get tired of seeing Greninjas on teams, even though I have one too, but it just doesn't make sense to say that getting rid of TMs or narrowing the move pool of pokemon would work either. Then, once you put out a dragon type, and you know it can only know moves by leveling up/of its type, then you can put out a fairy or ice, confident that'll you'll win. That would make battles more repetitive than what it is now! Type-match ups would be your ticket to victory right away; by adding TMs and pokemon that can learn many moves, then things start to get challenging. I made this point before, but I'll stress it again; THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A POKEMON THAT CAN BEAT ALL OTHER TYPES! No team is perfect. People constantly create strategies and counter-strategies, making the game exciting because your always going to face a challenge; I usually want to repeat battles with opponents to see if I made mistakes or my team just couldn't handle the opponent's. There is no sound solution to these types of problems, but that's why there are counter-strategies. When Smogon banned Mega Kangaskhan, for example, it was because of it's OP parental bond ability. I myself was sweeped by only a Kangaskhan, but that doesn't mean it's unbeatable. By making many pokemon have large move pools, then there is always a way to fight back. There was never a pokemon battle that was unfair because of a pokemon that could know multiple types of moves.