With regards to the extreme direct approach/hidden power issue, I think that the issue is negligible for two reasons. Firstly, solid special bulk (and no dumbass 4x weakness) would go a long way to sort it out, encouraging either powerful special STAB attacks or physical offense (and our underused types - take Grass for example - don't tend to have widely distributed physical coverage moves). Secondly, and much more importantly, the aim would not be primarily to be defensively vulnerable to the underused type but to be offensively impotent against it, necessitating usage of pokemon of that type rather than coverage moves.
I agree with jc104 that ideally elements of each approach should be integrated - after all, typing is such an integral part of the game that it takes multiple factors to affect its usage. In fact, I'm entirely in agreement with his post - the direct/extreme approach should be the focus, with the playstyle/hazard concepts accounted for but not centralized.
This forces us to think about the typings themselves - weakness, resistance, movepool typicalities, stat trends - and work from there rather than use an external factor like weather to get the result without deep consideration of the concept's initial questions. Seeking primarily to buff a playstyle ultimately teaches us more about that playstyle than about the types that it makes use of, and might not have the desired suppressive effect on dominant types (would Drizzle teams pack less water types purely because of an increased sun/sand/hail presence? Hell no. Would they vary their typings more specifically because CAP5 makes life hell for them if they don't? Much more likely.)
I agree with jc104 that ideally elements of each approach should be integrated - after all, typing is such an integral part of the game that it takes multiple factors to affect its usage. In fact, I'm entirely in agreement with his post - the direct/extreme approach should be the focus, with the playstyle/hazard concepts accounted for but not centralized.
This forces us to think about the typings themselves - weakness, resistance, movepool typicalities, stat trends - and work from there rather than use an external factor like weather to get the result without deep consideration of the concept's initial questions. Seeking primarily to buff a playstyle ultimately teaches us more about that playstyle than about the types that it makes use of, and might not have the desired suppressive effect on dominant types (would Drizzle teams pack less water types purely because of an increased sun/sand/hail presence? Hell no. Would they vary their typings more specifically because CAP5 makes life hell for them if they don't? Much more likely.)