Is covering weaknesses worth it?

Let’s say we have something with a lot of good moves, and 5 weaknesses. It has the ability to cover the weaknesses but the moves are not ideal. I am wondering if I should cover weaknesses as much as I can or just go with STAB moves.

Pleaselog inorregisterto add a comment.

Covering weaknesses may or may not take priority depending on what role this Pokemon has to play. Usually though,neutral / super-effective coverageis much more important, in comparison with weakness coverage. Meaning you want to many Pokemon at least neutrally over only weaknesses.This can be rephrased into saying: “covering the Pokemon that resist your STABs over those that hit you hard”.

Let’s take Tyranitar’s case as an example here. It’s primary function in life is to set up Sandstorm, and the other functions are to tearing holes in the opponent’s team. Over here, Tyranitar wants to hit as hard as possible, and the best way to do it is to use STAB moves i.eStone Edge/Rock SlideandCrunch. And since neutral coverage is more important,Earthquakeis the best next option. Not something like, say Aerial Ace which doesn’t give nearly as much coverage.

What happens is that if you go about covering your weaknesses, you’ll often find yourself abandoning STABs and coverage options. It’s not usually advisable, unless these weakness-covering options also happen to give good coverage. For eg.- Tyranitar may also run a Fire type move, not because it’s weak to Grass and Steel types, but rather because it hits them a lot harder in general (super-effective coverage).

Hope I helped!