>>55911825>however I do think dress up is important and should be factored inI agree. I think dress up would fit well with Pokémon Contests. But it depends on how exactly it's implemented.
I don't like gen 4's implementation. You have to follow a theme which is good. But you just paste sprites of the Accessories on top of your Pokémon's sprite. That's one thing Pokémon Musicals in gen 5 actually got right by limiting placement. I think it would be much harder to implement dress up and get it to look good now that Pokémon use 3D models instead of 2D sprites.
>Formatwise there's a surprising amount of options.True. I'd treat each Category as its own format. I'd also add a 6th one where the four players all vote on which of the five Categories to play, that would require Pokémon that could be ready for any Category that could be chosen. Then those formats could further get variations. Such as for Clever, you could get Clever OU, Clever UU, Clever Ubers, Clever AG and so on.
>would be funny seeing an ubers list.Very true! I can see it. Baby Pokémon too OP for Cute OU and banned to Cute Ubers!
>>55911899>If you want to win a cute contest with metagross or something that should be an uphill battleThis is one of the reasons I like the idea of Contest Base Stats. It just feels like it makes sense if contests are to be as in-depth as battles.
>Ribbon masters would be even greater achievements if you actually had to strategize for how to make your chosen mon viableYes. It would make any Pokémon having Ribbons from all five Categories be much more meaningful. But in a Contest-focused game, I think there would be a Contest equivalent of Levels, then you could just overlevel. But that wouldn't help in competitive.
>>55911984>Each iteration of contests had a different name and I hate it.It's likely because all but the first are all variations of another.
>Smeargle would be quickbanned.With contests as they are now. For sure. I think so too.
