offense will dominate and fuck stall, yes, you am rite (and you am annoying). it isnt one sided because balance and stuff will exist too, stall just wont as strongly.
if you don't play Stall, you hate Stall
this is exactly what I said in my post, you are literally using my argument. "Stall being mostlu unviable isn't a huge loss
to most people and actually makes
some people want to play it more." and like I said in my post, stall isn't exactly the dominant archetype in stabmons either. it is more common than in sketchmons, yes, but zygarde's moves basically let lando and other grounds neuter stall in stabmons, and offense has always been the predominant archetype. stall isn't completely unviable in sketchmons either, you're blowing it out of proportion. you can let anything be your hazard control, give everything recovery.
It's a valid play style. And I'm sorry if you and some other people don't like it, it's a part of competitive pokemon, and having a permaladder with a meta with no stall for the sake of fun is a horrible reason for a permaladder.
are you aware we are quite literally all on ps "for the sake of fun" ?_? you don't gain anything by being on ps besides entertainment. and saying "its a part of competitive pokemon" is wildly inaccurate because it is completely non-existent in official competitive pokemon (vgc). it is a valid playstyle, you're right. every meta has stronger playstyles. in ts and bh stall dominates. in ag and sketchmons offense dominates. etc etc.
metagame balance is when the more skilled player wins consistently and battles are not decided at team preview. it is not when all archetypes are equally viable.
your first paragraph is just full of a bunch of bullshit.
We don't know how popular Sketchmons will be when Gen 7 rolls around and we also won't know theoretically how popular STABmons will be in Gen 7.
we don't know exact numbers, but the fact is sketchmons is more appealing to new players. yknow what? sketchmons could potentially have mediocre activity to stabmons. but stabmons has had its chance and doesn't have it. nostalgia isn't a good reason to keep a meta, regardless of if its fun.
It's the difference between Hackmons and Balanced Hackmons, quite literally.
if this is true explain why hackmons is so popular and so many people wanted/probaly still want back? are you aware how much shit eevee and ti got for removing it? it didnt become "frustrating rather than exciting". the rest of this paragraph is also just dumb.
I reserve the right to be completely and totally wrong
this is the only part of your post that is intelligent.
now that im done with that, let me clear this up. i wasn't saying sketchmons is uncompetitive. the point i was making was simply a comparison; in theory it is less competitive than stabmons. sketchmons will reach a balance. talon will start running close combat most of the time, so rotom will still be a fine check. it is more comparable to bh, where nothing for the most part is truly counterable but that doesn't mean the meta isn't competitive.
ultimately Sketchmons will receive its state of balance down the line
this line from funbot is basically it. sketchmons will improve faster than stabmons because it will have a bigger playerbase. there is more to balance out, however, so it will probably still take longer than stabmons in a linear sense. i want stabmons to stay from a personal standpoint, not sketchmons. the thing is, though, like someone said there are only like 40-60 active people involved vocally in oms. its so tight-knit and circlejerky. we have too much influence as individuals. here's a line from megazard:
Ultimately both ladders are coming down to what the community wants, not what might be best for outside people to get into
i partially disagree with this. in theory, yeah, it should be down to what the community wants. but on the other hand, we need a bigger community to agree on said meta. and how do we get a bigger community? a meta that attracts more people. An active, fun to play OM with room for lots of creativity will draw more people to the om community as a whole. how many om players are actually good at pokemon? look at yourself. if you are capable of getting ladder reqs in standard tiers you are at least good enough for the purposes of this statement, not that it is difficult. there are very few om players i genuinely consider good battlers, including most of my om friends. this isn't a bad thing, don't take it as an insult. like i said earlier in this post, we are all here to have fun and if you are having fun then keep doing whatever it is thats fun for you. lots of standard tier players are in the same boat. however, the issue stems with these mediocre players getting to make votes as influential as 10-20 standards players who are of equal skill to them in their respective metas. we /need/ more people to influence metas, and shrink down the power individuals have. 5-10 people giving opinions over whether or not to ban thundy then 1 guy giving the final say vs 50-100 people voting and a 60% majority resulting in a ban. which sounds better? even if those 5-10 people are more invested than the 50-100, it is still /extremely/ prone to bias due to the small sample size.
tldr:
- I would support STABmons over Sketchmons if the playerbases were equal.
- OMs need more people. It's as simple as that.
- Next gen we can always bring STABmons back if Sketchmons fails. We need to give it a chance.
I'm not anti-STABmons, I can't stress that enough. I love it. I am really sad to be arguing against my favorite metagame but to me the correct course is obvious.