>>20239309Well, let's look at this like Extra Credits does. Depth is the number of meaningful decisions you can make, whereas Complexity is the number of decisions you can make.
By this metric alone, Pokemon is more strategically deep than chess, because teambuilding alone constitutes more meaningful choices than, say, your opening in Chess.
However, Pokemon becomes so complex by sacrificing simplicity. The decision of whether or not to use Mightyena is meaningless, because, sadly, it's shit. This decision contributes to the game's complexity, but not to its depth. In contrast, most decisions in Chess are meaningful.
So, I'd say that Pokemon is deeper than Chess, but Chess is *richer* than Pokemon.
>>20243331I don't think pokemon has a single strategy, such that the best counter to it is itself, and it's the best counter to all other strategies.
I mean, I'm no mathematician, so I dunno.
