Sep 22nd, 2012, 1:26:48 PM
Fare thee well.
Join Date: Sep 2008
CAP 4 - Part 3 - Threat Discussion
I know what you're thinking. What could possibly threaten such a magnificent Bug?
- Going specifically by typing, what Pokemon found in the OU (or relevant) metagame will be able to comfortably give this CAP project trouble?
- What Pokemon will be major threats to this project right off the bat?
- What Pokemon have the potential to become counters?
- What Pokemon may end up as threats, but must be contained or dealt with per the concept?
- Will the concept succeed with these set list of threats?
- Is this list of threats acceptable for the project?
- What Pokemon will be threatened by the CAP based off of typing?
- Are these Pokemon targets that we want CAP to hit?
- Will these targets be "unavoidable" to threaten based solely on the typing?
- What direction must the project go in now that a set list of basic threats has been identified?
- What must be done in order to make these threats "wanted counters" or these threats be eliminated from counter discussion?
- What Pokemon do we want this project to counter entirely?
Please try not to poll-jump.
Below is CAP 4 so far:
Originally Posted by Fat capefeather
(formerly "Living On the Edge")
This Pokémon is very risky to play, but very rewarding if played correctly.
Many of the Pokémon that are successful in OU are relatively easy to play or have great "safe" options (e.g. U-turn). Yet, many other Pokémon look very powerful, but are less successful than they could be because of some large risks involved (e.g. Hydreigon), and some aren't successful at all (e.g. Honchkrow). This self-balancing concept intends to explore what it takes for a risky Pokémon to be successful, and how much inherent risk a Pokémon can get away with. It should be emphasized that this concept is NOT about luck management, but rather, it is about what the user can afford to do given his/her opponent's options, and vice versa.
Questions To Be Answered:
- What is the relationship between risk and potential consequences, both positive and negative?
- What kinds of inherently risky tactics are successful in the OU metagame?
- Do risky Pokémon need some form of safe options (e.g. switch-ins) to be successful in OU, or can it get away with having few really safe options?
- How does Substitute, a well-known "safe" move with nearly universal distribution, impact how this Pokémon is built and played?
- How do existing Pokémon use and deal with risky situations?
- Can risky Pokémon be played well in the early game, or are they better off put into action later on?
- How do different playstyles interact with risky situations?
Bug / Psychic