Talk:List of Pokémon by availability: Difference between revisions

Talk:List of Pokémon by availability (view source)

838 bytes added , 24 September 2017

742

edits

@@ Line 182: / Line 182: @@
 ::Ah! That makes sense now. Thanks for the clarification :) I was not aware that Trade is ranked lower than event distributions! Maybe there should be a distinction between Trade within the generation vs. inter-generational trade? Either way, I was confused because the table cell's background for Umbreon and Espeon were all WHITE for RSE and FRLG, so it made me think these Mon's were totally unobtainable within Gen3 games. But, as you correctly state, they are obtainable with trading within the generation. Thanks again. [[User:Atonaltensor|Atonaltensor]] ([[User talk:Atonaltensor|talk]]) 20:20, 25 May 2016 (UTC)
+== Do trade evolutions deserve a colored background? ==
+It seems to me that if a game's column is colored for a particular Pokemon, that's supposed to signify that a player in the given game can get that Pokemon on their own, without outside trading. But then you have things like Alakazam which, while they are evolutions of Pokemon you can get normally, those evolutions are explicitly locked away without trading.
+Maybe those species could have a label of TE, to distinguish them from both the other E's and also from the "even more inaccessible" T's. But the background ought to be white just like the T's, assuming you can't get the evolution by some other means (like Milotic in OR/AS, or Gengar from an SOS chain in S/M). [[User:SadisticMystic|SadisticMystic]] ([[User talk:SadisticMystic|talk]]) 03:16, 24 September 2017 (UTC)