>>42266577I think ai that can switch and some sort of soft level cap would work well. Switching prevents battles from being mash A to win, and the level cap prevents the battle from being trivialized because the player has inflated stats.
> most teams are monotype so switching holds little benefitObvious solution is to have themed teams, rather than monotype ones. Even if they don't go that route, at this point there are enough pokemon that it's possible to build a monotype that doesn't share common weaknesses. For example, a grass gym leader might want a Lotad or a Lileep to cover their fire weakness.
> it's impossible to design a hard battle if the player has too many choicesI don't think that's true. An ai smart enough to switch out of obviously bad matchups, and a team with decent defensive synergy like I described above should be able to deal with a pretty wide variety of threats well enough. This is a bit of an extreme example, but what you're saying here seems to be like saying it's impossible to build a team in competitive pokemon that can deal with more than one archetype, because there are just too many options.
> TESI know at least Skyrim has a difficulty option.
