>>55440855>Like do they all really have that unique movesets and strengths that you can differentiate them by usefulness In 99% of cases, yes, Pokemon will be largely appreciably different from each other. Each Pokemon has 6 different stats, abilities, typings, and movesets, which all have a huge pool of combinations to pick from. Occassionally there are some redundancies (like some moves being effectively useless and thus not considered), so in very rare cases it's possible for one Pokemon to entirely outclass another, but in all others different species have something that they can bring to the table.
It's also worth noting, that the context changes this too-- a casual player has to take into consideration Pokemon availability much more than a competitive minded player, who will make choices based on optimization.
>or do you just go by the looks and aesthetics of them.I'm sure the criteria is different for everybody, and by different amounts.
Personally, I primarily care about aesthetics and design, but performance DOES influence my decisions. For reference, my list is
>>55435807, and while I do like Ferrothorn's design, it's pushed up further by being neat looking and strong. Similarly, Tropius, who is a shitmon, COULD be even higher if it was better. The rest of my S rank are at least useable, if not outright great.
I'm sure there are some people who go entirely off of certain memories they've had, impressionable moments, contrarianism, etc.. Theres no set rules.
