Pokemon as a whole hasn't developed much since it's initial form, it's had leaps every now and then, and occasionally saturates a release with gimmicks to make it appealing.
How would you fix it? What would you implement or change/remove to improve the experience.
Pic related: Idea I had for calculating STAB, removing the 2 types per Pokemon limit, and giving every Pokemon a percentage of what type they are. Take Aurorus, Rock and Ice, no water STAB despite Ice coming from water?
My autistic formulae is:
50% fill = Regular attack damage
75% fill = STAB
<25% fill = less damage than average
The pic example is Charizard
Also this isn't taking into account resistances.
If only there were a board specifically for your bullshit theorizing about pokemon mechanics that no sane person cares about
>>383507201
You cared enough to answer.
It means a lot!
Is there anything more pathetic than wanting to 'fix' a flashy cartoony video game geared for children? It's straight up pony tier retardation.
>>383507447
I was generally wondering what people would want, it's why it's here instead of /pokemon/ like a Monster Hunter esc experience would be killer.
>>383507038
After S&M, I'd kill the franchise. Anything after Gen 5 was a horrible mistake
>charizard
>Dragon
Memes aside, the structure of the game should allow any Pokemon to be able to win a championship. From that point there should be several approaches and solutions to battle situations.
>>383507038
they will not change the formula because it makes money the way it is
>>383507038
I think it's fine with sticking and building on it's base formula, but Gamefreak is welcome to make some more spinoffs if they are feeling experimental.
>>383507038
They shouldn't change STAB at all. You realise this game is primarily marketed towards children right? Any advanced autism we have was abusing the formula to make Pokemon feel special. Once the devs caught on that we knew how to abuse the formula they let us manipulate it at our will.
But it's still a kids game. It's fine the way it is. Gen 6 was a mistake, but currently it's fine
>>383507038
Anon there are nearly 1000 Pokemon already
Introducing complications like this would kill any existing competitive interest in the game
>>383507038
It's a game, you need dichotomization.
It's a turn based RPG, you create a meta team and take decisions based on what you expect from the opponent.
Say, they add foods that increase certain stats for the next battle. After a bit the meta follows up and stabilizes.
That's it. You can bring up new ideas but the core of the game is stale.
>>383507038
I would fix it by giving them their own board so they can fuck off.
oh wait.
>>383507038
I have never had a problem with the concept of STAB ever since I first learned about it sometime during gen3. At worst there are some issues with the type matchup chart itself that could be fixed with some very minor changes (why the hell does Fairy resist Bug? Did Bug need to be nerfed further for some reason? There's a point where a type intended to be weak crosses over from 'weak' to garbage').
Also Charizard is not a dragon you fucking autist, I don't care if one of its Mega Evos is.