CAP 16 CAP 5 - Concept Submissions

[Psylink]

Name:: Ambush Expert

General Description: This Pokemon would use an often horrible move to it's advantage to get through teams that won't have a counter for it, but can still utilize other sets, making it very difficult to face in battle. The move is only viable with certain EV spreads, one of it's three abilites (Non-custom, of course) or another normally used move in the currnet OU metagame.

Justification: It seems the BW2 OU metagame is rather predictable. You could assume that a Tyranitar lead is going to be a Specially Defensive set. Dragonite is a Dragon Dance set. Or Scizor is Choice Band. Bet with this new pokemon, it could use an underrated strategy, usually revolving around this move. Just to know, this Pokemon will be offensive. The Ambush Expert can also run more standard sets as well. Back to the odd move set, it needs certain elements (not weather :p) to function, as I stated before. This Pokemon will diversify the metagame severely.

Questions To Be Answered: 1) How will the Ambush Expert affect the way certain defensive Pokemon's viability? Will some not be able to function due this Pokemon?

2) How will this metagame react to the sudden higher usage of this pokemon? Will the metagame be able to handle it?

3) Is there a chance of it not working? If it doesn't, then how else can it help it's team? If it can, then in what ways?

4) Would other Pokemon be viable due to the threat this Pokemon poses? Would the usage of the counter or check be enough to bring it up to OU from other tiers? From what tier?

Explanation: This could go many directions. The main question that would be answered is what the move could be. Well, first things first, we sure can't make any. It would be a very interesting set with maybe a Life Orb set with Transform on it to deal with counters. Conversion2 could apply as well. I've always wanted a set with Zap Cannon on it (No Guard, people?). I can't think of any others, really, but if this was chosen, I would leave it to the forums.

The partners this Pokemon could have could go on and on, but it would be based on it's typing, abilities, and most importantly, movepool.

Oh yeah, and this is my first attempt at a CAP. :D

 

[Bughouse]

First off, ArcticBlast, your concept is essentially what I submitted for last CAP under a different name with veeeeeery slight modifications. It's a project I like. It's not time sensitive to CAP 5 however, so I'm not in favor of it again, due to Gen VI coming soon and this being our last shot in this meta.

now onto the main event.



So I never really intended for Number Cruncher to get much of any attention, but since it's now gotten 5 responses, I'll go more in depth.

That was the start to a lovely hour-in-the-making response to the 5 comments Number Cruncher has received, and the simple fact is, it's not where my heart lies. After careful thought, I feel comfortable supporting jc104's Weather Balancer above anything else. It's the right balance needed in a Weather concept. And as it stands right now, weather is the elephant in the room in OU. We needed to do it at some point in BW or BW2 CAP and we didn't. Now is the time.

If anyone is particularly attached to Number Cruncher or wants to see more about where I thought it was heading, feel free to ask. I saved what I wrote. But since I don't think I would vote for my own project, I'm not posting it here.

 

[Unoriginal Name]

Yay, first post outside of ASB!
I like the idea of a Weather Balancer, BTW. If mine isn't a suitable idea, then I'd like to go with that one.
Anyway, I've had an idea bubbling in my head for a while now (and, I know, the name sucks, I'm open to suggestions, I guess):

Name: Luck Counter
General Description: A Pokemon who can turn a "haxxy" game on its head- while not using hax itself.

Justification: Everyone who battles competitively knows that the RNG can suck. If the odds favour one player, it's pretty much GG for the other. Unless it's made up later, a Critfreeze Ice Beam or unlucky miss can change the game severely. People can and will rage at said hax. There is no escape. So, what if it could all just go away? Leaving hax in its tracks, this Pokemon can reverse a haxxy game. The only true counter to, say, Super Luck is a nullifying move or ability, and there's few moves that actually stop crits- and are said moves even worth the move slot, especially considering most users already suffer from 4 move slot syndrome as it is? This Pokemon aims to stop unlucky players from being doomed in whatever way possible. Reversing luck could be the way to go, or just stop them all together.

Questions To Be Answered:
Smaller ones affecting the CAP:
1) Is an existing aility the right way to go on this? How so? Would abilities like Steadfast be substantial, or is there no existing ability that would cover this idea effectively?

2) Would an existing move be a better way to deal with the problem, á la Lucky Chant's prevention of crits, for example? What would said move be?

3) Is there any way we can make this Pokemon useful, even when the game is neutrally lucky?

4) How would a lack of certain hax effect the metagame? Would it make certain Pokemon unusable (Jirachi springs to mind)?

Larger ones that would make this a true learning experience:
5) How would making hax easily countered by such a Pokemon effect the adding of Pokemon? Would a Pokemon utterly obliterated by Jirachi, for example, see more use and maybe move up a tier?

6) Are hax necessary to consider when making a team? If you ignore hax by using this Pokemon and compare it to when hax are a threat, how severly is your team building and strategy effected (besides from just adding in a new team member)?

7) Are existing moves and/or abilities sufficient for this role? May your regular Pokemon who also learns these moves and/or has this ability be enough, or perhaps better than the CAP at this role?

8) Are strategies or play styles severly effected with no fear of hax? How so?

9) Are hax as game-changing or major as everyone thinks they are, or does a lack of them barely make a difference essentially?

Explanation: A pretty basic idea, really. If there was a way to stop hax dead and make the game neutral and less luck-dependent, why not take the chance and see if it would work? The real challenge, however, is making the user not rely on hax itself. If they do, that's rather counter-productive and hypocritical, not to mention shifting the metagame even more drastically than needed. Also, it would make luck not a factor. Can you really argue that, luck-dependent a game as it is, there should be a little more equality and less one-sided battles due purely to secondary effects?
Oh, and Jirachi counter FTW.

BTW, Pokemon0078 suggested a similar luck-based idea, but one that preys off of hax itself. Mine differs by not using hax and instead counters hax. Just thought I'd bring that up if anyone thinks I stole the idea or anything.
Oh, and I realize that, looking back, I made this a tad lengthy. At least it's descriptive, right?

 

[fryfrey]

Whelp, here we go again!

Name: Backstabbing Balance

Description: Use the foe's own playstyle against them, some examples being outstalling, having a better offense, or abusing weather better, thus offering a balancing element.

Justification: In BW2 OU, many playstyles are used as a basis in one's team. In fact, so many playstyles are used that the vast differences between the two opposing playstyles could give one side an advantage without it necessarily being fair game to both sides. CAP 5 could offer balance by abusing a playstyle slightly better than the foe, and by having this subtle advantage, said balance is brought. However, do keep in mind that because said advantage is quite subtle, both the attacking and the defending Pokemon are quite feasible and may have things the other does not.

Questions To Be Answered:

- To abuse many playstyles, CAP 5 will have to be quite versatile. How did we do so without breaking him?
- Is there a playstyle CAP 5 worked better with than others?
- On the opposing side of the field, who often used the playstyles that CAP 5 was intending to turn against them?
- When a balancing element is implemented, how is momentum on both sides affected?
- Can we have a solid definition of balance, or would "balance" be a loose definition depending on the situation?

If there are any questions or confusions, I will be happy to address them and add an explanation.

 

[jas61292]

Moving right along....

Nomark's Sacrifice: I don't see this working at all. Being KOd is bad. Unless we add some absurd custom mechanic, which we won't, it is not possible to be of more value dead than alive. You'll need a lot more justification for something like this.

Korski's Weather Warrior: Well, as you say yourself, it is very similar to jc104's concept, but there are key differences, specifically in how yours is supposed to help exactly one weather, hurt exactly one, and only be able to do one role at once. I think this would at the same time give more options and make the project more focused. I can't say for sure which of these two weather concepts I prefer, but this is a very well thought out concept, and I can't really think of anything that needs to be adjusted.

capefeather's Faustian Bargain: Huh. Definitely an interesting one here, but I'm not entirely sure what to make of it. This takes that common "Let's do one thing awesomely but suck everywhere else" concept and actually makes something rather interesting out of it, which is pretty cool. However, I'm not sure I really see one Pokemon being able to do both roles well, at least not a Pokemon that comes about via the CAP process. This would mean the "base it on an existing Pokemon" rout would be the most likely way to go about things. I think its a cool idea, but it gives me vibes of being both too vague and too complex at the same time. It definitely has potential, but I'm just not really sure what to think at this point.

zyrefredric's Small But Terrible: Now, I'll be honest here, I would love to see a low BST Pokemon for this project. However, I just cant really see that in and of itself being a good concept. One thing we have established here is that when it comes to measuring a Pokemon's strength, BST means little to nothing. However, that does not mean that doing something with a low BST is better or more informative. In fact, low BST alone can't really teach us anything. Really, there is just not that much that we could get out of this concept in the end, in addition to the fact that the concept as is is way too vague.

Solstice's Leading the Charge: Leads are an interesting facet of the game that do not really exist anymore, so exploring how to make one shine again has some merit. However, I'm worried about how viable this actually is. I don't see anything glaringly wrong with it, but I would like to see a bit more as far as what some learning goals would be cause I would want to be sure we would be getting something out of this if we attempt to go this route.

DarkSlay's Utility Counter: Take Two: Well, it's a solid concept to say the least. My biggest personal problem is that I simply don't find it all that interesting. I feel like versatility, but not all at once, is something that we already know a decent amount about, and while this could key us in to specific things about the current metagame that may not be currently known, it won't tell us anything new about competitive Pokemon as a whole. There is absolutely nothing wrong with this, but I'm just not really sure this would be the best way to go.

QuimicVital's Legacy: The concept of making the Pokemon that follow dangerous rather than being dangerous yourself is interesting, but the concept as is is way too vague. I would have no idea where to even start. And the fact that you say you can't think how to not make it OP doesn't help. This definitely needs a lot more detail as to the goals of the concept.

ReddyGo's The Core Issues: I always considered concepts revolving around specific interactions with existing Pokemon in an attempt to learn about general cases of Pokemon groups (in this case cores) interesting, and this is no exception. That being said, I think the way the concept is currently written leaves it a bit too open ended. I'd like to see more of what you want to accomplish by making it part of a core. Simply making it is cool, but what is it that we want to get out of that?

Delta Nite's (via Birkal) Perfect Nemesis: Liked it then, like it now. As the previous concept, this gets into a specific case that can teach us more about how Pokemon as a whole interact. I feel it can teach us a lot, and is also very focused while still giving us many options as to how to go about it.

Eagle4's Two Sides of the Same Coin: Well, I have talked about vagueness on plenty of concepts already, and its the same thing here. You say you want a Pokemon that can do the same thing but in multiple ways, but you don't even hint much at what that means. I personally can't see how this is going to work, since if you can do one thing two ways, one will in all likelihood be superior. You rarely see Pokemon with multiple sets for any one role. If they have multiple sets they are for doing different things since you can only do one thing so well. Of course, maybe I am misunderstanding. Vagueness is definitely the biggest problem, so I can't comment on much else unless you add more detail.

Pwnemon's Hazard Control: This is definitely the most interesting take on a hazards concept I can remember seeing. Setting and spinning are talked about every single project, and bouncing them back relies on their existence to begin with, so trying to solve the "problem" by simply going down that route would be boring. However, actually trying to tackle the problem of hazards not by essentially changing the hazard culture itself via threatening the setters and discouraging people from wasting the team and time on it could be a fascinating project. I am concerned however that little of what we would learn from this would be applicable to an existing metagame. In that vein, I would suggest altering the questions section (which also looks like you may have forgotten to edit when you altered some things), to focus more on what this could teach us about hazards or the meta itself that would be applicable to OU.

SubwayJ's Plain Jane: Hmmm.... well... I'm not exactly sure what to think of this one. Its odd, but not to the extent that I would call it a bad idea. However, I don't really see us learning much from this. Maybe you can provide examples of what you are hoping to learn, but right now, I don't really see the point of it.

inanimate blob's Martyr: As with the above concept, I can't really see what we would be getting out of doing this concept. What is it supposed to show us? My other concern here is that such a Pokemon would need to be extremely good otherwise why use it over something else that can work well without hurting itself? I think these are questions that need answering before we would want to consider something like this.

nyttyn's Last Stand: So I've said this many times already, but I'll say it again, what is it that you want to get out of this concept? What is there to learn? I think this concept has a lot more potential than some of the others that seem to lack goals, but, as is, there is nothing in there that suggest why we should do it other than that it would be cool and interesting to have a Pokemon that fits into that role.

pokemon0078's Holder of the Dice: While I have a feeling any hax related concept will be controversial, I do like things revolving around luck management. I think this is something that we could learn things from, I am worried that it may have problems similar to our most recent concept. I think the best way for this to be clarified would be to give more of a concept for the Pokemon itself. Right now the concept has potential for a project, but is too vague for a specific Pokemon. I'd like to see the specifics of this developed a bit more.


And so ends page two. Going to go have some dinner and then will continue responding to the rest. Before I do that though, there is one thing I want to address. As I said at the beginning of this thread, the questions section is probably the part of a concept I scrutinize the most, and as you may have noticed, there have been many concepts about which I have mentioned that the questions could use improving. I want to take a moment to let you all know what kinds of stuff I am looking for.

Here are some examples from this thread of questions that I think are great:

"What defines a "core"? Celetran, Toed/Ferro/Jirachi, etc are all considered "cores", but we do not have a standard "definition" for one. Is it just a triplet of Pokemon that work together very well in unison, or a pair that has perfect coverage on the meta?"
"How does negative momentum affect the flow of battle?"
"Is a types usefulness relative to the metagame or is it intrinsic? (Ie. Can any type be the "best" type given the right circumstances or do type match-ups, available STAB moves etc mean some types will always be better than others?)"
"Bearing in mind that weatherless conditions offer minimal advantage to any team rather than sand or hail, is it even possible to restore weatherless teams to their former glory without banning stuff? Or is it mandatory to pack a Tyranitar, Hippowdon, or Abomasnow just to keep the other teams in check? Is sand the new weatherless?"
"How does weather control play into teambuilding? Is preparation required to confidently neuter an opposing weather team, or is superior gameplay enough?"
"What exactly is a counter? What is a check? How does the good-but-not-great Pokemon use these definitions to take on the Perfect Nemesis?"

These are detailed questions that get into things that we want to be learning as we go through the process. On the other hand, there have been plenty of questions that I would prefer you stay away from. Its not that these are bad, but that they are obvious. Simple things, often about collecting facts after the process is over, and not about being focuses for discussion in the process itself. They are not something we are out to learn, but things that are an innevitability of choosing the concept. Usually these are things like "Is it possible..." or "How will X effect Y." Here are some examples of what I am not looking for (note: I am not trying to pick on anyone. I am just using these as examples. If one of your questions appears here, than just take it as a suggestion to try and think of some more like the first group):

"Is it possible to have a pokemon be able to perform a multitude of roles, despite a small movepool, without relying on high BST, extremely powerful abilities or weather reliance?"
"How would the addition of moves such as "Tail Glow" or "Swords Dance" affect this priority abuser"
"What kind of strategies could such a Pokémon pull off?"
"Did this Pokémon make Stall more used, or did it do the exact oposite?"
"Will there be any Pokemon moved into OU with the introduction of this Pokemon?"
"Can a Pokémon that harms, but not sacrifices, itself for the good of the team be competitively viable?"
"How good does that pokemon have to be?"

Anyways, I hope this helps, and I'll be commenting more on the rest hopefully later tonight.

 

[WebsterVanCooney]

Hey guys, I'm Webster, and this is my concept.

Name: I'm Firein' My Phazers!

General Description: This pokèmon explores the art of forcing switches, whether it be through attacks (Dragon Tail, Roar, etc.) or through scaring other pokèmon to switch.

Justification: At its core, battling is all about one-on-one matchups (Can Infernape OHKO this guy or do I have to switch into Gliscor to take a hit?). Ideally, this pokèmon would force the opponent into unfavorable matchups that would lead to the steady breaking down of their team.

Questions To Be Answered:
1) How does one exploit newly created matchups that come from many forced switches?
2) How does the negative priority that comes with all phazing moves effect the player's strategy?
3) Can entire teams be built around the use of this tactic, and if so, how will will they fare against more popular and battle-tested playstyles?
4) How can opposing players keep phazing from effecting their offensive momentum?

Explanation: I play a lot of UU now, and I've always hated Whirlwind Snorlax and Roar Swampert for the following reason: "I spent the past 5 turns using Bulk Up on Scrafty and I get NOTHING FOR IT?!?" This is, as you might expect, painful to go through, as it usually kills all of my offensive momentum, and it always sends me into the pokèmon I'd never want out at that moment. I think this is an intriguing concept that we can delve farther into with CAP 5.

If you've made it this far down, thanks for reading and I hope the best for everyone who has posted their concepts! Also, if my concept looks a lot like yours, it's by pure coincedence. I'd never try to steal anyone's ideas.

EDIT: Changed up some questions to better determine what I want to accomplish with this concept.

 

[toshimelonhead]

Name: Mercenary
General Description: A pokemon designed to completely counter two or three strong yet completely different threats in the metagame and nothing else.
Justification: Instead of saying "True XXX counter", this concept would look at taking two or three very different threats as it is harder to build a pokemon specific on just countering a group of pokemon who each might not have any counters currently to begin with. Having a pokemon to uniquely counter two or three mons would provide great compare/contrast discussions, and if these mons were selected correctly, we could have some great discussions on creating a mercenary.

Questions To Be Answered:

How do you make something wall only two or three very strong threats instead of the whole metagame?
What makes a pokemon "uncounterable" or hard to check?
Is there a fine line between checking and countering?
Do you need to be a wall to counter something in BW2 or can you still be versatile enough to do more than just act as a sitting duck?
How do you balance defenses for a pokemon looking to wall threats from both the physical and special spectrum?

Explanation:

The idea for this came to me when trying to finalize the dreaded last spot on a team when there are just a few huge threats left to fill yet there isn't always the right mon to fill the spot. With the power creep in BW OU, it is very hard to find counters for some pokemon. S threats like Terrakion, Politoed, Landorus, and Deoxys-D come to mind, along with Keldeo. Other sweepers, like Volcarona, Dragonite, and Gengar are very devastating when used in the right hands. It is not unusual for a team to carry a specific counter for just one of these pokemon, leaving the team weak against either a playstyle (Sun, for instance) or trouble checking several mid tier threats. Ideally, this would take a strong physical attacker and strong special attacker and find a way to counter both in a way not currently available in the metagame at the moment. Even though this kind of sounds like Krilowatt, Krill failed in that it was a great counter of everything and we didn't focus on countering one or two specific threats. I think a more focused CAP could provide some great debates on countering some of the hardest pokemon to counter in the metagame today.

 

[Aerophoenix]

Aerophoenix's Psych Out: Mind games are an awesome part of competitive games that are rarely analyzed to their full extent. Concepts like this have popped up the past few projects, and I have always been a supporter of them due to the potential they have for teaching us things that you simply cannot get out of math or statistical analysis. As I have been doing a lot, I want to once more point to the questions as a good measure of the concept. I feel you hit a lot of the right notes with these. They are complex questions that are not simply a matter of "let's try it and see". However, I am a bit concerned in that even with these good questions there is a bit of vagueness in what the end goal is. I'd like to see a bit more about what things we should be looking to get out of the process discussions themselves, and not just overall conclusions we can draw based on the success, or lack thereof, of the final result. What you have now is definitely a good base though.

I was at work reading over my post an was thinking about how incredibly nebulous it was. I'm going back to make the goals and questions a little more concrete in the original post.

 

[heartsonfire]

Name: Hazard Reversal

General Description: A Pokemon that makes it detrimental for your opponent to set up hazards on you.

Justification: Hazards are one of the biggest things people complain about in all metagames. They're fairly easy to set up (especially since so many Pokemon learn the various hazard moves) and harder to take down, not to mention you only have Rapid Spin to try and do anything about them, once they're up. A Pokemon that can make hazards a risk for your opponent makes hazard-setting something your opponent has to be careful about (in a way, similar to the level of prediction required when you wish to set up hazards while a Magic Coat/Bounce Pokemon is on the opposing team).

Questions To Be Answered:
In what ways do hazards shape the movesets and power levels of teams? Many Pokemon rely on extra hazard damage to achieve one or two hit knockouts. Will this force Pokemon to use less reliable moves (i.e. hydro pumo over surf) to try and achieve these knockouts or will this change certain members of teams entirely?

In what ways do hazards prevent certain Pokemon from being played? Pokemon like Volcarona have many redeeming qualities, but losing 50% of your HP on every switch in makes them less feasible for usage.

Are hazards so common because there's so little risk compared to the payoff? Even with rapid spin, there is almost no risk to spending even a few turns setting up hazards.

Explanation: I like the idea of a Pokemon with a somewhat specialized purpose. Abilities like Magic Bounce would allow this Pokemon to bounce hazards back, while something like Mold Breaker would prevent Sturdy Pokemon from having a free turn to set up. To make this Pokemon a true hazard menace, usage of rapid spin would be nice, but so would a custom move that removes hazards unconditionally, splits hazards between players, or sends them back entirely (though this would have to come at some sort of drawback, like the loss of 50% HP, a required charging turn, or a certain amount of damage per hazard scattered by this custom move). This in turn balances this Pokemon, as the opponent can KO it after it suffers a drawback and set up hazards again, or use the turn spent on reversing the hazards to set up.

The idea isn't to make hazards useless; it's to force the opponent to play them carefully.

 

[Electrolyte]

Name: Almost Broken

General Description:
To create a pokemon that is as useful and powerful as possible in the OU metagame because it perfects a certain niche- yet due to some factors is not broken.

Justification:
•This project will help us have a deeper understanding of the metagame.
•We'll have a deeper understanding of what makes a pokemon broken and what prevents that as well
•We'll be able to explore the pros and cons of each of the top tier pokemon in our OU meta, analyze them, and then form our own
•We'll explore different niches- why some are more common than others, which ones are most effective and why each pokemon is able to fulfill its niche
•We'll learn more about balance in a metagame- how things check / counter one another
•Won't bring a new niche, but will perfect / strengthen an old one without going too overboard

Questions To Be Answered:
•What makes a pokemon broken?
•What defining traits / niches do top tier pokemon have?
•How does a pokemon's niche relate to its usage and overall power?
•How much does a few hard counters have an effect on a pokemon's effectiveness?
•How can we tie in and balance the pros and cons of such a pokemon?
•What makes pokemon with different niches unique?

Explanation:
This concept focuses around a couple of things- the relationship between a pokemon and the rest of the metagame as a whole, the relation between a pokemon and its counter, as well as the relation between a pokemon and other pokemon that have similar niches. Our goal in this project is to perfect a certain niche so well with a single pokemon that that pokemon would be deemed broken- if we weren't to weaken the pokemon somehow in other areas, which is a vital part 2. We are to try to make a pokemon outstanding in one regard yet lacking in another- but not so much so in eithe side that it will be broken or that it will be outclassed by other pokemon. What niche we will have the CAP pokemon fulfill will be decided later on, but everything from 'being mixed wall' to 'countering a certain weather' or 'being the ultimate supporter' are probable candidates for exploration.

 

[Enguarde]

Name: Weather Pressure

General Description A Pokemon capable of switching in to any of the OU weather inducers safely while having the ability to directly threaten them.

Justification:
Its easy to see the humongous influence weather inducing abilities have had in OU and even though a lot of time has passed since the beginning of Generation 5 and many bans and nerds have been implemented because of it, the debate on weathers stance in OU is still at full force (See the auto weather poll in the overused forum). Having access to a tool which can give you insurance against any type of weather around whether it be ensure your weather is successful, or to stop it from interfering with any wetaherless strategies you may have.

Questions To Be Answered:

• Could teams without using weather be actually have an advantage when it comes to facing weather based teams?
• Will this make a lesser used weather such as hail more viable?
• Can it put you in a position where you're more likely to win a weather war in an unfavourable matchup? (Sun beating Rain for example)
• Will Pokemon that reside in OU due to to their ability to abuse weather become a liability?

Explanation: A Pokemon with key resistances to the weather inducers, a strong but bulky prowess with supporting capabilities which will make it a liability for the opponents weather inducer to stay in. It might be able to achieve this further by having an ability such as Air Lock to not only decrease the power of Pokemon such as Politoed and Ninetales but to nerf the potential switch ins into this Pokemon. But abilities such as Regenerator or Natural Cure could also definitely have a place it increasing its longevity. Although it is impossible to remove the current weather form play without resorting to your own weather using Pokemon, this concept could potentially weaken your opponents key wether abusers enough, so that the effect of the weather currently in play could be somewhat negligible in a weather less play style.

 

[Scorpio]

Name: Slow but steady

General Description: A Pokemon that is good regardless of its (quite possibly bad) speed.

Justification: Speed. This single stat is, for the most part, what truly defines what is OU and what isn't. Most of the suspects we have banned (Blaziken, Excadrill, Thunderus, DrizzleSwim) were banned for, ultimately, being too fast for everyone else, and otherwise great pokemon have been left to rot in NU because of a poor speed stat. The only Pokemon that can get away with bad speed either have some sort of priority/ speed boosting move to make up for this, or are meant to just sit there and take hits, and even then the latter is no guarantee of usage (the number of Pokemon below 60 base speed in OU is single digits, and those with less than 70 barely makes double digits, and most of THOSE are powerhouses otherwise). My CAP would test to see if a Pokemon whose speed isn't quite up to par with the rest of OU can make it in that metagame.

Questions To Be Answered:
-Does this Pokemon necessarily have to be Slowbro-level slow for this to be explored?
-What will its other stats be like?
-Does it have to be bulky in order to be effective?
-Would it be able to abuse negative-priority moves?

Explanation: This is different from Chill Pill in the sense that while Chill Pill attempts to make the metagame go slower, with my concept everyone else can go as fast as they want; this Pokemon will just be an outlier in the Speed department. I want to see how well such a Pokemon would work.

Although if this concept happens to fail, I fully throw my support behind Chill Pill.

 

[Others1212]

Umbrella Head(Weather Hater)

First post :)

Name: Umbrella Head(Weather Hater)
General Description: The complete opposite of Tornadus-T. Basically this Pokemon would ideally encourage players to use a team mate to remove the opponents weather so this Pokemon can pull of a sweep.

Justification: The real problem with weather this gen is not that it exists it is that most people dont care enough to remove it. Some gimmicky sets can be utilized but the advantage of this would be massively increased by having this Pokemon on your team.

Questions To Be Answered:

Will having this option encourage weatherless teams or will it have a reverse snowballing effect of it being bad as weather continues to be prominent?

What teammates will serve this Pokemon well and which will be discounted because of weather dependency?

Is it possible to be weak to all weathers but still have good enough stats/movepool to pull of some sort of sweep?

Will this Pokemon actually be competitive or just be used as a gimmick on some teams?

Explanation:
After embracing the smogon philosophy of LURK MOAR and reading through previous CAPs I found the ones i liked on the ladder were the ones who's concepts really made other Pokemon better ie. Voodoom. I wanted to make a concept that would really make some previously gimmicky sets less gimmicky. and add some new gimmicks to.

 

[Yilx]

On some other submissions, the wether control seems pretty interesting if not for the reason of having something viable outside of weather. I don't think Big Dipper really has a place in the current metagame, because defensive styles aren't really seen. Likewise, perfect nemesis and utility counter are fantastic concepts, but I'm not sure how they would fit into the current style of play.

Gonna respond to this by saying a "Core" dosen't necessarily mean a defensive one; it could be an offensive core kind of like Terrak/Gengar or Keldeo/Terrak and such.

 

[GatoDelFuego]

Gonna respond to this by saying a "Core" dosen't necessarily mean a defensive one; it could be an offensive core kind of like Terrak/Gengar or Keldeo/Terrak and such.

I can't even begin to think of any way to "break" an offensive core, such as Ttar + Keldeo, outside of walling them. How this would apply to defensive AND offensive cores, I've no idea, but that's what the CAP team is for. The fact that this concept focuses on alternate methods rather than pure power has me intrigued.

 

[jas61292]

No stopping now...

GemOftheDay's Weather Breaker: While this concept may be the dream of a large portion of players, I really can't see it as viable. As is the concept is very underdeveloped, with very little goal in mind other than to completely change everything we know about the metagame. And not only that, but I have a hard time believing it would even be possible. I feel that some of the earlier weather concepts, such as Korski's Weather Warrior and jc104's Weather Balancer are much more rounded approaches to the weather problem. If you want to improve on this concept, I would suggest looking at a more specific way to tackle the problem rather than simply stating that you want to stop weather.

Canis Majoris's The Wall of Pain: This concept goes at things from an interesting angle. Fill the role of a wall without actually being a bulky wall. While it could be cool to see what we could produce with this, I feel that it is lacking a real goal. This is one of the kind of concepts I was referring to at the beginning of the thread as far as things that "can certainly teach us things" but "we really have no idea what going in." Simply put, the idea behind the concept is not bad, but it lack direction. Like many others I feel this stands out most in the questions section. See the end of my last post for more details on what I mean by that.

Deglas's Rock the Boat: This is probably the definition of a vague concept right now. While I'm sure there could be something that fits within this concept that could make for a good project, right now it is just so broad that it could really be anything. I would suggest thinking about the different ways of going about this and narrowing it down to a certain condition or play style. I want us to have specific things in mind to learn about going in, and something so vague that we don't even know what we are doing going in, much less what we are learning, is something I would want to avoid.

PureQuestion's Defensive Terror: While not the first concept here to talk about a more stall like concept of play, this one once again take it in a different direction, this time being more about punishing attacking itself rather than simply taking it. I think it is an interesting approach, but I almost feel like, depending on how it is thought of, it is either quite specific, requiring something like the mentioned iron barbs or other contact based abilities, or it is too vague and confusing, as with your tl;dr. Like I have said to a ton of people, I would suggest thinking more about what you want to be learning from the concept. Defense by methods other than tanking hits certainly is a novel idea that could very well have merit, but I am having a hard time pinpointing exactly what we would be aiming to find out from it.

chuckeroo777's Match Up Master: This is another concept that I feel is way too vague. While the difference between neutral and super effective coverage may certainly be something worth exploring, simply setting out to make something with a lot of the latter doesn't really have any goal in mind. This concept needs to be a lot more specific on how you want to utilize the coverage and what you expect we can learn about from it.

Infernis's Ultimate Weather Defuser: This is actually another interesting way to approach the weather issue that is very much in contrast with those presented earlier in the thread. Often times the problem with Pokemon that are supposed to counter one weather is that they end up just being used by weather teams to beat other weather teams. This was epitomized by gen V CAP 3, Mollux, who, while designed to counter Rain, ended up being a great addition to rain teams as well. Having a Pokemon that can stop weather teams without actually thriving on them as well would be a very welcome addition to the metagame. That being said, I don't know how viable it is. I am no fan of anything custom, so clearing the weather any way other than temporarily with Cloud Nine is really off the table. Additionally, countering multiple weathers at once is a ridiculously difficult task that almost no Pokemon could do on its own. I would suggest narrowing this down to something more specific, maybe with regard to a specific weather or something. Countering rain without being good on rain teams would be a difficult thing to attempt, but it is a lot more plausible than doing it for all weathers at once.

Eggbert's Weather Shield: Most of what I said to the last concept applies here. A Pokemon that alone counters weather is highly unrealistic and likely overpowered, if possible at all. I would suggest trying to focus on a more specific aspect of weather and making the concept centered on stopping that than simply "weather" was a whole.

jackm's Robot in Disguise: While I have never really been a fan of concepts like this (being one of the more harsh critics of Necturna's concept), I do think that, especially considering the gimmick level of Transform, this is a very well thought out concept. There is plenty it could bring to the table if done right. However, I fear that this will be very hard to do. Transforming is nice when it is free, but even with very good HP and a great movepool to go beside it, you don't see Mew utilizing it. Additionally, this is another concept where I can't really see the learning goals of. Transform is cool and all, but what can it teach us that would be worth learning? Those are the things I would think about.

I wish I could respond to more right now, but I really have to get to sleep. Anyone else who has submitted can expect a response tomorrow.

 

[ginganinja]

General Description:
To create a pokemon that is as useful and powerful as possible in the OU metagame because it perfects a certain niche- yet due to some factors is not broken.

n/o but isn't this like, every CAP lol, (tho we often overstep lol). So couldn't we just, like, pick a CAP concept and bear your one in mind (ideally we don't want to build something broken anyway)?

 

[Yilx]

I can't even begin to think of any way to "break" an offensive core, such as Ttar + Keldeo, outside of walling them. How this would apply to defensive AND offensive cores, I've no idea, but that's what the CAP team is for. The fact that this concept focuses on alternate methods rather than pure power has me intrigued.

I could think of a few ways. Posessing a move that checks both comfortably well, being able to threaten the other (and the rest of the team probably) by being able to set up on one, etc.

 

[Rhys DeAnno]

I can't even begin to think of any way to "break" an offensive core, such as Ttar + Keldeo, outside of walling them. How this would apply to defensive AND offensive cores, I've no idea, but that's what the CAP team is for. The fact that this concept focuses on alternate methods rather than pure power has me intrigued.

A sly way to do this could be the ability to wall the faster one and kill the slower one. For example a theoretical Celebi with Aura Sphere can probably be EVed to destroy all combinations that don't include Scarftar.

 

[Infernis]

Additionally, countering multiple weathers at once is a ridiculously difficult task that almost no Pokemon could do on its own. I would suggest narrowing this down to something more specific, maybe with regard to a specific weather or something. Countering rain without being good on rain teams would be a difficult thing to attempt, but it is a lot more plausible than doing it for all weathers at once.

You have a solid point. OU mainly worries about rain and sun, so that narrows the scope a bit. It would have to work well on neither sort of team, and optimally work very well against rain teams. (Rain needs the check more than sun does, but I wouldn't want it to just be another sun team standard.)

Typing would be a straightforward way to do this. It would need to be able to withstand fire, grass, water, and electric attacks. It would have to either wall or threaten water, grass, and fire types. Most importantly, it would have to have very little synergy with both archetypes. Funny thing: dragon actually resists all four of those. The current best Cloud Nine user is probably Altaria, who is dragon type and nigh-useless. This is partially due to its secondary typing, which grants it a crippling weakness to a move carried by most rain teams, ice beam. This is also due to its inability to really fight back against any weather abusing Pokemon, even in clear skies. The trick here for this CAP submission would be to find the type combination or movepool that helps it even more against those attacks while letting it fight back against those teams. (Though not very synergistically alongside those teams.)

I'll sleep on it and update my submission in the morning. Thanks for the feedback, mate.

 

[Menace13]

Name: The Clutch

General Description: A Pokémon designed to be lackluster in the early stages of a battle, yet which can clutch the endgame if used well. It requires teammates to set the stage, but then it will effortlessly clean up the remainder.

Justification: To the best of my knowledge, there has never been a Pokémon designed to do badly if used as a lead but well if used specifically near the end of the battle. Not only would The Clutch be a way to see if it is possible to make such a Pokémon, it would have a positive effect on the metagame. Due to team preview, when the opponent saw The Clutch they would be able to think out their moves much more in advance. They would have to think, "Which moves does it have? Which of my Pokémon can counter it? Which of my Pokémon can it counter?" The Clutch would not be overpowered because the opponent could keep one Pokémon that resists or counters The Clutch in reserve until necessary. It would also encourage people to keep a coverage move on more Pokémon to ensure they are not trapped by The Clutch.

Questions To Be Answered:

• Would it be possible to have a Pokémon that is weak early in a battle but strong later on without being overpowered and overused or underpowered and useless?
• Would The Clutch render some Pokémon better or worse than they were without The Clutch?
• Can teams which have trouble when they lose momentum (such as Baton Pass teams, weather teams without their weather-inducer, etc.) better survive the end-game with The Clutch? If so, does it make it too easy for them to come back and win?
• Would The Clutch help some lesser-used strategies see more use and even out the power gap between them and more-used teams? Or would it simply make those more-used teams even more powerful than the lesser-used strategies?
• Would it be possible to make The Clutch be bad on the kinds of teams that are commonly found wrecking the meta, but good on the surprise teams that need a boost?
• Can ANY Pokémon be good enough that it seriously impacts the meta and forces people to be ready to defeat it without being so overpowered as to be a staple on every team? Is there a middle ground?

Explanation: I think it would be cool to have a Pokémon that is fairly useless for sweeps, bad at being a lead, can't stall, doesn't have much bulk, yet can come from behind and win a game if played correctly. An example of The Clutch that is already made would be Shedinja, which pretty much wins once the opponent runs out of Pokémon with Fire/Flying/Rock/Ghost/Dark moves. However, there are ways besides Wonder Guard to make a Pokémon like this. Probably the best way to do it besides Wonder Guard would be Multitype, as any team could put in a Pokémon of another type that the opponent would not expect, and it could be made in preparation of other teams; pretty much a mini-Arceus, which would probably be a bad idea though due to complications with various sprites, although I think a single sprite that changes types and not colors would be fine. Alternatively, a bulky Pokémon with a typing with many resistances or few weaknesses that can learn almost any Type of move would be able to clutch just as well.

The best typing would either be Normal (if Multitype), or at least part Ghost, Psychic, Dark, or Fighting. A Dark/Psychic would be a fun typing, since it has never been done and only has 1 weakness (4x Bug) and 1 immunity (Psychic). Furthermore, having only 1 weakness would add to the idea of it being hard to predict, causing even further panic to the opponent as they try to figure out how to defeat it. Almost any Ghost/?, Psychic/?, Dark/?, or Fighting/? would make sense for the "Memories" aspect, whether talking to their spirits (Ghost or Psychic, and maybe Dark) or remembering their spirits (Fighting). As for the stats, low Speed and medium bulk seems logical to prevent it from being useful for setup. To be honest, I haven't really figured out how it would be able to clutch yet, but I think the best way would be with some fairly uncommon stat-booster and an ability that somehow prevents that stat from staying if you have other Pokémon.

Art design could be anything. The movepool would need to be diverse, but not expansive (as in, it would need to have a bit of everything, but not tons of everything). Nasty Plot or Calm Mind, not both, and Swords Dance or Bulk Up, not both; or, Nasty Plot or Swords Dance, not both, and Calm Mind or Bulk Up, not both. Either way works, depending on whether it is Physically based (in which case a choice between Swords Dance and Bulk Up), Specially based (choose between Nasty Plot and Calm Mind), or balanced (choose between Swords Dance and Nasty Plot or between Bulk Up and Calm Mind). My point is, it shouldn't have 100 options, but it should have enough variety that it isn't defined by a single moveset. If it is defined by a single moveset, it can simply be countered. In order to be a true "clutch", it must be a surprise, so it must have multiple viable sets.

For example, Politoed can be found with Leftovers, Choice Specs, or sometimes Choice Scarf, and it can have a large variety of EV spreads. It is usually found boosting health and Defense or Special Attack, but sometimes it focuses on Speed and Special Attack, and its nature can be Modest, Bold, or occasionally Timid. Furthermore, it is commonly found with Ice Beam, Scald, Perish Song, Toxic, Hydro Pump, Protect, Focus Blast, HP Grass, Encore, or Surf, which is a VERY large set of moves it is found using. Ideally, The Clutch would have as much variety as Politoed in viable movesets, but unlike Politoed it would be great at clutching while not very good as a starter.

Oh, also:

Definition of "clutch" (courtesy of Urban Dictionary):
clutch - adj.
being able to perform under extreme pressure

Thanks for reading!
-Menace13


Edit:
I noticed this is a lot like Last Stand (nyttyn). The real difference is that The Clutch would specifically be designed to be a hinderance to you at first, effectively making it a 5v6 game at first, and once you clear out the problematic counters, The Clutch can clean up the rest. Rather than turning around a lost game, you purposefully LET yourself get behind so that this Pokémon can finish off the last few Pokémon. It wouldn't be a 1v6 Pokémon, it would simply finish off the last few that are already weakened. It isn't a sweeper.

 

[Little Battler]

Name: Tactical Retreat

General Description: A primarily offensive pokemon that switches into a defensive mode should the situation become unfavourable for offensive play.

Justification: Zen Mode Darmanitan is an interesting concept. A hard hitter that turns into a bulky special attacker when in a pinch. However, from the usage ratings it is clear that in execution it does not do so well. I would like to explore the possibilities of what such pokemon can do to the metagame when done properly.

Questions To Be Answered:
-How will this pokemon affect the fast-paced metagame? Will it simply promote Heavy Offense by being a safety net? Or will it promote defensive play by being able to "shift gears" between offense and defense?

Explanation: As I have pointed above, the main inspiration for this proposal comes from Zen Mode Darmanitan, which is an interesting pokemon. It is, however, not used too often because it shifts focus from all-out physical attacking to bulky special attacking, which means it needs to invest in two different attacking stats. Another good example of such a concept that is already in the game would be the Weak Armor ability and the move Shell Smash, which in theory allows tanks to turn into frail but fast attacker. What I am proposing here, is for the pokemon to start off as an offensive pokemon like Darmanitan, and turns defensive on the trainer's orders when the whole team is in a pinch in order to gain tactical advantage, as well as indirectly giving its user slightly more control over the pace of the game.

What does this ability to turn defensive have over switching to a defensive pokemon?
Consider the following cases:
1. inability to switch out (shadow tag, pursuit)
2. opposing threat is not dealt by the defensive core
3. incoming revenge killer who can deal significant damage to your defensive core

The extra options provided by this pokemon in these (and similar) strategic situations is what we will explore in this concept. Note that I did not say switch between offense and defense, and this is because the switch will mostly be one-way, like shell smash and zen mode.

 

[PureQuestion]

PureQuestion's Defensive Terror: While not the first concept here to talk about a more stall like concept of play, this one once again take it in a different direction, this time being more about punishing attacking itself rather than simply taking it. I think it is an interesting approach, but I almost feel like, depending on how it is thought of, it is either quite specific, requiring something like the mentioned iron barbs or other contact based abilities, or it is too vague and confusing, as with your tl;dr. Like I have said to a ton of people, I would suggest thinking more about what you want to be learning from the concept. Defense by methods other than tanking hits certainly is a novel idea that could very well have merit, but I am having a hard time pinpointing exactly what we would be aiming to find out from it.

Mhm. I went back and added another question in the hopes of emphasizing what I think is one of the most interesting parts of the concept - Can fear function as an effective defense? Thinking about it, I'm imagining a pokemon which is risky or dangerous to attack, because attacking it comes with either a cost (in the form of iron barb/static/flame body/etc or even just counter coat), or because there's a chance it's going to obliterate your attacker with a potent attack (ideally one not strong enough to get through other walls, however). This is a two pronged concept: One where brute force isn't the ideal way to defeat it, and one where attempting to use brute force should be risky or otherwise able to backfire.

I hope that makes sense.

 

[Base Speed]

Some comments on the submissions that I find most interesting. Keeping them brief as there are plenty to get through, but hopefully constructive too...

DK's Climate Control: As you digress this concept is incredibly specific (perhaps the most of all concepts) and there would be great difficulty in ensuring it's a powerful threat to weather starters but not all pokemon. That said, there's good learning potential. Have you considered the possibility of using moves like Mean Look and Magma Storm so that we're not forced to use Arena Trap?

Yilx's Big Dipper: I like this one actually. Mainly because, as you've pointed out, the definition of a core is vague. I'd be interested in how you envision your goal to be achieved, though.

srk1214's Number Cruncher: A neat concept that I'd happily see made into reality. It just bugs me that every CAP project does number crunching. Calculations are also made commonly in high level play and I'd question why we need to make a pokemon to learn about them. If you could answer that, you'd have a very strong concept.

GatoDelFuego's Chill Pill: One of the few stall-based submissions I'd be happy doing, I like your unique take on it. It's not immediately obvious to me how one would make your concept, though, and a bit of explanation there would help win me over.

Rayquaza's Compact Movepool: A very nice concept all round. Puts extreme focus on just one aspect of the process and a bit of discussion as to why that's justifiable might be necessary. However, all in all, thumbs up.

GR's Cousin's Frostbite: The learning opportunities here are great but I don't think I'm the first to say this seems to necessitate a custom ability or move. I fear the concept is doomed unless you can tell us ways of doing it without customs.

capefeather's Faustian Bargain: I very nearly didn't bother talking about this concept because there isn't really anything I'd change. Just wanted to say I find this one pretty interesting and appreciate the comment at the bottom.

zyrefredric's Small But Terrible: Very similar to a concept I considered suggesting myself, it'll no doubt be a big challenge to emulate a pokemon like Breloom but no doubt would be rewarding if done properly. Is your title meant to be "Small But Not Terrible" by the way?

Pwnemon's Hazard Control: I had doubts about your concept until I read through it. I really like how you explained this doesn't have to be a rapid spin and magic bounce user.

I may add more to this later, but right now I want to get onto responding to comments on my own submission:

A concept I've been hoping for ever since I joined. Pokemon really needs more balance in the type department. Even if the project fails, we could see which types are good due to the type chart, and which are only good because of the metagame/users.

Thank you so much for the positive feedback, it means a lot. I'm considering borrowing the last sentence of this and add it to my explanation.

Type Equalizer

I really dont think this is doable. Some types are flat outbad in this meta, especially those that are weak to SR. This metagame is infested with dragons and ice types still see no usage. I really don't see one pokemon can save something like ice types when the prescence of dragonite, latios, and garchomp hasn't

It's a shame you're not convinced. I'm going to add a bit about possible executions of the concept into my explanation in the hope that they'll sway you and others like you but ultimately you're entitled to your opinion. I would like to clarify that the idea of the concept is to change the meta so that flat out bad types find themselves in a meta where they're more useful. Sorry if I'm wrong, but it seems you misinterpreted that a bit.

Also, one example of how this concept doesn't work in current OU doesn't mean it doesn't have the potential to. I could actually talk about learning opportunities relative to your example though - what I'd hope to discover is whether the trend you've identified is because ice as a type truly does suck, or whether other factors are at play. Are other 'mons in the meta pressurising ice types so much that they can't perform their role as dragon slayers? Is it that it's better to put an ice move on a non-ice type? Is it a combination of factors and if so, to what extent? There are complex interactions that can't be answered by speculation alone.

Anyway, sorry for the mammoth reply. Thank you for your comment, I feel it's been helpful in strengthening my concept.

Base Speed's Type Equalizer: Like with Yilx's concept above, I think your first couple of questions really seem to get it. Looking at what actually makes types good or not, and the trends that surround them, both in general and in the OU metagame could definitely be interesting. That being said, while it is different in concept, I feel that the goals are very similar to those of the concept for gen V CAP 3, Mollux. While Mollux focused more on bad types than good ones, the ideas about type quality are the same. I'd suggest that you try and differentiate a bit more by going it to detail on how we would attempt to go about it. I think that the concept is a bit vague, and would benefit from having a bit more direction so we can more clearly know what to expect and how by doing this we will be learning things not covered in previous projects.

Firstly, thanks for the general positivity here. I'm really flattered that one of my questions has been used as an example of a good question.
Your comments about Mollux are fair. I feel the difference between the concepts is that Mollux looked to manipulate new combinations of moves and abilities with types to alleviate their bad points, focusing on the build of a pokemon itself, whereas I'm trying to look more at how typing causes existing pokemon to interact with the metagame. It's less focused on the build of an individual pokemon and more on typing in relation to the build of the metagame and and what new opportunities existing pokemon will have in the modified metagame, without the presence of certain types.

Also, as I said a bit earlier, I plan to put a bit about the potential execution of the concept into the explanation. I need to give what I want to say a good think-through first, however.

 

[iamdanielcruces]

Make Me Bad - Final Submission
(Learning About Limits)

This concept is about crappiness: Mollux has a bad typing; Smeargle and Sableye have horrible BSTs; Keldeo’s ability is completely useless, and nevertheless, they are usable in OU, and in some cases, they are top threats, thanks to their redeeming "components" or "aspects". My goal with this concept is to explore what makes a bad Pokémon, by creating one that is underwhelming at first sight, no matter how you look at it: poor BST, poor typing, bad ability, sparse move list, but works well as a whole. I’d like to see how its bad components synergize with each other, so to speak.

Justification:

• This project will help us have a deeper understanding of Pokémon themselves.
• We'll have a deeper understanding of what makes a bad Pokémon, and by opposition, what makes a good one.
• We'll be able to explore the “weights” of each aspect of a Pokémon
• We'll have freedom defining the roles we’ll assign to this poke
• We'll learn more about how to explore the possibilities of existing Pokémon, by analyzing the different possibilities that arise from its different aspects
• Finally, we’ll be able to learn about the CAP process and community, by putting restrictions upon ourselves

Questions To Be Answered:

• In the latest CAP, I saw Aurumoth go from being a risky ‘mon to becoming S-tier threat. What could we learn from stricter limits during a Pokémon’s creation?
• Is it possible to build a Pokémon that needs every one of its aspects to survive? As (counter) examples, Terrakion could lose its ability and still be the same BMF, Blissey would arguably work better with other typing, Sableye’s stats (except for HP and DEF) could be even lower and it wouldn’t care much, etc.
• Is there a use for crappy abilities? There was this Ability Tiering thread that put Stall, Color Change and other “wonders” at the bottom of the list. Is it possible to make them work? From the top of my head, a Dark Pokémon with Stall could be the ideal user of Payback, Counter, and so on.
• Seeing that weather is such a defining factor, how could a “bad” Pokémon use weather to its advantage? I’m not talking about an improved Castform, but rather about a Pokémon that functions normally outside of weather, but could improve its performance under its weather (or weathers) of choice.

Explanation:

There have been several concepts here (zyrefrederic’s in particular, and Electroyte’s by opposition) that deal with the same aspects I want to explore, namely, what makes a bad Pokémon (or a good one), but what the hell, this is an idea I’ve been meditating since the start of Aurumoth’s CAP. Mollux was all about overcoming a bad typing, but we could go further: bad BST, bad ability, bad movepool and possibly bad team synergy, but (and here’s the catch) they function well as a whole. Perhaps this Pokémon can counter specific threats, perhaps it could be a weather abuser, or an utility player. The idea is to see how far we can go within strict limits.


We have examples which are still usable in OU thanks to a redeeming quality, like Sableye with its amazing Pranksterism, Wobbuffet and Shadow Tag, and Smeargle. These are good approaches, but they still have something, a particular aspect, that makes them outstanding. What I wated to explore was more along the lines of “is there a use for the Stall ability?”, “how could we make Color Change work with weather?” or “what’s the minimum BST a Pokémon needs to be OU, while being mediocre at everything else?”