XY What new Types would you like to see in X and Y?

Why would Ancient have any of those strengths/weaknesses? Like none of them make particular sense, unlike every other type.

Or maybe the fossils are Rock types because they are able to use Rock type moves? Over time they eventually became Rock types for survival or just because they became used to using Rock type moves.
 
Can any Sound-Type fan explain how the Sound Type would work? Pokemon Types are elements, whereas Sound-letting out roars/screeches- is more of an aspect. Take Seismitoad for example. It's clearly a Water type and clearly a Ground type. The fact it can use vibrations to damage its opponents is an aspect of it.
 
It uses vibrations as a means of its name, more or less. Siesmi- usually refers to the study of tectonic plates, or the movement thereof.
Sound isn't a good type. What would resist it, or what would it be strong against?
 
Metalizard said:
Keeper of Night said:
Armaldo lived on land, only Anorith lived in the water, so I don't see why Armaldo would be water type at all. - The anomalocaris (the basis for the Armaldo line) lived in the sea. End of discussion.
Bagon is a baby dragon thing, the only reason it has it's hard head is because it would be too plain without it. Plus they can make dragons however they want, since there is no real animal to base it off of.- WTF? Bagon has a hard head because it would be too plain without it? Do you think what you said actually makes sense? You know, Bagon has a rock-hard head (it even has the Rock Head ability) because it is part of its concept. It dreams about being able to fly one day, so it jumps off cliffs trying to fly (in vain), and also headbutts boulders in frustration. If it didn't have a hard head it would break its skull and neck and die right after the first try to fly or headbutt. As a Salamence, it doesn't have the rock head anymore since now it can fly.
Cranidos is a dinosaur, something that actually existed, and it uses it's 'rock hard head' too often to not be rock type. - So, just because Bagon is based on a mythical creature and cranidos is based on a creature that actually existed, they can't be compared (specially when the mythical creature and the actual creature are so similar)? They're part of the same fictional universe, they sure can be compared... And yes, refering to what you said above, they can make dragons however they want (even though that has nothing to do with the subject here, but since you mentioned it...), to the point they even make dragon-types based on dinosaurs...
Click to expand...

In summary... facepalm...

EDIT: btw, even though Bagon is a baby dragon, the rock hard head part of its concept comes from the pachycephalosaurus, the same dinosaur Cranidos is based on... And that's my point, if Cranidos wasn't a fossil pokémon, it would be a Normal-type (or maybe even Dragon-type - again, look at Haxorus) dinosaur, with the ability Rock Head, because of its rock-hard head (its hard skull, you know, made of bones - which is the case for the actual dinosaur) not because it actually had a rock head...
Click to expand...

lol

You say Armaldo is based on a water dwelling creature, and state that it should be rock/water.
Then you point out that pokemon can do whatever they want since they are all part of the same fictional universe.
Armaldo's pokedex entry states it went on land after evolving, therfore it wouldn't be water ever.

Then you say Bagon uses it's head to hit boulders in frustration, since it would break it's skull without the covering.
All I said is it would look too plain because, since it is again part of the fictional universe of pokemon, it could break boulders without any covering at all.

And please...how could Cranidos be anything other than rock? Look at it! It has all the right coloring and features to be a rock type, yet you still say it could have been either normal or dragon. If it was ever a different type, it would be at least part rock type.
 
Well, Anorith and Armaldo do both get Swift Swim. So I guess they could potentially have both been Water/Bug.
 
Here I go again...

Keeper of Night said:
lol

You say Armaldo is based on a water dwelling creature, and state that it should be rock/water. - No, I said it could, not that it should, It's a bit different...
Then you point out that pokemon can do whatever they want since they are all part of the same fictional universe. - Actually, it was you who pointed that out... What I said is that Cranidos and Bagon can be fairly compared with each other...
Armaldo's pokedex entry states it went on land after evolving, therfore it wouldn't be water ever. - True, they made it more land-walker. But It doesn't negate its marine basis and relation with water... like the person above said, it even has swift swim...

Then you say Bagon uses it's head to hit boulders in frustration, since it would break it's skull without the covering.
All I said is it would look too plain because, since it is again part of the fictional universe of pokemon, it could break boulders without any covering at all.It's a fictional universe that still applies common sense for the most part...

And please...how could Cranidos be anything other than rock? Look at it! It has all the right coloring and features to be a rock type, yet you still say it could have been either normal or dragon. If it was ever a different type, it would be at least part rock type.
Click to expand...

Finally, it seems you don't get what I'm saying... I'm not saying Cranidos (or any other fossil pokémon for that matter) should be of a different type other than Rock. It is a fossil Pokémon, of course it has to be part-Rock. My main point is: if Cranidos or actually any fossil pokémon were not fossil pokémon, they would be something other than Rock. period. They would look different, their types would be different, they would, simply put, be different than what they are as current fossil pokémon.
 
Is it okay if I don't really want to see any new typing? I think the game's pretty set as it is. I don't see why some people are like "light!" or "sound!"
 
MistahFuji said:
safariblade said:
Because the current types are already balanced enough. If we added new types now, the ratio of Pokemon of each type would be dumb. We have like, what? 250 water types or something? And then we will add 10 new pokemon of a type? That's silly. And changing a previous pokemon and adding a type doesn't help either, it just complicates things and will make trading pokemon to 6th Gen weird. I haven't even mentioned moves yet. We would have to add a ton of new type moves or change 'roar', 'uproar', 'metal sound', etc to sound-type or whatever and once again it doesn't make any sense and it would confuse things and mess with which moves get STAB, etc, etc, the whole thing would be a huge mess. Pokemon is not going to want to deal with that and I don't blame them.
Click to expand...

Listen to the wise one. Over-complication for game freak. New types aren't going to happen. Stop trying to make them happen.
Click to expand...

I saw his post and had to make this:

35461255.jpg
 
Re: RE: What new types would you like to see in X and Y?

Gr8Ampharos said:
MistahFuji said:
Listen to the wise one. Over-complication for game freak. New types aren't going to happen. Stop trying to make them happen.
Click to expand...

I saw his post and had to make this:

35461255.jpg
Click to expand...

10/10 best image of the year.

Sent from my ADR6300 using Tapatalk 2
 
MistahFuji said:
Listen to the wise one. Over-complication for game freak. New types aren't going to happen. Stop trying to make them happen.
Click to expand...

I don't think that we'll have a new type this gen, but maybe, in Gen XVII, when there are more than 2000 Pokémon of the same 17 types and its combinations, maybe they'll make a new one. Pokémon is all about change, you should never say never ;D But you can say, it is very unlikely, especially at this moment...
 
Probably this has already been said before, but still...
The type chart is big, and obviously not very balanced (see Poison, Grass, Dragon, Steel etc.). The question is, would a new type somehow balance things out? I think that whether a new type will be made or not is largely dependent on the answer of this question. Sure, Nintendo and GF might not make the games based on competitive battling, but they know that's an important aspect appealing to many players, so they almost certainly consider it. Thus, if a new type will completely screw up the poor type chart, it won't be made. And in my opinion, a new type would do just that. For me, a revamp of the already existing types seems more possible. Then again, all these are just an opinion.
 
ChillBill said:
Probably this has already been said before, but still...
The type chart is big, and obviously not very balanced (see Poison, Grass, Dragon, Steel etc.). The question is, would a new type somehow balance things out? I think that whether a new type will be made or not is largely dependent on the answer of this question. Sure, Nintendo and GF might not make the games based on competitive battling, but they know that's an important aspect appealing to many players, so they almost certainly consider it. Thus, if a new type will completely screw up the poor type chart, it won't be made. And in my opinion, a new type would do just that. For me, a revamp of the already existing types seems more possible. Then again, all these are just an opinion.
Click to expand...

Yup,

A new type would worsen it at least as much as it would potentially help.

In other words, if they wanted to improve the balance in the type chart, it would be easier through minor adjustments with the current 17 than by adding a 18th.
 
No new type plz.
I'm totally happy with 17 we have now. :)
If they'd want to balance anything they'd probably
work on resistances and weaknesses of the current types.
 
I'd like a new type. Don't care what it is as long as it's something cool. It's been over 15 years, and tweaking the game a tiny bit can't be too bad. Don't want it to completely mess up the previous generation of Pokemon but if GF wants to hype things up a bit they might want to add a new type.

Seriously if Sylveon ends up just being a boring old Normal type that is a big middle finger to the face.

I am getting kind of tired of playing the same game over and over again, so let's see some new ideas!
 
I'd love a new type, honestly. But I can't think of any except Light/Fairy. It'd be weak to Dark and strong against Ghost or something
 
Takuto said:
I'd love a new type, honestly. But I can't think of any except Light/Fairy. It'd be weak to Dark and strong against Ghost or something
Click to expand...
Light would be OK, but I don't like the idea of Fairy. It would most likely be fairy shaped Pokemon, and they haven't based Pokemon on shape (that I can think of).
 
I think Light type would only work with bioluminescent pokemon. I made a quick list of possible pokemon for Light and Sound types:

. jellyfish
. squid
. moth
. firefly
. star
. alien
. sunflower or other type of flower
. angelic looking pokemon

A light type would probably work best with the many sea creatures that make their own light and odd psychic types.

. bat
. dolphin
. owl (certain kinds also use echolocation like bats and dolphins)
. banshee
. frogs
. howler monkey (loudest animal)
. whale (maybe an evolution for the dolphin)

There are actually plenty of pokemon that rely on sound and there are already plenty of moves that work well with it.

Light types would use moves like Hyper Beam, Solar Beam, and certain fire and electric type moves.
Sound types would use moves like Hyper Voice and Screech.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top