CAP 10 CAP 10 - Part 1 - Concept Poll 2

[beej]

This will be the final concept poll. Your choices are Deck Knight's Dragons [No] Be Here and reachzero's Utility Counter. Vote for whichever you think will be the best concept to explore.

Because this is not a bold poll, posts such as "I voted for x" will not be allowed. This is a discussion thread, and if you post, please add substance to it. Justifying your vote is fine if you can back it up in more than a sentence or two.

Concept: Dragons [No] Be Here

General Description: A Pokemon which breaks new ground in reducing the potency or usefulness of Dragon-type moves.

Justification: Dragon Steel Dragon Steel blah blah blah. One of the biggest problems with Dragons is that the only current way to defang them in the slightest is to resist Dragon STAB (e.g. be Steel type). This has generally been ineffective, no matter how many Scizor, Metagross, Bronzong, Jirachi, Skarmory, Forretress, and Heatran infest your metagame, they are eventually worn down by the sheer power of Dragon attacks combined with most Dragon's ability to slaughter them with a backup Fire, Fighting, or Ground move.

Questions To Be Answered:

- Is it even possible to stop Dragons, or are their stats/coverage too overwhelming?
- If there were a Pokemon that could actually punish, field lock, or otherwise negate Dragon Moves rather than just resist them, would their usage decline?
- If Dragon attacks are more easily addressed, will the metagame then revolve entirely on Steel types because of resistances, ushering a more defensive era? Or will Steel's weaknesses to Fire, Fighting, and Ground become a death knell simply because many effective defensive pokemon can utilize these attacks with STAB?

Explanation: While it wouldn't necessarily require an ability, it's clear that typing alone has been unable to stop this centralization. This leaves the options of ability, moves, and stats. There's no real barometer for stats because Ubers has access to even more powerful Dragons than OU. However, I think a defensive pokemon with an ability that punishes the use of Dragon moves would make them far less flippantly used. If you had a pokemon that posed enough of a threat that Mence and Latias would rather try spamming UNSTAB moves that hit this theoretical Pokemon effectively instead of Draco Meteor, that alone might prove an interesting point of study.

Name: Utility Counter
General Description: This Pokemon is capable of being customized to counter virtually any specific Pokemon, but is incapable of countering a large number of Pokemon at the same time.
Justification: It is not unusual for people to say that "versatility is broken" from an offensive standpoint; less attention is given to versatile defensive Pokemon such as Zapdos or Hariyama. This Pokemon would allow us to study the impact of having a Pokemon that is capable of dealing with such varied threats as Salamence, Lucario, and Gengar....but not all at once.
Questions To Be Answered:
--How useful is defensive versatility in a metagame with so many different threats to account for?
--Given the existence of a Pokemon that can hard counter only specific major threats, which threats will be prepared for the most?
--How would team building change if certain difficult-to-prepare-for threats became easier to prepare for?
--Which is more useful, a Pokemon that can somewhat handle a wide range of threats, or a Pokemon that can handle a few threats extremely well?
Explanation: I envision this concept as looking like a more extreme version of Porygon2 or Hariyama; it can be custom designed to handle virtually any threat given the correct selection of EVs, moves, etc. However, in choosing to deal with certain threats almost flawlessly, it leaves itself open to other threats. Multitype would obviously make this concept's job much easier, though I doubt it is absolutely necessary to making it work.

This poll will close on March 7th, 8:30 AM (EST).

EDIT: I have changed the time that the poll ends, as I won't be in the house at 10. It will now be ending at 8:30.

 

[Skymin_Flower]

I voted Utility Counter.

I think that Utility counter would be a great addition to the metagame. When your opponent sends out utility counter, they have no idea what it is built to counter, so no matter what pokemon they send out, it is potentially in danger of being destroyed. This would be great for playing mindgames with the opponent.

 

[Sushidog]

I voted Utility Counter.
It can be so flexible and unexpected and would be a totally unique and interesting concept to work with and produce. As skymin_flower said, the mindgames and potential influence on the CAP metagame would be refreshing and exciting.

 

[ShravanP]

I voted Utility Counter.

I do see the merit of the other concept, but I'm generally not a fan of reactionary concepts (that is, ones that try to 'counter' or 'fix' something that's part of the current metagame).

I'm more interested in a concept that attempts to create something new, not seen before. And as such, I'm excited to create something as versatile as the Utility Counter promises to be. It will be a definite challenge to hold it down to earth and keep it balanced, but that's part of the concept's allure, IMO.

 

[FlareBlitz]

Voted for Dragons No Be Here.

I like the concept of "Utility Counter", but in my opinion, it's not specific enough to serve as a clear guideline during the rest of the CAP process. That's not a criticism of the way the concept was presented, but rather of the concept itself. I can't, for instance, imagine how it would be possible to justify one typing, ability, or stat spread when any other typing, ability, or stat spread can be used to counter certain"specific Pokemon" more efficiently. To me, it seems like a concept that fundamentally lacks direction.
Of course, it's entirely possible that some people see this as a good thing, that they'd prefer there to be as few constraints as possible placed on the forthcoming processes by the Concept. But personally, I'd prefer a stronger core guideline, and Deck Knight's concept is better in that regard than reachzero's.

 

[Azule]

Voted for Utility Counter

I feel that it would be something that would allow us to really explore how we create a Pokemon which can counter "almost everything but not at the same time" whilst still making it OU material.
And I just don't like Dragons No Be Here, it seems like all we'd be creating is a mega steel Pokemon able to completly stop Dragon Pokemon and punish them for using dragon typed attacks. I might have misread it, but that's my thoughts of it.

 

[FlareBlitz]

Actually, from what I read of the concept, it seems the primary idea behind Dragons No Be Here is to move the metagame away from the Dragon/Steel centralization. Presumably we'd need to combat Dragons through ability, movepool, or stat spread, which would be interesting to see instead of just typing, which would be interesting to see.

 

[Zystral]

The major thing I'm not liking about Utility Counter is this;
It can counter everything, but not at once.
You make it to counter something, and your opponent doesn't even have it on their team. The whole CAP is rendered sort of silly and you've wasted a whole moveslot.

And with the countering everything; not everything needs a counter because some things already have dedicated, better counters.

 

[Umbreon Dan]

The major thing I'm not liking about Utility Counter is this;
It can counter everything, but not at once.
You make it to counter something, and your opponent doesn't even have it on their team. The whole CAP is rendered sort of silly and you've wasted a whole moveslot.

And with the countering everything; not everything needs a counter because some things already have dedicated, better counters.

this isn't strictly true because it would be able to counter more than one thing at a time. for example, you customize it to counter salamence perfectly. your opponent doesn't have a salamence. okay. but by countering salamence, you're virtually guaranteed that it's going to counter flygon, dragonite, kingdra, maybe latias, etc. and who doesn't have a dragon on their team?

i voted utility counter.

 

[Skymin_Flower]

The major thing I'm not liking about Utility Counter is this;
It can counter everything, but not at once.
You make it to counter something, and your opponent doesn't even have it on their team. The whole CAP is rendered sort of silly and you've wasted a whole moveslot.

And with the countering everything; not everything needs a counter because some things already have dedicated, better counters.

Utility counter (in my opinion) is all about versatility and mindgames. Maybe you customised this Pokemon to counter Salamence, but your opponent doesn't know that, for all they know you could have customised it to counter their Infernape or Scizor. Until they know what this Pokemon is built to do, there is no safe switch in, and they could make a huge mistake which involves the loss of one or more of their pokemon. That said, some Pokemon's counters have similar traits to other Pokemons counters, so if you customise it to counter say, Rotom, chances are you will be able to defeat Gengar as well. Lastly, hopefully this CAP can be made so that is not a dead weight if the specific Pokemon is not on the opponents team (like Magneton in ADV)

 

[Vaz]

This is one very close end nominations. Though, I must say that I have to vote for Utility Counter.

We just need a way t stop those annoying pokemon that set up what they want and get away with it unlike a Dragon Dancer cannot with Argonaut around showing most dragons that they do not rule the field. I think we have enough Dragon stoppers. Another one woule be nice, but I would prefer a strategy not yet implemented and we should not have to just punish Dragons just because they only have one type resistance.

Thanks, and good luck with everything guys!

 

[Sushidog]

And on top of that, who's to say it couldn't be customised to fit a dragon-beating role?; albeit, not as well as a true Dragon counter proposed by Deck Knight.

Although, I was stuck for choice a little, since I think they are both good concepts.

 

[Erazor]

I voted for Dragons [No] Be Here. It'll be interesting to see what is required to scale down the dominance of the Dragons in OU. I think it'll help us see what aspect of Dragons are "broken" - is it their Draco Meteor, Outrage, or combination of types? Is it their stats?

 

[Destiny Warrior]

I voted for Utility Counter. I like the concept since it allows us to have one slot on our team that can bluff as a check to something, while actually destroying what would be a likely switch-in.

 

[PikaSai]

It's time to get a real counter to the Dragons in OU, not just a revenche killer. I vote for Dragons [no] be here.

 

[Blue_Tornado]

I voted Dragons [no] be here for a rather simple reason: In my opinion, Reach's Utility Counter increases the whole "team matchup" factor, which any experienced player would try to avoid. Think of it: you make CAP10 counter specific Pokemon, and the opponent doesn't end up having them. This makes CAP10 more of a liability to the team, and will put the user at a disadvantage.

To be honest, I posted almost the same concept in CAP9, with almost the same write-up as Deck, so I find it weird that one passed and one did not. Anywho, Dragons [no] be here.

 

[Infiltrator]

I vote for Utility Counter. The nifty advantage of a utility counter is that the user will enable it to counter a specific Pokemon, but at the same time able to counter other Pokemon related to the Pokemon it was originally set to counter.

 

[Maci12]

My vote went to Utility Counter. This pokemon would be extremely useful to teams that have a gaping weakness to one pokemon, and would also be different from many past CAPs that have become sweepers (there are, of course, exceptions). Also, there is a lot of room for creativity with such a project; we could take many directions in creating it.

 

[Snorlaxe]

I voted Dragons [No] Be Here.

While it is true that Utility Counter sounds like a cool concept, I really feel like Deck Knight's concept would really allow us to push the envelope further than it has ever been. Dragons + Steels are everywhere, and with no solid way to deal with these menaces I think that it would be an extremely rewarding concept for the CAP guys to work on, and at the same time quite fun. Nothing can switch in on Choice Specs Latias, and nothing can eat a DDMence's +1 Outrage. I for one would be thrilled to see a Pokemon that was capable of handling not only the two aforementioned threats but any other pesky Dragon-type Pokemon as well.

 

[Brambane]

I voted for Dragons [No] Be Here due to the fact Utility Counter is very dependent on the opponents team. If I create my Utility Counter prefectly able to counter Infernape, and my opponent doesn't have Infernape, my Utility Counter would be acting as a meatshield more than a defensive Pokemon. While I myself have not been the least bit bothered by Dragon Dominance (most likely because I never played any other metagame than DP), a Dragon-type counter, to me, would be a more interesting addition to the metagame than a Pokemon that is made to counter anything. It should also always do its job of countering said Dragons or Steel-types, to an extant, better than Utility Counter. If a Pokemon made to counter Dragons is roaming the metagame, fewer people would be inclined to run Dragons due to that Pokemon. Utility Counter can stop anything, so it is more of a luck factor, whether you, as the player, have the Pokemon the opponent is trying to counter.

Of course, these are just my views.

 

[Shock Trooper]

The CAP project is made to learn more about competitive play in the standard metagame. The Dragon-types in the standard metagame are some of the most potent sweepers you can find. If we can find a way to limit their efficiency through the use of Deck Knight's Dragons [No] Be Here, it may give us the best overall result and help break new ground not only in CAP, but in standard OU as well. This could occur because CAP was created to help us to learn more about how the metagame works.

 

[bugmaniacbob]

Voted for Dragons [No] Be Here.

I'm slightly sceptical of the merits of defensive versatility in this metagame especially, and I don't think it can really be compared with offensive versatility in the slightest. What you really come to expect from a defensive Pokemon (I don't mean coming across one in a battle, I mean when choosing them) is the ability to consistently wall or check something that your team has trouble with, and from this the ability to wall a large number of Pokemon at the same time consistently is the most desirable quality, and not possibly, in another situation, maybe, being able to stop that unexpected Earthquake Heracross (just an example, please don't bite my head off) but not in this situation. Hence defensive versatility is often less viable than offensive versatility, at least in this metagame that we know, and I can see several problems arising. A maddened urge to stick to the concept could possibly mean that we compromise defensive competence for sake of concept integrity - doing everything to an average standard, where Blissey does a few things to a great standard. In essence, Porygon2. In this situation, the attacker will almost always have the advantage over the defender, as CAP10 may well be unable to last long enough to make a standard impact on a battle, and if it does last long enough, I fear it will take a combination of a very good typing and very good stats - which coupled with the community's alarming tendency to shy away from anything that looks substandard on an offensive level (to balance high defensive stats), means that there may well be a repeat of Kitsunoh upon us - the CAP simply does something else, such as bulky sweeping, much better than what was originally intended. But who knows, this may well turn out to be a learning experience that we all benefit from.

In the case of Deck Knight's concept, some of the problems still apply, such as the very great probability of the result fitting a different, more powerful role, but there is a very great difference between the two. While UC addresses an absence, DNBH addresses a presence - to further elaborate, UC is not actually designed to promote a change in the metagame that is visible to us at present, but simply to open up a new niche that could be worthwhile, yet does not actually point itself at anything or any Pokemon in particular and say "that way over there" - it just seems to assume that we know what we want and can get there without trouble; we can find the end without the means. For DNBH on the other hand, what is asked is quite explicit, and the centralisation around Dragons and Dragon-type moves is quite visible even to the most moronic among us - what is asked is that there is some way to combat them beyond the use of Steel-types, who are pretty shaky to be honest. It's a difficult thing to ask, and has been asked many times before, but I believe that with the collective intelligence of the community taken for granted, it can be done, and the end result may well be more noticeable and, dare I say it, satisfying, than what could result from the other.

Whichever one is chosen, I have no hesitation in saying that this seems to be the most promising start to a CAP in terms of excellent ideas that I have witnessed, and I am uncharacteristically optimistic for the future of CAP10.

 

[Str0ngbad]

It has been said before me but I second that the Utility Counter idea is far to broad. If it can counter almost anything then it must have a wide movepool and stats to back them up. I don't think you can create a pokemon with that kind of potential and expect it to be limited to countering. On the other hand, checking dragons a bit would do more than just make someone think twice about using Salamence. If it were able to make dragons less potent then you might see less steels and more of other pokes that are overshadowed. I think that Dragon's [No] Be Here is more realistic and will make for a better experiment.

 

[reachzero]

Obviously voted Utility Counter. From a teambuilding perspective, I envision the Utility Counter as being the last Pokemon you would add to your team, designed to plug the gaps and holes in it that were created through the ordinary process of teambuiliding. Often you have five Pokemon assembled when you suddenly realize that you need something to cover both Gyarados and Life Orb Starmie....and nothing covers both Gyarados and Life Orb Starmie. That is the sort of situation I would picture the Utility Counter being useful in. Who cares if your opponent doesn't have those Pokemon? The rest of your team already can handle everything else.

Edit: It's also worth pointing out that if Latias is voted Uber in Stage 3-4, which is entirely possible, we may as well call Deck's concept "Salamence (No) Be Here".

 

[afterburn]

I voted for Dragon [No] Be Here.

As you all know, the CAP metagame is where we test how self created Pokemon can affect the current standard metagame. We do this by adding Pokemon which alter the most dominant characteristics of said metagame; the created Pokemon can improve that characteristic or hinder it. For example: Colosoil was made to hinder Pokemon who rely on status and use its "anti-stall" movepool to hinder the effectiveness of stall teams, by picking of their special wall (blissey) or their precious spin blocker (rotom-a) to allow offensive sweepers like Syclant to sweep or spinners like Starmie to spin away hazards. This alone made an impact on the metagame, because with Colosoil offensive teams have an easier time plowing through stall teams, while at the same time the existence of the Pokemon has reduced the number of stall teams altogether.

The reason I think Deck Knight's concept suggestion should be taken is simply because I think it will make a greater impact on the current metagame overridden by overcentralized dragons which every team needs to have a counter for. Because of them, teams will carry one or two checks to hopefully counter them, but with this new Pokemon, these threats won't be that terrifying anymore; the addition of this new Pokemon may limit the usage of the dragon-types and may pave the way for other overlooked threats forgotten in the presence of the dominant dragons.

To sum it all up, I think we really should stick to this concept because it will bring a more useful change and will really show us what new threats would arise if dragons were hampered in their usefulness. After all, that is what we do in CAP; analyze how a certain Pokemon can affect a metagame, and this concept is fit for the job, as it is sure to make a great impact on it!