• A new LGBTQ+ forum is now being trialed and there have been changes made to the Support and Advice forum. To read more about these updates, click here.
  • Hey Trainers! Be sure to check out Corsola Beach, our newest section on the forums, in partnership with our friends at Corsola Cove! At the Beach, you can discuss the competitive side of the games, post your favorite Pokemon memes, and connect with other Pokemon creators!
  • Due to the recent changes with Twitter's API, it is no longer possible for Bulbagarden forum users to login via their Twitter account. If you signed up to Bulbagarden via Twitter and do not have another way to login, please contact us here with your Twitter username so that we can get you sorted.

Should there be Stealth Rock Variations?

Should there be multityped Stealth Rock variations?

  • Yes

    Votes: 28 37.8%
  • No

    Votes: 28 37.8%
  • Maybe (please specify)

    Votes: 18 24.3%

  • Total voters
    74

Arc Blader

back to the start
Joined
Aug 6, 2010
Messages
2,545
Reaction score
2
Of all the moves introduced in Gen IV, Stealth Rock arguably had the largest impact. Its introduction changed the way Pokémon was played in many ways; it's now nearly impossible to find a competitive player who doesn't use it, and previously useful Pokémon like Ho-Oh and Charizard were taken down a few pegs.
My question is this: Should Stealth Rock come in multiple types, or would multityped Stealth Rock variations break the game?
EDIT: ALSO - If there were to be variations, which types should they be?
 
Last edited:
Aren't there already switch-out traps? Spikes and Toxic Spikes. Plus, I'm sure there are some others.
 
Aren't there already switch-out traps? Spikes and Toxic Spikes. Plus, I'm sure there are some others.

I meant like an Ice-Type Stealth Rock; one that hits Pokémon that are weak to Ice harder. For instance, a Dragonite would lose half its health switching into Ice Type Stealth Rock.
 
I think that it would depend upon the type. Obviously if it was something like normal, it wouldn't be an issue. a flying type "stealth rock" would be game changing.
 
NO NO NO!! Just no. I already have enough problems dealing with SR, Spikes and Toxic Spikes. We don't need more of that.
 
An Ice type stealth rock... that is ONLY available to Ice types.
With how somewhat broken that'd be, the Ice type would be saved from being overshadowed by Water! (and would kick Garchomp out of Uber)
Unfortunately that makes Water better, but at least having an Ice type isn't useless.

Though perhaps another kind of trap would work better. Like, a move that freezes any non-ice pokemon that switches in once.

Other elemental Stealth Rock... they'd work pretty good regardless and I say it'd balance the game in most cases.
 
And make certain Types and combinations completely useless again? No thanks. The worst idea ever.

If they ever add another broken Move of the same kind as Stealth Rock, I hope they at least have an unblockable Type Rapid Spin variant, or other more widespread ways to deal with this shit that don't suck so hard.
 
Ugh, I already find those moves obnoxious at a non-meta level. They're great for the metagame, but otherwise, ugh, no. Please, let's not.
 
Yeah, I think it would be an awesome idea, I'd love to see a Ghost version of stealth rock. They could call it "Ectoplasm" :D

And I think its a bit childish of people to whine about how much more difficult it would make the metagame, isn't that kind of the point? You battle competitively to show off your skill as a trainer and stealth-rock variations would make being an awesome competitive battle all the more satisfying, I think.
 
I'd rather not have the competitive metagame shifting more towards who can lay down their spikes and spin away the opponent's even more.

At maximum, spikes and stealth rock already set up 37% damage. Now imagine more of these types of moves stacking up, and these types of moves being more available to more Pokemon. Stealth Rock was so easily available to most people that every team was practically able to include them.

Perhaps if there was a restriction that kept it from stacking with other "elemental" spikes, then yes.
And I think its a bit childish of people to whine about how much more difficult it would make the metagame, isn't that kind of the point? You battle competitively to show off your skill as a trainer and stealth-rock variations would make being an awesome competitive battle all the more satisfying, I think.
Not if that's the only strategy that becomes prominent. People ban things like Garchomp (and now I hear Blaziken) because "they're too strong", yet we're not allowed to dislike a change like this, which while it won't make a single Pokemon broken, will shift the game to focus on two exclusive strategies?
 
Last edited:
no, oh god no.
i realy like the IDEA of spikes, and rocks. something that keeps games from just being "Something i'm weak to? Switch out!" relay, eatery hazards are essential.
however, i hate how stealth rock does type damage. While spikes hits all equaly, rocks decimated the fire,flying and ice types,and made steel, ground,and fighting twice as used.
more types of stealth rock would just be...bad.
 
No. That would create such a sad and boring metagame. People already complain enough about the current entry hazards anyways.
 
Good lord no. Stealth Rock is bad enough because my team tend to be rock hazards, but having variations of it would devastate many things. Until Rapid Spin is improved or an improved clone of it is introduced, Stealth Rock should not have any variations.
 
i'd like to see different type SR's but i'd like to see that combined with not being able to stack them too much & being able to clear them easier

maybe make rock types smash SR upon entry like poison clearing toxic spikes - that would fix it a bit imo (the same could work for other types - electric SR up? switch in an electric type - etc)



At maximum, spikes and stealth rock already set up 37% damage.

max 50% (with 4x SR weakness)
 
Please note: The thread is from 13 years ago.
Please take the age of this thread into consideration in writing your reply. Depending on what exactly you wanted to say, you may want to consider if it would be better to post a new thread instead.
Back
Top Bottom