Fairies and the Fairy Type: Why Fairies aren't a bad idea for a type - Page 9

Page 9 of 10 FirstFirst ... 78910 LastLast
Results 121 to 135 of 146
Like Tree118Likes

Thread: Fairies and the Fairy Type: Why Fairies aren't a bad idea for a type

  1. #121
    So what's your wish? Yato's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Gender
    Male
    Location
    Anywhere
    Posts
    6,671
    Blog Entries
    435

    Follow Yato on Tumblr

    Default Re: Fairies and the Fairy Type: Why Fairies aren't a bad idea for a type

    Quote Originally Posted by Zeta View Post
    I'm not saying 100% of the effort should be focused on top level gameplay, but given that this is Game Freak, we're not getting a game that's being developed extensively with competitive gameplay in mind every step of the way. For them to take such a drastic measure as introducing a new type for the primary stated purpose of nerfing something that's fine at higher level gameplay does not sit well with me. Especially when not only does this nerf the currently powerful but balanced (at higher level) five competitive dragons, it hits the rest of the Dragons who struggle hard. It doesn't seem to me like Dragons are so unbeatable at a low level of gameplay that this needed to be done. However, I do not have the greatest perspective of low level gameplay, so I concede that I might be wrong here. I've never really heard complaints about Dragons before, even from lower level and casual players, but then again I interact with the top 10% or so more than I do with the bottom 90% combined.
    Just from anecdotal evidence coming from someone living in the southern United States - there was going to be a semi-competitive/semi-casual Pokemon battling scene at the local state college. This organization's formation was nixed because the scene devolved into "whoever has the fastest dragon with Dragon Dance/Outrage Combo" wins. With the occasional upset from a well put-together Mamoswine. But even then it just formed a triangle of Mamoswine, Dragons and Mamoswine counters. If 18-24 year olds are struggling with dragons, at least here, I can't imagine how difficult it is for the game's target audience of 10-15 year olds. Dragon may be balanced at the absolute highest tier, but the combination of Dragon's strengths (only Steel-types resist Outrage, resistance to several major offensive types, most are demi-legendaries, only vulnerable to itself and Ice-types and 99% of Ice-types are ridiculously weak) all add up to a problem that's been building for a while since so many dragons were added to the game.
    Which makes the fairy-type all the more necessary AND a good idea for nerfing dragons :D It's time for those godly dragons to step down a tier and make room for everyone else

    Masuda himself said fairies were added to nerf dragons. It's the truth, so don't complain, dragons. You've had the time of your lives for 15+ years. Let other types get some spotlight
    Last edited by Yato; 19th June 2013 at 09:20 PM.
    Green Zubat likes this.

  2. #122
    The Troll Mokoniki's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Gender
    Female
    Location
    Limbo
    Posts
    943

    Follow Mokoniki on Tumblr Visit Mokoniki's Youtube Channel

    Default Re: Fairies and the Fairy Type: Why Fairies aren't a bad idea for a type

    Quote Originally Posted by Latias418 View Post
    I couldn't help but scoff at that first paragraph. Pokemon is not a hardcore competitive gaming franchise. It is something that is meant to appeal to everyone. Forgive me if I am generalizing, but you are part of the minority here. You should think about this from a casual standpoint, as most of the people that play this game are just here for the monsters and getting to explore the new gaming world.
    I am perfectly aware that I am part of a minority, and that Pokemon is not developed with hardcore competitive gaming in mind. That being said, a huge chunk of the casual playerbase probably doesn't care about balance all that much. The highly competitive players are generally the ones it affects most, after all, as they spend the most time focused around it. Again, I'm not saying 100% of the balance should be focused around high level gameplay, but despite us being a minority the balance for us should still be considered carefully given that it's most important to us.

    You have to consider that aside from us, most of those who play Pokemon are just little kids who don't really have a very large grasp of battling strategies. At the "highest level of play", Dragons may not be an issue, but on lower levels they are. Dragons resist most of the commonly used Pokemon types. If you don't have a Steel type on your team, which is the only type that resists Dragon, or an Ice or Dragon type on your team to deal with them offensively, you are pretty much screwed. I'm pretty sure I'm not the only one that has seen a Garchomp, Kingdra, or Haxorus on someone's team and just gone "Oh, dear God why?" Every fully evolved Dragon, that is not Altaria or legendary, is at the top of the food chain in these games and are very hard to deal with on lower competitive levels because they strike fast and deal lots of damage. Adding the Fairy type is a good way to balance out the Dragon type on lower levels of play.
    I have considered this, but I just did not think that Dragons were unstoppable at a lower level. As I said earlier in my post in reply to another user, though, I don't have the greatest perspective on low level play, so I am pretty willing to accept that I've been wrong in this regard.

    I think it is a very intriguing idea for the new type to be added. And, for someone like yourself who seems very into the competitive scene, it could make for some interesting new strategies don't you think?
    The metagame changes completely with every new generation - there won't be a lack of new strategies, so nerfing some things that are powerful but balanced at my level of play (while also nerfing even more things that are already underpowered) isn't exactly what I'm interested in.

    ---

    I suppose my perspective as a top-level player lead to a major bias. I apologise if I came off as condescending towards lower level / casual players. I should not have said that your input on balance didn't matter if you weren't a highly skilled player - that is obviously not true.
    Regarding your first paragraph, while that is true, focusing on the hardcore gaming crowd even a little tends to be what kills franchises when they were never intended to be hardcore in the first place. If you would like an example, may I suggest the somewhat recent SoulCalibur V? While that game was somewhat loved by critics, almost every fan that was not into the hardcore gaming scene hated it because it had such little single player content compared to its previous installments, and some of what it did have was pretty hard for anyone that was not a casual player.

    Regarding the second, Dragons are not exactly unstoppable on lower tiers with the proper strategy. But, whenever I tried to get into competitive online battling, and someone whipped out a Garchomp or some similarly strong Dragon type, I always lost. I eventually found myself forced to get a Pokemon that could counter it so I wasn't losing every time a Dragon stepped up to the plate. Not to mention, Dragon is the only type that's getting Pokemon with stats powerful enough to consider it "psuedo legendary", with Tyranitar and Metagross being the only exceptions.

    Regarding the third, until some more Pokemon are released, at this point I really don't think the fairy type as a whole will effect Dragon usage that much. If anything, with Gardevoir and some others being revealed as part fairy any other Pokemon that receives Fairy as a secondary type from a previous generation will probably be seeing more usage in the Gen VI metagame. Not that Gardevoir wasn't being used before, but I think you catch my drift. :P

    "My hobbies include staring at hot asian men, crying over hot asian men, and shipping hot asian men with other hot asian men~"
    Quotes stolen from tumblr. Claims: Zhong Hui, Xu Shu, Sewddle, Protect, Sitrus Berry, Max Repel, and Sap Sipper

  3. #123
    Registered User Stratelier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    2,258

    Default Re: Fairies and the Fairy Type: Why Fairies aren't a bad idea for a type

    Quote Originally Posted by Latias418 View Post
    This is exactly the motivation: it's not that the game is unbalanced, it's that you aren't skilled enough to deal with the challenges you're facing. Your motivation is to get better so that you can overcome the challenge. By losing to something that it unfair at a lower skill level, you are encouraged to try to find solutions to your problem, and in the process you become a better player.
    But if the challenge is too high and punishing, the player loses hope of overcoming it and may simply give up/walk away, in which case not only does the player (obviously) lose, the game loses too.

    I'm not saying 100% of the effort should be focused on top level gameplay, but given that this is Game Freak, we're not getting a game that's being developed extensively with competitive gameplay in mind every step of the way.
    That's right -- Pokemon is first and foremost a single-player RPG and the (quite popular) competitive multiplayer is a side feature. To which end I sometimes think that the "Lv.50 All" rule needs to prohibit certain Pokemon species who don't actually evolve by that level. It is good to have all Pokemon levels scaled to the same playing field, but scaling a Pokemon's level down eliminates the fact that in single player, certain species just don't exist before level X. If in single player you can't challenge the E4's Lv.50-range Pokemon with a Lv.50 Dragonite or Hydreigon on your team, why are you allowed to challenge live human players with one?

  4. #124
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Gender
    Female
    Posts
    16

    Default Re: Fairies and the Fairy Type: Why Fairies aren't a bad idea for a type

    Don't try to sound realistic because you aren't. Dragons unbalance the game in all levels of gameplay.
    If a person tries to enter a higher level of gameplay this person will be forced to use a dragon or something else specifically to counter you. This isn't fun. We want to be able to battle on Wi-fi too, with variety, etc.
    I honestly can't figure out what "don't try to sound realistic" means.

    Dragons don't unbalance the game in all levels of gameplay, and that's where you're wrong. High-level gameplay is not about using/going out of your way to counter Dragons. You obviously have to keep them in mind when building your team because they are a threat, but that's something that very obviously applies to everything that's powerful, and Dragons are not are the forefront of that list. Dragons certainly aren't stifling variety in high-level gameplay at all.

    Regarding your first paragraph, while that is true, focusing on the hardcore gaming crowd even a little tends to be what kills franchises when they were never intended to be hardcore in the first place. If you would like an example, may I suggest the somewhat recent SoulCalibur V? While that game was somewhat loved by critics, almost every fan that was not into the hardcore gaming scene hated it because it had such little single player content compared to its previous installments, and some of what it did have was pretty hard for anyone that was not a casual player.
    Nintendo / GF has already been supporting the competitive gaming community here and there. Pokemon isn't really in any danger of the casual or singeplayer aspects being neglected.

    Not to mention, Dragon is the only type that's getting Pokemon with stats powerful enough to consider it "psuedo legendary", with Tyranitar and Metagross being the only exceptions.
    There's still only four pseudo-legendary Dragons, but yeah, Dragons are being specifically selected for the task. That there are four powerhouse Dragons doesn't justify nerfing every Dragon unless they are seriously stifling casual / low level gameplay.

    Regarding the third, until some more Pokemon are released, at this point I really don't think the fairy type as a whole will effect Dragon usage that much. If anything, with Gardevoir and some others being revealed as part fairy any other Pokemon that receives Fairy as a secondary type from a previous generation will probably be seeing more usage in the Gen VI metagame. Not that Gardevoir wasn't being used before, but I think you catch my drift. :P
    So far we haven't seen enough of the battling side of the Fairy type to really judge that yet - we don't know the Fairy type moves, we don't know the stats of the new Fairies, etc. Given that their stated goal was to nerf Dragons, I'm pretty sure we'll see some stuff revealed that will stifle Dragons. Otherwise, Nintendo have failed.

    But if the challenge is too high and punishing, the player loses hope of overcoming it and may simply give up/walk away, in which case not only does the player (obviously) lose, the game loses too.
    Sure, I agree with that. Again, the problem is my lack of perspective - I simply don't know just how large of a problem Dragons can be for low level / casual because I'm not low level / casual. If it really is that hard for them to deal with, at least without stifling variety (as a previous poster indicated by his local semi-competitive metagame devolving into Mamo / Dragons / Mamo Counters), then it is of course an issue.

    If in single player you can't challenge the E4's Lv.50-range Pokemon with a Lv.50 Dragonite or Hydreigon on your team, why are you allowed to challenge live human players with one?
    You can't challenge the Elite Four's team with a Lv. 50 Dragonite because you're allowed to go one better - you can challenge them with a Lv. 70 Dragonite instead and sweep through everything easily. That aside, this is a very limited clause that only affects a couple of Pokemon, and it would prevent people from using their favourite Pokemon on a technicality, which I don't think is something GF wants. Lv. 50 All is just a minor balancing mechanic to enable fair battles between people who don't have Lv. 100 Pokemon, and levels in-game aren't about competitive balance at all.

  5. #125
    The Troll Mokoniki's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Gender
    Female
    Location
    Limbo
    Posts
    943

    Follow Mokoniki on Tumblr Visit Mokoniki's Youtube Channel

    Default Re: Fairies and the Fairy Type: Why Fairies aren't a bad idea for a type

    Quote Originally Posted by Latias418 View Post
    Regarding your first paragraph, while that is true, focusing on the hardcore gaming crowd even a little tends to be what kills franchises when they were never intended to be hardcore in the first place. If you would like an example, may I suggest the somewhat recent SoulCalibur V? While that game was somewhat loved by critics, almost every fan that was not into the hardcore gaming scene hated it because it had such little single player content compared to its previous installments, and some of what it did have was pretty hard for anyone that was not a casual player.
    Nintendo / GF has already been supporting the competitive gaming community here and there. Pokemon isn't really in any danger of the casual or singeplayer aspects being neglected.

    Not to mention, Dragon is the only type that's getting Pokemon with stats powerful enough to consider it "psuedo legendary", with Tyranitar and Metagross being the only exceptions.
    There's still only four pseudo-legendary Dragons, but yeah, Dragons are being specifically selected for the task. That there are four powerhouse Dragons doesn't justify nerfing every Dragon unless they are seriously stifling casual / low level gameplay.

    Regarding the third, until some more Pokemon are released, at this point I really don't think the fairy type as a whole will effect Dragon usage that much. If anything, with Gardevoir and some others being revealed as part fairy any other Pokemon that receives Fairy as a secondary type from a previous generation will probably be seeing more usage in the Gen VI metagame. Not that Gardevoir wasn't being used before, but I think you catch my drift. :P
    So far we haven't seen enough of the battling side of the Fairy type to really judge that yet - we don't know the Fairy type moves, we don't know the stats of the new Fairies, etc. Given that their stated goal was to nerf Dragons, I'm pretty sure we'll see some stuff revealed that will stifle Dragons. Otherwise, Nintendo have failed.
    Regarding the first, that is quite true.

    Regarding the second, I really don't think it's a stretch to say Nintendo will continue adding powerful Dragon psuedo legendaries, considering that they have done so every generation, with the exception of Gen II. If they continue to do that, I think the nerf is pretty necessary.

    Regarding the third, that is quite true as well.

    "My hobbies include staring at hot asian men, crying over hot asian men, and shipping hot asian men with other hot asian men~"
    Quotes stolen from tumblr. Claims: Zhong Hui, Xu Shu, Sewddle, Protect, Sitrus Berry, Max Repel, and Sap Sipper

  6. #126
    Registered User Stratelier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    2,258

    Default Re: Fairies and the Fairy Type: Why Fairies aren't a bad idea for a type

    Quote Originally Posted by Latias418 View Post
    You can't challenge the Elite Four's team with a Lv. 50 Dragonite because you're allowed to go one better - you can challenge them with a Lv. 70 Dragonite instead and sweep through everything easily. That aside, this is a very limited clause that only affects a couple of Pokemon, and it would prevent people from using their favourite Pokemon on a technicality, which I don't think is something GF wants. Lv. 50 All is just a minor balancing mechanic to enable fair battles between people who don't have Lv. 100 Pokemon, and levels in-game aren't about competitive balance at all.
    Levels are different in single player than in multi. Sure, they dictate a Pokemon's stats and all, but they also dictate more than half of all Pokemon evolutions. Which, coincidentally, you only see the effects of in single player.

    (And yes, you can totally grind for challenging the E4 in single player. But if you seriously need to be 20 levels higher to beat them, you're doing something wrong.)

  7. #127
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Gender
    Female
    Posts
    16

    Default Re: Fairies and the Fairy Type: Why Fairies aren't a bad idea for a type

    Regarding the second, I really don't think it's a stretch to say Nintendo will continue adding powerful Dragon psuedo legendaries, considering that they have done so every generation, with the exception of Gen II. If they continue to do that, I think the nerf is pretty necessary.
    It's not a stretch that Dragons will continue to fill the pseudo-legendary slot, but if Dragons don't need a nerf as they currently are but will if more and more powerful Dragons keep being made - Nintendo could have just stopped using Dragons as the pseudo-legendaries, and not nerfed the ones that already exist. Tyranitar was a massively successful design and is, in my opinion, one of the most interesting Pokemon from a competitive perspective. Metagross was also a successful design. I would love to see more pseudo-legendaries of other types.

    But if you seriously need to be 20 levels higher to beat them, you're doing something wrong.)
    That's not what I said. My point was simply that you said a Lv. 50 Dragonite couldn't be used against the Elite Four, but you can just use a higher level Dragonite (55+) instead. In Lv. 50 All, you can't use Dragonite at all, no matter what, under your clause, so it's kind of a silly comparison.

  8. #128
    The Troll Mokoniki's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Gender
    Female
    Location
    Limbo
    Posts
    943

    Follow Mokoniki on Tumblr Visit Mokoniki's Youtube Channel

    Default Re: Fairies and the Fairy Type: Why Fairies aren't a bad idea for a type

    Quote Originally Posted by Latias418 View Post
    Regarding the second, I really don't think it's a stretch to say Nintendo will continue adding powerful Dragon psuedo legendaries, considering that they have done so every generation, with the exception of Gen II. If they continue to do that, I think the nerf is pretty necessary.
    It's not a stretch that Dragons will continue to fill the pseudo-legendary slot, but if Dragons don't need a nerf as they currently are but will if more and more powerful Dragons keep being made - Nintendo could have just stopped using Dragons as the pseudo-legendaries, and not nerfed the ones that already exist. Tyranitar was a massively successful design and is, in my opinion, one of the most interesting Pokemon from a competitive perspective. Metagross was also a successful design. I would love to see more pseudo-legendaries of other types.
    The thing is, Nintendo probably won't stop using Dragons to fill the pseudo-legendary slot because they are so popular. Tyranitar and Metagross are popular as well yes, but not as much as the Dragons because they have something those two don't. Speed. In all honesty, I believe the only reason Tyranitar and Metagross were made pseudo-legendaries was because their typings were new and introduced in Gen II, even though Metagross didn't exist until the generation after. I feel they wanted to show the capabilities of the new types. I would love if they made more pseudo-legendaries of other types as well and it could be possible that we could receive a Fairy type one with the type being new and all.

    "My hobbies include staring at hot asian men, crying over hot asian men, and shipping hot asian men with other hot asian men~"
    Quotes stolen from tumblr. Claims: Zhong Hui, Xu Shu, Sewddle, Protect, Sitrus Berry, Max Repel, and Sap Sipper

  9. #129
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Gender
    Female
    Posts
    16

    Default Re: Fairies and the Fairy Type: Why Fairies aren't a bad idea for a type

    Tyranitar and Metagross are popular as well yes, but not as much as the Dragons because they have something those two don't. Speed.
    From my perspective as a high level player, this statement isn't true at all. Tyranitar has always been FAR more used than any of the Dragons, and was the center of the metagame in both ADV and DPP. There was really no Pokemon of greater importance (in standard competitive battles) in either generation than Tyranitar. He's no longer the center of the entire metagame in fifth generation, but he's still one of the most dominant forces around, and is still more popular than any of the Dragons. Metagross, likewise, was the second most-important Pokemon in third generation, and was still important in fourth generation, although he fell off his pedestal in fifth.

    Maybe it's different for casual players, but the point is that the Dragons aren't universally better (especially not for such a simple reason as speed), and are in fact worse at a higher level. Tyranitar is, in my opinion, the best Pokemon that's ever been made for competitive gameplay. Not my favourite Pokemon or even close, mind you. Setting aside the whole balance discussion, I really want to see pseudo-legendaries that aren't Dragons anyways. They're way, way more interesting than the Dragons, and better, and more popular among high level players.

  10. #130
    The Troll Mokoniki's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Gender
    Female
    Location
    Limbo
    Posts
    943

    Follow Mokoniki on Tumblr Visit Mokoniki's Youtube Channel

    Default Re: Fairies and the Fairy Type: Why Fairies aren't a bad idea for a type

    Quote Originally Posted by Latias418 View Post
    Tyranitar and Metagross are popular as well yes, but not as much as the Dragons because they have something those two don't. Speed.
    From my perspective as a high level player, this statement isn't true at all. Tyranitar has always been FAR more used than any of the Dragons, and was the center of the metagame in both ADV and DPP. There was really no Pokemon of greater importance (in standard competitive battles) in either generation than Tyranitar. He's no longer the center of the entire metagame in fifth generation, but he's still one of the most dominant forces around, and is still more popular than any of the Dragons. Metagross, likewise, was the second most-important Pokemon in third generation, and was still important in fourth generation, although he fell off his pedestal in fifth.

    Maybe it's different for casual players, but the point is that the Dragons aren't universally better (especially not for such a simple reason as speed), and are in fact worse at a higher level. Tyranitar is, in my opinion, the best Pokemon that's ever been made for competitive gameplay. Not my favourite Pokemon or even close, mind you. Setting aside the whole balance discussion, I really want to see pseudo-legendaries that aren't Dragons anyways. They're way, way more interesting than the Dragons, and better, and more popular among high level players.
    On lower levels, I hardly ever see Tyranitar. Mainly because all the Dragons serve Tyranitar's purpose but better because of the speed. Also because you have to make a team to deal with Tyranitar's Sand Stream ability, lest you want to lose health. But I'm a very casual player anyway. I only use Pokemon that I like and just stick them on a team.

    "My hobbies include staring at hot asian men, crying over hot asian men, and shipping hot asian men with other hot asian men~"
    Quotes stolen from tumblr. Claims: Zhong Hui, Xu Shu, Sewddle, Protect, Sitrus Berry, Max Repel, and Sap Sipper

  11. #131
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Gender
    Female
    Posts
    16

    Default Re: Fairies and the Fairy Type: Why Fairies aren't a bad idea for a type

    Mainly because all the Dragons serve Tyranitar's purpose but better because of the speed.
    Tyranitar's dominance stems, partially, from it's completely unique role as a sandstorm enabler (well, Hippowdon exists now, but still). No Dragon could ever fulfill that role. Of course, that's not the only reason it's good - it would be a very strong Pokemon without Sand Stream - but it's one of the best abilities in the game. It can perform many other roles, too - Tyranitar is one of the more versatile Pokemon in the game, part of why I find it so interesting and good for competitive gameplay. The pseudo-legendary Dragons can never match up to its versatility.

  12. #132
    The Troll Mokoniki's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Gender
    Female
    Location
    Limbo
    Posts
    943

    Follow Mokoniki on Tumblr Visit Mokoniki's Youtube Channel

    Default Re: Fairies and the Fairy Type: Why Fairies aren't a bad idea for a type

    Quote Originally Posted by Latias418 View Post
    Mainly because all the Dragons serve Tyranitar's purpose but better because of the speed.
    Tyranitar's dominance stems, partially, from it's completely unique role as a sandstorm enabler (well, Hippowdon exists now, but still). No Dragon could ever fulfill that role. Of course, that's not the only reason it's good - it would be a very strong Pokemon without Sand Stream - but it's one of the best abilities in the game. It can perform many other roles, too - Tyranitar is one of the more versatile Pokemon in the game, part of why I find it so interesting and good for competitive gameplay. The pseudo-legendary Dragons can never match up to its versatility.
    I suppose, but I wouldn't really know. High competitive play isn't really my thing, but I know of Tyranitar's versatility. I have used it on one occasion. :) But regardless, I still think it's a bit early to be judging the Fairy type so negatively.

    "My hobbies include staring at hot asian men, crying over hot asian men, and shipping hot asian men with other hot asian men~"
    Quotes stolen from tumblr. Claims: Zhong Hui, Xu Shu, Sewddle, Protect, Sitrus Berry, Max Repel, and Sap Sipper

  13. #133
    I eat eggs in users' sigs rafaelluik's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Gender
    Male
    Location
    Rio de Janeiro
    Posts
    223

    Default Re: Fairies and the Fairy Type: Why Fairies aren't a bad idea for a type

    Quote Originally Posted by Latias418 View Post
    That there are four powerhouse Dragons doesn't justify nerfing every Dragon unless they are seriously stifling casual / low level gameplay.
    You're missing the point people would still be able to stick to using these dragons after new hypothetical less powerful ones are introduced.
    Dragons have too few weakness compared to other Pokémon and unfair access to more powerful moves. Fact.

    Don't ignore Zeta's real life example.
    Last edited by rafaelluik; 20th June 2013 at 08:39 PM.

  14. #134
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Gender
    Female
    Posts
    16

    Default Re: Fairies and the Fairy Type: Why Fairies aren't a bad idea for a type

    I didn't ignore his anecdote, nor did I miss your point - I've already discussed the point, which you apparently completely ignored.

  15. #135
    Fairy type master. Lyra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Gender
    Female
    Location
    Sydney , Australia
    Posts
    71

    Default Re: Fairies and the Fairy Type: Why Fairies aren't a bad idea for a type

    Quote Originally Posted by Latias418 View Post
    Mainly because all the Dragons serve Tyranitar's purpose but better because of the speed.
    Tyranitar's dominance stems, partially, from it's completely unique role as a sandstorm enabler (well, Hippowdon exists now, but still). No Dragon could ever fulfill that role. Of course, that's not the only reason it's good - it would be a very strong Pokemon without Sand Stream - but it's one of the best abilities in the game. It can perform many other roles, too - Tyranitar is one of the more versatile Pokemon in the game, part of why I find it so interesting and good for competitive gameplay. The pseudo-legendary Dragons can never match up to its versatility.
    Well don't you worry. There are rumors of Fairy being super effective against the Dark type.
    Peanut Butter Jelly Time

Page 9 of 10 FirstFirst ... 78910 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •