The Pokémon: Symphonic Evolutions concert tour is coming to Philadelphia on September 19th. We have two sets of concert double-passes to give away to lucky Bulbanews readers!
Pokémon Omega Ruby and Alpha Sapphire are coming this November! Check BNN and Bulbanews for up-to-date Pokémon news and discuss it on the forums or in our IRC channel.

Talk:Pokémon Trainer's Choice

From Bulbapedia, the community-driven Pokémon encyclopedia.
Jump to: navigation, search

Inception

I think we should make a list of the PTC's of each episode.

Example: EP999 Question:Blah blah blah? Choices:Pokémon 1, Pokémon 2, Pokémon 3 Answer:Blah blah blah! - unsigned comment from Weezing22arbok (talkcontribs)

Yeah, same with Who's That Pokémon. TTEchidna 16:38, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
We have them listed on the episode's pages. Should we move them here? --PAK Man Talk 04:54, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Possible Layout

I've been experimenting with a possible layout for the Trainer's Choices to be listed on this page. This is what I've come up with so far:

Episode Question Choices Answer Note(s)
A Fan with a Plan Trainers, which one of these Pokémon evolves into Seviper? Arbok, Sableye, Suicune Arbok Epic fail on 4Kids' part: Seviper doesn't evolve from ANYTHING.
Solid as a Solrock Trainers, which one of these Pokémon isn't a pure Fighting-type? Makuhita, Blaziken, Machamp Blaziken Blaziken is Fire/Fighting.
Where's Armaldo? Trainers, which Pokémon was my original choice as a starter? Squirtle, Bulbasaur, Charmander Squirtle Ash first chose Squirtle, then Bulbasaur, then Charmander, and finding all Poké Balls empty, was forced to take Pikachu.

I was thinking the notes column could be used in case the answer was incorrect, and it would be used to explain it. Any thoughts? --PAK Man Talk 00:22, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

I like it, it organizes everything a lot better and it brings them all onto one page. Could we do this table on the episode pages? I think it would make the pages look a lot cleaner and consistant. MoldyOrange 00:24, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
Anyone wanna? TTEchidna 22:49, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
Ding-dong. (make a) List of Pokémon Trainer's Choice? Anyone wanna get 'em all together? TTEchidna 02:54, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
Until I read this page, I didn't even know that Ask asked the questions. Do you think this needs mentioning in the article? Taromon777 13:46, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

I've created a table for those who are interested..--ForceFire 02:05, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

I just finished putting all the questions on the page, and now I find out people are making tables for it. head desk

should I stick a table around them? it would make the page wayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy shorter._Volcronaperson_ 21:52, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

What about this layout

It's compact and its just specify that the answer is bold

Episode Question Choices Note(s)
A Fan with a Plan Trainers, which one of these Pokémon evolves into Seviper? Arbok, Sableye, Suicune Seviper does not evolve.
Solid as a Solrock Trainers, which one of these Pokémon isn't a pure Fighting-type? Makuhita, Blaziken, Machamp Blaziken is Fire/Fighting.
Where's Armaldo? Trainers, which Pokémon was my original choice as a starter? Squirtle, Bulbasaur, Charmander Ash first chose Squirtle, then Bulbasaur, then Charmander, and finding all Poké Balls empty, was forced to take Pikachu.

--Igor 01:18, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Question

Would it be possible that some of these questions don't only take typing into account, but other factors as well? Turtwig A (talk | contribs) 17:49, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

Could be, but given that this is intended to be child's trivia, there is little argument for assuming that the writers based some of the questions on stats or other complicated info. Types are the easiest things to remember, and it appears that all of the related questions only deal with typing, even if some are erroneous. --IWannaBeTheVeryBest (talk) 17:37, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

Explaining the answers

I have included all of the information regarding why certain answers are so. For example, I changed "Dustox has a double resistance to Fighting" to "The Bug/Poison-type Dustox has a double resistance to Fighting." Should we keep it my idiot-proof way or just assume that people know the types already? --IWannaBeTheVeryBest (talk) 17:37, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

More than type advantage

Note that Ash doesn't ask which has a type advantage...
AG132, Arcanine vs Kirlia: Who has the advantage?
"Neither choice is correct based on type match-ups because Fire-type Pokémon and Psychic-type Pokémon have a neutral effect on each other. Also, this is the first and only Trainer's Choice that has two choices instead of three."
I really think this question was about more than type match-ups, but a match where two types "seem" on equal ground, but really aren't. Kirlia has rather unremarkable stats, with low HP, Spd, both Atk and Sp.Atk, and both Def and Sp.Def. Arcanine, on the other hand, has notably higher stats in each. While neither has type advantage over the other, Arcanine is clearly correct in that it could deal more damage, resist more damage, and take more damage until being knocked out, as well as attacking first with higher speed. Also to note, Kirlia learns no offensive moves with type advantage over Arcanine (only Rain Dance, a status move); Arcanine learns Bite, a dark move Kirlia is weak to.
If you take the strongest and weakest Kirlia and Arcanine, Arcanine has a VERY clear advantage. Proof in the form of Battle Math is here. (And proof = fact, not opinion)

AG053, Best to fight Kirlia: Togetic, Combusken, Graveler?
"This is incorrect due to the part Fighting-type Combusken's weakness to the Psychic-type Kirlia. None of the choices has an advantage over Kirlia."
A tough call, I can only really say Graveler is best choice between Togetic and Graveler to battle Kirlia, here. Kirlia's psychic attacks are all special, with only 5 TM physical moves - Combusken is weak by type; Graveler has incredibly low Sp.Def. with a base stat of 45; Togetic has a Sp.Def. base stat of 105, meaning it would take the least amount of damage from Kirlia's attacks. However, Kirlia has incredibly low Sp.Atk. with a base of 35, so while Togetic would be able to absorb more hits, Togetic and Graveler have the same HP with a base of 55. Togetic takes until about lvl 50 to start learning offensive moves, and only a handful of TMs are worth having, including Hyper Beam, Return, and Giga Impact. It also has a base Atk of 40, compared to Kirlia's base Def of 35, which is enough for a stat advantage. Graveler, on the other hand, has a base Atk of 95 with great ground/rock moves like Earthquake or Stone Edge, which could double Togetic's damage easily.
Considering Graveler is a physical fighter and Togetic is a special defender, in terms of stats, it really comes down to who can knock out who first. Kirlia has a base speed of 50, while Togetic and Graveler have 40 and 35 respectively. Kirlia could hit Graveler for 65% before it acts using Psychic, but Togetic's Sp.Def. would protect it to take only 25%. Kirlia's 38 base HP means Graveler could hit with an attack with a power of 75 and still one-shot it (115%), so the 65% dmg would mean nothing (unless Psychic crits). Togetic, however, would have a tougher fight, dealing only about 25% dmg with one of its common attacks, or almost exactly 100% with one of its strongest attacks. As a note, Giga Impact, its strongest physical attack, would only one-shot an incredibly weak Kirlia, and only if the Togetic was above average.
Just for fun, Kirlia could potentially hit Combusken first for about 90-100%, but Combusken would likely hit first with a higher base Spd of 55, and strike for 85% physical or 100% special with common/weak moves (or more, with TMs and its strongest moves, pushing 120% phys and 170% special, on average). Combusken could be able take out Kirlia with no damage taken, or (if it's slow) the same as everyone else. Funny that means Combusken is the best choice to fight Kirlia...

Kinda makes me want to review other ones marked as "incorrect" (except seviper/arbok... really 4kids?) and see if the pokemon they chose really had an unnoticed advantage. --Kiomadoushi (talk) 01:07, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

Addendum
AG052, Best to fight Shiftry: Swampert, Taillow, Torkoal?
Taillow, a part Flying-type, would also be a good choice against Shiftry, who is part Grass.
Taillow has abysmal stats, and likely wouldn't survive the first round. Low defenses (30 each) combined with low attacks (55 and 30) means it's suicide against Shiftry, with high Atk and Sp.Atk. (100 and 90). Razor Leaf for 100% dmg before Taillow could attack. If Taillow attacks first, 30% special with Air Slash, 40% physical with Aerial Ace... Then weak Razor Leaf to knock it out. Once again, it didn't ask for what has type advantage, but which is best to fight it.
I knew looking for more was a good idea... --Kiomadoushi (talk) 01:19, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

This is all based on an assumption that the anime takes into consideration base stats and other game things. However, there is no evidence that this is true, and plenty of evidence that the anime does not take into consideration these things. I undid your edit. --It's Funktastic~!話してください 02:40, 13 September 2013 (UTC)
Perhaps not the numbers, but it certainly does take into consideration things like strong pokemon vs weak pokemon. Mind you that there was an episode that did use math and numbers, and that it's surprisingly accurate. It actually points to them at least being somewhat aware that not all pokemon are equal in a battle and that some are more advantageous than others, especially with a database with years of effort to now back up their answers that the under-informed believe are wrong. Considering the Hoenn games came out two years before the anime did in Japan even, it's more than improbable to think that 4Kids did not have somebody familiar with the games on which the anime is based. As for the person who did the seviper/arbok confusion, it's an understandable (albeit unprofessional) mistake with visual similarities in ekans and seviper to the unfamiliar artist and trainer's choice team lead. Can you really prove that they only meant type-matching? The anime DID prove that being at a type disadvantage didn't always mean losing. Fast easy-OHKO sweeper pokemon have appeared a few times, and it's something to think about when fighting a slow pokemon. High-defense types and which types of attack/defense have also mattered. Something to consider maybe... --Kiomadoushi (talk) 04:55, 13 September 2013 (UTC)
Trainers Choice was never meant to be based off stats. Only type match ups. This may be because the questions were targeted for children and that children knew types and effectiveness better than stats.--ForceFire 05:05, 13 September 2013 (UTC)
So I was the only one ever to think about which could take a hit and which were faster? I was the only person watching Pokemon growing up who thought about things like speed and special attacks versus defenses and physical attacks, and which could tank hits? Pikachu's agility vs. Raichu or thunder vs. Rhyhorn were just for fun and weren't tactical? That Heracross winning against Magmar even though it was type-weak to Magmar's flames was just a fluke and had nothing to do with Heracross' high special defense and Magmar's low physical defense? The loss after with Blastoise was obviously because he was weakened by the battle before, but more than type advantage has been shown in the anime. --Kiomadoushi (talk) 05:26, 13 September 2013 (UTC)
Unlike the games, the anime battles are based on the plot of the episode rather than the luck or skill of the trainer. If the writers want an Pikachu to defeat an Onix with an electric attack, they'll find a loophole to make it possible. It has nothing to do with stats or chance occurrences. Very rarely are stats even mentioned in the anime, and when they are no one even pays attention to them. Jo the Marten ಠ_ಠ 05:34, 13 September 2013 (UTC)
So just everyone refuses to accept that there's proof to backup 4Kids' answers, or that the games and anime do have congruency, and just close their eyes and say "that's wrong". Obviously 4Kids knew more about Pokemon than everybody is giving them credit, clearly being familiar with the statistical side of battles with those answers. Perhaps where they did wrong is in taking information from the games that came before the anime, hoping the viewers would be familiar with the games more than the "random luck" that the anime shows. Remember that 4Kids only dubbed the series, not wrote it - creator and translator can have different knowledge of the same topic. --Kiomadoushi (talk) 05:48, 13 September 2013 (UTC)
You're trying to convince me that 4Kids understood complex battle strategies that not even the majority of the players use, but they couldn't identify a majority of Pokémon on a semi-regular basis, and consistently made inexcusable mistakes. If 4Kids was so wise and all-knowing, why aren't they still dubbing the anime? Yes, we run a strict anime =/= games policy. Pokémon unaffected by certain types of attacks are constantly being hit by attacks of that type even to this day, in Japanese and English. Clearly the games and the anime follow extremely different guidelines. To treat them as one and the same is preposterous. Jo the Marten ಠ_ಠ 06:01, 13 September 2013 (UTC)
Why? That's easy. It's on this wiki, right here. Their contract expired in 2006, and they were outbid by TAJ. A money-related issue considering Pokémon has become less popular in the US after 10 years, so they wanted to cut costs for dubbing. When trying to get a new contract signed, TAJ offered to do it cheaper, and they took it. When TAJ closed, they passed it off to DuArt. Production costs, not production quality, was the key issue. 4Kids had worked with the series for a decade and obviously knew what they were doing if it managed to stay popular for this long. I can understand the importance of sticking to policy, but it's still not fair to 4Kids to say they're wrong even when information can be provided to support them, and ignore it just because policy overwrites proof. I guess figuring out Arcanine has a health, strength, defense, and speed advantage over Kirlia really is inexcusable and we can't forgive 4Kids for it.
I've done a little check on who you are, why so adamant. Editorial board, Junior Admin... You're policy keepers, and policy holds back change and new information. It ignores fact when it goes against the status quo. I have proof to backup 4Kids, but "policy" is keeping an encyclopedia from being up-to-date. Arcanine is stronger than Kirlia. That's fact with proof, not opinion. In the anime, that's also been proven. Arcanine is a fast, strong, resilient pokemon, while Kirlia is a first evolution lacking in ability. The fact that Arcanine is a final evolution and Kirlia is not gives it an advantage too. This isn't opinion, and other stuff isn't opinion. The anime works to draw heavily from the games. To state they are separate is just ignorant, but if that's what policy states, then so be it. If fact in the games can support information in the anime/dub, policy shouldn't mean anything. Fact is fact and canon is canon, and when factual canon lines up between them, and congruency is found, then it's congruent. Perhaps a change in policy is in order, to be a per-case sort of thing? Surely the editorial board member can see to the diplomatic and bureaucratic approach to changing policy when policy no longer applies and is holding back facts in the game from supporting information deemed "wrong" in the anime. Perhaps I should see what Werd or Kenji-Girl have to say about games supporting information in the anime, see if they say policy states they're separate so fact in one doesn't matter, even if it supports what's already there in the anime. -- Kiomadoushi (talk) 08:07, 13 September 2013 (UTC)
You put way more thought into this than the total man-hours of everyone who worked on Pokémon Trainer's Choice. Unfortunately for you, there are three reasons why we cannot correct a certain PTC judging by base stats:
• PTC asks questions about evolution, types, and identification. Not much else, and certainly not something as convoluted as base stats.
• Those who made PTC were dumb as bricks until the new guy took over, when they became dumb as moss.
• It was a feature in a kids show dubbed by people who knew less about the canon than the viewers.
Add everything the guys before me have put, and no, we cannot make a judgement saying that Arcanine beats Kirlia because of game-only mechanics like base stats. --IWannaBeTheVeryBest 10:26, 13 September 2013 (UTC)
Because the anime only showing Arcanine as a strong, fast, resilient pokemon, and showing Kirlia as an underevolved, mediocre, not-so-tough-in-any-way pokemon does not mean Arcanine has the ADVANTAGE, which is what it asks. And the questions haven't asked for type-matching, but rather which would be better. Type is one of the things to give a pokemon advantage, but so is speed, strength, and endurance, which the anime does show, and consistently shows. Slow pokemon always lose because of their speed. Intolerant pokemon almost always fall in one hit. Ignoring the numbers (though the anime takes heavily from the games and so matches fast stats with fast pokemon and defensive stats with enduring pokemon), the anime still shows that there's no reason to believe Kirlia would have any advantage over Arcanine, and that Arcanine would most CERTAINLY have advantage over Kirlia. Perhaps you'd like to go back to evolution: Arcanine is fully evolved; Kirlia is not. Or how about types and what secondary qualities they have: Psychic is a strong special attacker but not always the best on speed, and very lacking in defenses; Fire's biggest weakness is in health, but even that is great, with astounding attacking and defending ability, as well as many having speed advantage over most except electric types. Evolution vs Evolution, Type vs Type, Arcanine has an advantage. It's not as massive as Blastoise vs Charmander, but it's a distinct, noticeable advantage that would leave at least a majority of trainers quaking in their boots if their Kirlia had to fight an Arcanine. And it asks for advantage, not who would win, so answering by advantage in a way any 10-year-old can see should more than suffice. --Kiomadoushi (talk) 23:29, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

AG137

Wouldn't earthquake deal neutral damage on both Wishcash and Flygon, making both viable answers? - unsigned comment from 8BitRevenge (talkcontribs)

Flygon has Levitate. Pumpkinking0192 (talk) 02:04, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

Useless, faulty Notes

My gripe with edits like this is that a lot of the explanation added to these mostly arbitrary wrong answers have pointless information. Yes, Torkoal has one advantage and one resistance to Ninjask's types. However, since Nosepass has a double advantage and a resistance (not spelled resistant, by the way) over Ninjask, it is the best choice. There, done, no need to bother mentioning Torkoal at all. The PTC question asked which is the best choice, not "Rank all three by their individual characteristics." Volbeat, however, is flat-out wrong to include and thus imply it's as good a choice as Chinchou. Both have an advantage over Crawdaunt, but Chinchou has a resistance too. Boom. It's the best, so don't mention second place at all. Similarly, while Gastly does have an advantage and a resistance to Sunflora, Venomoth has all that and super effective Bug-type attacks and a double resistance. I think it's pointless (and in the latter two cases, misleading) to mention the second-best choices at all. —TheVeryBest 19:24, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

But at the same time, it is not incorrect to state that they at least have an advantage. Yes, it's asking for the best choice, but we can't just ignore the fact that another one of the choices would also be correct, albeit slightly ineffective. And the Volbeat and GAstly ones are going by types rather than moves, because we've established that moves do not take into account with these questions. Besides, it's like leaving out the Swampert note on AG059, Larvitar would be a perfect choice, but we can't just ignore that Swampert would be a good choice as well.--ForceFire 02:50, 27 June 2014 (UTC)