"GRASS" the worst starter and possibly type??

[Aurath8]

True, Grass is the worst defensive type next to Ice, and offensively is quite lackluster. I'm not denying that Grass types can be good. Ferrothorn, Torterra and Celebi are all great pokemon. But Grass types are definitely disadvantaged because of the type chart.

As for the worst type, I'd say either Poison or Ice is worse. Poison is terrible offensively, though pretty good defensively. Ice is very good offensively, hitting 4 key types including Dragon, but has no resistances bar itself and crippling Rock and Fighting weaknesses. The Ice type is actually renowned for its types attacks rather than the pokemon themselves.

 

[Nyarlathotep]

Ice is indeed the worst type in the game. It is not worth using a Ice-Type Pokémon in your team, all you really need are Ice-Type moves.

 

[Fluffyy]

Ice is indeed the worst type in the game. It is not worth using a Ice-Type Pokémon in your team, all you really need are Ice-Type moves.

Yeah, agreed. Theres no point, I'll just teach one of my pokemon Ice beam, then waa-laa.
Anyways, Im using Serperior atm in bw2.. it was a bit of trouble at first, now that I've got it's final moves and everythings, it's perfect.

 

[PancakeBoy]

OK, can somebody help me? I'm friggin tired of these posts everywhere about how grass starters suck. I'm not talking about competitive battling stuff, or how good the type is, but I'm talking about this meme/mentality that people have that Grass starters suck. Just because the original Fire type starter was a dragon (an animal known as one of the coolest of them all) and that Fire and Water can directly hurt people, but Grass can't, that caused this mentality that Grass sucks! I'm so freaking annoyed by that. When I look at funny pictures about Pokemon on Memebase or something, and now and then I see one about how the Grass starter sucks and that "nobody" picks them! Do they think it's funny to piss people off like that? And the comments just say "You're wrong, I love the Grass Starter!" and none of them address how much of a problem this is! Can someone help me?

 

[3HUNNASAUR]

Lol they do suck dude i like picking bulbasaur for example because it makes the game more challenging and i need to actually build a team to pass gyms

 

[Ilan]

Lol they do suck dude i like picking bulbasaur for example because it makes the game more challenging and i need to actually build a team to pass gyms

Actually venusaur is strong against the first 4 gyms in kanto although in Fire Red bulbasaur had bad attacks.. if fire red was a gen 5 game bulbasaur would be the best for 6/8 of the gyms and decent for the elite 4.

 

[Focus Aipom]

Grass type Pokemon may have a lot of weaknesses and generally poor offensive stats; however, that doesn't mean that they're completely useless or weak. Grass type Pokemon have their own methods of fighting, and it's more of the defensive way (especially HP absorbing moves and status changing moves) that really makes the grass types shine. While they may serve better as supporters, they can still be deadly in the right hands.

 

[mew661]

I use water type so I battle grass type starters even if i'm using a type other then water they can be challening (maybe bucause you probly wouldn't catch me using fire types much)

 

[PancakeBoy]

I just want to know if the hate comes from the reputation of grass in real life, or the gameplay being too hard with the Grass starter. I'd rather it be about the gameplay, because if it's about the former reason, that proves how dumb people are. That they just want the one that looks cool (Charizard) and hate the least cool looking Pokemon. That is what makes me mad. I hope it's because they suck ingame and not out of the game. Because I agree, even though I always picked te Grass starter, that they have many weaknesses and barely any moves to counter them. But I don't want it to be a physical appeal thing.

 

[Focus Aipom]

^I personally think it's because the game is generally more challenging if one doesn't know how to handle a Grass type effectively. At least with fire type and water type starter Pokemon, they learn some strong offensive moves earlier on; however, a different strategy is required when you go with grass types. Most of the grass Pokemon seem to be more defense oriented and as a result, the player needs to know how to play defensively with a strategy of defeating his or her foes. Of course, there are the more offensive based grass types; however, most seem to be less offensive from a standpoint. They learn less offensive moves; however, they still have some deadly moves in status inflicting moves as well as some other long term effect moves.

I personally love grass types as while they may take longer to muster, they're worth the challenge and can be very useful and fun team additions.

 

[BearTown]

As for the worst type, I'd say either Poison or Ice is worse. Poison is terrible offensively, though pretty good defensively.

I disagree, arbok and toxicroak are definitely offensive and have been some of my best pokemon. and I've been defeated by a good weazing before. it depends how u use it and train it really. just a majority of ppl dont know how to use it

 

[3HUNNASAUR]

OK, can somebody help me? I'm friggin tired of these posts everywhere about how grass starters suck. I'm not talking about competitive battling stuff, or how good the type is, but I'm talking about this meme/mentality that people have that Grass starters suck. Just because the original Fire type starter was a dragon (an animal known as one of the coolest of them all) and that Fire and Water can directly hurt people, but Grass can't, that caused this mentality that Grass sucks! I'm so freaking annoyed by that. When I look at funny pictures about Pokemon on Memebase or something, and now and then I see one about how the Grass starter sucks and that "nobody" picks them! Do they think it's funny to piss people off like that? And the comments just say "You're wrong, I love the Grass Starter!" and none of them address how much of a problem this is! Can someone help me?

I think venusaur is cool looking but i mean everyone has different taste

 

[3HUNNASAUR]

^I personally think it's because the game is generally more challenging if one doesn't know how to handle a Grass type effectively. At least with fire type and water type starter Pokemon, they learn some strong offensive moves earlier on; however, a different strategy is required when you go with grass types. Most of the grass Pokemon seem to be more defense oriented and as a result, the player needs to know how to play defensively with a strategy of defeating his or her foes. Of course, there are the more offensive based grass types; however, most seem to be less offensive from a standpoint. They learn less offensive moves; however, they still have some deadly moves in status inflicting moves as well as some other long term effect moves.

I personally love grass types as while they may take longer to muster, they're worth the challenge and can be very useful and fun team additions.

I totally agree i like the challenge of learning things not just knowing water beats fire

 

[Mitja]

I think a defensive Fire starter is long overdue.

I mean, Grass and Water usually do something new and have had quite a variety.
Grass has had a spA/spD, mixed defense, a fast sweeper, atk/def, and a quick and bulky annoyer. The only thing it didn't do yet is a serious mixed offense.
Water has had mixed defensive, atk/def, bulky atk, spA/spD, mixed offense. The only thing it hasnt tried so far is something fast.

Whereas Fire.................
special sweeper
special sweeper (literaly the same stats as first)
mixed offense
same just faster
same but high HP instead of speed

not to mention the last 3 were all Fighting, while Grass/Water have 3 pure types each..

They need to stop that and try to make a Fire starter that doesn't have both attack stats 100 or higher...


Heres what Id add next to spice things up.

Something that packs a punch and does it fast for Grass... a Grass/Flying starter with stats along the lines of:
80/115/70/65/95/105
like a physical version of Charizard now that I think of it lol.

A defensive Fire starter!
85/70/105/90/85/95

Some serious threat. Water/Dark or Water/Fight or Water/Poison even... we haven't seen that type since Venusaur too lol.
70/75/85/105/75/120

 

[Nyarlathotep]

it depends how u use it and train it really. just a majority of ppl dont know how to use it

Not really. Poison is a mediocre type, regardless of how you use it.

 

[Wishing Star]

Not really. Poison is a mediocre type, regardless of how you use it.

Is that really true even when it isn't compared to other types? (I'm aware that judging whether types are good largely is based on type-to-type comparison.)

 

[Nyarlathotep]

Is that really true even when it isn't compared to other types? (I'm aware that judging whether types are good largely is based on type-to-type comparison.)

But... there isn't much point in judging a type if we don't compare it to other types. Really, we see how good the Fire-Type is offensively when we compare it with other offensive types, like Ice and Electric. Anyway, allow me do a brief analysis of the type. Have in mind that I am not an specialist/competitive player, I just know some things by casual readings on smogon articles. Poison would be an interesting type if not by some things:

1.) Excessive access to powerful Ground-Type moves. Really, the amount of Pokémon which is able to learn Earthquake is ridiculous. And since Poison is a defensive-oriented type, it is hard to fulfill its role when almost every fully-evolved Pokémon can destroy them with an Earthquake. Sure, same goes to Steel, but this type at least have a huge lot of resistances and one immunity, unlike Poison. Plus, there is a very common type combination that negates the weakness against Ground: Bug/Steel.

2.) Like I said, Poison is oriented for a more defensive gameplay, but still, being Super Effective against only ONE type is ridiculous. And against Grass, the type which you barely see being used in high tiers. Also, a lot of Grass-Type Pokémon has a sub-type which negates the effectiveness of Poison moves. If they ever give Poison two more advantages, maybe against Fighting and Water (Two overused types), I am sure things will get better for the venomous beings. Also, Poison moves aren't very effective against FOUR types. It is severely flawed in the offensive side.

3.) Excessive access to the Toxic move. Imagine if only Poison-Type Pokémon were able to learn this move, their usage would be way higher.
Strategies like Toxic + Venoshock would be more attractive to use.

In the end, Poison is theoretically a good defensive type, but some aspects of the gameplay makes it undeniably one of the worse, if not the worst type in the games.

 

[Wishing Star]

But... there isn't much point in judging a type if we don't compare it to other types.

Oh yeah, I'm quite aware of that. The main point of my post was to ask for an opinion based on just the type itself, but sure.

1.) Excessive access to powerful Ground-Type moves. Really, the amount of Pokémon which is able to learn Earthquake is ridiculous. And since Poison is a defensive-oriented type, it is hard to fulfill its role when almost every fully-evolved Pokémon can destroy them with an Earthquake. Sure, same goes to Steel, but this type at least have a huge lot of resistances and one immunity, unlike Poison. Plus, there is a very common type combination that negates the weakness against Ground: Bug/Steel.

Okay.

2.) Like I said, Poison is oriented for a more defensive gameplay, but still, being Super Effective against only ONE type is ridiculous. And against Grass, the type which you barely see being used in high tiers. Also, a lot of Grass-Type Pokémon has a sub-type which negates the effectiveness of Poison moves. If they ever give Poison two more advantages, maybe against Fighting and Water (Two overused types), I am sure things will get better for the venomous beings. Also, Poison moves aren't very effective against FOUR types. It is severely flawed in the offensive side.

I personally don't think it's fair to consider tiers in this. After all, it's not whether or not Poison is a good or bad type in each of the tiers, but whether or not Poison is a good or bad type within the context of the entire game.

3.) Excessive access to the Toxic move. Imagine if only Poison-Type Pokémon were able to learn this move, their usage would be way higher.
Strategies like Toxic + Venoshock would be more attractive to use.

If anything, I'd say that the wide distribution of Toxic is a boon for Poison-type Pokémon. I think that the wide distribution of Toxic wasn't a "pity move" but rather a way to say how Poison can be used by a wide variety of Pokémon, which ultimately increases the effectiveness of the type.

In the end, Poison is theoretically a good defensive type, but some aspects of the gameplay makes it undeniably one of the worse, if not the worst type in the games.[/FONT]

I'm genuinely curious on how Poison compares to another type (say, Flying).

 

[Nyarlathotep]

I personally don't think it's fair to consider tiers in this. After all, it's not whether or not Poison is a good or bad type in each of the tiers, but whether or not Poison is a good or bad type within the context of the entire game.

Still, disregarding tiers and the competitive scene, do you think that it is worth using a Poison-Type Pokémon while there are other better types that plays a similar role? Like Steel and Water? Personally, I think that unless you definitely like the type and Poison-Type Pokémon, there is no reason to use them.

If anything, I'd say that the wide distribution of Toxic is a boon for Poison-type Pokémon. I think that the wide distribution of Toxic wasn't a "pity move" but rather a way to say how Poison can be used by a wide variety of Pokémon, which ultimately increases the effectiveness of the type.

How is it a boon for Poison-Type Pokémon? While it may increase the usefulness of some moves of this type, it makes using Pokémon of the said type completely pointless. The "poison" status ailment is probably the most useful after "burn" and I can't help but think that it would be good for Poison-Type Pokémon if only them were able to use Toxic.

I'm genuinely curious on how Poison compares to another type (say, Flying).

You mean, by a non-competitive view? To be honest, I don't think it is fair to compare Poison to Flying, since they have different roles.

 

[Wishing Star]

Still, disregarding tiers and the competitive scene, do you think that it is worth using a Poison-Type Pokémon while there are other better types that plays a similar role? Like Steel and Water? Personally, I think that unless you definitely like the type and Poison-Type Pokémon, there is no reason to use them.

Is it worth using a Poison-type Pokémon based on the conditions you stated? Probably not, I'd agree with you on that.
Is it worth using a Poison-type move based on the conditions you stated? That's half a quantum level away.

How is it a boon for Poison-Type Pokémon? While it may increase the usefulness of some moves of this type, it makes using Pokémon of the said type completely pointless. The "poison" status ailment is probably the most useful after "burn" and I can't help but think that it would be good for Poison-Type Pokémon if only them were able to use Toxic.

Maybe it's just me, but I find the poison status ailment extremely useful, yeah. To say that a type is bad when considering everything about it is alright, but to say that it's bad when considering only Pokémon of that type is definitely erroneous. The fact that Poison has access to such a status ailment affects how good it is, doesn't it?

You mean, by a non-competitive view? To be honest, I don't think it is fair to compare Poison to Flying, since they have different roles.

I agree with this somewhat. That being said, it's not wrong to compare Poison and Fighting, as each have their own faults, but I don't really think it's right to say that even when considering these facts, Fighting is better than Poison due to competitive usage. :/