Talk:Type

Hi. What type is Mewtwo's smash attacks? I can't see any of them on any of the lists.

Physical Attack
The current type system has a set of individual types and a set of type groups, and considers them entirely separate. However, in SSBU, the Spirit skill "Physical Attack ↑" boosts the power of punches, kicks, and bites, making a new supertype comprising those three types. There doesn't appear to be a good way to describe this under the current rigid system. -- Snorlax Monster  01:35, April 14, 2019 (EDT)
 * There's a fair chance it actually means the same thing as what Brawl calls "Specials: Direct"; that is, stuff that uses the "direct" bit of hitboxes rather than anything in the type system. Since we don't know for sure yet let's not change anything right now. Toomai Glittershine [[Image:Toomai.png|20px|link=User:Toomai/Bin|???]] The Wacko 09:35, April 14, 2019 (EDT)
 * I've found that punch, elbow, kick, knee, body, bite, head, tail, and hip (what is normally 'butt' in other games) are affected by "Physical Attack ↑". I'm not aware of any attacks that are affected by "Physical Attack ↑" that aren't one of the listed types. I guess with the current system it would be a supertype of other types (head, bite, bite, tail) and supertypes (arm, leg, body)? Maybe classing it as a supertype is over-generalizing it a bit.--CanvasK (talk) 13:16, February 17, 2020 (EST)

List of types
I'm going to post this here for others reference. Names used are what is used in their respective listing and are case-sensitive. If anyone has a better source for Brawl's data, let me know; the current one is hard to search and uses a core just for its visualizer.

--CanvasK (talk) 09:57, February 22, 2020 (EST)

Renaming the type pages
Would anyone be opposed to renaming the type pages to include "(type)" in them? Essentially moving, let's say, "Arm" over its redirect "Arm (type)". I have two reasons for this: --CanvasK (talk) 20:24, March 9, 2020 (EDT)
 * 1) Makes it consistent between all of the types. Water and Pikmin are already followed by (type), why not all of them?
 * 2) Future proofs from them from becoming just "list of moves that look like it". The best example of this is Spin, which prior to the overhaul was filled with moves that "looked like spins" or "the character spins" without being that type (Such as Bowser Jr.'s Clown Kart Dash or Isabelle's Nair).
 * Neutral/Support based on second point, but Support based on first point. Doesn't sound like this would be hard to do at all. Even if an article like "Arm" could easily be found to be a type simply by looking at it, it would be nice to see the (Type) next to it to make things a bit clearer. Acgamer28  03:01, May 13, 2020 (EDT)
 * I think a great example would be "Bite". I can easily see users looking for Chomp but searching for "Bite" if they don't know the proper name. I think adding "(type)" would make it more clear that it is a game mechanic rather than an attack, stage element, or something else. --CanvasK (talk) 08:17, May 13, 2020 (EDT)

This is not a bad idea, but perhaps the reason for its current state should be mentioned: like all pages, types are only specified with "(type)" if something else requires it to be disambiguated. For Water, this is the stage element, and for Pikmin, this is the minion. Also note that doing this would arguably create an inconsistenty with effects. Toomai Glittershine The Labbie 07:43, May 13, 2020 (EDT)
 * I understand why Water and Pikmin are currently the only ones, there's already other things that share the names. I feel like this proposal could also be extended to effects to make it consistent. --CanvasK (talk) 08:17, May 13, 2020 (EDT)
 * That's what I'm saying though. Sure it's making it more consistent within the group of pages, but it becomes inconsistent across the wiki as a whole (where the general rule is "only specify if there's a direct conflict"). Toomai Glittershine [[Image:Toomai.png|20px|link=User:Toomai/Bin|???]] The Obfuscating 07:47, May 15, 2020 (EDT)
 * After looking at things like this, i'm Neutral/Support on both facets of the suggestion. I find that even if we do decide that the effect articles must follow this naming convention as well, it would be a minor action to take for some small benefit: everything would be cool if we just left it, but at the same time moving everything to conform with this would also provide some benefit. Even across all type and move articles, it probably wouldn't be all that difficult, right? (a genuine question asked out of ignorance) Just move all the articles. Acgamer28  16:38, May 15, 2020 (EDT)
 * Bumping. This is a minor discussion, but more input would be good so it can be laid to rest.  Acgamer  28 Acgamer28SignatureHead.png 00:56, June 18, 2020 (EDT)