Playstyles in the OU metagame

[Syndrome]

Playstyles have been a pretty big part of competitive Pokémon since…well, forever. I assume that everyone has a pretty good idea of what a playstyle is, so I'm not going to go in depth and explain what they are in the OP (though if you don't know, and really need to know, click this and scroll down to "Team Archetypes").

With that being said, I just want to ask a few questions.
Do you think there's a playstyle that's superior to the rest?
What makes you think this way?
How viable do you think other playstyles are?
If you think any aren't viable, how do you suggest they be fixed?

Please be civil.

 

[5qwerty]

I really like HO, but I sometimes go for BO as well. I'm too impatient to use Stall or Semi-Stall. Because of my playstyle, I think Offense is superior to the other playstyles because bias and also narcissist.

I don't really like Stall because it's really annoying, and sometimes they stay in with Chansey on my Heatran when I can just go for SR so easily. It's not too bad, because you have to outpredict just like any other match. Also I really, really hate Baton Pass because that's actually low skill and can easily beat teams that aren't prepared for it.

EDIT: Also with Stall you get some 1287-turn garbage.

 

[ShanWow]

I think Offensively oriented teams are the best because they are the most proactive playstyle. Stall/Defensive teams tend to be more reactive as the Pokemon are generally slower.

Offensive teams tend to play around a win condition (e.g. Set-up Sweeper, Removing checks to sweepers, Late game cleaner,etc.) which makes them attempt moves to gain momentum and pull ahead. Defensive teams are more focused towards nullifying opponent win conditions over achieving their own (which I guess is a win condition itself).

This isn't true of all Offensive and Defensive teams of course as the large variety of Pokemon available leads to different team compositions and synergies. Personally I've never liked playing reactively because it relies heavily on out predicting a complete stranger with a random team.

 

[noa]

If there are ultimately three major playstyles, HO, BO and stall, I wouldn't say any are superior to the rest... Even if I greatly hate playing with or against stall. I love HO the most, I personally think it's the most entertaining to just go all out like that. It's fast, crazy and fun. But I try to make sure I can still cripple the opposing team with status moves so my all-out offensive is a little easier to pull off.
I think stall is plain annoying to play against, though I do enjoy the challenge it gives me in figuring out how to break down their defensive cores.

 

[loser]

There's so many different playstyles, all with their own strengths and weaknesses. There is no playstyle that's better than the rest in my opinion. I like fatter teams, though, like balance, semistall, and stall but offense is fun as well.

 

[Aurora]

The viability of playstyles varies depending on the metagame. I'll answer this thread from the perspective of an Ubers player.

There is a clear gap between offense and balance, and an even greater gap between those two playstyles and stall. The incredibly powerful metagame, coupled with the recent rise of fast threats such as all-out attacker Deoxys-A, make it difficult for stall and, to a lesser extent, balance, to keep up. Stall is limited in what it can use -- the Hack Stall sample team and its derivatives are probably the "best" anyone has found this generation. This has resulted in dedicated stallbreakers, such as certain Calm Mind Arceus formes, declining in viability. If the metagame had less dangerous sweepers and quick offensive threats, stall would probably improve.

I personally hate using and facing stall. I find it boring, both to use and to play against. I'm more inclined to try and overwhelm my opponent using offensive teams.