|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Tue Jan 29, 2013 1:45 pm
Hi, I'd like to start off with a hello since I don't get to post almost at all being that my life currently has me unable for regular computer access.
I start this, as a conversation debate or discussion. I have always had some personal I guess annoyance at the abundance of Legendary Pokemon. I always had a bias against them and have rarely ever used them, by choice, cause I have always felt that, being what they are, one of a kind super rare and unique Pokemon (not unlike the starters in rarity apparently hehe) now to be fair I do think a majority of the Legendary Pokemon I am well acquainted with are awesome I can't truely speak of the ones I do not know from not having played alot of the newer games (Gen. four and up). Yet I have allways held a sorta personal irk for seeing people with all legendary or tons of legendary Pokemon cause to me it ruins the fun of them being rare and unique as well as it seems to detract from the experience of having a team that anyone has access too and proving your trainer skills are superior. So! To Legendary or Not to? I'd like to hear other trainers take on the subject.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Jan 29, 2013 6:36 pm
Personally, I do not like to use legendaries in my team. I haven’t enjoyed working with legendaries since Gen. I and II because I enjoy customizing my team to the max. Needless to say, the introduction of natures and individual values in Gen. III-onwards makes it next to impossible to get exactly the pokémon I want with one-catch-only no egg group legendary pokémon.
I’ve never been bothered by the number of legendary pokémon since their existence usually drives the plot of the game in some way (or at least adds to it), and the more of them the more plot points we get. Moreover the really cool/cute ones aren’t available in normal gameplay anyway *sigh* (Mew, Jirachi, Darkrai, etc.). But if people still want to use them in their teams or have an all-legendary team, I don’t really have a problem with it. I might avoid battling with that person, though.
lol
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jan 31, 2013 1:04 pm
I will agree that legendaries have definitely saturated Pokemon battles ever since Generation IV and on with the introduction of quite a handful of them, so seeing a team that consists of half of it being legendary would typically annoy me. However, that's not to say that even something like Sharpedo couldn't beat a legendary, because it can. This is why some legendaries are allowed to be used in standard play; they have a balanced set of base stats that are on par with a lot of regular Pokemon (or worse than in some cases. I'm looking at you, Regirock). I don't think one would be saying what you're saying if someone's team consisted of Regirock, Regice, Registeel, and three other fillers, because that's a pretty fair matchup already if you ask me.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Feb 01, 2013 2:52 pm
Hmm, I can agree there, perhaps I lacked specification. I had observed a pokemon battle in which one team was all legendary of the newer and 'more op'? variaty. The Regi bunch dont bother me cause not to sound rude but they dont stand out as huge and awesome but are cool in their own way. It just some like, even if I find the concept funny, a friend wanting two Ho ohs for a 'double rainbow' joke. Some legendary teams are not so acceptable, I mean really who has two mews, two mewtwos, a dragonite, and Arceus on a team? In my opinion? Someone I dont care to poke battle. I suppose that there are a portion of legendary pokemon that I am alright with opposing it is simply the 'doubles' that get under my skin.
Granted, I did do my research and Legendary pokemon do fall into a few categories such as 'true legends' that are unique and all powerful, or pokemon that are so rare they are legendary in their rarity. I found out a Nurse Joy actually had a Latias. That surprised me.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
