• The forums' spoiler embargo for all content from Pokémon Legends: Z-A's Mega Dimension DLC has been lifted! Feel free to talk about the new content from the expansion across the forums without the need of spoiler tabs!

    Please note that this lifted embargo only applies for the forums, and may still be in effect on other Bulbagarden sites.

How Cacneas evolution scheme shouldve been.

A

AceTrainerChristy

Ace Trainer
Joined
May 16, 2011
Messages
85
Reaction score
0
I wish the Pokemon Producers wouldve made Cacnea's evole scheme this way:

Cacnea----> Maractus -----> Cacturne
:banana:
 
Last edited:
Don't you mean Cacturne?
Also, why would Cacturne get smaller?

Just because they are both based on the same desert plant (they are not related to the same type of cactus though) doesn't mean that they should be related, since they don't really look anything like eachother, other than being green and based on castuses.
Cacturne is based on the saguaro cactus while Maractus is based on a prickly pear cactus. Just like Tauros is based on a bull while Bouffalant is based on a buffalo, doesn't make them related.
 
Last edited:
Cacnea (cactus jack o lantern) / Cacturne (cactus scarecrow)

Maractus (happy mexican maraca)

*nope.. does not compliment at all.

And I would want Mawile & Farfetch'd to have evos more than anyone else.
 
I agree with city villain. The Cacnea line and Maractus are based on two completely different things. Not to mention they have completely different themes. Maractus doesn't seem like the STAB sucker punch type.
 
I disagree. Your idea just doesn't seen to make any sense. How would a jacko-lantern like cactus evolve into a mexican dancing cactus with flowers and then evolve into a cactus looking like a scarecrow? 0___0" Sorry, your wish just sounds really weired, and I would hate it if that came true.

Maractus looks good on its own and doesn't need to be related to the Cacnea line. This just shows how in the real world has more than one type of cactus. They can breed though :]
 
Pidgey and Spearow are both based off birds. So one should evolve into the other, right?

Obviously this doesn't make sense -- for the same reason that Maractus and Cacnea's evolution doesn't make sense. You're dealing with two species that are based off of plants in the same group, but are nevertheless different.
 
No way! They look nothing alike...

Besides, GameFreak may add Pre-evos and Evolved forms, but they don't throw things in the middle.
 
Maractus just seems like it's more of Cacturne's girlfriend rather it's pre evolved form so I would say no too, they just wouldn't really fit.
 
Maractus just seems like it's more of Cacturne's girlfriend rather it's pre evolved form
Click to expand...

^^You win some cookies for this.

Really it doesn't make sense, you just have look at them to find that out. One has flowers, is one legged and is sorta happy, whilst the other is pointy, is evil looking and is kinda creepy (still one of my favourites though).
 
I'm reminded when the first artwork of Lilipup came out and I actually saw people upset claiming that Lilipup "should have" been a pre-evolution of Growlithe.
 
Maractus looks different enough that it should have been a branched evolution, if anything. Kind of like how Froslass looks similar to the Snorunt line, but not enough to be a direct evolution or pre-evolution. To be honest, there are a few Pokémon that could easily be related to other, pre-existing evolution chains, but they missed their opportunity by Nintendo's persistence on keeping everything a fresh start. But that's digressing a bit.
 
~ Z ~ said:
This.
And also; Luvdisc needs evo more than Maractus... D:
Click to expand...

I assume you're talking about the similarity to Alomomola? (If not, feel free to correct me and/or elaborate.) I agree, Alomomola or not.

One that I would like to see with an evoution/pre-evo would be Skarmory.
 
Guys, this isn't the place to discuss evolutions/pre-evolutions in general, just Cacnea's. You can discuss so here. (feel free to bump the thread, despite the age of the last post, as long as your post contributes with something)
 
No. Maractus and Cacnea are based on different species of cacti, with different themes as well (Cacnea= spooky, Halloween-themed; Maractus= happy Mexican dancing thing); it would not make a great deal of sense to merge the two lines. It would be like merging Squirtle and Turtwig's lines, or merging Tepig and Spoink's lines (Hey, they're both based on the same animal, so they're one and the same, right?).
 
I don't think this should be true. If you put Maractus after Cacturne it would be like one of the trivia paragraphs of Seviper which is "In the most infamous Pokémon Trainer's Choice, Seviper was incorrectly claimed to be an evolution of Arbok.". Like Seviper, Maractus is a pokémon which does not evolve and is similar to a two stage evolutionary family introduced two generations earlier. Ekans, Arbok and Seviper have all been owned by Jessie maybe Maractus will be owned by James because he has owned a Cacnea.
 
Last edited:
I don't see how this would work as they do not look alike in any way besides being based on a cactus.
 
I think that just because Maractus is also based off of a cactus, it doesn't mean they should be part of the same evolution line. I think they are great as individual pokemon, and should be left as two unique entities rather than grouped together and adding more complication to the pokedex
 
Male Cacnea -> Cacturne
Female Cacnea -> Maractus

That's how I would want if you gonna throw in Maractus. However, I don't like making some Pokémon that could be only one gender. Maybe...
Male Cacnea -> Maractus
Female Cacnea -> Cacturne

Just because it would be fun! :)))))
 
Please note: The thread is from 15 years ago.
Please take the age of this thread into consideration in writing your reply. Depending on what exactly you wanted to say, you may want to consider if it would be better to post a new thread instead.
Back
Top Bottom