Analysis Suggestions

Magicxgame · Nov 11th, 2012, 9:03:03 AM

While C&C does a good job on quality control, I still have a couple of suggestions for the analyses.

1) There are small inconsistencies scattered throughout the analyses.

Stealth Rock damage is the biggest offender. We have "after Stealth Rock", "after Stealth Rocks", "after Stealth Rock damage", "if Stealth Rock is in play", and so on. This sometimes occurs in the same analysis (see the recent B/W OU Metagross analysis).
Speed is also a big issue. We have "max Speed Poke", "+Speed Poke", "Timid Poke", "252 Spd Poke", and so on.
Gen 4 analyses flip-flop between "4 HP Poke" and "minimum HP Poke".

A universal phrase such as "after Stealth Rock" or "after Stealth Rock damage" across all of the analyses would make them seem more uniform.

2) There needs to be a way to condense or remove lists of damage calculations from analyses (see OU Choice Band Ferrothorn, Choice Specs Jellicent, Uber Cloyster, etc). They just balloon the analyses and seem slightly situational, especially when they could be condensed into "this Pokemon OHKOs/2HKOs common walls and resists". It also seems inconsistent; why do some wallbreakers get special treatment while others don't? I don't see why CB Ferrothorn gets some damage calcs while the more popular Mixmence is shit out of luck. Maybe another tab such as Team Options and Additional Comments or another section (e.g. Options) would do if we need them. But I'm in favor of nixing them and just pointing people at damage calculators instead of just hurling out a bunch of calcs and disrupting the flow.

3) What happened to giving people credit at the bottom of the analyses? I realize these are revised all of the time, but it would be a way to let the world know about their hard work. It would also explain writing style and minor other discrepancies between tiers (I know Whimsicott used to flip-flop between "cute" and "ugly" in its flavor text between tiers). Credit is still given in articles, so why not go for the analyses, which (arguably) get more exposure? Plus, some of my suggestions went up and I'd like to be noted.

The Smogon analyses are the standard that all other competitive Pokemon analyses are held to (whether or not people want to admit it), so any improvement is welcome.

Jukain · Nov 11th, 2012, 10:39:48 AM

Okay, so here's what my opinion is.

For your small inconsistencies, most of that is 100% writer's preference. However, if you could point out where you saw "after Stealth Rocks", than that definitely needs to be fixed. As for the others, they all work and aren't in any way incorrect. Otherwise, as say, everything is all over the place, and while it might seem a bit desirable to make them uniform, overall it's just a superfluous goal that doesn't mean anything in the long run. Some Pokemon run minimum HP and some run 4 HP, for different reasons. As for your examples concerning Speed, usually it's either "maximum Speed EVs/investment". If that becomes monotonous or doesn't fit, it's usually "252 Speed EVs" or something of the like. "+Speed" is only used in Speed tiers, and it's "+Spe". "Timid Poke" is fine except for the Poke part but I'm sure that was just for an example. "252 Spd" only exists maybe in importables in articles. Other than that, it is "252 Spe" in EV spreads and "252 Speed" in writing.

On your second point, read where damage calculations are. They're only used to prove how powerful something a bit out of the ordinary is or if they add something to a point. Choice Band Ferrothorn, Choice Specs Jellicent, and Uber Cloyster are prime examples of this. When you think hard hitter, you don't think Ferrothorn or Jellicent, or in Ubers, Cloyster. These damage calculations are sort of to prove their worth.

Your third point, well, that could work, can't argue with that. It's a pretty good idea, except that it would involve going through every analysis on the site. I mean, it could get done, but there's a ton of other things that take that much work and actually affect much.

**Furai** · Nov 11th, 2012, 11:50:54 AM

pokemon0078 hit it dead on. I just want to add that we do give credits to mass contributors. If you want to know who made the analysis, you'd just scout the forum, especially the Archives of C&C section.

***Great Sage***** · Nov 11th, 2012, 3:29:21 PM

To address your first point, we do strive to maintain consistency within a particular analysis, so if you notice inconsistencies, you're welcome to point them out. It is not necessary, however, to standardize certain phrases across analyses; it is not awkward if two different analyses state the same thing in slightly different ways. Damage calculations are included where they are judged helpful and informative; for your Choice Band Ferrothorn and Salamence example, it is clear that Salamence is a very strong attacker, but it might not be intuitively obvious how strong Choice Band Ferrothorn is. The damage calculations in Ferrothorn's case help demonstrate a somewhat unexpected result. As for your third point, there is a general credits page; analyses will never be credited individually.

Nov 11th, 2012, 9:03:03 AM	#1
Magicxgame Join Date: Sep 2010 Posts: 44	Analysis Suggestions While C&C does a good job on quality control, I still have a couple of suggestions for the analyses. 1) There are small inconsistencies scattered throughout the analyses. Stealth Rock damage is the biggest offender. We have "after Stealth Rock", "after Stealth Rocks", "after Stealth Rock damage", "if Stealth Rock is in play", and so on. This sometimes occurs in the same analysis (see the recent B/W OU Metagross analysis). Speed is also a big issue. We have "max Speed Poke", "+Speed Poke", "Timid Poke", "252 Spd Poke", and so on. Gen 4 analyses flip-flop between "4 HP Poke" and "minimum HP Poke". A universal phrase such as "after Stealth Rock" or "after Stealth Rock damage" across all of the analyses would make them seem more uniform. 2) There needs to be a way to condense or remove lists of damage calculations from analyses (see OU Choice Band Ferrothorn, Choice Specs Jellicent, Uber Cloyster, etc). They just balloon the analyses and seem slightly situational, especially when they could be condensed into "this Pokemon OHKOs/2HKOs common walls and resists". It also seems inconsistent; why do some wallbreakers get special treatment while others don't? I don't see why CB Ferrothorn gets some damage calcs while the more popular Mixmence is shit out of luck. Maybe another tab such as Team Options and Additional Comments or another section (e.g. Options) would do if we need them. But I'm in favor of nixing them and just pointing people at damage calculators instead of just hurling out a bunch of calcs and disrupting the flow. 3) What happened to giving people credit at the bottom of the analyses? I realize these are revised all of the time, but it would be a way to let the world know about their hard work. It would also explain writing style and minor other discrepancies between tiers (I know Whimsicott used to flip-flop between "cute" and "ugly" in its flavor text between tiers). Credit is still given in articles, so why not go for the analyses, which (arguably) get more exposure? Plus, some of my suggestions went up and I'd like to be noted. The Smogon analyses are the standard that all other competitive Pokemon analyses are held to (whether or not people want to admit it), so any improvement is welcome. __________________ #10 in Black/White Battle Subway Singles\| Top 5 in US GBU Rankings for Seasons 2-4 (Top 3 for 2 and 4) My Free VGC Pokémon on Pokécheck! \| Free (Mostly) Shiny Black 2 Legends\|Miscellaneous RNGs My B2W2 In-Game Tier List FAQ (GameFAQs). \|Catching B2W2 Legends (WIP)

Nov 11th, 2012, 10:39:48 AM	#2
Jukain rip numeros Join Date: Feb 2011 Posts: 1,688 somewhere could be anywhere Mentor	Okay, so here's what my opinion is. For your small inconsistencies, most of that is 100% writer's preference. However, if you could point out where you saw "after Stealth Rocks", than that definitely needs to be fixed. As for the others, they all work and aren't in any way incorrect. Otherwise, as say, everything is all over the place, and while it might seem a bit desirable to make them uniform, overall it's just a superfluous goal that doesn't mean anything in the long run. Some Pokemon run minimum HP and some run 4 HP, for different reasons. As for your examples concerning Speed, usually it's either "maximum Speed EVs/investment". If that becomes monotonous or doesn't fit, it's usually "252 Speed EVs" or something of the like. "+Speed" is only used in Speed tiers, and it's "+Spe". "Timid Poke" is fine except for the Poke part but I'm sure that was just for an example. "252 Spd" only exists maybe in importables in articles. Other than that, it is "252 Spe" in EV spreads and "252 Speed" in writing. On your second point, read where damage calculations are. They're only used to prove how powerful something a bit out of the ordinary is or if they add something to a point. Choice Band Ferrothorn, Choice Specs Jellicent, and Uber Cloyster are prime examples of this. When you think hard hitter, you don't think Ferrothorn or Jellicent, or in Ubers, Cloyster. These damage calculations are sort of to prove their worth. Your third point, well, that could work, can't argue with that. It's a pretty good idea, except that it would involve going through every analysis on the site. I mean, it could get done, but there's a ton of other things that take that much work and actually affect much. __________________ C&C Work \| 1k RMT \| Contribute! \| VM for an OU Rate! \| gp member: vm/pm for a check \| previously pokemon0078 / aka jew-cane

Nov 11th, 2012, 11:50:54 AM	#3
Furai standing in the eye of the hurricane Moderator Join Date: May 2010 Posts: 2,096	pokemon0078 hit it dead on. I just want to add that we do give credits to mass contributors. If you want to know who made the analysis, you'd just scout the forum, especially the Archives of C&C section. __________________ *#gohard* \| Wolfpack (Ubers RMT)

Nov 11th, 2012, 3:29:21 PM	#4
*Great Sage* Administrator** Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 5,872 Boston, MA Mentor	To address your first point, we do strive to maintain consistency within a particular analysis, so if you notice inconsistencies, you're welcome to point them out. It is not necessary, however, to standardize certain phrases across analyses; it is not awkward if two different analyses state the same thing in slightly different ways. Damage calculations are included where they are judged helpful and informative; for your Choice Band Ferrothorn and Salamence example, it is clear that Salamence is a very strong attacker, but it might not be intuitively obvious how strong Choice Band Ferrothorn is. The damage calculations in Ferrothorn's case help demonstrate a somewhat unexpected result. As for your third point, there is a general credits page; analyses will never be credited individually.