Quoted By:
To the people that insist there is an imbalance: there are two ways I know to do this. The rock, paper, scissors way (all types are neutral to themselves and SE to 8 types and resistant to the other 8), or the democratic way (SE to a third, neutral to a third, and resistant to everything else) The latter is possible only by another type since 17 cannot be divided by 3 (or anything, it's prime). 18 can, though. Immunities are inherently imbalanced, so I excluded that
The flaw is not in the chart, I think, though. The flaw is that certain types are favored over others, and it is plain to see that they did not do the math as to what it would all add up to. Then again, I question whether this was ever intended to be taken so seriously. This game has mechanics designed to intentionally subvert straitforward battling, to the point that it's broken. You can't counter it, at least in it's pure form. The conclusion I gather is that you were only supposed to have fun beating junk up, there is no real finesse to it. The tournaments only restrict pokes that are too powerful, not the moves, and the moves can still be completely unfair if done right. Balance? The only way to balance this junk is to rewrite it from the ground up. More types solves nothing. It isn't even a good marketing gimmick. Yeah, I said it, if more types were added every gen, we'd be tired of that, too. Just this once? That's a lie and you know it. All any of ever do is cry for more types even if it does nothing.
