Quoted By:
>How long and descriptive should battles be, and how does the size/scale/significance of the battle factor in?
Depends on the pokemon involved and the skill level throughout.
A battle between two rookies is going to be far, far shorter than a battle between an MC versus a regional champion. Can both be interesting? Well, the first one can be just as interesting as the second if written right if not better. If the rookie battle was written with flow in mind while the top-tier MC vs. Champion fight was written flat, drab, and turn based to a degree, then I'd rather read the rookie fight because, in the end, it'd be more engaging and passionate even if it were much, much shorter than the latter fight.
For size, it plays a massive factor. Generally speaking, larger pokemon tend to be defensive focused and have more health and can endure hits that some pokemon could legitimately die from (if one doesn't accept fainting as a mechanic) like Hyper Beam. That's of course one way to show the how size/scale/age/exp. plays in but another is showing difference between two pokemon that are of the same species but are different physically.
Using kinfecat, the writethread's de facto mascot, one could be somewhat younger than the other, being described as: shorter, thinner, slower, less agile, and less vicious. The older sneasel would have every advantage, from experience, size, strength, and endurance so in this battle, it should be a serious struggle for the younger sneasel to just survive in the first place.
