In competitive there are various things I mind, but mostly is the metagame.
Be it singles, doubles, or whatever format you play, you will have no success unless you don't stop and look at the list of what are the most popular, strongest threats at the time and prepare for them during your teambuilding process.
Next is deciding on a game plan. You can build an aggressive team, focused on making your ideal kind of game, a team that focuses on disrupting the opposing affinities, or simply, a team whose basic lineup is so strong that it cannot be shattered. Regardless of what you pick, you want to have more than one plan in stock since that is the very definition of gimmick, and gimmicks never make it.
To give you an example, let's say I have a Dark Void smeargle. A novice would make a team solely around Dark Void spam, with Fake Out users and such.
A good Pokémon player, on the other hand, would make a point out of threatening fake out + Dark Void and never using it, allowing for easier lead prediction and furthering his own real goals.
As for the individual teammates, no doubt. I pick a mega, and then pick 5 mons that do the work. The key is not originality, but to make a metagame call. If Trick Room is very popular, you make sure to have a slow mon to take advantage of the opponents' and gain momentum. If rain teams worry you, you carry a bulky Ludicolo. If, on the other hand, Mega-Kangaskhan becomes a problem, you carry a Ferrothorn with iron barbs and Rocky Helmet.
Typing wise, I don't worry to keep consistent my types like fire, water grass etc as much as making sure no more than one of my mons are particularly weak to widespread attacks and the STABS of the most used megas at the time, and try to have perfect coverage with my offensive attacks.
>>21862878That is a meh idea. Ideally, your Pokémon should be efficient. That is, do their role in the team for the current metagame, and do it well. Without taking in account the meta, your teams will be poor.
