CAP 18 CAP 18 - Part 1 - Concept Submissions

Status
Not open for further replies.
Name: Predictable me?

General Description: A Pokemon which looks like it is predictable, only to turn out to be really unpredictable and regain momentum.

Justification: In the current metagame, a lot of Pokemons are really predictable. For instance, when Starmie is on the field, you know what it's gonna do. Another example would be Ferrothorn, who really has only one use. On the other hand, some Pokemon are unpredictable. For example, Tyranitar can be Scarfed, Banded, MEvo or AV. This Pokemon would mix the two. Trick the opponent into believing it is predictable, and then, do something unpredictable, surprising the opponent and regaining momentum, and turning the match in your favor.

Questions To Be Answered:
-What makes a Pokemon "Predictable"? What about unpredictable?
-How could a Pokemon be unpredictable if the opponent knows it is? How could it trick the opponent's mind?
-How would an unpredictable Pokemon affect the metagame?
-How can a Pokemon act in battle to look predictable?
-How can we trick an opponent to make him think the Pokemon is predictable?

Explanation: This Pokemon's goal is to "be" predictable, make the opponent predict falsely to surprise him later. Many Pokemon in today's metagame fulfill only one role and are predictable doing it, so this Pokemon could add to the metagame by forcing the opponent to predict carefully to outplay you whatever the Pokemon role is. But how could a Pokemon be unpredictable if the opponent knows it is? This could be solved by many ways, for instance a vast movepool or an ability, or by combining moves in different manners. This could lead to different strategies, as the opponent could think he has "predicted" the unpredictability, only to get wiped out by a surprise hit. It could also be used to keep the opponent feel unsure about the Pokemon and to keep pressure on him, while preparing the trick.
Examples: (mostly for DetroitLolcat :P)
Quote from "the art of psychological warfare" on smogon, that explains the concept pretty well:
"A side effect of my low strongs is that they create a 'baseline expectation' of what I'm going to do. The sneaky roundhouse I do after the 17th low strong is pretty tricky, actually. I mean, wouldn't you expect an 18th low strong after the 17th one? (Note: I was actually even more sneaky, by doing the 18th low strong, then the low roundhouse.)"

That's a point I wanted to bring. Make a sort of "expectation" in the opponent's head, then deceiving him by doing something surprising.
This could be done by many ways, examples (these are just examples, not just the way I would like the CAP to take):
General Examples:
-Having a very specific playstyle, then switching to another
-Make the opponent falsely predict a switch or an attack
-Relying on the CAPmon's ability for unpredictability
Specific Examples:
- Using U-turn repeatedly, then using another move such as Focus Punch on the opponent's predicted switch, landing a powerful hit.
- Having the Pokemon use a Stall playstyle, then switching to hyper offense to surprise the opponent
- Having multiple abilities that could make the Pokemon act different ways depending of the ability
-Bluff Specs with an Expert belt, but at the end the Pokemon uses a Physical attack

Another quote from the same article that really represents what I am saying:
"It is far better to create an expectation of doing something than an expectation of uncertainty. This is because the uncertain opponent is unpredictable. When they know what you're going to do, you can know what they are going to do. Then you finally do one surprising move at just the right moment to guarantee a sweep."

Example included in the article:

"For instance, say my Heracross uses Focus Punch, but his Weezing predicts this and uses Sludge Bomb. I am clearly forced to switch here, as he can just keep using Sludge Bomb all day with no ill effects, for I am Choice Banded. He has been conditioned into believing me to be a very cautious battler, as my maxim is to predict only when prediction is needed. Now, I have a Jirachi, and Sludge Bomb is a great move to switch into. Only an idiot would leave in Heracross, and since my enemy doesn't think I'm an idiot, the thought of me leaving in Heracross never crosses his mind, so he switches to his Jirachi counter, Snorlax with Earthquake.

Heracross is tightening its focus!
Bob Dole withdrew Weezing!
Bob Dole sent out Snorlax!
Heracross used Focus Punch! (82% damage) It's super effective! Snorlax fainted!

At this point, Calm Mind Jirachi can freely clean up the remainder of his team."


I hope you're getting what I'm saying better, but I'll keep adding more

I'll keep adding to this post, so thanks for reading!
 
Last edited:
Name: Fog Bank

General Description: A Pokemon that discourages the use of Defog, but not necessary offensively.

Justification: There has always been a way to avoid the opponent from being able to remove hazards, DPP UU had the common double ghost build to get around the ForeSpinners in the tier, and spin blockers have been a bog standard role since rapid spin was introduced. However with the buff to defog, it is much harder to retain your hazards, taunters aren't always in and then all your hazards are gone. We have a way to abuse this with competitive and defiant, however there is no way to make the risk v reward for defogging favor leaving the hazards there. It is effectively a non-existent niche, which makes exploring it an amazing opportunity.

Questions To Be Answered:
- What opportunity costs are present when committing to using defog?
- What current mechanics have the potential to skew them?
- Is it better to try and stop defog, or abuse it's use?
- What can we learn from Bisharp's rise about how people perceive defog?
- How can you manipulate the value of your opponent's hazards?

Explaination:

There is so much conjecture about the effects that defog has had on the metagame. And currently, it is simply a smart choice for teams that don't rely on many hazards because it lacks too much opportunity cost to make it ineffective. If you have something to deal with common Defiant and Competitive pokemon (which is pretty much just Bisharp) then there is little reason to not use defog at the first available opportunity, something that is an entirely new concept in competitive Pokemon.

As such it provides and amazing opportunity to study the effects of hazards and move/ability interactions in this fresh generation. This is because of the various ways of completing the goal of this CAP. 1. Stopping the use of Defog itself, currently this is done primarily by fast taunters. However they aren't ever present. There are now more options for dealing with support Pokemon, including Assault Vest tricking and new immunities to status moves (Powder on Grass, Para on Electric). These types of ideas can potentially be explored and manipulated as a path to this CAP's goal.

Secondly, there is simply a responsive rebuttal. That is to create a situation where using Defog would end up buffing your opponent to a point where they became difficult to deal with. Currently we have options for taking this route, however it is one dimensional and entirely offensive, through the use of the Defiant and Competitive abilities. It's possible that this type of approach could be used to tip the balance.

Lastly, would be to manipulate the opportunity cost of the action itself. Whereby CAP18 has the ability to manipulate the strength of your opponent's hazards to make keeping them around an aim for both sides. This can be done subtly, however would require us, as CAP creaters to properly understant the roles that hazards play to us.

The route(s) we take, or new ones that we come up with will all depend on the answers to the key questions, which have the potential to teach us a lot about a key aspect of the metagame, in this case hazards. It is something that hasn't properly been looked at as a case study on the effect of the hazards themselves and their 'value'. A concept which every player will say they have a bearing on, but couldn't scientifically provide actual values for. This fascinates me, because every aspect is quite closely observed and manipulated by as us battlers. This could be the key to a new view of hazards in Pokemon.

CAP has always been about learning about our metagame, and these questions are poignant.
 

Knuckstrike

Hi I'm FIREEEE
is a Tiering Contributor
Name/Concept:

Jack of all trades, ...

General Description:

A pokemon that can effectively fulfull every role in the current metagame decently while not being the very best pick for any of them.

Justification:

Most of the pokemon in the current metagame, if not all, seem to only be able to fulfill a handful of roles. This leads to a more predictable metagame with battles often being decided by who has the better team of the two. Next to that, before the first move has been made in a battle, trainers can already figure out what pokemon to definitely keep healthy for another pokemon. Having a pokemon in the metagame of which the moves it carries and stats aren't known the moment you see the pokemon will create a more exiting and strategic metagame. Figuring out what set the opponent runs on the CAPmon by analyzing what pokemon they switch the CAPmon into will cause trainers to think better about the moves they use and will create a very interesting metagame.
This pokemon is unique because there is not a pokemon that has a surprise factor this big. It should be able to at least check every pokemon currently in OU making it a very valuable team member if you'd like to get a surprise kill on that one (group of) pokemon your team has trouble with.

Questions To Be Answered:
  • Will a pokemon that's able to pull off all roles effectively change the metagame into one where trainers have to be more thoughtful of their choices in-battle?
  • Will the unpredictability of said CAPmon make strategy more viable over the strategy 'trying to have more pokemon alive than the opponent at any one time'?
  • Will teams be built around the CAPmon or will the CAPmon be used as a 'glue' for the team?
  • Is it necessary for a pokemon to have a huge movepool if it wants to be able to fulfill all roles a team could wish for?
  • Will the average team in the metagame turn into a more balanced team designed to cover every aspect of a CAPmon like this, or will it make the pokemon in the teams more extreme, designed to beat the CAPmon by trying to outclass it at a certain aspect?
  • Will trainers shape this pokemon into a pokemon similar to an existing one but with a surprise factor, or will completely new and original sets arise?
Explanation:

This pokemon does not have to have six equal base stats. Especially its speed can be varied quite a bit. What would be an option on this pokemon is making the EV's on this pokemon have more of an effect, either through the use of a move, an ability or an item that would otherwise be useless.
To come back on the "Jack of all trades, master of none" part; there are numerous ways this goal can be fulfilled. Giving him a huge movepool but without the 'best' moves like spore and V-create would be the most obvious one. Another one would be to have a special ability or move that makes the pokemon able to check the types this pokemon normally has trouble with.
 

CaffeineBoost

6th Best Circus Poster of 2023
is a Community Contributor
Name: Perfect Klefki Counter

General Description: A perfect counter to Klefki and any other swag-play or Prankster Pokemon

Justification: Right now, there is a lot of fuss about Swag-play, Prankster and everything that Klefki does saying that it's OP, Non-competitive etc. It has checks but (as far as I know) it doesn't have a perfect counter. Therefore, I thought that perhaps it could be made.

Questions to be answered:
-
Will the Pokemon make people regret including Klefki or some other Prankster user on their team?
- Will the Pokemon be able to have a function besides countering Klefki?
- Will it function so well that it will itself become an annoying Pokemon?
- Will people use it?


Explanation: This is extremely hard to do without mentioning specific types/abilities etc. But this Pokemon can range from having priority moves that could OHKO Klefki or perhaps an ability that can make itself immune to some of Klefki's moves. The pokemon basically has to counter Klefki COMPLETELY and counter/check other prankster/swag-play users.
 
Name: Gettin' Tricky With It
General Description: A Pokémon tailored to making the best possible use of Trick Room, both as a tool for its own purposes and as a means of supporting its team.
Justification: Given how Speed-focused the OU metagame is, Trick Room should be a really disruptive strategy on paper - but, in practice, it's, well, shit. There are precious few really good users of Trick Room - at least those that have any business using a moveslot on it - and the 5-turn period is inadequate for a lot of slower, bulkier powerhouses (ex: Tyranitar) to be capable of abusing Trick Room support. G5 Reuniclus was the closest we've come, but Offensive Trick Room Reuniclus is still far from making a Trick Room team viable.
Questions To Be Answered:

* How do standard OU offensive teams and offensive threats adapt to a metagame where Trick Room is a legitimate threat? When a Pokémon's Speed can be turned against it, how do teams reliant on fast offensive threats build in security against Trick Room? Does priority become even more important than it already is? Do the teams themselves become slower and bulkier? Do they include Pokémon specifically intended to allow them to beat Trick Room?
* What Pokémon benefit most from the presence of a workable Trick Room supporter?
* How do the slow offensive Pokémon that benefit most from Trick Room support capitalize on the limited Trick Room turn count? Perhaps they might adopt a hit-and-run playstyle, hitting hard for a few turns before using a slow U-turn or Volt Switch to allow a Trick Room user to retake the field.
* Would a Trick Room supporter necessarily need to be capable of posing an offensive threat on its own, or could it simply focus on being able to come in and out of the battlefield, setting up Trick Room again and again?

Explanation: It's important to look at what's hindered potentially-interesting Trick Room users if this concept is to succeed. The most obvious issue is typing; a Trick Room team is going to feature several slow, bulky Psychic or Ghost-types, giving it exploitable weaknesses. They also tend to lack other useful support options - for instance, Stealth Rock - and lose momentum when they switch out to a Trick Room abuser. Realistically, you're going to have to use more than one Trick Room user; this Pokémon, then, should provide defensive synergy with extant Trick Room setters. This means that - whatever the typing - it's probably going to be one that's not traditionally associated with the move. Keeping momentum is an issue, as mentioned; VoltTurn could help immensely with this, as could tools like Magic Coat/Magic Mirror that deprive the opponent of options and force them into predictable attacks.
 

bugmaniacbob

Was fun while it lasted
is an Artist Alumnusis a CAP Contributor Alumnusis a Top Contributor Alumnusis a Top Smogon Media Contributor Alumnus
Name: Psychological Warfare

General Description: A Pokemon that can cause the opponent to make mistakes by presenting the illusion of immortality, hence generating a stressful environment in which the opponent's belief that they can control the battle or eventually win is compromised. Thus, the emotions of the player are manipulated in order to influence the battle's outcome.

Justification: The nerve and good judgement of a battler, as well as their capacity to handle stressful situations, is a well-documented factor in the outcome of a competitive Pokemon battle, but is relatively unexplored in all areas. We know how a single, low-chance miss or secondary effect activation can cause a less skilled player to give up on a battle within their own minds, or else forfeit entirely. Does this apply to higher-level players as well, in a way that can represent a consistent niche? We have a lot of Pokemon that can be described as generating a stressful situation by being a constant presence in the battle and generally being difficult to wear down, or possess the capacity to limit an opponent's perceived options, such as Sableye. However, few if any of these Pokemon are truly viable in the high-power environment that is the current state of OU. Can any Pokemon be viable in the current OU with these traits as their main positive? Certainly, a Pokemon that is specifically designed to exacerbate pre-existing situations represents a truly rich opportunity, and one which no other part of the site is in a position to investigate - this is a real chance for us to learn something about the game and how it operates.

Now, I should make it plain at this juncture that, yes, there are a lot of ways in which players can hypothetically accumulate stress over the course of a given battle. It could be the result of an unfortunate miss that ruined a perfectly good prediction, or fear over the opponent's Terrakion waiting in the wings for the moment your primary check is weakened, or growing irritation about your opponent's stall team, or even the relentless ticking of the timer in one's ears. These and many more are covered in far greater detail in an old Smogon article written by obi (the linked article is the updated version for BW), which thoroughly explains the concept as it pertains to standard competitive battling, far better than I could. Here, all manner of psychological warfare is discussed, from pretending to be a less skilled player in order to encourage an opponent's sense of superiority to the tactic of manipulating the opponent using the chat system. However, this part of the article is the bit that this CAP concept exists to deal with:

The Art of Psychological Warfare said:
Take Jirachi with Protect, Wish, Doom Desire, and some filler move, most likely Body Slam (60% paralysis keeps most enemies from setting up). If you use Doom Desire, Wish, and then Protect, you damage your enemy, nullify its attack, and heal yourself, all in the same turn. This creates the illusion of invincibility, regardless of the actual effectiveness of the set. This is most effective against the player who believes you to be better than he is, but with the occasional Body Slam added in to paralyze, even the veteran player can find himself feeling outclassed by the brick wall that inexorably paralyzes his team, creating fears, however unfounded they may be, of a sweep by something slow, like Ursaring or Marowak.
The illusion of immortality, and the illusion that the battle is fully within the user's control, is the absolute core of this concept, insofar as it relates to the opponent's belief that they can win being compromised. As the article goes on to say, "[the] moment you assume your opponent is going to win is the moment you have lost". There are many more ways now that this can be achieved than back when this article was written, and there has never been a better time to investigate a concept that is so tied to the game of Pokemon yet so lamentably unexplored as of yet. There are other illusions concerned with stress, of course; most notably the illusion of the theoretical threat, such as the presence of a sweeper like Terrakion or Pinsir on the opposing team preview being held back, presumably for a late-game sweep. However, these are a pound a penny in OU nowadays, whereas here is something that truly does not currently exist, truly has a lot to teach us both about the game and the metagame, and may even be a positive effect in and of itself by encouraging novel strategies. It's a large black box just waiting to be opened.

Questions To Be Answered:
  • Is a Pokemon whose effectiveness presumably strongly varies from opponent to opponent viable in the OU metagame?
  • Is the ability to manipulate the opponent to such an extent a significant factor in the outcome of a competitive Pokemon battle?
  • To what extent will this Pokemon's viability differ from battle to battle? Will it be more effective against different opponents? If so, which ones will it be more effective against?
  • How strong and/or viable is "psychological warfare" as a strategy against more traditional, well-developed team strategies?
  • Is it a trait of a top competitive player that they are more able to play against this Pokemon than a less skilled player?

Explanation: To make this absolutely clear from the get-go, this is not a concept that is suggesting the use of "annoyer" strategies such as SwagPlay or ParaFusion in an effort to simulate stress. I'd like to make this concept focused on the component of stress as applied to decision-making and belief, which will actually tell us something, as opposed to producing a Pokemon that is merely stressful because it is wholly dependent on the luck of the roll. That simply isn't interesting, so let us concentrate on the idea of stress as that which is separate from that of the standard response to "hax". In previous incarnations of this concept, I emphasised the deceptiveness aspect of the Psychological Warfare ideal, but now I absolutely want to focus on the concept of stress as it pertains to Psychological Warfare and its sources that are prevalent in the existing metagame. Uncertainty is certainly a recipe for stress, but it is not the only one, and the part that I want to address first is simply that of mental exhaustion from having to deal with the CAP, by creation of the illusion of invincibility. To be clear, this doesn't mean stalling the opponent out - It just means that the effort to KO the Pokemon and remove it from the game is large, and builds up to a point where options are restricted and the player feels that they are not in control. Hence, another point is that of giving the impression of limiting the opponent's options - were this hypothetical CAP to, say, spread paralysis as its modus operandi, the opposing player may become stressed into making a decision that is costly in the long term if he feels that a single Pokemon on his team has to become paralysed. At this point, some examples may be helpful to emphasise this point.

One example that I would like to bring up first is Sableye. This is a Pokemon with the ability to Taunt before the opponent can move, spread burns around like candy, and then Recover off any damage taken, again before the opponent can move. If you do not possess a Pokemon such as Heatran or another that can switch into Sableye with relative impunity, it can be a severe nuisance, not least because no physical attacker can make a move against it without being burned. Sableye, however, is limited by its mediocre stats and its status as something of a one-trick pony, as well as its four-moveslot syndrome. A second example is that of Slowbro or Alomomola in the lower tiers of BW, although really any Regenerator Pokemon fits the bill to an extent - by restoring HP simply by switching out, the Pokemon becomes far harder to wear down, and the mental load on the opposing player becomes that much greater, as it appears that regardless of what they try to do, they simply cannot wear it down. Again, these Pokemon tend to be limited by lacklustre stats or simply the inability to fill a niche within the OU metagame.

So, here is a concept that has, in many ways, little precedent in terms of what already exists in the games. I do, however, want to make this clear - this Pokemon should, ideally, create stress from a defensive, rather than an offensive standpoint. There are plenty of examples of Pokemon that cause stress by simply hitting damn hard and thus limiting options by forcing sacrifice, but fewer defensive examples, particularly those that do not possess a high offensive potential on top. This is not only because this angle is more interesting, but also because it is more practical - being able to remain standing for the majority of the battle necessitates defensive competence, and since we want to create the illusion of invincibility, not that of steamrolling the opponent without a shred of difficulty, there is no necessity for high offensive stats. Now, making a Pokemon like this worthwhile tends, in the current state of OU, to fall into two separate categories - that of Sableye, where the opponent is subjected to a constant stream of moves like Will-O-Wisp, Toxic, Knock Off, and the like, which wear down the opponent and give the impression that they are on a timer, and hence the need to remove the offending Pokemon from the game becomes that much greater. Alternatively, they could take the Alomomola route, where the threat to the opponent's team comes through the use of support moves such as Wish, Aromatherapy, and the like.

With this in mind, I find myself struck by the possibilities that present themselves. The Pokemon could, yes, simply act as team support and through chip damage to make the opponent feel like they are on a timer, but there are so many other things that could be done, that the game has given us to work with, that it would be a shame not to list just a few of them here, that I can think of off the top of my head. We could have a proper Regenerator + Switch Pokemon, as Mienshao is far too frail to be worth using in the current OU metagame, which would make use of Regenerator to offset the entry hazard damage accumulated by switching, which plagues Pokemon that rely on this ability, such as Rotom-W and CB Scizor. It could make use of a variation on the standard Substitute + Leech Seed strategy, as demonstrated by PttP in a recent SPL battle in terms of how WoW/Sub/Seed Gourgeist can generate stress through the illusion of immortality, again. It could be a Pokemon that excels in shuffling and pseudo-hazing to rack up entry hazard damage. It could mess around with forgotten support moves such as Light Screen and Reflect, or go the opposite route entirely with Toxic in combination with Infiltrator. We could make use of a move that is rarely seen in OU but has enormous potential under this concept's umbrella, such as Parting Shot. We could even experiment with something completely bananas, like Protean alongside support moves, but this would seem to be wholly unnecessary for the concept to succeed. Regardless, the point is that there are a vast number of directions that this concept could go in and potential strategies the resultant CAP could use.

-----------------------------------------

Now, the following is not part of the concept proposal; however, it is a discussion of some parts of the concept from IRC, featuring some notable CAP personalities. While the conversation was not particularly favourable to the above concept, and I did a very poor job of explaining it at the time, quite a few of the objections can be chalked up to either not reading the concept properly, dismissing it out of hand, or my stupidly posting last year's version of this concept instead of the actual updated version (which was my mistake, and I make no bones about it), mixed in with some insightful objections that, for sake of fairness, I feel I should invite you to consider. I'll outline some rebuttals underneath.

Code:
<srk1214> I'm not in favor of rehashing psychological warfare
<Pwnemon> i still
<Pwnemon> dont like it
<Pwnemon> at all
<Pwnemon> id much rather do something like theoretical threat
<bugmaniacbob> I really really want to do it though
<srk1214> especially when XY literally introduced a pokemon that does it
<Pwnemon> if we're going to explore that
<srk1214> Charizard
<bugmaniacbob> it's got so much to offer
<nyttyn> Mega Lucario also counted
<Pwnemon> dont u mean mega pinsir srk
<nyttyn> since there was the huge question of
<Pwnemon> and klefki
<srk1214> no. I mean Charizard because you don't know its set.
<nyttyn> "oh god is it just going to obliterate something or swords dance"
<bugmaniacbob> the hell does mega charizard have to do with psych
<srk1214> pinsir you at least know what it's going to do
<bugmaniacbob> oh for the love of
<bugmaniacbob> did you even read the concept
<Pwnemon> bmb we're not doing a pokemon
<nyttyn> Obviously not to the extent bob went to
<bugmaniacbob> "no offensive mons"
<Pwnemon> that literally just tries to troll the opponent
<Pwnemon> no
<Pwnemon> pls
<bugmaniacbob> it's not a troll mon either
<nyttyn> anything that's not offense
<nyttyn> has a hard time pulling off mind games on that leveloutside of trolling a la sableye.
<bugmaniacbob> its closest analogy would be something like regenerator slowbro
<bugmaniacbob> but actually worth while
<Pwnemon> how the hell does regen slowbro cause ur opponentt o choke
<srk1214> how does regenerator slowbro present psychological warfare in the slightest?
<bugmaniacbob> it doesn't because it sucks
<bugmaniacbob> regenerator presents a clear case of the illusion of immortality
<Pwnemon> if ur bad
<bugmaniacbob> by not being worn down, that's a huge psychological advantage
<bugmaniacbob> this concept is supposed to investigate that sort of thing
<Pwnemon> uh
<nyttyn> uh
<Pwnemon> only bad players
<Pwnemon> let themselves tilt
<srk1214> the closest thing I can think to psychological warfare that is more wallish is CM Unaware Clefable, but even that is just another set up sweeper
<Pwnemon> if youre good you wont ever lose to something that literally tries to tilt
<bugmaniacbob> not "hurr durr swagplay" or "hurr durr setup sweeper"
<Pwnemon> you
<nyttyn> That's not really a mind game, that's just basic pivoting...
<bugmaniacbob> it's got nothing
<bugmaniacbob> to do
<Pwnemon> your concept is literally "lets make something that can only beat bad players who play based on their penis instead of their head"
<bugmaniacbob> with mind games
<srk1214> lol then don't call it "psychological warfare..."
<nyttyn> BarackObama,A Pokemon whose strength in battle comes from its ability to force the opponent to make mistakes or to believe that they have no chance of winning - in short, by forcing the opponent to be defeated by their own stress.
<nyttyn> that's
<bugmaniacbob> STRESS
<nyttyn> the definiton of mind games
<bugmaniacbob> not mind games
<bugmaniacbob> STRESS
<Pwnemon> bmb
<Pwnemon> you are literally
<Pwnemon> saying
<nyttyn> the entire point of mind games is to get your opponent's head and make them choke, bob.
<srk1214> I don't see how you can divide those two
<Pwnemon> we make a pokemon
<Pwnemon> that causes ur opponent to tilt
<Pwnemon> WE ALRADY HAVE 10281348 OF THOSE
<Pwnemon> CONFUSE RAY TOXIC UMBREON
<bugmaniacbob> and how the hell would you know it can only beat bad players when literally nothing like it currently exists
<Pwnemon> because
<Pwnemon> good players
<Pwnemon> dont let themselves
<Pwnemon> tilt
<bugmaniacbob> how the hell would you know
<bugmaniacbob> seriously
<srk1214> Chansey can make entire teams lose and be on tilt
<Pwnemon> because if u let urself tilt
<Pwnemon> ur not a good player
<Pwnemon> Oo
<srk1214> that doesn't mean chansey is good at making your opponent tilt
<Pwnemon> see: furai
<srk1214> that means your opponent was shit at teambuilding
<DHR> rofl
<bugmaniacbob> we're supposed to be learning something from this
<Pwnemon> like literally the definition of good player includes the phrase "doesnt do stupid shit because they feel bad on a given day"
<bugmaniacbob> I'm struggling to see how you are arguing based on precedent when what I'm proposing has no precedent
<Pwnemon> im struggling to see how youre arguing to make a mon that is literally uncompetitive
<bugmaniacbob> and literally everyone is susceptible to stress and influences on decisions pwne
<srk1214> It has some precedent
<srk1214> subprotect gliscor
<bugmaniacbob> if you don't understand that I'm afraid your grasp of psychology has some issues
<bugmaniacbob> I guess that's a fair comparison actually
<bugmaniacbob> but even so, Gliscor's meant to stay in
<srk1214> but these are cases of your opponent not being prepared for a threat they should have been prepared for. Against any decent team, you just can't induce psychological pressure on someone with something other than a set up sweeper
<bugmaniacbob> my ideal would be one that could generate advantage even while not serving as a specific check
<bugmaniacbob> you can by stalling
<nyttyn> Well, you can snatch momentum with u-turn...
<bugmaniacbob> it's perfectly possible
<srk1214> no. you really can't.
<bugmaniacbob> yes, you can
<nyttyn> with what?
<Pwnemon> srk see: lord elyis
<Pwnemon> isnt he like 4-1
<Pwnemon> with the sames tall team every week
<bugmaniacbob> or at the very least, this is a Pokemon that /would be designed to/
<srk1214> lol that's because stall is pretty good this gen as long as you don't face
<srk1214> cube
<srk1214> luke
<srk1214> or pinsir

...

<nyttyn> anyways
<nyttyn> There's a big problem with a theoretical mon like this
<nyttyn> there are a huge, huge number of offensive threats, all highly varied within OU.
<bugmaniacbob> that's true, nyttyn
<nyttyn> Most offensive teams will be easily able to manage a switchin that 100% beats this mon every time
<bugmaniacbob> that would be a part of this CAP's challenge
<nyttyn> for example, your ghost/dark theroetical mon gets absolutely assraped by megavoir who can bypass substitute.
<bugmaniacbob> well, depends if it has Toxic or not
<bugmaniacbob> but yeah I take the point
<nyttyn> no it just clicks hyper voice and bypasses the sub
<nyttyn> and then ded.
<bugmaniacbob> Toxic on the switch?
<bugmaniacbob> then run away?
<nyttyn> yeah bob but your entire stress
<nyttyn> got entirely put on its head. and every offensive team will be packing an answer to this. meanwhile defensive teams will just stall wards(tm) you.
<bugmaniacbob> well that doesn't really matter unless literally no member of the team is susceptible to anything
<nyttyn> that's why things that aren't set up sweepers can't stress the opp to the point of being put at a massive disadvatnage - because the worst that it can do to you is a burn.
<bugmaniacbob> theoretically there's always something it could potentially do
<nyttyn> Which will REALLY SUCK but there are ways to get around that.
<nyttyn> And it's far from game ending.
<bugmaniacbob> burning and switching is still fairly legitimate
<nyttyn> yes but we already have rotom-w for tha. we already have jellicent for that.
<bugmaniacbob> and hey there's stuff like sleep powder and parting shot and what not
<bugmaniacbob> the possibilities are boundless
<bugmaniacbob> also rotom-w gets worn down quickly and jellicent isn't really fit for purpose any more
<nyttyn> yeah but most of those aren't manipulation, they're basic volturn/switch punish strats that are caused by most good walls/u-turners.
<nyttyn> what distinguishes your concept from them?
<bugmaniacbob> rotom-w is used because it counters talonflame and other stuff, not because it stresses the opponent
<bugmaniacbob> ideally the point of this thing's niche is that it can last for long periods of time sufficient for its presence to make an impact
<Pwnemon> what does that even mean
<bugmaniacbob> and there should be very few viable things that can actually switch into it safely
<Pwnemon> the only way to stress your opponent
<bugmaniacbob> it means it doesn't get worn down
<Pwnemon> is to have a good team matchup
<bugmaniacbob> its presence on the opponent's team is a strong incentive to prioritise removing it
<bugmaniacbob> and it has the capacity to execute its strategy independently of team match-up
<Pwnemon> so
<Pwnemon> genesect
<bugmaniacbob> no
<nyttyn> genesect wasn't very survivable tho
<bugmaniacbob> that gets worn down extremely easily
<bugmaniacbob> and focuses on offensive pressure
<nyttyn> If it's going to just do its thing no matter what, and it's defensive enough it can actually survive for a extended period of time, isn't this just a wall?
<bugmaniacbob> well, no
<bugmaniacbob> "wall" implies that it's meant to sit there and tank things
<bugmaniacbob> as its primary purpose
<Pwnemon> so what youre saying is
<nyttyn> so basically
<Pwnemon> we need a pokemon that can execute its strategy reliable
<nyttyn> this thing's just supposed to make the opponent rage and try to murder it?
<Pwnemon> we need a pokemon that puts pressure on the opponent
<bugmaniacbob> <nyttyn> this thing's just supposed to make the opponent rage and try to murder it?
<Pwnemon> so basically: make something ou
<bugmaniacbob> for lack of a more succinct way of putting it
<bugmaniacbob> yes
<bugmaniacbob> I question the term "rage"
<nyttyn> well, make angry, etc
<Pwnemon> so youre saying that its trying to make them
<DHR> why
<Pwnemon> play badly
<Pwnemon> all right
<DHR> why do you want a mon that does that
<bugmaniacbob> because it doesn't currently exist, it would teach us something about the game that we don't already know, and it would be a challenging building exercise
<dodrio> it exists in dusclops
<dodrio> that shit never dies
<dodrio> just burns all my pokes
<bugmaniacbob> I mean even the artwork could play some part
<bugmaniacbob> a particularly annoying art design would incentivise its removal
<nyttyn> Honest to god this sounds like a concept that only works on terrible players.
<bugmaniacbob> among the weak-minded
<bugmaniacbob> well that's the thing nyttyn
<nyttyn> The entire point of being a good player is that you don't choke, and that you dont make these kinds of mistakes.
<srk1214> ok bmb... the second you bring up artwork you know you need to stop
<srk1214> or at least you should know that
<bugmaniacbob> I don't know that it would be successful in OU. It's entirely possible that it would only be consistent on weaker players.
<nyttyn> Yeah and that's why we think this concept is terrible.
<nyttyn> It's obnoxious for the sake of being obnoxious.
<nyttyn> Nobody wants that.
<bugmaniacbob> but we really don't know that, however much we pretend to know otherwise.
<nyttyn> It might be successful
<bugmaniacbob> and the artwork was a joke. Calm down.
<nyttyn> but
<Pwnemon> literally the whole
<Pwnemon> art to being a good player
<nyttyn> I personally feel that a mon that is actually toxic to the game (entire intent is to piss people off) is not a concept that we should pursue.
<Pwnemon> is that you DONT PLAY ON EMOTION
<bugmaniacbob> I know enough about psychology to know that it affects everybody, and I consider this an exceptionally good opportunity for experiment
<bugmaniacbob> all people are subject to it pwne, only to greater or lesser degrees.
<nyttyn> Ignoring how successful it might be, ignoring its potential for a social experiment (which isn't what CAP is about ffs)
<nyttyn> we are literally making /v/ - the mon.
<Pwnemon> lol
<Canis_Majoris> you're implying 4chan can't make good fakemon
<Pwnemon> double lol
<bugmaniacbob> and it isn't obnoxious for sake of being obnoxious, it's meant to be stressful by holding opponents independently of team matchup
<Pwnemon> triple lol
<nyttyn> The only way to do that for anything that isn't a setup mon is be an incredibly obnoxious immortal prick.
<bugmaniacbob> I feel like you think that this Pokemon must necessarily use confuse ray or something
<nyttyn> otherwise wham, bam, thank you ma'am, power crept mons are just going to kill it.
<bugmaniacbob> I feel like there's some sort of cognitive disconnect going on here
<nyttyn> The stress factor is present in fighting games, so I see where bob's coming from.
<capefeather> isn't choking the most common accusation levelled at tournament players who lose
<bugmaniacbob> pwne says that good players don't play on emotion. I agree, and want to test this idea
<capefeather> well maybe "hax" is up there too
<nyttyn> Unlike fighting games, though, you can't force emotion in pokemon, because it is a turned based game.
<Pwnemon> the only time youll see people accept a lose is when they choke
<bugmaniacbob> how can you tell?
<Pwnemon> otherwise it was luck or team matchup
<nyttyn> A player can just take five secnds, take a deep breath, and calm down. They have the luxury of being able to calm down.
<Pwnemon> what if timer is on
<capefeather> oh right, "team matchup" is up there too
<srk1214> choking at the top level happens for sure
<nyttyn> Choking usually happens when it's a 50-50 tho
<srk1214> yeah I find a lot of what people call chokes is mispredicts
<nyttyn> also pwnemon
<Pwnemon> oh right 50-50s also
<nyttyn> that's why I say five seconds
<srk1214> which isn't really a choke...
<nyttyn> the timer is really geneorus and gives you plenty of time to take a few secs to breathe and calm yourself.
<Pwnemon> not in doubles really though
<Pwnemon> :s
<nyttyn> Yeah not so much in doubs.
<srk1214> for those who don't get the difference between a choke and a mispredict, I recommend this post: http://www.smogon.com/forums/threads/spl-doubles-discussion-replays.3497214/page-2#post-5201819
<bugmaniacbob> that's not exactly a difficult concept
<bugmaniacbob> anyway
<bugmaniacbob> everybody seems remarkably happy to throw around these views on when and how chokes happen
<bugmaniacbob> yet none of them are based on anything besides anecdotal evidence
<bugmaniacbob> here is an opportunity to, if not find out, at least establish some sort of data on the issue
<bugmaniacbob> Looking at the last 2 concept, I feel that CAP was punching way below its belt in terms of what could and should be pursued in the name of exploration
<bugmaniacbob> *concepts
<nyttyn> though I will say
<srk1214> it is undoubtedly true that the past two CAPs have had less "ambitious" concepts
<nyttyn> the idea itself is ambitious.

...

<paintseagull> To what extent will a Pokemon that relies primarily on the strength of the enemy controller be effective and viable in the X/Y metagame?
<paintseagull> I don't understand how this relates
<paintseagull> what do you mean strength
<bugmaniacbob> I mean mental strength, as supposedly separates high-level and low-level players
<bugmaniacbob> perhaps it could be changed to "Pokemon whose performance is contingent primarily on the mental strength of the enemy controller" or something
<paintseagull> hm well i feel like this idea could be solidified a bit
<paintseagull> what defines a mistake on the opponent's behalf?
<paintseagull> and what's the situation in which they'd make a mistake
<paintseagull> more specific than just 'stress'
<bugmaniacbob> a mistake that is made because of stress, where an altogether possible course of action is ignored or the controller limits his own options by not thinking a move through
<paintseagull> what's causing the stress? probably prediction difficulty, a high cost for a wrong move, a 50/50 chance of something happening or not so that it's hard to choose which side of the odds you want to play..?
<paintseagull> hm ok
<bugmaniacbob> everything is causing the stress
<bugmaniacbob> but here, specifically, is a Pokemon that exacerbates one part of it that we are interested in
<paintseagull> what everything? what's an example
<bugmaniacbob> well, constant switching, perceived difficulty in eliminating a key threat, and as srk and pwne have pointed out, the mere presence of an offensive Pokemon in the wings can all add up
<bugmaniacbob> it tends to be cumulative - the longer a battle goes on the more mental stress is accumulated
<bugmaniacbob> what is being focused here is specifically the perception that one is fighting a losing battle
<bugmaniacbob> *focused on, sorry
<bugmaniacbob> which I consider to be a large component of stress in any arena
<paintseagull> ok
<paintseagull> [*]To what extent will a Pokemon that relies primarily on the strength of the enemy controller be effective and viable in the X/Y metagame?
<paintseagull> imo just ditch this point
<bugmaniacbob> it almost certainly won't be a losing battle in actuality - the key is perception
<paintseagull> find a better one. "Is this Pokemon effective in the meta" is not a valid question - obviously our goal is to make it so
<bugmaniacbob> well, tbh I don't know how effective it would be
<capefeather> can the brain... ever rewind itself???
<bugmaniacbob> sure it can
<bugmaniacbob> just not on demand
<paintseagull> it's still not a very good question
<capefeather> I watch toom many tv show commercials <.<
<capefeather> *too many
<bugmaniacbob> I suppose, but that would be one of the things we'd be interested in finding out
<paintseagull> almost everyone puts this question in their concept and it's dumb since it's a question we ask of every CAP creation by default
<bugmaniacbob> I guess so
<bugmaniacbob> I'll label it for removal and see if I can come up with either a better wording or a better question
<paintseagull> it always is. but it's never something that makes a concept interesting
<paintseagull> how about [*]To what extent can a single Pokemon increase the stress level of the enemy controller?
<bugmaniacbob> I suppose that's reasonable, but part of the emphasis of the project is on whether it affects different people, well, differently
<bugmaniacbob> "to what extent" implies uniformity in result
<paintseagull> true enough
As I stated in the concept, this is neither a Pokemon that is supposed to intimidate by being an offensive powerhouse, nor is it a Pokemon entirely designed to "troll" the opponent, and nor is it a Pokemon that is designed to "be obnoxious for the sake of being obnoxious". More to the point, I personally think it is somewhere between casually dismissive and childishly naive to state that all good players are absolutely immune to any form of psychological manipulation in this respect - I think I know enough about psychology to say that, at the very least, this is absolutely not something that can be outright stated without evidence to back it up. Cognitive biases and conditioning are everywhere - and to write them off based on the feeling that you either are influenced or you are not strikes me as a poor argument against the concept. Certainly I personally think it likely that the better players are also those less likely to be influenced in this respect and more likely to calmly and rationally think decisions through, but that doesn't make this concept meaningless at all. This would be a great thing to investigate and confirm for ourselves, and if it turns out that this Pokemon performs poorly against those of higher ability, well then, so what? That's one of the questions to be answered by the Project regardless. I also disagree that only set-up sweepers are currently in a position to put the opponent at an absolute disadvantage - but this is one other pre-supposition that would be very nice to actually test out in practice.

If you are one of those people who only wants something fun to play with on the ladder or something that is likely to be successful, then I will not deny that this is almost certainly not the CAP for you. In addition, there are probably a lot of great concepts out there which are more your cup of tea. But, to reiterate, I really feel that CAPs 5 and 6 were really, again, punching below their weight. We've shown that we can do great and complex concepts well and we get a heck of a lot out of them, and I'd like to start the XY generation, as we did with the BW generation, on an ambitious footing. This concept provides that, and more besides.

I'll highlight some of the other concepts I really like in a future post if I have time.
 
Name: INTERROBANG

General Description: A pokemon that is only (but very) effective, when the opponent doesn't know its role on the team.

Justification: Whether a pokemon has one job it can do, or many, when you look at a team, based on its other members before and during playing, you can generally deduce what that pokemon is doing in that battle. Even when you know this information, that pokemon will still do its job, and likely, still be useful to that team. While the concept of deception has been explored in pokemon before, such as with Zoroark and illusion, never have we seen a pokemon whose usefulness relies on the opponent not knowing a pokemon's purpose, allowing us to explore the tricks, traps and mind games associated with it!

Questions to be answered:

  • What risks or sacrifices must be made in order to keep a pokemon's usefulness hidden?
  • When battling against an "interrobang" what steps can be taken to discover its role?
  • What steps during teambuilding can be taken to hide a pokemon's purpose from the opponent?
  • Can the same moves or abilities be used in completely different jobs for greater deception?
  • Is it possible for a pokemon to hide its role by itself, or must other pokemon be chosen to deceive the opponent?

Explanation: When playing against someone on PS, usually the win will go to the player who has outplayed their opponent using their knowledge about both their own team, and the pokemon of the opposing player's. This becomes considerably harder to do when you have absolutely no clue what a pokemon is meant to be doing. Naturally, as a battle progresses, your opponent will gradually learn more and more about your team, and chances are, you aren't going to do anything to stop this. If a pokemon existed that relied on the opponent's unknowing about it and your team, that would influence the way both you and your opponent would battle. Currently no pokemon really fits for my concept in any tier, sure having a pokemon's purpose hidden will help it in some way, but no pokemon rely on this fact entirely. This concept allows us to explore the avenues of deception and just how difficult is to battle when you have no clue what to expect!
 

alexwolf

lurks in the shadows
is a Forum Moderator Alumnusis a Community Contributor Alumnusis a Tiering Contributor Alumnusis a Top Contributor Alumnus
Name: Knock Off Punisher

General Description: A Pokemon that can punish the use of Knock Off or take advantage of Knock Off's most common users.

Justification: Knock Off received a huge buff in X and Y, which made it from a situational gimmick move for Pokemon with a moveslot to spare to a great choice on any Pokemon that gets it and a must on most Pokemon with STAB on it. Knock Off is also one of the reasons that certain Mega Evolutions are so popular, such as Mega Venusaur and Mega Scizor, as the ability to switch into common Knock Off users and not lose your item is invaluable. However, even though Knock Off can be stopped by a few Mega Evolutions, there isn't any way to punish the use of Knock Off, so the Knock Off users can just attempt to beat the few Pokemon that don't mind Knock Off with other moves or by slowly outlasting them. This concept aims to provide a drastic deterrent to the use of Knock Off that can actually make the users of Knock Off think twice before using it.

Questions To Be Answered:
  • What are the best ways to punish the use of Knock Off?
  • Can the use of Knock Off be punished directly or is it better to just take advantage of its most common users?
  • Can the item loss be turned into an advantage, and if yes how?
  • What tools are needed to switch into the most common users of Knock Off?
  • Which is the ideal role for a Knock Off punisher? Sweeper, wallbreaker, supporter, etc
  • To what degree will the existence of a Knock Off punisher affect Knock Off? Is it possible to deter some Pokemon which used it regularly from using it or will those Pokemon just find their ways around the Knock Off punisher?
Explanation: Similarly to how Scald and Stealth Rock have been considered to be some of the best and most annoying moves to deal with, Knock Off is very hard to completely shut down. This cripples many defensive cores and gives to offensive Pokemon a distinct advantage over defensive Pokemon, as a defensive Pokemon without its item becomes very easy to wear down. Furthermore, Knock Off has a very respectable Base Power when the foe holds an item, which when coupled with STAB and the fantastic neutral coverage the Dark typing provides, makes it even harder to switch into, and is the main reason that Pokemon such as Bisharp and Crawdaunt are almost unwallable. By punishing the use of Knock Off, offensive Pokemon such as Mega Mawile and Bisharp become easier to deal with, which is great because they are some of the biggest offensive forces in 6th generation's OU, and defensive cores gain some much needed breathing space in this fast paced and offensive metagame. Knock Off is too good and has very little drawbacks, and this concept attempts to somewhat fix this.

There are many ways to create a Knock Off punisher. We could directly punish the use of Knock Off with Justified, Unburden, Weakness Policy, Rattled, Flame Body, Static, etc, or we could make a Pokemon that takes advantage of some common Knock Off users, similarly to how Substitute Kyurem-B takes advantage of common pivots, such as Rotom-W, Mega Venusaur, and Landorus-T. This concept also gives us the chance to explore to what degree a Pokemon can mitigate the item-dropping effect of Knock Off and if the item drop can be turned into an advantage (Acrobatics, Unburden), something that no existing Pokemon does well (if at all) in OU.
 
Last edited:
Name: Bad Ability?
General Description: A Pokemon with a bad or negative ability, where the ability is the the strongest weapon.
Justification: There are good and bad abilities. There are pokemon that rely on thier good ability to be good, like Azumarril, Talonflame, Ditto or nearly every Prankster user. Other Pokemon might be awesome or broken, but have a horrible ability. Slaking or Regigigas to name the most famous. And then there are the Pokemon that might be good, if they would have a better ability, but dosn't have a negative ability, just a bad. The positive effect on the metagame would be the raise of skilled play. Since your main selling point is the bad or horrible ability you need skill to use it's ability. We could learn why Pokemon with bad or negative abilities have these flaws and how a pokemon that utilizes a bad Ability looks like.
Questions:
-How can a Pokemon use it's bad or negative ability as a weapon against teams?
-What kind of Abilities should it use, bad or negative?
-Would it be an Attacker, Wall, Support Pokemon or Annoyer.
-Would it have awesome overall stats or would it focus on one or two stats.
-Would it be viable in OU?
Explenation:
Slaking and Regigigas Sucks. They have legendary stat, but a bad ability. Dittos stats suck, but it has an awesome ability. Prankster is also awesome, but relies on the movepool of the Pokemon. Its basicly an useless ability without the right movepool or with the wrong item. We turn bad abilities with the right movepool into dangerous weapons. An example is Durant. Entretaiment Truant Durant is a pokemon that can use it's bad ability as a weapon. Sadly, it sucks. However, the Entretaiment route can be used. You might use Entretaiment and Slow Start to cripple incoming pokemon. Another concept might be to use Stall to utilize moves such as Metal Burst. Or a combination of Klutz and Trick might be used.
 
I think I'll break the mold and post some thoughts on some concepts.

First, I'd like to say that I like the concepts submitted by TRC., Brammi, and alexwolf because they explore parts of the metagame that are new to Gen VI. This is a large reason why I submitted my concept; I believe that the first CAP of the generation should explore new characteristics of the metagame or mechanics that we haven't had a large opportunity to explore yet. TRC brings very interesting points about Sticky Web about how we haven't been able to see its full potential because of a lack of viable users, and Brammi's concept of an anti-Defog Pokemon that isn't just "switch in and get +2 but still have your hazards cleared" is also very interesting as we don't have anything like that at the moment. Going off of alexwolf's concept, I'd love to see a straight up deterrent to Knock Off. It's arguably the best move in this gen and nothing can solidly 100% handle users, as nothing appreciates losing an item and Megas that can take Knock Off can be played around by their users.

Quanyails, I don't really understand parts of your concept. While I understand what a "safety net" is supposed to do, it seems a bit too situational to base an entire Pokemon on. How would such a Pokemon fare in situations where it isn't needed? How often would it be needed to fall back on?

Other concepts I like are ones by Kankuro195, Fuzzie, Yilx, and Vryheid. No reasons in particular for liking these. They just seem like interesting paths to take for a CAP.

Finally, pointing out to JohtoHawk that my concept is essentially identical to yours and, well, this piece from the OP:

Do not duplicate or closely-resemble Concepts already posted by others. It is your responsibility to read through all previous submissions in this thread to ensure you are complying with this rule. Ignorance or laziness is not an excuse.
 
I'll continue on this and share some thoughts:

First, I really like Vryheid concept. It's really original and it's a concept that hasn't been explored. Really like it.

I like bugmaniacbob concept too. I read the article a few months ago and it really helped me in my battles, so having a Pokemon dedicated to these strategies would surely help players understand the "psychological warfare"

Facepalmboook concept is pretty cool too, but I've got nothing to add XD


Also, I'd like to point out that Knuckstrike and SubwayJ concepts are almost identical to mine:

Knuckstrike: "This pokemon is unique because there is not a pokemon that has a surprise factor this big", "Will the unpredictability of said CAPmon..."
That's exactly what I said. My idea was a Pokemon that was unpredictable because it could fulfill a handful of roles and because it tricked the opponent into believing it was predictable. (sorry if your idea is different, that's how I understood it.)

SubwayJ : "A pokemon that is only (but very) effective, when the opponent doesn't know its role on the team."
Same thing. Multiple roles, surprise factor, etc. (sorry again if it was different)
 
Name: What Might Have Been
General Description: Take the template of a Pokemon in NU and fix whatever went wrong.
Justification: There's a lot of Pokemon that simply don't cut the mustard in OU, for whatever reason, and that's okay; not everyone can be OMGAMAZING. The important thing, to my mind, is to figure out exactly why they don't, and what that teaches us about the current OU meta, and I think that the best way to do it is to look at some godforsaken non-entity in the Pacific Trash Vortex that is the lower tiers and figure out how to make it work in OU. Whether it's problems in the movepool or statline or typing - hell, all of the above in some cases - anything can be made to work if done properly and used correctly. I accept that this is more general than a lot of the suggestions, but I also think it hinges on a concept not really covered: OU does not exist in a vacuum. With the recent introduction of Mega Evolution, new abilities, and other wonderful goodies, all kinds of Pokemon from the dregs of the competitive world are being given new leases of life in OU; it's imperative that we figure out how to do this ourselves, because the spirit of Pokemon is to be the best that you can be despite the odds. Also, it teaches us how to best shut up the idiots who are determined to shoehorn patently absurd Pokemon into OU because they think the design's cool or something.
Questions To Be Answered:-
  1. The big question: what can we learn about OU from other tiers?
  2. How do the Pokemon from lower tiers fill particular niches that don't really exist in OU?
  3. A follow-up to the above: what can those niches bring to OU, and why weren't they really there in the first place?
  4. What are the points of commonality between the metagames of OU and other tiers, and why do they diverge?
Explanation: I have to admit that I haven't played that much OU. Sorry. I was, however, fairly OK at Gen. V RU, and that's what inspired me to make this suggestion. Take Eelektross. As of Gen. VI, it's the only Pokemon with no weaknesses at all. Unless you run Gravity or Smack Down (and let's face it, you'd have to be clinically insane to do that - I speak from experience on that matter), you cannot get super-effective damage on an Eelektross. It's bulky, it's got both good Attack and Special Attack stats, it's got more moves than God, and yet... it is RU. That feels weird to me. Of course, it's easy to see why a speed-centric meta like Gen V OU would overlook a Pokemon with a base Speed of 50, but Reuniclus is still very much a going concern in OU and its Speed is even worse. I think it'll be interesting to see what the people of this forum can make, and see if you really -can- polish a turd. =]
 
(Repost, now jas and birkal approved)
Name: Terrain Control

General Description: This would be a pokemon which would be able to set up terrain move(s) in a more efficient or viable way then any current users can.

Justification: With the introduction of pokemon X and Y, out of all the new game mechanics that were implemented, terrain altering was one of the first to be deemed completely and utterly useless. Throughout the progression of the metagame, terrain moves have seen practically zero usage in OU Singles. However, if there was a pokemon which was able to be set up in a more efficient way, they could not only be viable, but blaze a trail for many new strategies and combinations. Not only would this have a positive and game-changing impact on the meta, but it would also allow us to see a new potential niche make its way into the metagame. The hidden experimental value in terrain moves is gigantic and needs to be explored. What better place to do it then CAP?

Questions To Be Answered:
  • What are the various ways a pokemon could use terrain moves viably?
  • What pokemon might rise to power if terrain moves could be used more efficiently, or set up quicker?
  • What pokemon might be countered?
  • What kind of stats would an effective terrain user need to have?
  • How could new strategies use and abuse terrain moves?
  • Would this CAP be only a terrain setter, or also a terrain abuser?
  • What kind of ability fosters a good terrain setter?
Explanation: An important thing to consider is the untapped potential that game-freak planted in terrain moves, but refused to allow to prosper. A fast terrain setter, or a terrain setter with an ability similar to Fidgit's would create an extremely prosperous environment for pokemon with the potential to abuse terrain. A prankster terrain setter could also be viable, or even a pokemon who sets terrain in on switch in, reminiscent of abilities like drought and drizzle. Pokemon like gogoat could potentially rise to power, dragons could fall, or volt switch or stall teams could suddenly become extremely viable. The possible outcomes of of CAP 18 could suddenly become incredibly fresh and incredibly interesting.
 
Last edited:
Name: Perfect Pivot Pokemon

General Description: A Pokemon whose purpose is to get in and out of battle as quickly as possible, make preparations for its allies, allow its allies to enter the field safely, and remain in good health.

Justification: Any team strategy is always iffy when it involves a lot of switching. But this Pokemon would provide synergy for the team and not only be capable of switching a lot and surviving, but excel at it. It would be the best Pokemon at switching, so to speak. Most Pokemon have a presence on their own, but this Pokemon's presence would be more known by the presence it gives its allies.

Questions To Be Answered:

-How is switching more or less beneficial to certain Pokemon archetypes (and Types)?
-How much is the measurement of team unity/synergy dependent on how much its members directly rely on each other?
-Can a team whose members' roles depend directly on each other succeed?
-Can a small niche be successful if a Pokemon is good enough doing it?

Explanation: I envision this Pokemon from multiple perspectives. It is possibly one with a more supportive movepool, but I wouldn't rule out offensive prowess, either. Some theoretical possibilities/examples: It could have access to Baton Pass and Prankster, therefor giving it priority passing without needing it to set up substitutes just to get a boost or two in (only to be killed by Talonflame). It could have the ability to cripple an ally Pokemon's counter (possibly with Burn or Paralyze), use Parting Shot, Volt Switch, or U-Turn (and do decent damage with the latter two), switching to a counter and healing up with Regenerator, all the while having the typing and/or stats to have not taken too much damage (or status effects) in the process. It could be a killer user of the Rest/Natural Cure combo. It could de-hazard the field while taking minimal damage from said hazards(possibly none if it had Magic Guard), and be able to survive and quickly switch to an ally who really wanted those hazards gone. Etc., etc. The point of this Pokemon is to be able to prepare for its allies, survive, and be able to do it more than once during the battle. And this Pokemon would be versatile in its ability to prepare. But always be known for its in-and-out nature. I think there could be a lot of ways to imagine this Pokemon, and it would be fun to think of the perfect pivot.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: FMD
I really like alexwolf's concept. Knock Off is such a prevalent move in this generation, so I feel that a way of punishing Knock Off users is definitely a great idea.
 

Epikhairz

Anything goes
Name: The Optimal Assault Vest User

General Description: This will be a Pokemon that makes the best use of the new Assault Vest item while not being broken. It will also help judge if a Pokemon that should make the best use of the Assault Vest can perform another role as well as it can use Assault Vest, or better.

Justification: The new item Assault Vest has been incredibly influential in all tiers of XY, though to make a Pokemon the most effective it can be, it needs a mix of an optimal BST, moves that make the most of not being able to use non-attacking moves, and something to mitigate Assault Vest's downside of not being able to use status moves

Questions to be Answered:
-What is the optimal BST for the optimal Assault Vest user?
-How do we make up for the fact that our CAP will most likely not be using non-attacking moves?
-Should the moves we give our CAP have side effects that can normally only be done with status moves? (e.g. stat boosting attacks [Flame Charge, Charge Beam, Fiery Dance], attacks with a high chance of inflicting a status ailment [Lava Plume (BRN), Thunder (PRZ), Scald (BRN)])
-If we take off the Assault Vest from our CAP and allow it to pick another role to perform, will it be able to perform that role just as well or better?
-Which stat type should the optimal Assault Vest user lean towards - Bulky, Fast, or Powerful?
-How far do you have to go to break an Assault Vest user?

Explanation: will edit in later hopefully. some feedback would also be nice while i get to this
 

Quanyails

On sabbatical!
is a Top Artist Alumnusis a Community Leader Alumnusis a Community Contributor Alumnus
Heya, Salt the Flesh. Did you read the Questions to be Answered for the concept I suggested? You'll find your questions already there! I'd disagree that it's too narrow; if anything, I feel the idea's quite broad given the range of situations the Pokemon could be defined to resolve. We can take a Rapid Spinner as an established example. While there are 'Suicide Leads', there aren't typically 'Suicide Spinners'; that is, a Spinner, while it has the key role of using Rapid Spin, is not required to remove hazards at the expense of giving the opponent material advantage. If it does, it prompts question six in my bullets. My own criticism for my concept, given a second readthrough, is that it focuses too much on the CAP rather than the OU metagame surrounding the CAP, even if the concept in of itself is dependent on undoing the habits of the metagame.

This also applies to other concepts I've read. There are a few sentiments that I and other people share on IRC about the reach of some concepts. Remember that CAP consists of open-ended discussions, so the initial concept should be open to them. If a concept's questions essentially say "Can this sort of Pokemon be viable in the OU metagame?", "What do we need to build a Pokemon with this concept?", "How will this Pokemon be used?", and "How has the metagame changed with this addition?", I become less enthusiastic for the concept. Questions that are more detailed, specific, concrete, yet open give me a more genuine curiosity, which would translate over into what I hope are more engaging discussions. For those who are newer to CAP, it might not hurt to read concept submissions threads from previous CAPs. You'll find that there are concepts from ago that bear similarity to the ones in this thread. Comments to those concepts may allow you to get a sense of what ideas gain interest and momentum.

I'd personally be interested by a concept that tackles something new to Gen. VI (this excludes mine :P). alexwolf's idea is relevant to the modern metagame given both the buff to Knock Off as a move and to Dark as an attacking type against Steel-type Pokemon. Mowtom asks us to revisit the viability of entry hazards with the additional hazard Sticky Web and the additional remover, Defog. Salt the Flesh's/JohtoHawk's concepts focus on reducing priority attacks and statuses, which have become even more ubiquitous with new users and abusers. I admit that I've wanted breathing room around priority users while building a team. I even muse over how weather has fallen from grace from TitaniumWall55's concept and if reanalyzing it would be worthwhile.

That's not to say 'older' concepts aren't worth looking into. Rediamond's/The Pizza Man's concept of bringing an old playstyle back and Birkal's/colourcodedchaos's idea of bringing a strategy common in a metagame outside of OU make me interested in how the OU metagame evolves when compared with older generations and with different tiers. Vryheid's The Robber Baron made me think of Pokemon in a way I hadn't before! I have quantified 'resources' in Pokemon as the advantage in Pokemon, perhaps type matchups, synergy, and team builds in general, but adding Pokemon roles, entry hazards, and turn value into this idea of 'resources'. (This is where I go off on a tangent.) In chess, pieces and pawns are given values, but a pawn close to promotion or a knight covering many squares is more valuable than a rook stuck in its corner. Something similar could be said of Pokemon's metagame, where Pokemon, moves, and area effects have more advantage in some situations in union rather than in isolation. Stacking entry hazards takes multiple turns, and removing them takes just one turn, but the pressure to switch takes precedence most of the time over removing hazards. The value of entry hazards is dependent not only on turn value but also on the ability of a team to force switches.
 
Never done this before, but is like to participate, especially since I think (key word) that I've come to know competitive battling a little more intricately.

Name: Where do you think you're going?

General Description: to punish/reverse the momentum gained by volt/u-turners.

Justification:
these moves, volt switch and u turn are moves that are easily spammable and an easy way to regain or maintain momentum. Oftentimes when coupled with a scarf, it is an easy damage and escape button.

Questions To Be Answered:

1) How prominent is the role of attack/switch moves in OU?

2) how important is the momentum these moves bring?

3) can key attack/switch Pokemon like rotom w, scizor, lando-t, mega manectric still be as valuable without these keys moves?

Justification: while I admit, with genesect banned this is not as prevalent an issue, however volt turn spamming is something that can frustrate teams that are either

A) not fast enough to take out fast volt turners or

B) not strong enough to take out slow volt turners

Which is often the case. Just between lando t and mega manectric one round of volt turning can neutralize physical attackers.

Rotom wash and other less popular slow volt switchers (think mega ampharos) can take a hit, deal good damage with a slow volt switch and bring in a set up sweeper or an appropriate counter.

How this could go about being done? A specific ability or move to trap those specific moves but that is too niche. Maybe the ability to randomize what Pokemon is sent out next, removing the users ability to pick just the right Pokemon to send out.

Perhaps a type combo that resists both moves but again that is too niche. A move or ability would suffice I think.


Again I realize that, as my first submission it probably is not the most scintillating idea but hopefully it'll generate some discussion.
 
Quanyails, Thanks for explaining. I just felt that it seemed like a very specific role to build something around and it would be hard to make the Pokemon useful in general without diverting from the concept. You also have a good point on questions. I become interested in a concept if the questions are interesting, but (I'm bashing myself here) I generally lack the knowledge or experience to understand some of the more complex ones. I guess this part of the reason why I didn't understand yours.
 

Ununhexium

I closed my eyes and I slipped away...
is a Community Contributoris a Smogon Discord Contributoris a Contributor to Smogonis a Smogon Media Contributoris a Social Media Contributor Alumnusis a Forum Moderator Alumnus
Name: Check This Out
General Description: A Pokemon that can check many common threats in the OU metagame, but not necessarily counter them.
Justification: The terms "check" and "counter" are often thrown around metagame discussions. Aside from the article in The Smog, we do not really have a solid definition/explanation for the terms "check" and "counter". This CAP will attempt to resolve this. With this problem resolved, the OU metagame would be a much more healthy metagame as people would be more informed on common concepts when making a team. Also, we could create ways to check a Pokemon effectively without necessarily revenge killing or using traditional methods.
Questions To Be Answered:
  • What does "check" and "counter" mean?
  • What differentiates the two terms?
  • What makes a Pokemon a good check?
  • What are common ways to check a Pokemon?
  • How can something check everything, but counter nothing?
  • What are more unorthodox ways to check Pokemon?
  • How is it possible to effectively combine multiple ways to check?
Explanation: Check and counter is thrown around everywhere and we should really know what it means. This sort of is like an anti- krilowatt. I found that krilowatt, though having the equivalent of 125 special attack with a life orb, comes at the opportunity cost of not being able to hold an item like leftovers or life orb etc. Also, granted that we stick with the definitions in The Smog article, this shouldn't be able to safely switch into most attacks, sort of like Syclant. This should be a healthy medium though it still cannot continuously switch into attacks multiple times. Also, it would be interesting to test other ways of checking other than walling it into oblivion or obliterating it with powerful attacks (maybe a strange, unorthodox combination of movepool and ability maybe) because that is already common in OU. Krilowatt does half of what I want this to do better, but doesnt really do the other half. This should be able to take a hit or two but cannot manually switch in multiple times in order to fill its goal of really differentiating the terms "check" and "counter". I hope that if this concept becomes CAP 1 of the sixth generation of Pokemon, this will be a resolved issue.
 
Last edited:

DarkSlay

Guess who's back? Na na na! *breakdances*
is a CAP Contributor Alumnus
This was originally a concept submitted for the Generation V metagame, but I feel that this concept actually holds even more merit in this generation than the previous one. After talks on IRC, this still is a very valuable concept to explore:

---
Name: Swiss Army Knife
General Description: This Pokemon can fill a role for any team archetype, but focuses on its role with the team rather than itself.
Justification: This concept places an emphasis on versatility, affecting both its placement during the Team Building stage and its usage during actual gameplay. With the evolution of team building in Generation VI and the introduction of new threats like the Mega forms and Talonflame, the metagame has found itself in a state where the threats are varied but the Pokemon themselves (and as a result the playstyles) are fairly straightforward in their individual roles. The definition of "versatile" also finds itself to be vague and unclear. Pokemon like Thundurus-I and MegaVenusaur can be seen as versatile due to their sheer physical composition alone (great offenses, etc.), but Pokemon like Landorus-T and Heatran can play multiple roles due to how well they blend in with team archetypes, hence their "versatility".

Questions To Be Answered:
·
What is "versatility" by Generation VI's standards? Is it who the individual Pokemon is, or what the individual Pokemon can do in battle?
· How important is it for a Pokemon to be versatile in today's metagame?
· How does versatility impact the Team Building stage? What would a team-centric Pokemon do to shape team builds?
· How does versatility impact in-game decisions of both the player and the opponent? How does a player react to different kinds of versatility?

Explanation:
As stated in the Justification section, there are mutliple ways to look at "versatility". Thundurus-I can be seen as a versatile Pokemon: it can threaten most of the Pokemon in the metagame, which gives it the ability to fit on almost any team. While it can't really run a variety of sets (there isn't really a "Defensive Thundurus-I" set) and is consistently used for offensive pressure, it can still run dissimilar sets that ensures that it is effective against a wide range of threats. In contrast, Heatran can also be seen as a versatile Pokemon: it can run a Specially Defensive set set, it can run an Offensive set with Balloon, it can run a Support set with Stealth Rock, and it can even run effective Choice Scarf and Choice Specs sets. Looking at Heatran, it doesn't have "superior" stats or abilities comparatively, but rather has "just the right" composition to play multiple roles for teams. The goal of this concept is to look at the way the term "versatility" is seen and how it applies to the team creation stage and how it's used in battle. While the justification may seem like the project will lean towards the Heatran build, the way a player views "help for the team" is purely subjective and open for debate. We could approach this topic from many angles, so long as the focus lies on enabling multiple team builds to succeed.

This does not mean the CAP should be forced to play a support role. There is a difference between "supporting the team" and "using Support to help the team". For example, Gen IV Celebi ran a lure set that was specifically designed to bring out and OHKO Scizor. For the team, that played a huge role in paving success. It was also an offensive way of helping the team out. Another example is Gen V and Gen VI Landorus-T. Swords Dance and Rock Polish sure are nice to sweep entire teams, but when a team needs a bulky pivot to change momentum, Defensive Landorus-T is is employed to help set up hazards, weaken physical threats and threaten opponents with its specific movepool. That's the exact kind of versatility we're talking about: something to help out the team it's on achieve its goal.

The best part about this kind of concept is how wide open it is: questions in the metagame that are so broad, yet are specified enough to have concrete examples, give us both the freedom to make choices that cater to our needs while having the structure of direction for the project. Personally, I can't say for sure what the stats, abilities, movepool, or typing of this Pokemon will be, as the concept leaves pretty much all of that up in the air.
 
Last edited:
Name: Glue

General Description: A Pokemon capable of "holding together" a team by filling roles that Pokemon that fit into common team archetypes are normally incapable of doing.

Justification: When talking about teambuilding, the term "Glue" is thrown around a lot. Seemingly every team has a Pokemon that can be described in this way. However, as far as I'm aware, there is no definition of a "Glue" Pokemon. This topic seeks to explore an oft-mentioned topic without a concrete definition in a similar manner to the first BW CAP, which explored the concept of momentum.
Questions to be Answered:
  • What are common threats that a typical team has trouble handling effectively?
  • What jobs/roles do typical teams have difficulty fulfilling?
  • What does it mean for a Pokemon to be the "Glue" of a team?
Explanation: I, like many others, believe that the best CAPs are the ones where we learn something. We have had several of these in the past, the most notable one to come to mind being Tomohawk, the product of the aforementioned first BW CAP. I'll be honest - I heavily based this topic off of Korski's from that CAP. I thing a broad-ranging concept like mine would be a good way to open XY CAP, and could pique the curiosity of users new to CAP and expand the community.

Now for my interpretation of the concept. In my opinion, the best example of a "Glue" Pokemon we have right now is Excadrill, which provides invaluable utility to an offensive team in the form of hazard control while being able to check common threats such as Rotom-W and Aegislash with its powerful STAB Mold Breaker Earthquake. However, it is frail and the things that it checks can OHKO it with the appropriate move. Personally, I think we should do something that has good offenses while still remaining bulky, with the ability to spread status or lay hazards and countering a threat that most teams have trouble with.
 
Name: Onslaught

General Idea: A Pokemon that explores the concept of Onslaught Cores - offensive cores that double or even triple up on offensive Pokemon with the same or similar checks/counters with the hope that the combined effort will break through them. (DragMag, Double Dragon, TalonRaptor, etc)

Justification: It all started in DPP Ubers when some brilliant mind put Salamence and Rayquaza on the same team, realizing that all the havoc that one dragon dance sweeper wreaks on the defending team before it gets stopped makes it that much easier to succeed with the second one! This strategy was aptly named "Double Dragon" and was a great offensive strategy throughout the generation, and one of the best if not only reasons to use Salamence in Ubers. The reason this worked so well is because even if there was a defensive Pokemon that Salamence could only 3HKO but got OHKO'd back, by the time you brought in Rayquaza that Pokemon had already taken one hit stopping Salamence's sweep so it's like that 3HKO became 2HKO for Rayquaza, a much more favorable position to be in for an offensive Pokemon.

This offensive Onslaught type of strategy evolved into the infamous DragMag strategy in BW OU because with the release of Haxorus and Hydreigon as well as Lati@s's drop into OU we finally had five dragons worth putting on a team. DragMag was pretty simple- only Steel types resisted dragon, so a Steel trapper + five dragons = easy sweep. Even if Magnezone failed to take out the opponent's steels (which it rarely did), the sheer combined power of your dragons all beating up on the one Pokemon your opponent had that wasn't 2HKO'd by them was usually enough to break through it eventually and finish crushing your opponent. This strategy was popular enough in BW OU to be considered a major team archetype often cited along with (though not necessarily as good as) Rain, Sun, Weatherless, Hyper Offense, and the other major playstyles of the era.

Come sixth gen the Onslaught stratey has only become more popular. DragMag has fallen from grace a bit with the introduction of the fairy type, but it is still quite viable as Magnezone handles most fairies quite well and the popular Dragons have a wide array of coverage moves. However- DragMag is just the tip of the iceberg. The main threat this gen are the new Onslaught cores. Double Dragon is back with Salamence having a new partner in Mega Charizard X, both being powerful dragon types with access to Dragon Dance, high base power STABs, and the coverage to ruin any would-be wall's day. Dragon isn't even the only offensive type to be on high alert for this gen either. Staraptor, Mega Pinsir, and most importantly Talonflame can be run together very effectively as they all share similar checks that get worn down fast with repeated assaults and appreciate the same team support (all they really need is for Stealth Rock to be gone). In fact, they are arguably better than dragon spam, because after Staraptor and/or Mega Pinsir have dented a team's flying checks Talonflame doesn't even need to waste a turn boosting to start cleaning up with it's potent priority Brave Birds.

Double Dragon, DragMag, Talonraptor- different names, different faces, same idea. Load up on offensive Pokemon with shared checks/counters and either wear them down with repeated brute force or pack a counter to their counters and start smacking away at the enemy team. It may be rather unelegant, but it is in no way diminishing in popularity. Looking back, we only see this strategy getting more and more popular through the generations. If this pattern continues we can definitely look forward to a lot more of this in the future. Until now we've been giving the cores little nicknames like they were isolated cases, but looking at these strategy as a whole it's easy to see that it's really just one central idea- Onslaught. For our first CAP of the 6th generation, let's explore this idea and see what makes it tick.

Questions To Be Answered:

-
What attacking types and offensive "groups" are viable for this kind of strategy? Dragons works well due to the relatively small number of Pokemon that resist their STAB. Flying works well due to being a good offensive typing and it's fantastic abusers. If we were to try and say create a new Onslaught core what types and what Pokemon would work well for it?

-
Other than the obviously popular Onslaught cores, are there any popular cores that could be considered semi-Onslaught? Fighting types have no shortage of high attack users with powerful moves. Rain boosted water attack gave us all headaches last gen. What offensive cores are putting the most pressure on today's OU metagame?

- How can you effectively stop an Onslaught core? Resistances and high defenses are nice and all, but even Mega-Aggron, one of the most physically defensive Pokemon in the game, has trouble not getting worn down by the combined might of DD Salamence and MegaZard X, not even to mention their special attacking teammates. Can such problems be overcome in indirect ways such as recovery and status? Perhaps ditching a defensive answer and opting to revenge kill is a better way to go?

- What traits do these cores all share? Are they something we'd be able to predict just upon seeing the new Pokemon in a generation shift or are these cores something that take time to be discovered?

- Why exactly do these cores work so well? To most battlers, loading up on offensive Pokemon that are all stopped by the same Pokemon seems counter-intuitive. Is it just that the current abusers of this strategy already only have shaky counters as it is or is there a deeper strategic value in focusing all your strengths on one point rather than covering all your bases?

Explanation:
The best way to go about this, in my opinion at least, is to choose a dangerous offensive Pokemon or pair of similar dangerous offensive Pokemon and create a CAP that completes an Onslaught core with them. Note that Onslaught cores are a little bit different than traditional offensive cores, in that you don't complement your flying type sweeper with a ground type sweeper that hits all the flying resists super-effectively. Instead you compliment your flying type with another flying type that draws the same switch in.

That's not to say that they have to be exactly the same however. For example, take a look at 6th gen's Double Dragon combo- Salamence and MegaZard X. Yes they both commonly run together with Dragon Dance, but they work a little differently. Salamence's Intimidate and handy ground immunity gives it the bulk to set up on many physically oriented attackers, while MegaZard X usually gets his Dragon Dance with his offensive presence forcing a switch. You can even still effectively run them together by taking advantage of Salamence's ability to hold items by running Scarf MoxieMence with DD MegaZard X. While Pokemon in Onslaught cores tend to be somewhat similar they do not have to be same, and can even be more effective by taking advantage of different secondary typing and abilities.

Going this route, the most important stage for learning is not when we choose CAP's partner(s), but when we choose CAP's checks and counters. It's just as important, if not more important, to develop a counter-play to a strategy as it is to develop the strategy itself. Onslaught cores are really effective when done right, but that just makes it that much more important to know how to beat it. Due to the wall-breaking nature of Onslaught cores, Pokemon just with high defensive stats and resists probably won't completely cut it (Not that it doesn't help of course!). That's not to say that it can't be done, it will just require some creativity. Making good but balanced Pokemon is what we're all here for and it's what the CAP community does best.

If you can't tell already, I'm really hoping that I can get the "Onslaught Cores" name to stick. But that aside, I really do think that this is something worth looking into. Good luck to all the other submissions! There's a lot of great submissions here and I think it it'll be pretty hard to go wrong this time around.
 
Last edited:

Birkal

We have the technology.
is a Top Artistis a Top CAP Contributoris a Top Smogon Media Contributoris a Site Content Manager Alumnusis a Battle Simulator Admin Alumnusis a Senior Staff Member Alumnusis a Community Contributor Alumnus
Name: Fully Uncompetitive

General Description: Design a Pokemon that is deemed and defined as uncompetitive in the current Overused metagame. Ultimately, discuss and discover strategies which remove control from the players' grasp.

Justification: This Pokemon should not have a positive effect on the metagame, sorry friends; we must forge a devil. What this submission brings to the table, however, is a large knowledge gain on how exactly 'uncompetitiveness' is defined in competitive Pokemon play. With the current heated discussion on these elements in Overused, now would be the ideal time to explore which facets of play are qualified not as luck, but as uncompetitive.

Questions To Be Answered:
  • What exactly does the word 'uncompetitive' mean in terms of competitive Pokemon? How does it differ from 'luck'?
  • Which strategies are considered uncompetitive? What makes them that way?
  • Are there varying degrees of uncompetiveness between differing strategies? If so, what are they?
  • Are uncompetitive elements desirable in a metagame? To what degree?
  • Through which means can a player remove uncompetitive elements from matches? Is this possible?
  • Do uncompetitive elements come and go in phases? If so, is this pattern predictable?

Explanation: Uncompetitive elements in competitive Pokemon is neither insular to Smogon nor new. Pokemon Online and PokeBattle have both considered these elements in their tiering decisions, and Smogon has joined the fray within this generation. Furthermore, uncompetitiveness has been considered from as far back as Generation IV tiering with the banning of Shaymin-S and Deoxys-S. This topic has come up time and time again in our competitive metagames, and I believe it's about time that the Create-A-Pokemon Project tackled it head on.

In my eyes, approaching this topic from a perspective of "banishing uncompetitiveness" is trite and nigh impossible. Rather, we should be viewing this through the lens of a devil's advocate. This concept encourages us to get creative with how we leave a match to the hands of fate. Sure, we could approach this from a perspective of SwagPlay or flinch hax (please, let's not). But the underlying questions here dig much deeper. What exactly defines uncompetitiveness? Are there levels of uncompetitiveness? Do these tactics reach a diminishing return of usefulness at any particular point?

Finally, I am most interested in the philosophy of 'uncompetitive phases' in Pokemon. The first example to reflect on is Wobbuffet. It was banned in DPP OU because it did its job so effectively that it made matches pointless. Sure we've had power creep, but can that solely explain the sudden dip in Wobbuffet usage? Shed Shell isn't widespread by any means, and Wobbuffet's movepool hasn't changed in the slightest. And what about Pokemon such as Jirachi and Thundurus, both of which rely on some uncompetitive traits to win matches? How does Deoxys-S fit into the mix; it didn't rely on hax, but it was definitely considered uncompetitive when banned. Speed ties... guaranteed outcomes... Where is the consistency here? I'm not only curious on tackling this concept by creating a nefarious Pokemon to cause dicey situations, but also greatly interested gathering some data on deeming a Pokemon as 'uncompetitive' throughout history.

There's much to discuss here. I believe this concept combines the fun of creating a Pokemon that everyone will loathe with the thoughtfulness of observing our past and predicting the future. Let's see what it takes to be considered fully uncompetitive.
 
Last edited:

Srn

Water (Spirytus - 96%)
is an official Team Rateris a Forum Moderatoris a Community Contributoris a Top Tiering Contributor
OUPL Champion
Name: The Ultimate Trapper

General Description: This pokemon effectively traps a wide variety of pokemon and takes advantage of their presence in many ways. It could even Baton Pass a trapping move to another pokemon.

Justification: Switching is a gigantic part of the game. It makes up the basis of lures and baits, of sacrificing and revenge killing, of pivoting and double switching. No doubt this mechanic is a vital part of the game in the competitive scene, and there's no real way to avoid it. Switching, in short, is vital to the game and practically unstoppable. Throughout the game however, there are a few exceptions. Pokemon that were basically trash otherwise, like gothitelle and dugtrio, were carried to the top solely for their ability to prevent switching. If a pokemon that was slightly viable outside of its ability to trap-pass was introduced into the metagame, without a doubt it would carve itself a very unique niche into the current metagame. This is solely because the ability to prevent switches could possibly force your opponent into a checkmate position that he/she cannot stop.

Questions to be Answered:

- Why don't pokemon like Gothitelle and Dugtrio get higher usage? What can we do to our CAP pokemon to make it better than those two yet still not totally broken?
- How do certain playstyles (Stall, balanced, Volt-turn, HO) benefit from trapping a pokemon, if at all? In which of these styles can our CAP fit into and be used to its full effect? What style benefits the most from trapping?
- How would existing playstyles react to a powerful trapper? Would HO become even more common so that our CAP is hit hard before it can do anything?
- Would it be better for our CAP trapper (and trappers in general) to be Offensively biased or Defensively biased?
- Would the usage of Choice items be affected with the introduction of a viable trapper?

Explanation: Trapping is one of the things that may even be defined uncompetitive, because, to a certain degree, you are removing a lot of control from the opposing trainer. One of the main things everybody does is switch, and once you cut that off, you will usually be very uncomfortable. It's like suddenly not being able to leave your house anymore, and being forced to stay in until you die, while somebody else steals everything you own. Without a doubt, the thought of being trapped and forced to sack an integral team member of the party is always something a trainer doesn't want to think of. When you can be able to eliminate any one pokemon 100% of the time from the opponent's team, you're wielding a powerful niche.

There are several ways this strategy could be implemented. The most obvious one seems to be to just smack shadow tag on a pokemon with actual decent stats, perhaps a good set up move, not be total dead weight in some way, and just call it a day. Trappers can definitely work this way, but its very hard to draw the line between a fair trapper and a broken trapper. What I want to see with this project is put our heads together to draw a fine line between a viable yet not broken trapper and create a pokemon that lands right on that line.

One very overlooked way to trap is to pass it! There are only a few pokemon who can actually do this, and by few I mean smeargle and ariados. You would use Block / Mean Look / Spider Web and then use baton pass to a different pokemon with a good match-up against the trapped one. The opposing pokemon would stay trapped, and you are free to do whatever the hell you please. This is a very strong strategy that requires specific conditions and teammates, but is nigh impossible to handle once put into effect. This could very well be what our CAP could do.

A good reason why dugtrio and gothitelle don't receive too much usage, in my eyes, is because they are not that great when you look past its ability. Our CAP pokemon, to succeed, must fulfill some important role outside of trapping to fit into a team without having a team based around it instead. To be able to provide something else to the team, and not have your team entirely based around a trapper doing its job, is what could make a pokemon's usage really skyrocket.

When playing with balanced or HO teams, one of the primary things you try to do is open up a set-up opportunity. You could spend 30 turns of intense maneuvering, baiting, and sacking to just achieve 1 turn, a window of opportunity, to get your win condition in safely and clean up. Opening up this window of opportunity can be one of the toughest things to do, especially against more skilled players, as you HAVE to bait the counter in with an unusual set or force it to take hits so its weak enough so that your win condition can power through it. This entire process, could simply be eliminated, by the use of a good trapper. One could forego the whole weakening/baiting process, get in the trapper safely once, and then have some pokemon to take advantage of the counter that threatens your main win condition to do its job. In this way, trapping would become an extremely effective strategy to eliminate obstacles to sweepers.

However, we must again walk the line of is it broken or not? A pokemon that can do the above a large majority of the time, such as mega gengar, has been proven to be highly broken. Somehow, this trapper must be viable and fill a role other than trapping while also performing its main role decently. The main way to probably solve this problem is make it weak to a certain common group of pokemon, but make it very strong against a separate group of pokemon. This way, the opponent would have a few choices to take down this trapper, making it a little more fair, but still have to be weary of using the group of pokemon which it defeats, keeping it effective.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 1, Guests: 0)

Top