• 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.

What new starter trio types would you like to see?

ipromisetoraichu

New Member
Joined
Feb 8, 2009
Messages
11
Reaction score
0
I did a bunch of the math and I only found a few that were as compatible as the original, i.e., have resistances to the types they're super-effective against in a circle. There are of course plenty of combinations if you're only considering super-effectiveness.

Fighting—>Flying—>Rock
Fire—>Steel—>Rock
Ground—>Poison—>Grass
Grass—>Rock—>Flying

What do you think? Personally, I'd like to see Fighting/Flying/Rock because they're none of the original three types. Tough because rock resists normal moves, though. Maybe Fighting/Flying/Ice?
 
That last one wouldn't work because Fighting doesn't resist Ice. I think Fighting/Flying/Rock would work the best, but it'd be harder to make those Pokémon attractive to mass audiences. They'll probably stick with Grass/Fire/Water, and I'm cool with that.
 
Well, I doubt they'll ever make a pure Flying-type Pokémon, and I'm quite glad with that. Grass/Fire/Water has worked very well, and starting out with a Rock- or a Steel-type would make the beginning of the game far too easy.
 
Dark->Psychic->Fighting
:)

Same here, although not all the starters if many have pure final forms
Feraligtr, Blastoise, Typhlosion, Sceptile *Meganium?*

I'd like to see a Water flying that can fly cause i believe Gyarados and Mantine can't fly
Also Fire Psychic and Grass Electric
 
That one could be very cool, but Dark has an immunity to Psychic, not just a resistance, so that'd be pretty lopsided.

This. I really don't see why everyone is obsessed with that lineup.

Now, what would be an interesting lineup would be Fighting, Flying, and Rock. It works nicely, as they're all physical based for the most part (physical/special split or not, a lot of moves are still their original type). Plus, it'd be good to see a pure Flying type for once. Of course, it has the same odds of happening as Dark/Psychic/Fighting: zero.
 
Fire/Grass/Water will probably always be the starter 3.
I think they should add another to make 4 and put an electric one up there.
 
Fire/Grass/Water will probably always be the starter 3.
I think they should add another to make 4 and put an electric one up there.
The reason 3 is used is because they want something that loops.
Water resists fire, but is beaten by grass; Fire resists grass, but is beten by water etc.
Its like Paper Scissors Rock, add forth one and it wrecks the game.
Noob said:
Wow eye'em liek, haxing wiht bom!

Having four wrecks it. Then you would end up with a square like this:

Type A -> Type B
^ |
| V
Type D <- Type C

Meaningless diagonals. This means that one type beats one, is defeated by one and is neutral to the other.
This makes it a lot less fun and a whole new pattern would have to be established. Here is what your proposal would look like if we add electric:

Electric -> Water -> Fire
^ ^ |
| | V
-------------Grass

Not only that, but grass only has a resistance to electric, it's not actually Super Effective.

Now, I'm sorry if I offended you, but I like to prove my point.

A good combination would be Grass/Rock Water/Steel Fire/Electric. See if you can find my logic. (Hint: Steel resists Grass)

Side note: Charts currently don't work, will fix at a later date.
 
I want to see the traditional types again, but with new and interesting subtypes; it would be especially good to see Grass/Dark, Fire/Psychic, and Water/Fighting, so their subtypes form a triangle opposite to the main types.
 
What's wrong with Fire-Water-Grass? Messing with the trio would be like,...umm...evolving pikachu in the series. It's a pillar of the pokemon games, it's just not supposed to be messed with. Besides, no-one has to actually use the starters. I've given up on my lv.100 torterra for a lv.50 aerodactyl in the battle tower. Whoops, he's rock AND flying.
 
What's wrong with Fire-Water-Grass? Messing with the trio would be like,...umm...evolving pikachu in the series. It's a pillar of the pokemon games, it's just not supposed to be messed with.

I agree with you. There's no point changing them because it's been that way throughout the whole series.

But if I had to choose one, I'd like to see Fighting—>Flying—>Rock. :3
 
My idea would be, keeping to the fire-water-grass starters:

Water/Flying
Grass/Fighting (Get a good one for once)
Fire/Ground

Water/Flying would be super effective against fire and fighting Water/flying moves, grass would be strong against water (or would it? Gyrados is water/flying and I don't think it was) and would it be effective against the fire/ground as its part ground? and fire, effective agains grass.

Now, I always wanted sceptile to be art fighting as it suited it, and breloom is not much of a grass/fighting type if you ask me.
 
What about: Fighting/Rock Psychic/Rock Bug/Rock?

That works, I think...

And it would simultaneously be ''new!'', ''exciting!'', and give purpose to the otherwise unloved Bug type!
 
dark psychic ghost (since dark is kinda good against both they both get side types like fighting bug whadeva dark is neutral about to event em up)
 
My idea would be, keeping to the fire-water-grass starters:

Water/Flying
Grass/Fighting (Get a good one for once)
Fire/Ground

Water/Flying would be super effective against fire and fighting Water/flying moves, grass would be strong against water (or would it? Gyrados is water/flying and I don't think it was) and would it be effective against the fire/ground as its part ground? and fire, effective agains grass.

Now, I always wanted sceptile to be art fighting as it suited it, and breloom is not much of a grass/fighting type if you ask me.

if you change it it would be poliwrath hoppip numel and your way the pokemon are gyrados camerupt and breloom
 
Please note: The thread is from 17 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