Even has a Vikings name smh <| sep |> Oh well , it just means I ' ll get it from the local hobbyshop . It ' ll be a bit more expensive but I ' m helping to keep the place open . <| sep |> Indoor operations in real life are pretty fast . <| sep |> I like this idea even if it ' s an approximation , bracketing the reasonable outcomes and selecting something in the middle of the range is probably going to give one a pretty good sense how things might work out when one considers the randomness inherent in real battles . And the range itself is potentially useful , since that might be greater for some pokemon than others . In case it is helpful , here is the idea I was playing with earlier it seems that some variant could be used in conjunction with the attacker scenario framework you ' ve outlined . Prefatory intuition the idea here is to model an attacker as a device that converts potions or more specifically HP into effective damage over time . From a potion efficiency standpoint and , of course , this is but one of many things about which one could care , the goal is to output as much effective damage as possible for a given HP loss . Some useful definitions and concepts Let ATKDamageSec be the effective damage dealt by a pokemon recognizing that this is the quantity that will get divided by DEF to generate HP loss . As a simplification , we assume that the defender produces effective damage at a rate R , in units of effective damage per second . I assume that this is already typeadjusted it isn ' t going to matter anyway . Likewise , let D be the mean effective damage rate generated by the attacker so ATKweave DPS or ATKbase DPS , whichever is higher . On average , in some period of time T , our attacker can deal DT units of effective damage to the defender . In the same interval , however , the attacker will take an average of RT units of effective damage from the defender . The HP loss to the attacker is then RTDEF . To obtain our measure of potion efficiency , we want to consider the damage dealt per HP lost . in our T second interval , this is approximately DTRTDEF DDEFR . Thus , T falls out , and we can just consider the rates . While the absolute damage dealt per HP lost obviously depends on R , in most cases we are interested in comparing performance of different pokemon with R held constant i . e . , vs . the same hypothetical defender . Thus , it is convenient to use units of damage dealt per HP loss per effective defender damage rate , in which case we multiply the above by R and are left with just DDEF ATKDEFmaxWeave DPS , Base DPS . Obviously , we have left out a lot of things , including the effect of incoming damage on energy and dodging . To the extent that dodging effectively reduces both D and R hopefully R more than D ! , this is unlikely to change the picture too much . For incoming damage , that obviously depends on a lot of factors . My intuition would be that this effect is much smaller than the others , but I haven ' t worked the numbers on that . We are also , of course , approximating everything in terms of a continuous average damage rate per time , which neglects the often important implications of move quantization . It would take simulation to see how much this changes things , but to the extent that we are interested in expected performance across many battles with many random effects on move timing and so forth , the ratebased approach may be rationalizable as an approximate average . In terms of the framework you just suggested , a natural thing to do would be to use your highlow scenarios to set the damage rates for the attacker . The averaged result would then give one a sense of what might happen in a moderate exchange . Actually , the interval itself would also be useful it could be useful to know which mon overlap in efficiency , and which are wellseparated . BTW , vis a vis defense , it seems that the obvious counterpart to potion efficiency would be damage cost for a given attacker effective damage rate D , how much effective damage will a defender deal before falling ? It may be that some of the existing gym defense ratings are equivalent to this , so I ' d have to look at them again , but the basic idea seems straightforward enough . One would want to take into account the defender ' s increase in HP due to gym mechanics and whatnot , of course . The scenario system you describe could be used to modify the damage rates for this calculation in the same fashion as the above . For a defender , it might also be interesting to have the bestworst case scenarios also factor in bestworst case type matching , so that one can see how wide the interval is between getting attacked by a naive versus an experienced attacker . It would be really ideal to factor in the fact that not all type combinations are possible , but that gets to be a PITA fast . My guess would be that this is more of a consideration for some defenders than others , but I could be wrong . Anyway , thanks for reading this very long post ! I hope that some of these ideas are useful personally , I find good metrics to be very helpful even if no one is going to capture all facets of combat , and it ' s fun to see what people are coming up with !