This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.

What Pokemon do you think didn't need an evo?

  • Topic Archived
You're browsing the GameFAQs Message Boards as a guest. Sign Up for free (or Log In if you already have an account) to be able to post messages, change how messages are displayed, and view media in posts.
  1. Boards
  2. Pokemon X
  3. What Pokemon do you think didn't need an evo?

User Info: Firemaster5

4 years ago#51
CrusnikCain posted...
I love Rhyperior even though i don't think giving Rhydon a evolution was necessary but i do not like Porygon-z and lickilicky

If not for the Eviolite boost, Lickitung getting an evolution was unnecessary design-wise.
FuneralCake posted...
All of the ones in gen 4, because gen 4 sucks.

"Sorry to be frank but if you were interested in JRPGs and bought a 360 only then you flat out chose the wrong system."-Thamauturge

User Info: Gsus_94

4 years ago#52
I don't think Chansey needed one, especially with candidates like farfetch'd from the first gen
3DS FC: 0473 7779 6792
ACNL: Melo from Besaid

User Info: Chaos_Missile

4 years ago#53
Rhydon, because I'd rather Rhydon get a retyping to Ground/Steel due to how armor-liked its design is in addition to having the primary colour of steel type Pokemons.

Kingdra didnt need to exist since Seedra was badass. A retyping for Seedra would've been better imo.

I wont deny Licklicky's existence confused me. Also Tangrowth. After a while, however, I'm fine with the latter. Still not so much with the former.
Action speaks louder than words. But words, when used right, overwhelm any action - Me, 2006
Let's put a smile on that face - The Joker, 2008
  1. Boards
  2. Pokemon X
  3. What Pokemon do you think didn't need an evo?

Report Message

Terms of Use Violations:

Etiquette Issues:

Notes (optional; required for "Other"):
Add user to Ignore List after reporting

Topic Sticky

You are not allowed to request a sticky.

  • Topic Archived