Strategy or Balance?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Mufasa

Mufasa

So I was thinking about team building and came up with this question/discussion topic:

Is it more feasible to make a team around a strategy like an agiligross sweep and then execute it, or is it better to make a team around a balanced core of pokemon and then just eliminate everything on the other team? Or if both are feasible, which one do you prefer?

I'll start this off:
I find that it's a lot easier to slap 6 pokemon with decent synergy and complementary typing together, but putting together a strategy team takes a lot more effort, but putting together a team around a strategy or late game sweeper that needs support ultimately is more rewarding.
 
Mufasa said:
So I was thinking about team building and came up with this question/discussion topic:

Is it more feasible to make a team around a strategy like an agiligross sweep and then execute it, or is it better to make a team around a balanced core of pokemon and then just eliminate everything on the other team? Or if both are feasible, which one do you prefer?

I'll start this off:
I find that it's a lot easier to slap 6 pokemon with decent synergy and complementary typing together, but putting together a strategy team takes a lot more effort, but putting together a team around a strategy or late game sweeper that needs support ultimately is more rewarding.
Click to expand...

Ok, first things first, you need to take my bias into account... so yah, I HATE teams that run just sweepers, or mixes. You need to run a STRATEGY.

I would go for the agiligross, as that is a whole total boatfull more fun, AND I would actually suggest you go for an agili-pass team. Don't build it solely around metagross - build it around about 4 agility/swords dancing/baton passing pokemon, and 2 or 3 good passes. (like metagross).

You'll have way more fun that way, trust me.
 
I used to run a Semi-Stall team where I'd go for all hazards, a bunch of shuffling, then bust out Empoleon and sweep. I could be down 4-1 with only Empoleon left and just smash whatever was left just because nothing can stop Empoleon if you get the opponent just right and it's not all that hard to do but one screw up (like no Toxic Spikes on Blissey) means I am stuck and have almost no chance. This team used to eat anything but Stall for breakfast. Then Stall got really popular and I couldn't win at all.

So in that sense, having a focus lets you pound certain match ups but get pounded by others. Constantly changing your strategy to counter the flavour of the month is the key.


Going balance means that, on average, you'll probably do just as well as an all or nothing strategy. If you are really good, your average can beat almost anything.


Basically, balance > single strategy overtime but an evolving strategy is optimal.

First, assume balance is always 50/50 against equal opponents. Now, say the metagame is stall focused, 60% of teams are stall, you can then win 60% of games with a stall beating focus, even if you lose the rest, which is better than the balance approach. Now say the metagame shifts to bulky offense and you can't touch that with your strategy, now you only win 40% of the time which is worse than balance. If you change with the shift and keep winning 60% of the time, you'll be better than balance.

Obviously those numbers make no sense but the analogy is apt I think.


Oh and the only exception is a Hax strategy which is sort of a cheat since now you can win games you should otherwise lose with a single strategy.
 
I think that if a supposedly "thrown together" team is well played and tuned for a while on the ladder, higher strategies involving, for example, setting up certain pokemon to sweep by destroying their counters will tend to develop. You'll find that just by playing a team for long enough, you'll have moments where you say "Wow, if I had that (move or EV spread or even pokemon) available to deal with this problem, 3 of those ladder matches I played today might have gone different."

So I think its more about putting the team together to start in a way you're more comfortable with, and either it'll have some core strategy to begin with or develop a good one over time.
 
Formulaic balanced teams don't tend to work well.

Teams with a specific theme, like Rain or support, need to be built around that theme. But more general offensive, balanced, or stall teams work well by picking an offensive of defensive 'core' of two complementary Pokemon, then thinking about what else to add to support the core.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top