Hmm, I'm not really sure what would be in my reply, though? Obviously I'd agree that it's unbalanced, though maybe not to the extent we should change it a ton (I had some thoughts about this but then forgot them. I guess an opponent that resists the specific type the ability works for would be a pretty good counter, though somewhat situational?), throw out some numbers (1.625x boost to base power after accounting for STAB) and offer some alternative suggestions for a fix. And that seems... not a good thing to post about.
("Good" isn't really the right word, but I don't know what would apply in this situation - "relevant" is obviously wrong, but closer to what I'm looking for, so maybe "discussion-provoking" or "contributory"? (This is why I don't really post in meta threads? Like, I either don't have a super important point to make and feel like I won't contribute anything that wouldn't be said better by someone else, or spend time and energy on the post and then feel unmotivated to respond to replies because my brain goes, like, hey you already spent time and energy on this topic, what are you doing spending more?? You should go look at cute rabbits on tumblr or something instead.))
(back on track, said potential fixes would be: lower the threshold, lower the boost, lower the threshold and the boost but to a lesser degree in each, lower the boost and make it affect final damage instead, increase energy costs of those moves, increase energy costs of all moves (while activated), combinations of the above. I don't really have numbers to give for these ideas, though, so.)
I had a thought about using Huge and Pure Power as balanced benchmarks for discussion, but now I'm feeling conflicted as to whether Huge and Pure Power are relatively good or relatively bad compared to the starter abilities. (I start leaning towards relatively good, but then I think "raised energy costs for all moves, only a 1.2x boost, starter abilities are situational but really good in those situations, which will also always happen over the course of any relevant battle", but then I think "it's only 1% extra, energy is rarely relevant, and the powers work for other types too", and the cycle continues.)
("Good" isn't really the right word, but I don't know what would apply in this situation - "relevant" is obviously wrong, but closer to what I'm looking for, so maybe "discussion-provoking" or "contributory"? (This is why I don't really post in meta threads? Like, I either don't have a super important point to make and feel like I won't contribute anything that wouldn't be said better by someone else, or spend time and energy on the post and then feel unmotivated to respond to replies because my brain goes, like, hey you already spent time and energy on this topic, what are you doing spending more?? You should go look at cute rabbits on tumblr or something instead.))
(back on track, said potential fixes would be: lower the threshold, lower the boost, lower the threshold and the boost but to a lesser degree in each, lower the boost and make it affect final damage instead, increase energy costs of those moves, increase energy costs of all moves (while activated), combinations of the above. I don't really have numbers to give for these ideas, though, so.)
I had a thought about using Huge and Pure Power as balanced benchmarks for discussion, but now I'm feeling conflicted as to whether Huge and Pure Power are relatively good or relatively bad compared to the starter abilities. (I start leaning towards relatively good, but then I think "raised energy costs for all moves, only a 1.2x boost, starter abilities are situational but really good in those situations, which will also always happen over the course of any relevant battle", but then I think "it's only 1% extra, energy is rarely relevant, and the powers work for other types too", and the cycle continues.)
