Pokemon: Our Non-Legendary Profiles Aren't Good

[Dark649]

The Hitmons from which category are scaled? and if Blue used a Pidgeotto during the third fight that means that Misty is higher than 8-A+.

 

[AidenBrooks999]

The Hitmons from which category are scaled? and if Blue used a Pidgeotto during the third fight that means that Misty is higher than 8-A+. With the new calc Tyranitar and who scale to him like Dragonite is 7-A and Megas like Mega Tyranitar are at least 7-A.

The hitmonline falls in the 8-A category.

Also, who keeps rating the pseudos at High Hypersonic? Not only scaling Dragonite from Charizard like that is wrong, but said feat is anime only AND from a trained one. It must be removed and scale them to Supersonic Dragonite

 

[AidenBrooks999]

@Dark I have no problem on editing the trainer profiles, but I'll do that in the weekend (One and half day from now) when I have more time.

 

[Dark649]

I agree with these, but i have last two questions. Do you think we should also remove the speeds from Magnemite and Mewtwo pages? [Since the anime has moments like Pikachu defeating a golem with lighting moves]. So we scale the speeds from Pidgeot page and the Ultra Beasts remains at least 7-A, likely far higher or you plan a revision from them.

 

[Dark649]

Mewtwo still scales to the birds crossing Sinnoh, but their Low 6-B rating is movie only.

 

[AidenBrooks999]

Al legendaries would scale (Except better feats) from the birds' High 7-A feat.


Also, Legendaries are composite. So they scale from their movie counterparts too.

 

[Dark649]

Ok.

 

[The_real_cal_howard]

My bad. I was scaling to Dragonite. However, it should be SS+ via Garchomp instead of SS via Dragonite.

 

[The_real_cal_howard]

Also, I'm a bit...iffy for the level scaling for the 40s-60s, as even Pokmeon like Dodrio and Rapidash and Muk don't evolve until 40. It might just be safer to follow what's above, especially considering some of those Pokemon for the 40s-60s Mega Evolve, which would complicate things further. Also, only the gen 1 and 3 fossils evolve at 40. Gen 4 evolves at 30, Gen 5 at 37, and Gen 6 at 39. That may be semantics tho.

 

[ArbitraryNumbers]

@Arbitrary
The only thing the pokemon you listed have to justify them to not be High 8-C is because they look weak/have low stats. But neither of those are relevant for the scaling.

No, it's because they're consistently portrayed as grind fodder, and all of their showings and statements (of which there are slim to none) greatly contradict a Tier 8 ranking. 90% of this upgrade is baseless regardless.

How is scaling Pokemon based on levels any different? Like I said, I don't think it's too big of a stretch to assume this stuff, but if we can use levels for our reasoning then we might as well use stats.

 

[AidenBrooks999]

I don't see the problem with the 40-60 scaling.


They may able to Mega Evolve, but they are either Pseudo or scale from Abomasnow. So it works pretty well.

 

[The_real_cal_howard]

Fair enough, but can we make it 50 instead? Or at least 45? I feel we'd be right back at square one with Dodrio as only slightly behind a Mega Charizard for example.

 

[AidenBrooks999]

It should stay at 40 to 60

Also, doduo evolves at level 31 (Before Charizard). And even if not, what would be the problem?

 

[AidenBrooks999]

We are not even talking about Jasmine.

And I already said that MHS comes from the anime. So your comments was not neccesary.

 

[The_real_cal_howard]

I was wrong about Dodrio. My bad (again). But replace it with Rapidash, which I'm certain is 40. It just seems off. Rapidash, while undoubtedly a powerful Pokemon, isn't that special, and it throws off the scaling a bit too much. I have no problems with having someone like Ledian at the level of someone like Lairon, or Levanny being equal to Infernape. It just seems like some Pokemon who GF likely didn't want to be seen as a big reward would be getting good tiers.

(For example, I believe that Bisharp, Braviary, Volcarona, and Mandibuzz should be scaled as more powerful because they're seen as late game Pokemon that are rewards for the intense training, like little pseudo legendaries (well, not so little), but for example, Mienshao, in which you can get Mienfoo pretty early, just seems like a pain to train to that high, and that would make Mienshao (52) stronger than Garchomp (48)). While I think the idea works well (like take Walrein, who is believably a powerful Pokemon, as you get it's first form around gym 7, and takes a while to evolve. Then take Rapdiash in gen 4, who's first form incredibly common, and you can get it before gym no. 3)

All in all, a case by case should probably be done for that too, or at the very least increase it to 50 or at least 45.

Btw, I revised the rules as per what Ant asked.

 

[AidenBrooks999]

@Arbitrary

But at least levels doesn't **** up the scaling. Also, it's mostly for reference. Pokemon that evolve at late levels can be easily interpreted as pokemon whose pre-evolution can take more power before the need of a new body.

 

[The_real_cal_howard]

Hmm... Food for thought.

 

[AidenBrooks999]

@Cal

Also, Mienshao won't be stronger than Garchomp, since it scales from Tyranitar

 

[RadicalMrR]

I just want to point out both Larvitar and Pupitar have tier 7 feats.

One eats a mountain worth of rock to evolve and the other just destroys a mountain if gets pissed.

 

[The_Everlasting]

@Radical

Those can be as low as 7-C, as there's nothing noted about the mountains' sizes... I think.

 

[The_Everlasting]

Also, why are we basing scaling on levels? Those are the very definition of game mechanics.

 

[RadicalMrR]

@Radical

Those can be as low as 7-C, as there's nothing noted about the mountains' sizes... I think.

I agree, that seems like the most appropriate rating to me as well.

 

[AidenBrooks999]

@Ever

Yes and no.

 

[The_Everlasting]

@Aiden

That doesn't really answer my question.

 

[The_real_cal_howard]

Replace Garchomp with Flygon or Haxorus. Other than those that I've named above (the version exclusive birds of gen V and Bisharp. Oh. Volcarona and the Deino line too). It's probably because of how easy it is to level up in gen V without the need for serious grinding (seriously, that was the first time I ever beat the E4 on my first try)

 

[The_real_cal_howard]

An example. The Pokémon that evolve level 50 or higher.

Pseudos (to be specific, Salamence, Goodra, Dragonite, Tyranitar, and both of Deino's evolutions, with Hydreigon being the Pokémon with the most required levels to reach its final form at 64. Just a fun digressing fact . But I digress (duh))

The gen 5 trio I've been constantly calling out (I do consider them above an average Pokémon, but only to the level of Abomasnow)

Volcarona

Solgaleo and Lunala

and then Mienshao

 

[Cropfist]

Also, why are we basing scaling on levels? Those are the very definition of game mechanics.

I was also wondering this.

 

[AidenBrooks999]

@Aiden
That doesn't really answer my question.

It does.


Level is the game mechanic. But the interpretation of it is what we use for the scaling.

Like, how you interpretate evolution? That's what we are using. We talk about levels here, but the scaling on the profiles is based on who needs more power to achieve evolution.

 

[The_Everlasting]

I don't see how you can "interpret" levels to be viable for scaling.

 

[AidenBrooks999]

Because is the same in the anime (They even talk about levels once. Literally)


The pokemon evolves when is strong enough.

Levels is just an idea of when the pokemon evolves.

 

[The_Everlasting]

Do the games ever actually imply that?

 

[SomebodyData]

Hmm... We've had so many threads discussing on how to scale the Pokemon, to the point that in the beginning, I didn't want to debate too much against what Cal is suggesting. But if we're really on an interpretation of levels, then we're going way too far.

 

[AidenBrooks999]

@Ever. Honestly, they need to? The concept is very obvious and easy to understand.


@SD it's only for pokemon who clearly for something are a pain to evolve.


This is the best we got guys. This or delete and make against creating anything pokemon related.


Simple. As. That.

 

[The_Everlasting]

@Aiden

No, it's a fan theory. Nothing more. If you're honestly saying the games don't need to explain something we're building the foundation of scaling on, I don't know what to tell you.

 

[AidenBrooks999]

Tell me "F*ck Pokémon, let's delete everything relate to it because it's a ******* pain to scale. And also I'll make a rule to prohibe create anything of the lord"

 

[The_Everlasting]

You're making way too big of a deal out of this and thinking the "only" alternative is far worse than it actually is.

 

[AidenBrooks999]

Because it is.


Is going by this scaling (Which if you seat and think, you will notice how it make sense) or do what I said: delete the profiles.


There's no really other way since other scaling stills incomplete.

 

[SomebodyData]

It makes sense if we accept game mechanics and interpretations, which really is going too far.

Also, there is another alternative, use logic to see who scales (Garchomp should be superior to Pokemon of his respective region based on pokedex and etc) it's not a perfect system, sure, but at least we aren't abusing mechanics and placing one interpretation above what we do know.

 

[FTW395]

Might be a tad too late to ask this seeing how people are performing changes to the Pokemon profiles left and right, but what exactly are we basing the scaling on?

 

[SomebodyData]

Read the past few replies @FTW, to a degree its levels and other stuff like their canon standings