>>36481997>>36484097Gen 7 was a close second
>>36484123First off, you didn't answer my second question which was actually the main point of the reply
>a 2 staged dream eating TapirThe only thing they have in common is that they mention dreams. Even then it's different because Musharna does more than just eat dreams and the pokedex says nothing related to dreams about hypno
>a literal rock that evolves at level 25 and then via tradeLiterally have nothing in common except in movepool and stats which isn't this case in lazy design more as lazy stat distribution which always happen in pokemon games (Plus are you going to tell me you prefer Golem over Gigaltih because it came first?)
>a 2 staged Bat pokemon that is common in cavesNot only is how you encounter them are different but there also based on different species of bats. What we can't use other species of bats as a desighn choice because "Duhh it's copying Zubat"
>a fighting type that evolves at level 25 and then via tradeSame case with Gigalith. Machamp is based on a fighter whereas Conkeldurr is based on a constuction worker
>a 2 staged ground type mole pokemonYou cannot be possibly serious with that
>a 2 staged horse-like pokemon (in this case zebra)Based on two completely different species of horse. What we can't have those either?
>Rock type ParasNow you're just reaching
>2 staged literal trash pokemonMuk is based on sludge and can be considered a play on slime minsters in RPGs, plus they represent something completely different then Garbador
>pokeball-like trap pokemonCompletely different pokemon in every other way. Once again you're reaching
>a 3 staged ghost pokemon that is catchable in a graveyard tower This is so retarded it hurts. So what does that make the Duskull line?
>tauros 2.0Same case as Conkeldurr and Gigalith. Also based on different species of bull/buffalo.
>luvdisc 2.0Not a Gen 1 pokemon. Why is this even here?
