dondon151

Bulk Up Blaziken is sooo much better than Swords Dance Blaziken in-game. Bulk Up allows Blaziken to set up against any physical attacker that it's not weak to and some physical attackers that it is weak to. There are much more enemies that Bulk Up allows Blaziken to set up against than Swords Dance. We shouldn't solely consider a Pokemon's "best possible state" because that's only the endpoint. Imagine if you had a terrible family vacation and the end result was that you returned home to your satisfactory daily life; that's not a "good" vacation even though the endpoint was good. A player still has to play through Reborn with his Pokemon in various sub-optimal states, so considering only the "best possible state" ignores most of the game. Froakie, for example, is a lackluster Pokemon until it learns Extrasensory, Grass Knot, and Surf (Ice Beam is no longer learnable), so only the users who ignore ~85% of the current game would rank it in the same tier as Torchic (and even with the benefit of its full movepool, Greninja doesn't trivialize the game to the degree that Blaziken does). Let's not forget that between the levels of 5 and 60, Froakie overall is probably about as good as Squirtle or Totodile, who are bad starters. It does seem like there are many users who realize that Froakie is mediocre for most of the game, so that's a good thing! A starter with a specific ability is easy to get because a player just needs to reset for the ability or use an Ability Capsule that takes a few seconds to obtain. A starter with an egg move requires the player to first find a parent Pokemon with the egg move, breed, and then re-raise the hatched Pokemon to a viable level. One could argue that this Pokemon is no longer the player's starter Pokemon because it's clearly not the Pokemon that the player started out with. This is actually why Bulk Up Blaziken is so good, because it's not a glass cannon on the physical side.

No one picks Tepig because Torchic and Chimchar are better, but Tepig isn't a below average starter. Also I've never really understood the point behind judging a starter Pokemon based on its egg moves. It's your first Pokemon; of course it's not going to have any egg moves.

S tier: Torchic A tier: Bulbasaur Turtwig Chimchar Snivy Fennekin B tier: Everyone else C tier: Squirtle Chikorita Totodile Piplup Pokemon are not ordered within tiers. In general, fire > grass > water and having a set-up move such as Bulk Up or Coil is greatly advantageous. Beyond that are important considerations such as a good movepool and a good offensive stat distribution. A good movepool should have, on top of set-up moves, offensive STAB attacks learned early and useful support moves such as Leech Seed or Will-o-Wisp to round out a Pokemon's moveslots. Players tend to overvalue late-game, which is where Pokemon like Cyndaquil and Froakie stand out (once they have access to good moves), but the Pokemon listed in S and A tier are simply solid through all parts of the game. No doubt users will contest my opinion (especially Froakie in B tier), but I think this should suit your flowchart needs.

Hone Claws is a reasonable TM that I think should already be obtainable in a current or previous episode.

Chespin also gets Leech Seed + Bulk Up, but Snivy is definitely the best at setup sweeping of the grass type starters because it's fast.

Yes, but that prevents you from using Coil effectively, which is the number 1 reason to pick Snivy as a starter. Stat boosting moves are very good in Reborn because the AI can't change its game plan to deal with them. Snivy has Leech Seed to ease set-up, and unlike Turtwig or Chespin, it's much faster. It also gets Growth at L13, which interferes with Contrary. Suggesting that picking Snivy for Contrary implies that a player should pick a Snivy with Contrary (which may or may not be what you intended to imply), which means that its natural set-up moves become useless. If a player wants a Contrary Snivy, he should pick one with Overgrow and then use an Ability Capsule once it learns Leaf Storm.

Two points: I would argue that Coil is the bigger draw for Snivy (since Contrary does nothing until it learns Leaf Storm) and Mudkip doesn't need Damp for Julia because her field effect makes Explosion normal + electric type, to which Marshtomp is immune.

I have no idea what "misc. updates" refer to, but I can tell you that scripting takes time and debugging takes even more time. Rarely, if ever, can someone have an idea in mind and materialize it, problem-free, after sitting down for 5 minutes. And usually the idea requires refining in order for it to be implemented successfully.

I do wish that EV reduction berries were either buyable outside the department store (you need quite a few stickers to access the proper floor within the department store) or at least obtainable through events, hidden items, overworld berry trees, etc. Vitamins are more easily obtainable in the overworld than berries, which may or may not make a whole lot of sense?

Right, the bigger differences are levels between 20 and 60. So in the case where the estimated party level is L60, I think effectively the categories boil down to: - Low-leveled Pokemon (L1 to L25) - Mid-leveled Pokemon (L26 to L40) - High-leveled Pokemon (L41 to L50) - Good-to-go Pokemon (L51 to L60)

Dude, you are the master of missing context. Beldum can't be obtained until the player has access to Route 1. The wild Tauros are L52 and I think there's a trainer in Radomus's gym with a L57 Sigilyph. If Reborn is still using the gen 5 EXP formula, and I'm pretty sure it is, a L1 Beldum gains 6340 EXP from switch training against the Sigilyph, which elevates it from L1 to L17.

To be fair, there is approximately zero difference between a Pokemon obtainable at L1 and L20 because a single lategame opponent Pokemon can probably give enough EXP to go from L1 to L20.

Man, Mighty Kamina is on point. This argument isn't getting repetitive from my perspective - everything that I included in my previous post is something that I haven't brought up before. It does seem to be getting repetitive from the opposing perspective, because I keep seeing arguments about infringement on player enjoyment (which has been countered) and lack of realism or sense (which has been countered). Makuhita is still better than Pancham, though, which is also an event Pokemon. Scraggy is a very strong Pokemon in-game almost solely because of Moxie. EDIT: As far as what would be an acceptable level, I think that, for example, a L50 event Pokemon in an area of the game where the expected team level is L60 is kind of the minimum as far as what I would consider acceptable. A halfway compromise between L10 and L60 (so L35) is still too low, and the difference will only grow as the game progresses.

How is this a logical conclusion? Repels exist in all of the main series games along with more abundant grassy areas and higher encounter rates. Does this mean that wild Pokemon shouldn't exist in the main series games? Repel introduces an option. Options are good. Players who want wild Pokemon can look for them. Players who don't want to waste their own time can use Repels and ignore them. Contrast this with if wild Pokemon simply didn't exist; players who want wild Pokemon are SOL. Or if Repels didn't exist, the players who don't want to waste their time are SOL (would you tell them to suck it up and deal with the time lost from wild Pokemon encounters?). This is analogous to the current debate over event Pokemon; we should seek to maximize options instead of jumping to silly conclusions. I don't understand this, either. Wild Pokemon are ubiquitous. The player is certain to encounter wild Pokemon over the course of playing the game. Event Pokemon, on the other hand, are almost always off the beaten path. You may not cite guide reliance as a reason why wild Pokemon are more difficult to obtain while ignoring that event Pokemon often require a guide to find, let alone to obtain (or a huge time investment in exploration). In my playthroughs of the game, I have never once found Teddiursa, Zangoose, Electrike, Whismur, etc. The only reason I know how to get them is because I've read the Pokemon locations guide. Grinding detracts from the goal of diversity. Reborn doesn't promote diversity by forcing the player to use a team of shitty Pokemon for the entire duration of the game. The entire reason why "good" or popular Pokemon are pushed back so far into the game is so that players are incentivized to use poorer or less popular Pokemon for the substantial opening portion of the game. So now that we're already 75% of the way through the game, is there really a point to further incentivize the player to use shitty Pokemon when the game demands progressively more from a team? No! If we've already forced the player to not use Electabuzz for 75% of the game, is there any reason to require a 50-level grind just so he can use Electabuzz for 25% of the game? Furthermore, there are plenty of strong Pokemon that are available early on in the game that crowd out later joiners. In that thread where a user complained that Reborn didn't have obtainable legendaries, one user rebutted with a lengthy list of obtainable Pokemon that were actually good. So an event Pokemon obtainable in the latter half of the game is not going to automatically oust a supposedly poorer party member. I mean, yeah, Seaking is probably fucked, but at this point in the game I can already have my starter, a Gardevoir, a Conkeldurr, a Galvantula, a Krookodile, etc. There's nothing stopping one but himself when it comes to using a high-level event Pokemon despite preferring to raise a low-level event Pokemon - literally. A time commitment problem exists outside of player psychology; not wanting to use a high-level event Pokemon purely because of a personal preference is a problem that exists purely within player psychology.

Someone who agrees with me for entirely different, less rigorous reasons would not have as valid of an opinion.

Of course there are downsides. I've already elaborated on them in detail. The newly added Pokemon is likely still behind the player's current team in levels (not to mention evolution stage), it doesn't have any EVs, and its moveset probably needs work.

I don't think that an emotional stance is silly. It's part of the reason why we're allowed to nickname Pokemon, for example. When you give the player a choice to use various characters that have differing characteristics, whether the characters be human or non-human, that gives room for emotional attachment in a game. It's not possible to take all of these possible positions into account, though. There could be a player who only uses a Pokemon if its starting level is odd, and it would be silly to design a Pokemon game that accommodated for this obsession.

Opinions can be assessed based on the strength of supporting evidence and rhetoric. I went out of my way to analyze the possible cases from different player perspectives, and I don't see anyone else on the opposing side doing the same.

Because time commitment is a real problem for real players? Have you ever thought about why players, game reviewers, etc. look unfavorably on games that require grinding? It breaks the natural pace of the game, it requires time to execute that doesn't reveal any new game content, it's a repetitive activity, and so on. From the perspective of the game developer, it should be the player's last resort, because it's almost always an effective strategy that minimizes the amount of thought invested in strategizing. I'm not even going to pull the life card here and say that players have better things to do with their time than to grind; even if that were true, that's hardly a point that I need to mention.

I don't understand when someone cites that it's "quite easy to grind [something] up." The problem with grinding is never its difficulty; the problem with grinding is the necessary time commitment. RPGs that require grinding are typically criticized for that aspect - I suspect that the reason for this is that grinding is a time commitment that doesn't test the player's ability to adapt to the challenges presented by the game. It's repetitive, and the reward for grinding is not the same reward for progressing through the game, which is more content. EV training is not easier at a lower level. EV training is actually easier at a higher level because the Pokemon that you're EV training against have a static level. Heart Scales are not the only method by which to re-learn moves. I already stated that if it's really a big deal that a player wants to "build attachment" to his low-leveled Pokemon, Common Candies are cheap and buyable en masse. If for some reason you're not happy with a L50 Goomy and would much rather prefer it to be L20 at a point in the game where the average opponent Pokemon level is L60, then by all means, go buy 30 Common Candies, re-learn all your level up moves, and play the game your way. If what I'm proposing sounds ridiculous and irrational, well, that's what you asked for. I already explained why the argument works more in my favor. Do you want me to explain it again? Gather 'round, folks, you're about to get Gaunt special. Suppose that player A is a player like myself who doesn't like to grind and player B is a player who just can't use a Pokemon unless it starts at L20. Let's take the scenario where the event Pokemon is at a high level. - Player A is reasonably happy with this. Player A will use the Pokemon (no time commitment) if he wants to. - Player B is not happy with this. He has several options: he can suck it up and use the Pokemon (no time commitment), use the Pokemon later in the game where it's more of an underdog (no time commitment), buy a bunch of Common Candies (time and money commitment), breed (time commitment), or not use the Pokemon. Now let's take the scenario where the event Pokemon is at a low level. - Player A is not happy with this. He has few options: he can suck it up and use the Pokemon (time commitment), or not use the Pokemon. - Player B is happy with this. Player B will use the Pokemon (time commitment) if he wants to. It's pretty clear here that the argument works in my favor because even in the case unfavorable to player B, player B has a range of options that allows him to do as he pleases, whereas in the case unfavorable to player A, player A's options are identical to player B's options. The only premise necessary for this comparison to work is that time commitment is a negative. Time commitment is not necessarily a negative, but it usually is in the context of grinding for reasons that I explained in a previous paragraph. I mean, I'm not so sure that this is the best method. Not everyone's opinions are equally valid, not everyone's opinions are equally informed, and communities are subject to groupthink.

This argument works both ways, and it works more in my favor. Why have Pokemon levels lower than 20 when you can breed them at the daycare or use Common Candies to reduce them to whatever arbitrary level you need to "get attached to it?" If your recommendation is for me to suck it up and grind, what stops me from telling you to suck it up and use your L50+ event Pokemon? It's easier to use a Pokemon than it is to grind a Pokemon (I shouldn't have to explain why; this seems incredibly obvious). An event Pokemon that comes at a high level still isn't suited for immediate use on a team. Enemy trainers are going to have Pokemon in the L70+ range soon, so even a L50 event Pokemon would still require copious amounts of grinding to reach a usable state. I'm entirely not convinced by the users who claim that they wouldn't use a Pokemon that appears at too high of a level, because there's substantial evidence that players either don't know or can't articulate what they want - look at the best Pokemon you didn't know you had thread for examples. There is no opportunity to discover a surprisingly useful Pokemon later in the game if all of the obtainable Pokemon at that point are at too low of a level to perform.

What many users seem to not understand when they post in this thread is that their vision or idea for Reborn doesn't translate to how people behave in practice. You can say that it's "supposed" to be hard, it's "supposed" to encourage the player to grind out a usable team, and the player is "supposed" to feel great after grinding his Pokemon from a low level. The problem is that it's impossible to force the player to feel or play the game this way simply because of how the Pokemon engine works, so in practice, players don't have to conform to these visions. Like I said before, I can circumvent these goals simply by continuing to use the Pokemon that I've been using prior to the 4th gym or so. So by setting event Pokemon levels to egregiously low levels, not only have the users failed to get me to conform to their goals, but they've also deterred me from using the event Pokemon at all. This is an instance where the intended consequence doesn't occur and a negative unintended consequence occurs instead. I suspect that some of the users who claim that they won't use an event Pokemon because it's at too high of a level aren't being completely honest. That is a really easy statement to make because it's nearly impossible to verify. If your favorite Pokemon is in the Goomy line and the game had a L50 event Goomy, chances are, you're not going to pass on it because its level is too high.

You can still EV train a higher-leveled Pokemon the same exact way that you'd EV train a lower-leveled Pokemon. This makes no sense at all. Suppose that in every main series game thus far, there have been abundant high-leveled NFE Pokemon in the wild (and this is actually somewhat true). This is copious evidence to support the claim that high-leveled NFE Pokemon naturally occur in the wild!

B/B I think you have to look at the first question by guessing what a type of player would do in each circumstance. If you give an event Pokemon unevolved at a low level: - Grind-happy player will use it - Grind-intolerant player won't use it If you give an event Pokemon at a high level (unevolved or evolved, doesn't matter): - Grind-happy player will use it - Grind-intolerant player will use it So really, in the case of B, both types of player win. I doubt any player will be upset that his event Pokemon is not at a low level; it's not going to stop a grind-happy person from using that Pokemon or playing Reborn in the first place. By choosing option A, you are only hurting players like me who do not like to grind. If there's a strong disincentive to use this event Pokemon, then I'm just going to keep on trucking with my Blaziken, or whatever, which means that option A doesn't encourage team diversity as much as options B or C. EDIT: Also, there's nothing "illogical" about having a high-leveled Pokemon in its base or NFE form. Gamefreak does this with in-game trainers all the time. Eagun has a L50 Pikachu in the Orre series games, for example. For the second question, D just seems awkward. Are the egg moves supposed to be easter eggs? Wouldn't this be unfair to players who don't know that receiving a Pokemon in party is different than sending it to the PC? How does it make sense, anyway, that whether a received Pokemon is sent to the PC determines its knowledge of egg moves? Isn't it almost strictly better for a Pokemon to come with egg moves than to not come with egg moves? This isn't a mechanic that exists in the main series games, either.

Right, I should add that I assume any mention of "legendary Pokemon" to refer to the 580 and 600 BST Pokemon, not the 680+ BST ones.