/vp/ - Pokémon » Thread #14390246

[43 / 3 / ?]

Why do you choose your Pokemon?

Anonymous Wed 09 Oct 2013 05:21:08 No.14390246 View View Reply Original Report

Quoted By: >>14390269 >>14390322 >>14390372 >>14390700 >>14391025 >>14391447 >>14391966 >>14395337

This is just out of curiosity. I always see people fussing over certain Pokemon because of their stats.

Why do you guys choose the Pokemon you choose to have in your party?

Stats, or looks?

I choose mine for what I think looks cool despite their stats. I'm sure there a fuckton of people who find that ridiculous. Fire away, anyway.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 09 Oct 2013 05:22:18 No.14390269 Report

Quoted By:

>>14390246
looks mostly, and then i check the stats, still use them if they're shitty or not.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 09 Oct 2013 05:24:05 No.14390315 Report

Quoted By:

Yeah, I would not trash a Pokemon based on its stats. Fuck that.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 09 Oct 2013 05:24:14 No.14390319 Report

Quoted By:

In game, I need to have type variety and the pokemon to collectively have the colors red, orange, yellow, green, blue, and purple.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 09 Oct 2013 05:24:27 No.14390322 Report

Quoted By:

>>14390246
Simply playing storymode, there is no need to look at stats. The stat discussion should just be a competitive topic.
I always chose my team by type-balance over looks. I hated having a type twice even if I loved designs of both pkmn.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 09 Oct 2013 05:24:32 No.14390324 Report

Quoted By: >>14391489

A combination. If I like the looks, I'll check stats and move pool. As long as the stats are decent and the move pool works with the stats, I'll use it.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 09 Oct 2013 05:24:55 No.14390339 Report

Quoted By: >>14390405

>I just defeated this gym, it's time to find a new friend
>let's see what typed I have out of the obligatory five I ways use (plus any other one)... oh, I don't have this one yet
>this pojemon is from said type and it appears between this city and the next gym? gotta catch it!

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 09 Oct 2013 05:25:19 No.14390350 Report

Quoted By:

There is a minimum threshold for appearance and a minimum threshold for viability.

I will never use Slurpuff. I don't care if it's got 900 base I won't use that stupid thing.

I will also not use Tropius. I love it's design, but it's so shitty I can't carry it.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 09 Oct 2013 05:26:04 No.14390366 Report

Quoted By:

Looks, but I take stats into consideration as well. Movepool being a distant third.

I love Mew and Mawile. They ain't the greatest, but they're normally fine in battle.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 09 Oct 2013 05:26:10 No.14390372 Report

Quoted By:

>>14390246
Yeah i pick based off looks and sometimes personalities. I train them from there and dont really bother breeding unless its a neat move to have on my Pokemon. But if a Pokemon doesn't look appealing to me then i wont even bother training it despite its strengths

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 09 Oct 2013 05:27:34 No.14390405 Report

Quoted By:

>>14390339
>pojemon
typing from a phone is shit

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Tangrowth Love.jpg, 427KiB, 750x950

Anonymous Wed 09 Oct 2013 05:27:43 No.14390409 Report

Quoted By:

Some Pokemon I fall in love with solely based on looks. It's why I can't help but like Tyrantrum in spite of its subpar spread and typing, or why I make sure to level a Bellsprout to level 100 in every generation.

Other times I wind up using a Pokemon I would never have even touched before, only to fall in love with it as it completely wrecks the competition. Then suddenly all the perceived "flaws" in its design just become endearing characteristics, and I can't bear the thought of ever NOT having them on my team. Picture related on that front.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 09 Oct 2013 05:28:23 No.14390426 Report

Quoted By:

I like using my favorites as well as pokemon that have types that I'm not already using. I love having a variety of pokemon, even in monotype runs (I'll almost always do my monotype runs with pokemon that are commonly dual-typed)

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 09 Oct 2013 05:30:12 No.14390479 Report

Quoted By: >>14390536

Usually I go by whether I think it's got a cool concept/design, but there are two factors that will deter me:

1) Really bad stats. I love Ledian, but it's just a pain in the ass to use, and using it multiplayer outside of a tier that none of my friends will restrict themselves to, all I'm going to experience is seeing a pokemon I really like have its ass kicked.

2) If I'm attracted to it because of an underlying concept which just doesn't ultimately function. Struggling to think of an example right now, but for example, design aside, I love Shuckle being a pure wall and really obnoxious. I'll still use Shuckle because, despite not being amazing, he can still manage to be a wall/be annoying in the right circumstances. However, some pokemon have an underlying concept that they just can't function in because it's too easily countered/just doesn't work out like the designers conceived.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 09 Oct 2013 05:32:19 No.14390536 Report

Quoted By: >>14390816 >>14390969

>>14390479

>2) If I'm attracted to it because of an underlying concept which just doesn't ultimately function. Struggling to think of an example right now

Slow, Defensive Ice-Types.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 09 Oct 2013 05:36:26 No.14390670 Report

Quoted By:

In the playthrough, I only chose my starter, then go playing and only catch things I need. The looks and stat doesn't matter, only it's typing. They will be considered my bros in the end of the game.

Competitive wise I just use the pokemon I like, for looks or for being emotionaly-attached to them from the playthrough.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 09 Oct 2013 05:37:23 No.14390700 Report

Quoted By:

>>14390246
Greninja - Fucking awesome
Charizard - To repay a debt. Also, fucking awesome
Aegislash - Fucking awesome
Trevenant or Pumpkaboo - Trevenant because fucking awesome, Pumpkaboo because hilarious Trick-Or-Treat attack
Pyroar - Fucking awesome
Klefki - I love it

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 09 Oct 2013 05:41:36 No.14390816 Report

Quoted By: >>14390969

>>14390536
Thanks! Great example.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 09 Oct 2013 05:47:34 No.14390969 Report

Quoted By:

>>14390536
>>14390816
>Abomasnow

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 09 Oct 2013 05:49:25 No.14391025 Report

Quoted By:

>>14390246

I have never used stats as a basis for any Pokemon I've used.

My final team takes into consideration:
Do I like the way it looks (or at least not dislike it)?
Do I have 2 of this type already?
Does it have a versatile movepool, or at least, moves that I need?

The starter is chosen entirely based on looks.
I MUST have a pokemon that can learn Fly
I MUST have a pokemon that can learn Surf
I MUST have some sort of status ailment move. Usually Thunder Wave, but can be anything along those lines.
I MUST have complete type coverage in some way.
I usually have someone with Bite or a variation.

I tend to pick Grass/Water starters
I almost always have Crobat on my team, but I used Swoobat & Staraptor as well.
I generally have a Water type, Ground type, Electric type, and a Ghost or Psychic, but this isn't guaranteed depending on movepools.

As of HeartGold, I've planned my teams (for the most part), but those plans deviate as I find more suitable Pokemon for my tastes or some Pokemon I just 'have' on me saves me in a pinch and becomes a true bro all of the sudden.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 09 Oct 2013 05:50:10 No.14391046 Report

Quoted By:

A combo of both. I love using ridiculous looking pokemon (See: Bibarel) and cool looking ones as well. If they got good stats then it's just a bonus. If not, well, they might get replaced by a more competent mon if things get too bad.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 09 Oct 2013 05:51:28 No.14391084 Report

Quoted By:

I almost always pick my favorites based on design or concept. Base stats don't weigh into my decision much.

Movepool on the other hand, is a dealbreaker for me. I find it frustrating to play through a game with a pokemon that doesn't have some diversity in its moves.

Examples: I love Parasect's concept (cordycepts fungus) and Hariyama's design, but neither of them have much they can do in battle outside of some decent STAB moves. Parasect is actually a little better off with Spore, though.

Some others, Like Drifblim or Golurk, may not have the best stats, but the designs are cool and unique, and they both have fun movepools (especially Drifblim).

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 09 Oct 2013 05:55:17 No.14391177 Report

Quoted By:

I traditionally pick the fire starter everytime.
Other than that I pick from what looks cool and my favorites based on experiences.

Nerffie

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Rosa Klebb.jpg, 241KiB, 650x650

Nerffie Wed 09 Oct 2013 06:00:57 No.14391338 Report

Quoted By:

Playstyle and pokemon that support it. Stats are a factor but it's also about what the pokemon actually DOES and whether or not it aids me in doing what I want to do.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 09 Oct 2013 06:03:46 No.14391421 Report

Quoted By:

I go by what type i need at the time and how it looks. if it doesnt perform after i catch it i box the little shit and try again.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 09 Oct 2013 06:04:51 No.14391447 Report

Quoted By:

>>14390246
WOW OP THAT'S TOTALLY the exact same thing I do.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 09 Oct 2013 06:06:49 No.14391489 Report

Quoted By:

>>14390324
This, pretty much.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 09 Oct 2013 06:07:28 No.14391507 Report

Quoted By:

I used to pick pokemon based on looks. stats didnt matter, but eventually they did. If a pokemon would lose constantly despite level/advantage, id just be disappointed in it and box it away.

Hated Turtwig, every battle his attacks barely made any damage and would always be last to move. He could take hits more than the others though, so he was more of a switch in guy than a plowthrough battler which i am more into.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 09 Oct 2013 06:07:34 No.14391509 Report

Quoted By:

Type variety, whatever looks cool, and I'm more favourable to something that will evolve.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 09 Oct 2013 06:13:16 No.14391637 Report

Quoted By: >>14392087

I actually do a bit of both. If I like how something looks, I hope it has at least decent stats.

Example: Bidoof. It's the derpiest Pokemon there is (aside from Stunfisk). It evolves into Bibarel, and... doesn't get much better, in looks or stats. Ended up reduced to HM slave for me. And probably everyone else, actually.

Swablu: "oh my god you are the cutest fucking bird I've ever seen." Caught it, but wasn't expecting much. It eventually evolved into Altaria and it could actually hold its own.

Noivern: Apparently its stats are disappointing? As long as they're not all below 80 or something I'm still using it.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 09 Oct 2013 06:21:49 No.14391858 Report

Quoted By:

Neither. Stats and looks are secondary to me. It's all about how the pokemon functions in its role.

I am a HUGE fan of stallers and walls. So if a pokemon performs that task exceedingly well, I fall in love regardless of stats or looks. I absolutely hate Sableye's look. But god damn if that little guy doesn't have a special place in my heart for what he can do.

Favorite pokemon of all time, though. That spot belongs to Feraligatr.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 09 Oct 2013 06:27:00 No.14391966 Report

Quoted By:

>>14390246
>Attack No 1 gif
You're an okay guy, OP
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I2XhBdHXTqA

Anyways, for story I go simply off of looks, and type. For competitive I go off of who I like, and see if their stats are decent enough. I don't really pay attention to the tiers or anything like that.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 09 Oct 2013 06:33:05 No.14392082 Report

Quoted By:

In-game I go by looks. The games are easy enough that you don't need to use Pokémon with strong stats and I had a blast playing through Black 2 with Pachirisu, Dunsparce and Muk. Competitively, stats are what matter. That said though, I like to try to incorporate some of my favorite designs into my teams if possible. My favorite NU team for instance was designed entirely around me wanting to use Articuno and Stunfisk and it's been pretty successful.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 09 Oct 2013 06:33:14 No.14392087 Report

Quoted By:

>>14391637
It's stats are only disappointing to people who were hoping for him to be OU he has a pretty good BST and spread

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 09 Oct 2013 06:37:17 No.14392158 Report

Quoted By: >>14392802

I usually go for sexual attraction .

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 09 Oct 2013 07:11:52 No.14392802 Report

Quoted By:

>>14392158
You and the 1%...

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 09 Oct 2013 07:14:38 No.14392861 Report

Quoted By:

My primary consideration when choosing Pokémon for my in-game team is whether I believe they will play interestingly. Please note "interestingly" and not "efficiently". I may deliberately select Pokémon I think will be more difficult to raise if I think they'll bring something new and different to the table, or I may pick something stupidly broken if it's stupidly broken in a fun way. It's a video game. I pick whatever seems like the most fun to use.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 09 Oct 2013 07:16:08 No.14392896 Report

Quoted By:

I usually just pick for their type then looks.
I've never really been into the battle stuff

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 09 Oct 2013 07:18:42 No.14392947 Report

Quoted By:

I thankfully have enough favorites to choose from if I wanted to play competitively. But I always go with looks first.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 09 Oct 2013 07:25:31 No.14393058 Report

Quoted By:

First I look the type (I think that repeating types, unless it is a mono-type run, is a bad idea and aesthetically poor). I usually get type combinations that I find interesting unless they don't look cool to me (Stunfisk doesn't). The property of coolness is hard to explain and different for everyone, but as examples I could say Jolteon, Heracross, Altaria, Bronzong, Volcarona and Dragalge.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 09 Oct 2013 07:25:40 No.14393061 Report

Quoted By:

Looks for RPG stuff. Even if they look edgy or shit.

Stats when I play on multiplayer.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 09 Oct 2013 07:27:51 No.14393094 Report

Quoted By:

Both. If there's a Pokemon I feel has a really cool/interesting design, I'll cut some slack on their stats if they're subpar and try to use them best I can.

Similarly, if I like a Pokemon's type/movepool/stat distribution a lot, I may be a little lenient if the design isn't so good. The former happens far more than the latter, however.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 09 Oct 2013 10:39:16 No.14395337 Report

Quoted By:

>>14390246
When people talks about stats is talking about online play. No one discusses the value of pokemon ingame because you can beat it with 5 magikarps. When someone brings the subject of stats you must assume he is talking about online.

No one looks stats to beat the game, people just pick what they like.

Capcode	All Only User Posts Only Verified Posts Only Moderator Posts Only Manager Posts Only Admin Posts Only Developer Posts Only Founder Posts
Show Posts	All Only With Images Only Without Images Only Spoiler Images Only Non-Spoiler Images
Deleted Posts	All Only Deleted Posts Only Non-Deleted Posts
Ghost Posts	All Only Ghost Posts Only Non-Ghost Posts
Post Type	All Only Sticky Threads Only Opening Posts Only Reply Posts
Results	All Grouped By Threads
Order	Latest Posts First Oldest Posts First

On these archives

Your latest searches

Why do you choose your Pokemon?