I'm not sure how a trapping ability could ever dissuade the opponent from KOing CAP 19. If anything all you would be doing is creating scenarios where they have no choice but to set it up one way or another.
-
The moderators of this forum can be found in the CAP forum staff directory.
-
Welcome to Smogon! Take a moment to read the Introduction to Smogon for a run-down on everything Smogon, and make sure you take some time to read the global rules.
-
Congrats to the winners of the 2023 Smog Awards!
CAP 19 CAP 19 - Part 1 - Closed Concept Assessment
- Thread starter paintseagull
- Start date
- Status
I think that we actually agree more than we disagree here. I was more arguing against the weather/hazards/status suicider that some people have been suggesting. At the end of my last post I suggested a "sniper" role for CAP- basically a Pokemon meant to take out a key Pokemon or two on the opponent's team so you can take control of the match with your own sweeper, wall, hazard setter, etc- which sounds a lot like what you've been suggesting.
Snipers are pretty under-appreciated concepts in battling in general. My main concern is how do we dissuade KOing something that clearly built to punch a whole through a team?
My thought would be we make CAP 19 unable to beat what it's trying to snipe, however make it so that your opponent has little choice but to take it out with what you want to bring down. Instead of actively KOing the Poke, CAP 19 cripples it to the point where it's vastly diminished it's usefulness. This could certainly have a lasting effect on the battle as it can make the opposing team unable to do a role. Maybe you're running a bulky team, and you make it so you can revenge kill their wallbreaker with ease, or maybe you used it to take out their one check to your sweeper so that you can ravage their team with another teammate. It's certainly an interesting idea, though figuring out how to actually make this work might be challenging.
The interesting part of this concept is that if your opponent sees what you're trying to do with CAP 19, they have a choice to either KO it and know that it'll cripple them in the way you want OR they could leave CAP 19 alive and try to slowly defeat it by other means while it continues to cause problems otherwise.
This is a really interesting idea. Basically, we could have CAP 19 guarantee the elimination of a key threat on the opposing team but can ONLY guarantee this through its own death. I can think of one way to do this: make the target Pursuit-weak. The idea would be to make CAP 19 annoying, but not overpowering, and only reliably taken down by Pokémon that are weak to Pursuit (say Ghosts). That way, the only way it can be taken down would guarantee a Pursuit Trapper comes in next and takes out a key link in the opposing team. I actually really like this idea and think it could be discussed more.
You may hesitate to take it down with your Ghost/Psychic until you know that you won't get any more use out of the Ghost/Psychic further down the line. Perhaps CAP 19 could also be a status spreader or hazard setter so its influence remains afterward. The opponent is torn between taking it out to stop the status spam and knowing that taking it out means losing what could be a key sweeper or wall on their team. This also has the bonus of meaning the only way to take him out is to sacrifice your spin blocker (though I know Defog is much more popular nowadays).
Except I never suggested we make a Pokemon specifically to be neutered when burned. It was just an example of the argument I was trying to get across. The idea that KO is the most disadvantageous state a Pokemon could be in is not true at all, even in a niche sense. That's basically why non-damaging moves are any good to begin with. My mention of zugzwang is the same way. There are few true zugzwang situations in Pokemon, but the idea I was trying to get across is that material advantage isn't everything in either game.
Anyway, I feel like something along the lines of Tailwind might be a better idea than a weather move. This is simply because far more Pokemon benefit from Tailwind than any given weather. I'm not entirely sure if we can reasonably make a viable Pokemon that would want to use Tailwind, though.
I have a couple of things to say. First, I'd like to put out there that making a weather mon is a horrible idea, and is probably the worst thing we could do for the concept that has currently been brought up. It's already been said that nobody would actually want to suppress themselves from killing a weather starter excluding some specific late-game scenarios, and completely focusing on these types of situations would make for an unsuccessful CAP because there's nothing to learn from that. Secondly, if this mon is not given a weather-inducing ability, it would be hard pressed to avoid being put aside for Politoed, Tyranitar, etc. Most manual inducers actually abuse the weather they set up themselves, unless they're a suicide rain setter like, the mon we're all trying to avoid being like, Deoxys-S, which actually did have, to my knowledge, a successful suicide Rain Dance set that saw use on offensive rain teams. Finally, the notion that a weather starter like this can provide a lasting effect is misguided because if this weather starter is used to help a sweeper like Kabutops sweep and end the game.... well, that effect didn't really last long, did it? Basically, all weather can accomplish is set up once and die to let a weather-based sweeper end the game in just a few more turns.
This brings me to my next point. After thinking of weather in this way, I don't think helping a late game sweeper at all is a particularly good move to make, simply because pulling off your sweep directly after CAP dies doesn't really show us any lasting effects; all it does is allow us to sweep. This is why we should be focused on mid-game support, and I do think something like a status or debuff spreader can do this best. This may also indirectly help the late game sweeper, which, in my eyes, is better than trying to directly target things that the late game sweeper hates and then dying just before said sweep occurs.
This brings me to my next point. After thinking of weather in this way, I don't think helping a late game sweeper at all is a particularly good move to make, simply because pulling off your sweep directly after CAP dies doesn't really show us any lasting effects; all it does is allow us to sweep. This is why we should be focused on mid-game support, and I do think something like a status or debuff spreader can do this best. This may also indirectly help the late game sweeper, which, in my eyes, is better than trying to directly target things that the late game sweeper hates and then dying just before said sweep occurs.
Seems to be a simple difference in short-term and long-term (dis)advantages. Since the tangible results of fainting a Pokemon aren't very relevant to this CAP's concept, the second one seems to be more appropriate. Loss of opportunities for teammates, loss of momentum, and crippling team synergy are the aspects that stick out the most to me, since some things like 'added stress' come down to the player's frame of mind, which cannot be reliably affected.
In my opinion, both goals are viable and equally intriguing. For a more team-oriented CAP 19, its fainting should either benefit the team as a whole in some way, or benefit the next Pokemon being sent in. If CAP 19 is aiming to be more of a solo player, perhaps its fainting should force opponents to play around it, similar to a passive Destiny Bond in that regard, or maybe even force them to sacrifice something (a Pokemon, momentum, whatever) to remove it.
Both are also equally doable; something along the lines of a Parting Shot / Memento upon fainting could force out the opponent or cripple, and give your next switch-in some breathing space. Just the first one that came to mind, but yeah, you get the point. There are many ways to discourage an opponent from attacking or fainting a Pokemon. A passive ability that activates upon fainting seems to be the best fit, with an appropriate movepool to match.
Well, some of the ways something can leave a lasting mark on the game after it faints are through status or a team buff. Rn, I'm thinking of abilities / moves that could either: inflict status upon the opponent, shuffle them out, stun them for one turn, give a boost to the next switch, or something along those lines. Maybe even a mon that is more valuable when saved for death fodder.
In my opinion, both goals are viable and equally intriguing. For a more team-oriented CAP 19, its fainting should either benefit the team as a whole in some way, or benefit the next Pokemon being sent in. If CAP 19 is aiming to be more of a solo player, perhaps its fainting should force opponents to play around it, similar to a passive Destiny Bond in that regard, or maybe even force them to sacrifice something (a Pokemon, momentum, whatever) to remove it.
Both are also equally doable; something along the lines of a Parting Shot / Memento upon fainting could force out the opponent or cripple, and give your next switch-in some breathing space. Just the first one that came to mind, but yeah, you get the point. There are many ways to discourage an opponent from attacking or fainting a Pokemon. A passive ability that activates upon fainting seems to be the best fit, with an appropriate movepool to match.
Well, some of the ways something can leave a lasting mark on the game after it faints are through status or a team buff. Rn, I'm thinking of abilities / moves that could either: inflict status upon the opponent, shuffle them out, stun them for one turn, give a boost to the next switch, or something along those lines. Maybe even a mon that is more valuable when saved for death fodder.
Last edited:
I was originally not planning on posting here, given that I missed the concept submissions stage and, indeed, all of the discussion that has taken place thus far on this... highly intriguing concept that we have chosen for ourselves. Moreover, I have to confess that I am still rather behind on the current thinking, or community consensus, regarding the direction we have chosen to move in. Possibly this is because I have missed one or more summary posts that address all of the current arguments, but so far as I can see, nearly all posts rendered unto us thus far have limited themselves to the question of how we might go about achieving one particular facet of the concept, or discussing the implications of the concept, or some similar topic. Consequently, I am not certain if my vague and malformed ideas are of any worth, but possibly they will be of interest to somebody, somewhere.
Generally speaking, I dislike concepts that contain the word "or" in their description. Particularly in this case, we appear to have two entirely separate roles being suggested, neither of which seem to have the mildest bearing on the other, so far as I can see or the justification can elucidate for me. In cases like these, we have often fallen upon one small area of the concept and neglected its entirety, ostensibly in the name of prioritising that which is of greatest interest, but at the same time causing the final product to be one that does not quite reflect the concept that was offered. Here, however, we have a problem. This is a Pokemon that wants to dissuade the opponent from KOing it, so naturally it should last for the majority of the battle if successful. On the other hand, if it wants to maximise its post-mortem effects on the battle, it would naturally want to faint earlier in the game. Which of course begs the question - What do?
Based on the way the concept was presented, what immediately sprung to mind was a Pokemon capable of running two mutually exclusive yet equally effective sets, one of which would dissuade the opponent from KOing it, and the other of which would act to maximise its post-mortem effects. If this were still DP or BW, and illegal egg combinations were still a thing, I would surely advocate something along the lines of a Spikes + Destiny Bond illegality, such that CAP19 could run a Spiker/utility set (which, a la Forretress, your opponent would want to KO as soon as possible) as well as a marginally different set with Destiny Bond, which punished the opponent for guessing that it was running the other set. Hence, mindgames of a sort. But this is altogether not possible with the tools that we have, barring some event move shenanigans, and as such I am drawn to the possibility of their being a more elegant solution.
The other alternative is what I like to term the "dead weight" possibility, or in more descriptive terms, the "Sticky Web Shuckle". Once Shuckle has set up Sticky Web, its job is done and the ramifications will last for the entire battle, assuming of course that the opponent does not carry a Defog user. From this point onwards, Shuckle is little more than death fodder, or - circumstances permitting - entirely setup bait. It is wholly in your interests for the Shuckle to be killed off by the opponent, and more than just a little bit in your opponent's interest to keep it alive. But there's the rub - does the opponent keep your Shuckle alive for the possibility of a double-switch that could give their sweeper an easy set-up opportunity? Or should they kill it now, and prevent it from being a death fodder later on that could give that Charizard-Y on the cusp of death a free switch-in?
There are problems with this, of course, and quite a few of them relate to the fundamental nature of this concept. Shuckle is not viable in OU, and probably wouldn't be even if Smeargle, Galvantula, and Spinarak didn't exist. It's not viable in OU precisely because of its limitations, and the fact that it introduces an opportunity for the opponent - any opponent - that is wholly avoidable. For the above to be successful, the nature of the support used must be so unbelievably stonkingly good that it's worth the cost of a teamslot to have it around, and the support cannot be provided by a more powerful or more versatile alternative that doesn't give your opponent the same opportunities. This ties into the concept of "effective fainting" - when a Pokemon has served its purpose and is for all intents and purposes out of the game, a la suicide lead Aerodactyl confronted by Bullet Punch Machamp in DP. So this option requires a bit more thinking through. I personally do not think that there is any sort of support currently in the game whatsoever that qualifies here - at least, nothing that an infinitely better Pokemon doesn't already have. I mean, some sort of uber-reliable sleep user might work, or a combination support Pokemon like Smeargle (but more defensive). But I can't think of anything other than that, and having more than one single-turn support move quickly skews the opponent's priorities decidedly into the "kill it nao" side of proceedings.
To finish proceedings, I feel I should address some of the other ideas floating around. Doug made an important point when he mentioned emphasis on fainting, largely because this seems to be the aspect of the concept most likely to be ignored if we try to focus primarily on any other aspect. More to the point, it is indeed the most interesting path forward. I would, however, at this point like to reiterate that we should cover every aspect of this concept if we can, not simply those bits that are easiest or which appeal the most to us. The concept of a Pokemon that wants to faint, is most effective after it faints, and consequently is in the opponent's interests not to faint, is an altogether fascinating concept, if not entirely, well, possible with the mechanics we have to work with. Very quickly, then: suicide moves like Memento and Explosion are pointless, since they abandon the concept of opponent choice altogether; opponents that stack entry hazards, such as Deoxys-D and Ferrothorn, are really far better off dead than alive given the damage potential of entry hazards in general, and thus the list of reasons for not KOing them is not altogether that long; there are so many examples of Pokemon that act as wallbreakers and pair with sweepers that I am really not certain what we are supposed to be learning from it, unless someone is somehow unaware of what would happen if we introduced a Prankster + Destiny Bond wallbreaker to FlySpam teams; more to the point, there is a very real chance that such a Pokemon would be hard to balance effectively while keeping it in its chosen role; the only arguments for weather seem to be centred around the fact that it wouldn't turn CAP19 into Deoxys-S or Ferrothorn; this CAP will not be interesting and consequently will not be successful if we focus on what the effects after death are rather than how exactly to make these effects most useful after CAP19's demise, given that most defensive hazard setters prefer to stick around in case of a Defog user on the opponent's team.
That or we give this mon Rough Skin or Gooey or something. But that seems a fairly unimaginative way out.
Generally speaking, I dislike concepts that contain the word "or" in their description. Particularly in this case, we appear to have two entirely separate roles being suggested, neither of which seem to have the mildest bearing on the other, so far as I can see or the justification can elucidate for me. In cases like these, we have often fallen upon one small area of the concept and neglected its entirety, ostensibly in the name of prioritising that which is of greatest interest, but at the same time causing the final product to be one that does not quite reflect the concept that was offered. Here, however, we have a problem. This is a Pokemon that wants to dissuade the opponent from KOing it, so naturally it should last for the majority of the battle if successful. On the other hand, if it wants to maximise its post-mortem effects on the battle, it would naturally want to faint earlier in the game. Which of course begs the question - What do?
Based on the way the concept was presented, what immediately sprung to mind was a Pokemon capable of running two mutually exclusive yet equally effective sets, one of which would dissuade the opponent from KOing it, and the other of which would act to maximise its post-mortem effects. If this were still DP or BW, and illegal egg combinations were still a thing, I would surely advocate something along the lines of a Spikes + Destiny Bond illegality, such that CAP19 could run a Spiker/utility set (which, a la Forretress, your opponent would want to KO as soon as possible) as well as a marginally different set with Destiny Bond, which punished the opponent for guessing that it was running the other set. Hence, mindgames of a sort. But this is altogether not possible with the tools that we have, barring some event move shenanigans, and as such I am drawn to the possibility of their being a more elegant solution.
The other alternative is what I like to term the "dead weight" possibility, or in more descriptive terms, the "Sticky Web Shuckle". Once Shuckle has set up Sticky Web, its job is done and the ramifications will last for the entire battle, assuming of course that the opponent does not carry a Defog user. From this point onwards, Shuckle is little more than death fodder, or - circumstances permitting - entirely setup bait. It is wholly in your interests for the Shuckle to be killed off by the opponent, and more than just a little bit in your opponent's interest to keep it alive. But there's the rub - does the opponent keep your Shuckle alive for the possibility of a double-switch that could give their sweeper an easy set-up opportunity? Or should they kill it now, and prevent it from being a death fodder later on that could give that Charizard-Y on the cusp of death a free switch-in?
There are problems with this, of course, and quite a few of them relate to the fundamental nature of this concept. Shuckle is not viable in OU, and probably wouldn't be even if Smeargle, Galvantula, and Spinarak didn't exist. It's not viable in OU precisely because of its limitations, and the fact that it introduces an opportunity for the opponent - any opponent - that is wholly avoidable. For the above to be successful, the nature of the support used must be so unbelievably stonkingly good that it's worth the cost of a teamslot to have it around, and the support cannot be provided by a more powerful or more versatile alternative that doesn't give your opponent the same opportunities. This ties into the concept of "effective fainting" - when a Pokemon has served its purpose and is for all intents and purposes out of the game, a la suicide lead Aerodactyl confronted by Bullet Punch Machamp in DP. So this option requires a bit more thinking through. I personally do not think that there is any sort of support currently in the game whatsoever that qualifies here - at least, nothing that an infinitely better Pokemon doesn't already have. I mean, some sort of uber-reliable sleep user might work, or a combination support Pokemon like Smeargle (but more defensive). But I can't think of anything other than that, and having more than one single-turn support move quickly skews the opponent's priorities decidedly into the "kill it nao" side of proceedings.
To finish proceedings, I feel I should address some of the other ideas floating around. Doug made an important point when he mentioned emphasis on fainting, largely because this seems to be the aspect of the concept most likely to be ignored if we try to focus primarily on any other aspect. More to the point, it is indeed the most interesting path forward. I would, however, at this point like to reiterate that we should cover every aspect of this concept if we can, not simply those bits that are easiest or which appeal the most to us. The concept of a Pokemon that wants to faint, is most effective after it faints, and consequently is in the opponent's interests not to faint, is an altogether fascinating concept, if not entirely, well, possible with the mechanics we have to work with. Very quickly, then: suicide moves like Memento and Explosion are pointless, since they abandon the concept of opponent choice altogether; opponents that stack entry hazards, such as Deoxys-D and Ferrothorn, are really far better off dead than alive given the damage potential of entry hazards in general, and thus the list of reasons for not KOing them is not altogether that long; there are so many examples of Pokemon that act as wallbreakers and pair with sweepers that I am really not certain what we are supposed to be learning from it, unless someone is somehow unaware of what would happen if we introduced a Prankster + Destiny Bond wallbreaker to FlySpam teams; more to the point, there is a very real chance that such a Pokemon would be hard to balance effectively while keeping it in its chosen role; the only arguments for weather seem to be centred around the fact that it wouldn't turn CAP19 into Deoxys-S or Ferrothorn; this CAP will not be interesting and consequently will not be successful if we focus on what the effects after death are rather than how exactly to make these effects most useful after CAP19's demise, given that most defensive hazard setters prefer to stick around in case of a Defog user on the opponent's team.
That or we give this mon Rough Skin or Gooey or something. But that seems a fairly unimaginative way out.
This is a very interesting discussion so far.
Interestingly, when I thought about this concept, one Pokemon immediately came to mind that I haven't seen mentioned before: Wobbuffet
While Wobuffet doesn't necessarily discourage the opponent from fainting it, it does discourage the opponent from attacking it without preparation of some sort. Opponents would prefer to use status moves, set up on it, and essentially delay its demise until the opponent is ready. Obviously Wobbuffet got more and more tools until it became so effective at its job (shutting off nearly every avenue an opponent had to not kill it via Shadow Tag, Encore, Safeguard, etc) that we banned it; however, I think if we decide to explore the first part of this concept, the "idea" of Wobbuffet is something that would be highly beneficial.
So what does this imply as far as concept direction? How about a Pokemon that creates a situation where taking traditional damage helps it do its job? We can refine the meaning of "traditional" in later concepts - it could be direct damage, it would be status damage, it could be hazard damage, or it it could be all of the above. Essentially, our goal should be to create a Pokemon that creates such a high opportunity cost for taking damage that it highly encourages the opponent to avoid trying to kill it until they are first able to set up certain conditions.
Interestingly, when I thought about this concept, one Pokemon immediately came to mind that I haven't seen mentioned before: Wobbuffet
While Wobuffet doesn't necessarily discourage the opponent from fainting it, it does discourage the opponent from attacking it without preparation of some sort. Opponents would prefer to use status moves, set up on it, and essentially delay its demise until the opponent is ready. Obviously Wobbuffet got more and more tools until it became so effective at its job (shutting off nearly every avenue an opponent had to not kill it via Shadow Tag, Encore, Safeguard, etc) that we banned it; however, I think if we decide to explore the first part of this concept, the "idea" of Wobbuffet is something that would be highly beneficial.
So what does this imply as far as concept direction? How about a Pokemon that creates a situation where taking traditional damage helps it do its job? We can refine the meaning of "traditional" in later concepts - it could be direct damage, it would be status damage, it could be hazard damage, or it it could be all of the above. Essentially, our goal should be to create a Pokemon that creates such a high opportunity cost for taking damage that it highly encourages the opponent to avoid trying to kill it until they are first able to set up certain conditions.
I'm still not sure where we want to go, but I don't actually mind the weather idea. If it can set weather and faint to bring momentum for the team, that's a win. I would also like to make a mention for the move Explosion. Though it was debuffed, it is still a great move in my opinion. I mostly use it on suicide lead Azelf because it can set up Stealth Rock and explode to block the Rapid Spin, deal damage, and get momentum. This doesn't necessarily dissuade you from attacking it, but it is certainly effective at effectively completing a job through fainting. Also, the move Metal Burst could be a cool move to use as it directly discourages the opponent attacking you physically or specially. It also only takes one moveslot. So I was thinking we could build a Pokemon that does it's job (or Metal Burst) while it goes down to a Focus Sash and then explodes to give momentum or block the opponent from spinning or Defogging (provided that it sets a hazard).
Great discussion we have going here. I've already learned some stuff by reading everything posted so far. Actually, I haven't really learned anything new, but this discussion has made me think differently about several things I already knew. That's why I love CAP project discussions so much!
But after reading everything in the thread, and thinking long and hard about the concept, I just don't think we can directly address the concept as it is specifically worded. I think we are going to have to pull back a little bit, and try to address the "spirit of the concept" instead. Otherwise, I think we are setting ourselves up for a lot of frustration in future threads.
Deck Knight, Ignus and a few others in this thread have posted some great "obvious fundamentals" about fainting that tend to get forgotten in discussions like this. And because the concept overtly states that we want to dissuade the opponent from fainting our pokemon, we have been assuming that it is actually POSSIBLE to do that with the existing mechanics of Pokemon. I am beginning to come around to the thinking that it is IMPOSSIBLE. We are not going to get around the following inevitable fact:
While there are some isolated situations where you may actually want your pokemon to die or your opponent may want you to live -- you generally cannot engineer those situations, and if you could build a pokemon that is better off dead than alive, you have likely built a really bad pokemon.
The only way to reasonably create situations where the opponent is discouraged from fainting CAP19 would be to make a custom move or ability that has some huge effect when the pokemon faints -- and this project is Create-A-Pokemon, not Create-A-Move or Create-An-Ability. We are not going to create any more new mechanics in CAP. And we certainly are not going to create a new game mechanic as a magic wand to make an impossible concept become possible.
Yes, we created some new moves and abilities on a few DP CAP projects to achieve certain effects to enhance the pokemon's ability to fulfill their concepts. But since that time, the CAP project has matured and so has the game of Pokemon. Our current stance is that the game of pokemon is overflowing with thousands of mechanics and we must use those existing mechanics unaltered.
So, since we can't bend the mechanics of the game, I think we're gonna have to bend the concept a little bit. Rather than trying to make a pokemon the opponent does not want to faint, we should strive to build a pokemon around one or more "fainting strategies".
Building around a "fainting strategy" is not a case where we WANT the pokemon to faint. We would build a pokemon that is likely or even guaranteed to faint in certain predictable situations, and in spite of knowing this likely bad outcome (ie. fainting), we STILL want to include the pokemon as a valuable member of our OU team, and use the fainting in the BEST WAY POSSIBLE.
A classic example is Suicide Lead Deoxys. Do you LIKE that Deo usually dies at the start of the match? Hell no. If Deo-S could have 150 base HP and tank lots of hits and still get off blistering fast screens, hazards, and Taunts -- it would be even better. In fact, it would be broken as hell and wouldn't bother with a suicide lead set, but that's not the point. The point is: It's not like we enjoy the "suicide" requirement.
Yes, with the suicide lead strategy, the act of fainting is not always as bad a thing as it normally is with other pokemon and strategies, because you may get extra turns of Taunt or Screens or whatever for later pokemon. But don't make the mistake of thinking that Deo's frailty is somehow a good thing, that would be preferred over better defenses. Deo's frailty is a limitation. Period. But the rest of the pokemon and moveset allows it to be a valuable member of OU teams, and teambuilders are able to include the fact that Deo will likely faint as part of their team strategy.
It seems like most people agree a suicide lead is not terribly interesting for CAP 19, so we need to come up with a different framework, that still incorporates one or more forms of "fainting strategies".
So I'm working along the lines of the following definition (reworded from earlier):
Perhaps, I'm wrong about the impossibility of the current wording of the concept. But it seems like others in this thread are coming to similar conclusions. Both Deck Knight and bugmaniacbob seem to be having big reservations as well (correct me if I am misreading you guys).
I don't think the concept itself is bad or anything. I just think we need to interpret it a bit more liberally and look to the spirit of the concept, which, in my opinion, is putting a new spin on the strategic impact of fainting in battle.
But after reading everything in the thread, and thinking long and hard about the concept, I just don't think we can directly address the concept as it is specifically worded. I think we are going to have to pull back a little bit, and try to address the "spirit of the concept" instead. Otherwise, I think we are setting ourselves up for a lot of frustration in future threads.
Deck Knight, Ignus and a few others in this thread have posted some great "obvious fundamentals" about fainting that tend to get forgotten in discussions like this. And because the concept overtly states that we want to dissuade the opponent from fainting our pokemon, we have been assuming that it is actually POSSIBLE to do that with the existing mechanics of Pokemon. I am beginning to come around to the thinking that it is IMPOSSIBLE. We are not going to get around the following inevitable fact:
Fainting is bad for your pokemon and your team, and good for your opponent.
While there are some isolated situations where you may actually want your pokemon to die or your opponent may want you to live -- you generally cannot engineer those situations, and if you could build a pokemon that is better off dead than alive, you have likely built a really bad pokemon.
The only way to reasonably create situations where the opponent is discouraged from fainting CAP19 would be to make a custom move or ability that has some huge effect when the pokemon faints -- and this project is Create-A-Pokemon, not Create-A-Move or Create-An-Ability. We are not going to create any more new mechanics in CAP. And we certainly are not going to create a new game mechanic as a magic wand to make an impossible concept become possible.
Yes, we created some new moves and abilities on a few DP CAP projects to achieve certain effects to enhance the pokemon's ability to fulfill their concepts. But since that time, the CAP project has matured and so has the game of Pokemon. Our current stance is that the game of pokemon is overflowing with thousands of mechanics and we must use those existing mechanics unaltered.
So, since we can't bend the mechanics of the game, I think we're gonna have to bend the concept a little bit. Rather than trying to make a pokemon the opponent does not want to faint, we should strive to build a pokemon around one or more "fainting strategies".
Building around a "fainting strategy" is not a case where we WANT the pokemon to faint. We would build a pokemon that is likely or even guaranteed to faint in certain predictable situations, and in spite of knowing this likely bad outcome (ie. fainting), we STILL want to include the pokemon as a valuable member of our OU team, and use the fainting in the BEST WAY POSSIBLE.
A classic example is Suicide Lead Deoxys. Do you LIKE that Deo usually dies at the start of the match? Hell no. If Deo-S could have 150 base HP and tank lots of hits and still get off blistering fast screens, hazards, and Taunts -- it would be even better. In fact, it would be broken as hell and wouldn't bother with a suicide lead set, but that's not the point. The point is: It's not like we enjoy the "suicide" requirement.
Yes, with the suicide lead strategy, the act of fainting is not always as bad a thing as it normally is with other pokemon and strategies, because you may get extra turns of Taunt or Screens or whatever for later pokemon. But don't make the mistake of thinking that Deo's frailty is somehow a good thing, that would be preferred over better defenses. Deo's frailty is a limitation. Period. But the rest of the pokemon and moveset allows it to be a valuable member of OU teams, and teambuilders are able to include the fact that Deo will likely faint as part of their team strategy.
It seems like most people agree a suicide lead is not terribly interesting for CAP 19, so we need to come up with a different framework, that still incorporates one or more forms of "fainting strategies".
So I'm working along the lines of the following definition (reworded from earlier):
A pokemon that is likely or even guaranteed to faint in certain predictable strategic situations and the pokemon or its teammates can use the fainting in the best way possible.
Clarifications:
"likely to faint in certain predictable strategic situations" -- This does not necessarily mean ALL situations, or even MOST situations. But it should not be contained to merely rare, random, or gimmick situations.
"best way possible" -- This does not mean the fainting is a GOOD thing for the pokemon or team, it just means there are aspects to the act of fainting that makes it less negative than it would be for most other pokemon in the same situation
Clarifications:
"likely to faint in certain predictable strategic situations" -- This does not necessarily mean ALL situations, or even MOST situations. But it should not be contained to merely rare, random, or gimmick situations.
"best way possible" -- This does not mean the fainting is a GOOD thing for the pokemon or team, it just means there are aspects to the act of fainting that makes it less negative than it would be for most other pokemon in the same situation
Perhaps, I'm wrong about the impossibility of the current wording of the concept. But it seems like others in this thread are coming to similar conclusions. Both Deck Knight and bugmaniacbob seem to be having big reservations as well (correct me if I am misreading you guys).
I don't think the concept itself is bad or anything. I just think we need to interpret it a bit more liberally and look to the spirit of the concept, which, in my opinion, is putting a new spin on the strategic impact of fainting in battle.
Some ideas that came to mind for a pokemon that is not great to faint:
If instead of avoiding fainting the pokemon, you treat it as avoiding attacking the pokemon, weaknesses to hazards come to mind.
I'd propose something with massive defense, that is weak to both hazards and statuses. A stall pokemon that is extremely weak to phazing (slow start? weakness to stealth rock and spikes?) and status (no rest, but recover/moonlight/aqua ring), that benefits from PP stalling, with very poor offensive capabilities.
- Easily set up on, as Rayquaza_ and I assume others came up with.
- High defense (conventional attacking doesn't work well).
- PP stalling (Pressure, Spite, Grudge)
If instead of avoiding fainting the pokemon, you treat it as avoiding attacking the pokemon, weaknesses to hazards come to mind.
I'd propose something with massive defense, that is weak to both hazards and statuses. A stall pokemon that is extremely weak to phazing (slow start? weakness to stealth rock and spikes?) and status (no rest, but recover/moonlight/aqua ring), that benefits from PP stalling, with very poor offensive capabilities.
Perhaps it's best to look not at what makes an opponent want to avoid fainting a pokemon, and more closely examine what makes an opponent want to faint a pokemon. If a pokemon puts on high offensive pressure, stat boosts, or sets up hazards, your opponent will want to faint it as soon as possible. By extension, I think our mon should put on as little offensive pressure as possible, as well as NOT set up hazards. Doing either of these things will only make the opponent want to our opponent get rid of us as quickly as possible which will defeat the purpose (or one of the purposes) of the mon.
EpicUmbreon29
^-^
I would just like to take this time to point something out about Memento/Healing Wish, but mostly Memento, that I do not believe has been said yet: They do not make the opponent avoid fainting the Pokemon; they make the opponent avoid sending in an effective counter in the first place. In a psychological war, a foe which can effectively faint this Pokemon will not switch in due to the lurking threat of Memento. If such a counter is put into play, Memento can render it useless, giving the next Pokemon to faint it or set up, the latter of which working better when(/if) the opponent switches out (which will occur often). Naturally, the opponent will not want to give the player momentum, so in a fairly indirect way, the goal of discouraging the opponent from fainting this Pokemon can be accomplished.
On the topic of Healing Wish, if the opponent decides not to send in a Pokemon susceptible to Memento or sends in one which is no longer necessary, this Pokemon may be able to harm these in another way before using Healing Wish. Then, a Pokemon which can effectively set up against (or faint, if it is too much of a threat for it to survive to your team, like Chansey, for a (/some) specififc reason(s)) the opponent can be sent out.
These two moves force the opponent to choose between the same two bad options, allowing this Pokemon to grab at least some momentum for the team, hopefully making this a good CAP. I apologize if this seems like I talked too much about this Pokemon's moveset, but I felt that it was necesary to give more specific examples in order to hopefully get my point across.
On the topic of Healing Wish, if the opponent decides not to send in a Pokemon susceptible to Memento or sends in one which is no longer necessary, this Pokemon may be able to harm these in another way before using Healing Wish. Then, a Pokemon which can effectively set up against (or faint, if it is too much of a threat for it to survive to your team, like Chansey, for a (/some) specififc reason(s)) the opponent can be sent out.
These two moves force the opponent to choose between the same two bad options, allowing this Pokemon to grab at least some momentum for the team, hopefully making this a good CAP. I apologize if this seems like I talked too much about this Pokemon's moveset, but I felt that it was necesary to give more specific examples in order to hopefully get my point across.
I think this might be a good way to view what were trying to do, but it seems to be pretty self conflicting.
If you consider that basically anything beneficial CAP 19 does for your team will be reason to KO it. Therefore the reasons to dissuade your opponent from KOing CAP 19 must be greater than the reasons to stop it from benefiting you. This is a very concerning statement because as this whole thread has clearly concluded it's very difficult to give reasons why not to KO a Pokemon, so by extension, the benefites of having CAP 19 actively around would have to be not very substantial. Personally I think that's a recipe for disaster. We don't want to make CAP 19 not be useful so perhaps a safer route would be to make your opponent want to KO CAP 19, but simply have to be cautious with what they KO it with.
Going back to what DougJustDoug said: "A pokemon that is likely or even guaranteed to faint in certain predictable strategic situations and the pokemon or its teammates can use the fainting in the best way possible."
If CAP 19 was, by nature, weak to a specific role or type of Pokemon but very resilient and good at harming everything else, then this could be taken advantage of. If you can reliably predict the situation in which your poke will be KO'd your team can be built to switch in the next pokemon specifically to set up on the sort of thing that KO'd you, or trap it, or any other way in which getting to choose your matchup with that poke can be beneficial.
They way in which it would achieve this would likely be some form of passive damage, which would indicate it's good at putting wear on the opposing team, which would certainly give your opponent incentive to KO you, but would make them have to be careful when they do this, and which poke they want to do it with.
Ignus
Copying deli meat to hard drive
I'm going to try to clear up what seems to be some extremely common misconceptions within this thread. If we don't, I'm worried that we'll mess up some chances we won't get later on, especially from the typing phase and onwards.
So let's talk about what this concept is and isn't.
This concept IS about fainting. The basis of this project as a whole is to learn something new. Right now, we want to explore what it means, especially from a competitive standpoint, to lose a pokemon. There are obvious fundamentals, which have been mentioned numerous times by now, but we also want to explore further.
When is the best time to faint?
How do we make the best out of what is literally the shittiest thing that can happen to an individual member of your team?
What options, now that we lost a team member, have opened up that weren't there before?
We need to ask ourselves these questions throughout the process, but right now, in this phase, it's especially important.
This concept ISN'T about suicide. We aren't trying to kill ourselves. If you were given the option to kill a terrorist before they set off a bomb, killing them self AND everything around them, was that the better option? Fuck yes. The same applies here. We don't want to strap a bomb to ourselves and poke our enemy with a stick.
This concept IS about what happens after you die. We're trying to make the best out of a really terrible situation. It's like trying to put sprinkles on ice cream that you somehow BURNT. We don't know how it got that way, but it's still ice cream, so we might as well eat it. It's the same here. We don't know how our pokemon fainted. There are literally hundreds of different situations in this game. We don't know how we got here, but we still want to make the most of the situation. Maybe we need weather, maybe entry hazards. Maybe we decide we need so many fucking sprinkles to fix the situation that we can't even tell if we're dead or alive anymore. But we need sprinkles.
This concept ISN'T about trying to become a martyr every game. On the same note as suicide, WE DONT NEED TO DIE EVERY SINGLE TIME. DougJustDoug put this pretty well. We want to make sure, in a certain situation (or a certain few situations) we can have the largest possible impact after death. Maybe that means winning the game. Maybe it means we're able to control momentum consistently after the point of no return (fainting). Maybe it just means we give a team member a big chance to do something cool. The truth is I don't really care what exactly happens. But it needs to be CLEARLY defined. We need to decide what it is we plan to gain from fainting, within the next few steps. If we wait too long to do this, we'll end up with a product that both looks messy and feels messy to build.
This concept IS about choice. We NEED to give our opponent a choice. They have to choose between making CAP faint and CAP directly taking an action. Maybe they choose to get burned. Maybe they get hit by knock off. Maybe they just cry softly as they wait for weather to run out. But the choice between making us faint and something else HAS to be present.
So, I guess to review:
That's all I got for now.
So let's talk about what this concept is and isn't.
This concept IS about fainting. The basis of this project as a whole is to learn something new. Right now, we want to explore what it means, especially from a competitive standpoint, to lose a pokemon. There are obvious fundamentals, which have been mentioned numerous times by now, but we also want to explore further.
When is the best time to faint?
How do we make the best out of what is literally the shittiest thing that can happen to an individual member of your team?
What options, now that we lost a team member, have opened up that weren't there before?
We need to ask ourselves these questions throughout the process, but right now, in this phase, it's especially important.
This concept ISN'T about suicide. We aren't trying to kill ourselves. If you were given the option to kill a terrorist before they set off a bomb, killing them self AND everything around them, was that the better option? Fuck yes. The same applies here. We don't want to strap a bomb to ourselves and poke our enemy with a stick.
This concept IS about what happens after you die. We're trying to make the best out of a really terrible situation. It's like trying to put sprinkles on ice cream that you somehow BURNT. We don't know how it got that way, but it's still ice cream, so we might as well eat it. It's the same here. We don't know how our pokemon fainted. There are literally hundreds of different situations in this game. We don't know how we got here, but we still want to make the most of the situation. Maybe we need weather, maybe entry hazards. Maybe we decide we need so many fucking sprinkles to fix the situation that we can't even tell if we're dead or alive anymore. But we need sprinkles.
This concept ISN'T about trying to become a martyr every game. On the same note as suicide, WE DONT NEED TO DIE EVERY SINGLE TIME. DougJustDoug put this pretty well. We want to make sure, in a certain situation (or a certain few situations) we can have the largest possible impact after death. Maybe that means winning the game. Maybe it means we're able to control momentum consistently after the point of no return (fainting). Maybe it just means we give a team member a big chance to do something cool. The truth is I don't really care what exactly happens. But it needs to be CLEARLY defined. We need to decide what it is we plan to gain from fainting, within the next few steps. If we wait too long to do this, we'll end up with a product that both looks messy and feels messy to build.
This concept IS about choice. We NEED to give our opponent a choice. They have to choose between making CAP faint and CAP directly taking an action. Maybe they choose to get burned. Maybe they get hit by knock off. Maybe they just cry softly as they wait for weather to run out. But the choice between making us faint and something else HAS to be present.
So, I guess to review:
- We have to explore fainting.
- We can't kill ourself just because we like bombs
- We need some after-death sprinkles
- We shouldn't plan on dying every game
- We have to give our opponent a choice.
That's all I got for now.
Last edited:
"A Pokemon that dissuades your opponent from fainting it"
The first thing that came to my mind is a new ability, one that would either help cripple the opponent's Pokemon that knocks it out, or gives a boost to your own Pokemon that comes in after it, or both.
For negatively affecting the opponent:
The ability could inflict a status condition, lower stats, force a switch, or act as a death-activated encore or taunt
For positively affecting yourself:
The ability could heal your incoming Pokemon, or offer status boosts, or bestow another effect like a safeguard, reflect, or magic bounce
The CAP could also have two abilities, with one hurting the opponent's Pokemon and the other helping your Pokemon. This would add to the unpredictability of the CAP. Knocking it out could cause your opponent's sweeper to be put to sleep or have its attack cut in half, or it could increase the speed of your next incoming Pokemon to allow for a revenge kill. This would definitely meet the goal of making the opponent think "I don't want to knock out this Pokemon, at least not yet", and also would have the CAP's presence be felt before it is even on the field and after it is knocked out.
The first thing that came to my mind is a new ability, one that would either help cripple the opponent's Pokemon that knocks it out, or gives a boost to your own Pokemon that comes in after it, or both.
For negatively affecting the opponent:
The ability could inflict a status condition, lower stats, force a switch, or act as a death-activated encore or taunt
For positively affecting yourself:
The ability could heal your incoming Pokemon, or offer status boosts, or bestow another effect like a safeguard, reflect, or magic bounce
The CAP could also have two abilities, with one hurting the opponent's Pokemon and the other helping your Pokemon. This would add to the unpredictability of the CAP. Knocking it out could cause your opponent's sweeper to be put to sleep or have its attack cut in half, or it could increase the speed of your next incoming Pokemon to allow for a revenge kill. This would definitely meet the goal of making the opponent think "I don't want to knock out this Pokemon, at least not yet", and also would have the CAP's presence be felt before it is even on the field and after it is knocked out.
As a fact of fainting, your team gains momentum, simply because you're able to have the best matchup possible on the following turn. Frequently the problem, however, is that you can lose momentum pretty quickly if you're unable to revenge kill. The hardest part of the idea of generating massive momentum from CAP 19 fainting isn't getting the momentum on the following turn, it's figuring out how to keep it. Somebody previously mentioned the use of the move Fairy Lock, which was a really interesting though it seems far too situational to actually utalize it might be the right general idea for momentum based concepts. Perhaps CAP 19 allows us to gain momentum simply by finding ways to tank the other teams momentum enough that they have a hard time catching up.
Another thing that this thread seems to be closer in agreement on is the nature of what CAP 19 is doing while it's alive. We all seem to think that it needs to be doing some sort of passive annoyance to the opponent so that it's not being useless, but isn't a huge necessity to KO, otherwise we're really not giving our opponent much of a choice which we agree that is a necessary condition of this CAP. Here is where the problem lies (at least with the momentum based idea): Utility pokes tend not to generate momentum. In fact they do the opposite--they consume your teams momentum to set up the utility that you hope will help you for the rest of battle. This is paradoxical as we hope to gain momentum but with a team role that isn't suited to do so.
This being said, even if this seems obvious, CAP 19 CAN'T allow for loss of momentum in the turns leading up to it being KO'd. If it could be freely set up on, then the turn after it's KO'd we have the opposite of what we wish to achieve--a buffed opponent that's positioned itself exactly how it wants to be before you even get a chance to counter it. I strongly believe that CAP 19 needs some way to limit the opponent's options before and after it's KO'd. The opponent can still choose when to KO it, and to some degree how they KO it, but the important aspect is CAP 19 creates opportunities for the one using it, not for the one KOing it. As far as how to actually limit what your opponent can do, moves like Fairy Lock and everything that is cured by Mental Herb are options, as well as potentially certain statusing and even debuffs if we wish to discourage a certain team role from taking out CAP 19.
Last edited:
So... page four and we haven't agreed on anything yet. Or even come close really. Oh well. Now, I'm not the guy who's going to come up with a super amazing idea we can all jump on and merrily advance, but I can at least recap what has been said and who said it. Maybe that'll refresh things and maybe liven up this stagnating discussion? Idk.
We pretty much have two schools of thought here :
(I bolded the "good" ideas. It's just my opinion though, other ideas still might be good and I'm not smart enough to see it)
1. The "Discourage from fainting" camp
Some want to focus more specifically on the act of fainting and how the opponent might be discouraged from fainting CAP, which is pretty much taking the concept rather literally. That might be good, that might be bad. It's been said a lot though. Mainly the explanation here on how this is doable focuses on specific moves and the "free switch in" aspect of the Pokemon. However, notable users such as Deck Knight and DougJustDoug have voided their doubts on the possibility of doing this.
The roles suggested for the CAP in this school of thought are:
Here we have a more liberal approach to the concept. Basically, this school of thought wants to make a CAP whose presence after fainting is still felt because it accomplishes a permanent or semi-permanent goal. The "free switch in" aspect of fainting has also come up here, but only after it has accomplished what it has set out to do, and only if it has too.
The main roles suggested here are:
So there you have it folks, everything on this thread boils down to pretty much four core ideas: The Lure, The Weather Setter, General Support, and Sweeper Support. They are all pretty good options, so lets see if we can pick one and not get too carried away with little nuances that turn 4 ideas into 24 ideas. We can work the details out later but really it's down to these four.
P.S. - I get carried away sometimes so if I sound a little bossy here I apologize. I have no authority I just want to simplify what's been said so we can get a fresh start on the discussion.
We pretty much have two schools of thought here :
(I bolded the "good" ideas. It's just my opinion though, other ideas still might be good and I'm not smart enough to see it)
1. The "Discourage from fainting" camp
Some want to focus more specifically on the act of fainting and how the opponent might be discouraged from fainting CAP, which is pretty much taking the concept rather literally. That might be good, that might be bad. It's been said a lot though. Mainly the explanation here on how this is doable focuses on specific moves and the "free switch in" aspect of the Pokemon. However, notable users such as Deck Knight and DougJustDoug have voided their doubts on the possibility of doing this.
The roles suggested for the CAP in this school of thought are:
- The Suicide Lead- suggested by many people at the beginning of the discussion. Many notable users dislike this idea, or at least have expressed reservations such as this missing the concept or being to similar to a recently banned alien. However, only a few people have been posting as of late so it's difficult to say where opinions stand on this one.
- The Chansey- SolarisFox , Rayquaza_ , FlareBlitz , Redwolf , and a couple others have recently been suggesting a wall/support mon that serves little active threat to the opponent and is something they want to keep alive because it could provide them a set up opportunity. Forgive me if that rough amalgamation of your posts is off, but that's what I'm getting out of it. Ok, I was trying to stay impartial here and just recap but I don't like this idea. It sounds too much like "build a bad Pokemon that doesn't do anything so the opponent doesn't feel the need to KO it". Please offer me a rebuttal if I'm wrong, but that's what it sounds like.
- The Gen 3 Dusclops- packs all those annoying moves like destiny bond, memento, spite, Grudge, Aftermath, etc, that technically dissuade the opponent from attacking. These have been on pretty much every page from multiple users. While I like some of these moves for this concept I really don't think they should be the basis for the CAP. Sure, I'd be happy for CAP to have maybe a few of these as options in it's movepool but I don't think they are good as a foundation. I don't even think that they deserve a place on a standard set. Also the TL has told people to stop discussing these as they should be discussed in the movepool stage. Good ideas, but now is not the time.
- The Lure- DarkSlay brought this up and bugmaniacbob really solidified it. Basically, the idea was to have two different but viable sets- one performing an important role with lasting effects, and the other being a danger to counters to the other set but not quite as useful. Basically leaving it up to the opponent as to whether they want to risk bringing a counter in and KOing CAP before it does it's job (that's what I got out of it correct me if I'm wrong). I really like this and I personally think that it is the most viable choice of role from this school of thought on the concept. jumpluff and ginganinja noted that lures work on surprise value and are difficult for a CAP, but that was before bmb fleshed out the idea more so idk.
Here we have a more liberal approach to the concept. Basically, this school of thought wants to make a CAP whose presence after fainting is still felt because it accomplishes a permanent or semi-permanent goal. The "free switch in" aspect of fainting has also come up here, but only after it has accomplished what it has set out to do, and only if it has too.
The main roles suggested here are:
- Weather- Basically a mid-game weather setter that sets the stage for a sweep. I saw this a few times in the middle of the discussion, I believe it was mainly brought up by DarkSlay in the middle of the discussion and supported by jas61292 . ginganinja brought up the point that Weather doesn't have many notable sweepers that are worth 2+ teamslots, but Deck Knight brought up sand and Excadrill on irc, which is probably the best weather sweeper of this generation. Is it good enough? I don't know. Also, some people such as alexwolf have pointed out that weather already has many inducers and is probably already as good as it is going to get, and others just plain don't like the idea of a weather CAP.
- Status- This is really broad but the main idea here is that status effects persist even when CAP is KO'd, so it's "presence" lives on. There are a few variations- parashuffle has been thrown around a lot, alexwolf suggested a general support Pokemon with access to moves/abilities that directly discourage fainting. A rather straightforward avenue but by no means a bad one at all. Some have called it too simple, or even boring, but I'm of the opinion that whatever gets the job done is best.
- Sweeper Support- The idea behind this is to make a CAP that can take out / cripple key walls and revenge killers on an opponent's team and then use itself as a sacrifice if need be to bring in a set-up sweeper that can now sweep unhindered. This has mostly been brought up by DetroitLolcat . I suggested a general "sniper" CAP that runs a tailored set to take out a certain few Pokemon, letting you bring in whatever you need from there to control the match, but DLC is smarter and his idea more focused so you should probably listen to him over me.
So there you have it folks, everything on this thread boils down to pretty much four core ideas: The Lure, The Weather Setter, General Support, and Sweeper Support. They are all pretty good options, so lets see if we can pick one and not get too carried away with little nuances that turn 4 ideas into 24 ideas. We can work the details out later but really it's down to these four.
P.S. - I get carried away sometimes so if I sound a little bossy here I apologize. I have no authority I just want to simplify what's been said so we can get a fresh start on the discussion.
There are moves that can cripple an opponent without dying, such as acid spray, acid spray attacks but cuts your SpD by 2 stages. Other moves can do similar things with other stats like bulldoze, rock tomb, chip off, and the list goes on. These moves for the dissuade to kill aspect can be used on a wall. The wall would lower stats so badly that death of it would carry easy momentum forward for not only a revenge kill, but a set up sweep and leave your crippled opponent there. Your opponent would have the choice of losing momentum now by switching Pokemon to rid the poor stat drops, or later when you take advantage of it after KO. This method dissuades your opponent of koing it and leaves resounding after death affects.
I definitely have been making posts against this concept, rather than for it. e,e
also as viperfang4 is mentioning here debuffs have been brought up quite a few times. I rather like the idea of having access to a variety of debuffs because not only are they an under-utilized and explored option but also are rather difficult to avoid. When combined with a move like encore, debuffs can act as a sort of phasing because a poke can become crippled to the point where it has no choice but to switch. This ties in with the concept of CAP 19 because if you're KO'd after having spammed several debuffs on your opponent, then your next poke in will have a really easy time preforming it's role. This isn't even as one-dimensional as memento either, because it can lower defensive stats potentially as well, meaning that it's not even consistently certain what your opponent's best option to eliminate you with is.
Personally debuffs (probably mixed with statusing too) is my current favorite idea that has been presented, but because it's such a strange and easy to bypass form of utility, I'd really like to hear counterarguments to why not to use debuffs as well as see some other thoughts on how they could be utilized during and after CAP 19's time on the field.
Last edited:
I feel like debuffs, particularly Attack/Special Attack debuffs, are a great way to create "damned if you KO damned if you don't" scenarios. Not only does it dissuade the opponent from KOing our CAP by the sheer fact that it's now harder to do so, but it means that if CAP is fainted, whatever switches in has a nice buffer to ensure momentum. So essentially Memento, but without CAP's user pulling the detonation switch (and if you force a switch instead, hey, the CAP has dissuaded the foe from KOing it).
The question, though, is how to make this the most effective: after all, there are plenty of pokemon out there with great debuff moves, but barring Featherdance Murkrow (which never rose high above gimmick level itself) it's never been viable. Would we need to limit CAP's moveset so it has little choice but to use debuffs? Is there a certain stat spread (obviously speaking in general for now) that would optimize a debuffer (top of my head, I'm thinking speed is key, then bulk, unless we have a prankster)? Generally, if debuffs would work well, why haven't they yet?
Debuffs would never work. Making the CAP hard to kill is entirely different from making the opponent not want to kill it. Debuffs have no real lasting effects because they can be removed instantly by switching out. This idea just failed BOTH aspects of this concept with just minimal examination.
I on the other hand think stat lowering attacks succeeded in following suit with the concept and being a viable strategy
- Status