>>33495571Yeah, that's why people play multiplayer. Challenging enemies in RPGs are designed to compensate for the difference in intelligence with better stats. You're dumb if you think better design would be to keep you always at-pace with all of your opponents and have them play smarter, because playing smarter for a CPU results in the shit people complain about in battle facilities. You can't reasonably simulate a human. And as long as they stick to type-specialists for almost all of the major bosses, they'll be at an inherent disadvantage even if they use cheating AI.
Besides that, the single player battles aren't supposed to give off the feeling of winning a close match against your equal, it's supposed to be about overcoming obstacles. Rival battles would be the exception, I suppose, and you can get away with thinking maybe the Champion battle should be similar, but then you have to balance making it seem like an equal fight, or the most challenging part of the game yet, befitting of the "final boss". I'd rather the latter.
Better designed and larger teams from almost every trainer would be better though, yes. Though some trainers are clearly intended to be cannon fodder, and also have quotas to meet in showing you a lot of different Pokemon throughout the game in case you don't encounter it in the wild so you can check its habitat and catch it.
