Time for a takedown
>>42049810>It was clear they meant aesthetically."Clear", huh. I'm no mind reader, pal. I just look at the facts.
Nowhere in this entire post (
>>42048259 ) was it ever stated or implied that the anon was judging them Solely on aesthetics. The anon just vaguely claimed hero zamazenta was somehow Superior to hero zacian in a "general" sense,
>"Hero Zamazenta > Hero Zacian"rather than just saying Only "aesthetically" or naming any other specific criteria.
If we're talking in a general sense, hero zamazenta loses out to hero zacian in so many categories.
>Offensively?Zacian's intrepid sword boost and wider offensive movepool win out.
>Defensively?Zacian's Fairy type covers more than zamazenta's Fighting.
>Movepool?Zacian was intended to be a sweeper and has the ability and movepool to back it up. Any sweeper set that hero zamazenta can use can be done by hero zacian but better. Meanwhile zamazenta was intended to be a wall, but its only recovery is Rest. Also no access to moves like Bulk Up or King's Shield that could accompany dauntless shield's boost. And its best Fighting move lowers its defenses to boot. Meanwhile zacian gets more Fighting moves than zamazenta like sacred sword.
>Aesthetically?It's a subjective category. I won't say that one objectively looks better than the other, because such subjective claims are never objectively true. If you believe one looks better than the other, you're entitled to your own opinion. (I myself prefer hero zacian's design and don't like hero zamazenta's upward ponytail. But I also won't pass off my subjective statements as 100% TRUE like other less objective anons would do). But for the other categories I mentioned, you can't have an opinion on those. Hero zacian is objectively competitively better than hero zamazenta when it comes to offensive attack power, defensive typing, and wider movepool.
In a "general" sense, this makes hero zacian Superior to hero zamazenta on most (if not) all levels.
