So I think I am at the point where I have a decent grasp of the basics of competetive pokemon battling and I want to branch out into using more diverse pokemon for my teams instead of always using the go-to solutions to a certain teambuilding problem. That being said, I still have a hard time valuing a Pokemon correctly. I keep seeing C-Rated mons in RMTs where the team peaked very highly and it makes me wonder wether its the player just being very good, them abusing a cheesy strategy (Para-Confusion-Sub-Chatot comes to mind) or if it just doesn't matter all that much whether a mon is technically outclassed. What makes certain pokemon so much better than their counterparts, and how big is the difference? I don't know how many here can relate, but the only analogy I can think of is a Super Smash Bros Melee one, where Doctor Mario is a character that is very capable of pulling of sweet combos and punish insanely well, but he has to work way, wayyy harder to achieve that in comparison to the higher ranked part of the cast. Is it a bit like that?
Lets take Floatzel and Samurott as an example: as far as I am aware, both of these mon have the possibility to run physical and special sets, both have comparable attack stats, Samurott is bulkier while Floatzel is faster. What makes one A+ while the other one is C+?
Sorry if this is not a simple question. Couldn't find a more appropriate thread to ask this.
Lets take Floatzel and Samurott as an example: as far as I am aware, both of these mon have the possibility to run physical and special sets, both have comparable attack stats, Samurott is bulkier while Floatzel is faster. What makes one A+ while the other one is C+?
Sorry if this is not a simple question. Couldn't find a more appropriate thread to ask this.