Project "Update Overviews" (post 1 updated with reservations)

[Aldaron*]

Intro (not necessary to read, but provides background)

---

I'm gonna preface this with a FACT: The analyses are unarguably the best they have ever been.

I've been involved with this site since 07, and presided over C&C's revival from a purely dead state (with BK / Junior / Stellar / darkie / Caelum / jrrrrrrr... good times) and I can say that with confidence. I have adamantly disagreed with the standard talking point criticisms about "red tape" or "inefficiency" and all of that, and I will continue to do so. I think that throughout the years, whoever the active leadership, we have succeeded in implementing necessary projects / protocols / systems to resolve the needs of the time.

Our analyses are supposed to cater to the newer player, and having information that is relevant and specific is always a good thing, so I don't have a personal "length requirement."

That said, in spite of any hostility that may have resulted from the previous iteration of this thread, I still think it's important that the section responsible for a SIGNIFICANT number of this site's hits (dp/pokemon was #1 in dpp, not sure if bw/pokemon is the same anymore) be open to constructive criticism and be open to forever improving.

I'd like to take 2 posts from the previous thread to highlight where I feel improvements can be made to a system that is already very good and already pumping out what are bar none the best analyses Smogon has ever had.

Originally Posted by Fat Honko

I agree that there is too much fluff in a lot of analyses these days. Wordiness is a pretty common mistake for people who aren't experienced writers, especially in an environment like Smogon where we're insisting on a bunch of formal rules that don't matter in natural conversation ("like" vs "such as", for example). It makes people think they're supposed to use a bunch of stereotypical legalese to sound smart. You don't need to use the word aforementioned. Ever.

Adding some flavor/personality to analyses is a good thing when done well; it's a pleasure to read (at least for some people) and it keeps the writer from getting bored of churning these things out. But you can add personality without forcing in long side stories and cliches. It's hard to do well though, and when it isn't done well it just adds length without adding value.

The other problem is there seems to be a checklist of things people feel obligated to mention even when it isn't useful info. You never need to explain a 4/252/252 EV spread. You don't need to mention it in the writeup at all. Everyone reading these analyses knows what a 4/252/252 spread is for, even the noobs. You don't need to say that Adamant hits harder and Jolly is faster. You don't need to keep pointing out that _____ will perform better if it has Wish, Heal Bell, Memento, Rapid Spin, Pursuit, Encore, dual screens, and hazard support. You don't need to mention every mediocre move this Pokemon learns in AC and OO and then explain why it's not worth using.

On the other hand, there is a lot of potentially useful info that could (and in my opinion should) be included, but definitely wasn't in ADV and often isn't even now. It's the stuff that you actually need to test the mon, or run some calcs, or at least having solid knowledge of the metagame in order to know. If you're going to mention spin support, don't tell me Scyther needs spin support and then name all the spinners in the tier; just tell me the spinner that works best with Choice Band Scyther. That's actually useful for someone who isn't very familiar with the tier. If Scyther can beat some of its usual counters with a specific set of hazards on the field, and you have calcs to back this up, then mention that. It gives the reader actual data to help them make decisions both in teambuilding and in battle, whereas just saying Stealth Rock helps get "a number of OHKOs and 2HKOs it wouldn't otherwise get" doesn't really help anyone. Basically, I think our analyses actually need more info, but only if it's specific. If you're going to write a 2000 word analysis, it shouldn't be something that just anyone could have written. You should be an expert on this Pokemon, sharing what you've discovered so other people don't have to spend the time discovering it for themselves.

Honko's post was entirely constructive and well stated so I won't add anything to it; I basically agree 100%.

Originally Posted by Fat undisputed

...

I just opened the OU Pokemon tab and went to Infernape to confirm my suspicions. Lo and behold, the very first sentence that greets me is:
This is a joke right? First of all, it's pretty fluffy, but whatever. The real problem here is that the analysis completely misses the mark. Infernape is one of the worst OU Pokemon in Gen 5 OU. I know maybe one successful BW1 team that used Infernape. One. But you'd never know it looking at this analysis. If I were your average player, I might leave this analysis thinking that Infernape is awesome. But then I'd be totally wrong, so the analysis has missed its mark.

Really, the analyses need to return to conciseness and quality. We need the facts and that's it. Tell me that Infernape is sub-par and that there are superior sweepers. Tell me that Salamence usually fits on a Dragon Spam or Heavy Offense team. Tell me what the most common Tyranitar set is. Tell me what people currently use to counter SD Breloom. All these can be accomplished in a sentence. We could be taking a 5000+ word Salamence Analysis and easily cutting it down to <2000 words.

I took out the first part of undisputed's post cause I didn't think it was necessary, but this last part is so necessary that I have bolded the entire part. IN BW OU...Infernape sucks lol. Ok it might not suck but whatever Infernape is, the reader, new or not, does not get that impression from the overview. I'm going to take a different route from undisputed and not pin this on the writer though, as counter-intuitive as that might seem. C&C throughout the past 5 years, ignoring who we cater to, has had significantly different needs and priorities. At one point, it was simply getting people to look at the forum (Bk will remember this). At another, it was getting people to explain how a Pokemon fit on a team. At another, it was making sure the analyses written earlier were still relevant. Different needs on an operational basis (again, independent of who we cater to) caused us to write analyses that, for whatever reason, may not correspond to our needs in the present.

This isn't the writer's fault imo. C&C should be a fluid system anyway (and from what I can see, it is), and I take this as an opportunity to continue the fluidity and just continue improving.

Plan

---

So, what do we need to do to improve? I can't agree with undisputed about length being bad, but I can agree with fluff being bad. I'd like to take a combination of both those posts and formulate the plan for a project with whoever can be bothered to help.

1.) Recruit active players who are willing to consult. <-- LOL Sorry, had to laugh, cause like, this has been a concern / desire forever and it kinda goes somewhere and then kinda dies. But o well..this is still a desire for the optimistic -.-

2.) Get a group together to work on the "overview" section for all analyses. First, we need to define what overview means for us at this time (and not go into hating on how it was implemented in the past, because again, different times mean different needs mean different results). Then, we go through and update (key word, update, not fix) them. Here, we channel the spirit of undisputed's post; in Infernape's BW OU overview, we say "this blows." In C&C talk of course.

1 and 2 work side by side, because the overview is probably all an experienced battler will look at lol.

3.) Get a group together to work on making the individual set descriptions concise. I feel like I'm beating a dead horse here, but again, I have to reiterate that this isn't blaming the writer at all; at the time it was written, the need was different, and the writer adapted to his time's needs / expectations. We're all volunteers working on a hobby we love; none of us are to blame. That said, I think, at the present, the needs are a.) be concise b.) be informative c.) be interesting

This means take out fluff (group might have to define fluff), add specifics, and try to keep the writer's personality evident.

#3 is a lot of work honestly, and, since I'm such a fucking realist, I don't really expect it to pan out. That said, we can make efforts to see something move in this general direction.

In fact, all I really want to see personally is #1 and #2 come to fruition. Since we have tabs / drop down menus for the analyses anyway, it's entirely up to the user what he chooses to read, but the overview should come straight out and smack the reader with a metaphorical cock and say "this is what the fuck this is." Since a person, whether new or experienced, bothering to read the analyses will always read the overview, I agree with undisputed in saying that at the very least, this part of the analysis should be clear, concise (yes, this might even mean emphasizing length and making explicitly short), and straight to the point.

So, unless someone really wants to take the lead on #3, you can refer to this as the "Update Overviews" project.

Advice

---

I'll even help whoever wants to volunteer to lead this in the right direction...

yee / undisputed / lavos / myzozoa are part of one group ("team west"); iconic / eo / tfc another ("nowhere / elsewhere"); jabba / locopoke / kd24 another ("strongs"); mcmeghan / ginku / cbb another ("etc"). Go to these groups of good players, ask for a few people to help writers in getting right to the brunt of what a specific pokemon's purpose is, and work with them to getting that down on paper in the Overview section. Actually don't go to tfc. But the rest, they're all part of different groups that frequently do well in high level competition, and I know that at least some members of each group will happy to provide assistance in getting to the core of what a Pokemon's purpose in a tier is.

Current reserved list

---

1. By user:
   
   Aldaron - writer and adviser - Sableye
   
   alexwolf - writer - Xatu
   
   Arcticblast - writer - Magneton
   
   ernesto - writer - Crobat / Slowbro / Tornadus
   
   Iconic - writer and adviser - Sharpedo
   
   JabbaTheGriffin - writer and adviser - Terrakion
   
   lord of bays - writer - Hydreigon
   
   myzozoa - writer and adviser - Deoxys-D
   
   Nachos - writer and adviser - Abomasnow / Metagross / Tyranitar
   
   nyttyn - writer - Blissey
   
   pokemon0078 - writer - Gastrodon / Lilligant / Smeargle
   
   undisputed - writer and adviser - Dragonite / Tornadus-T / Gengar / Heatran / Latios / Latias
   
   yee - writer and adviser - Infernape / Machamp / Tangrowth / Chansey / Jellicent
   
   By Pokemon:
   
   Abomasnow - Writer / Adviser: Nachos
   Accelgor
   Aerodactyl - Analysis: ballabrown24
   Alakazam
   Amoonguss
   Azelf
   Azumarill
   Bisharp
   Blissey - Writer: nyttyn
   Breloom - Analysis: Seven Deadly Sins
   Bronzong
   Carracosta
   Celebi - Analysis: alexwolf
   Chandelure
   Chansey - Writer / Adviser: yee
   Cloyster
   Cobalion
   Cofagrigus
   Conkeldurr - Analysis: ThePillsburyDoughBoy (Abandoned, needs to be taken over)
   Crawdaunt
   Cresselia
   Crobat - Writer / Adviser: ernesto
   Darmanitan
   Deoxys-D - Writer / Adviser: myzozoa, Analysis - ballabrown24
   Ditto
   Donphan - Analysis: Arcticblast
   Dragonite - Writer / Adviser: undisputed
   Dugtrio
   Durant
   Dusknoir
   Empoleon
   Espeon
   Exeggutor
   Farfetch'd
   Feraligatr
   Ferrothorn
   Forretress
   Froslass
   Gallade
   Galvantula
   Gastrodon - Writer / Adviser: pokemon0078
   Gengar - Writer / Adviser: undisputed
   Gliscor - Analysis: Electrolyte
   Golurk
   Gorebyss
   Gyarados
   Haxorus
   Heatran - Writer / Adviser: undisputed
   Heracross
   Hippowdon
   Hitmontop
   Huntail
   Hydreigon - Writer / Adviser: Lord of bays
   Infernape - Writer / Adviser: yee
   Jellicent - Writer / Adviser: yee
   Jirachi
   Jolteon
   Jynx
   Kabutops
   Kingdra
   Kyurem
   Landorus
   Latias - Writer / Adviser: undisputed, Analysis: shrang
   Latios - Writer / Adviser: undisputed, Analysis: Lavos Spawn (abandoned, needs taking over)
   Lilligant - Writer / Adviser: pokemon0078
   Lucario
   Ludicolo
   Machamp - Writer / Adviser: yee
   Magikarp
   Magneton - Writer / Adviser: Arcticblast
   Magnezone
   Mamoswine
   Mandibuzz
   Medicham
   Meloetta
   Meloetta-P
   Metagross - Writer / Adviser: Nachos, Analysis: religiousjedi
   Mew
   Mienshao
   Milotic
   Nidoking
   Nidoqueen
   Ninetales
   Ninjask
   Omastar
   Parasect
   Politoed
   Porygon2
   Quagsire
   Raikou
   Reuniclus
   Roserade - Analysis: Arcticblast
   Rotom
   Rotom-C
   Rotom-H
   Rotom-W - Analysis: alexwolf
   Sableye - Writer / Adviser: Aldaron
   Salamence - Analysis: LucaroarkZ
   Sandslash
   Sawsbuck
   Sceptile
   Scizor
   Scolipede
   Scrafty
   Sharpedo - Writer / Adviser: Iconic
   Shaymin
   Shiftry
   Sigilyph
   Skarmory
   Slowbro - Writer / Adviser: ernesto
   Slowking
   Smeargle - Writer / Adviser: pokemon0078
   Staraptor
   Starmie
   Stoutland
   Suicune
   Swampert
   Tangrowth - Writer / Adviser: yee
   Tentacruel
   Terrakion - Writer / Adviser: JabbaTheGriffin
   Throh
   Togekiss
   Tornadus - Writer / Adviser: ernesto
   Tornadus-T - Writer / Adviser: undisputed
   Toxicroak
   Tyranitar - Writer / Adviser: Nachos, Analysis: Trinitrotoluene
   Vaporeon
   Venomoth
   Venusaur
   Victini
   Victreebel
   Virizion
   Volbeat
   Volcarona
   Weavile
   Whimsicott
   Wobbuffet - Analysis: pokemon0078
   Xatu - Writer / Adviser / Analysis: alexwolf
   Yanmega
   Zapdos
   Zoroark

[Chou Toshio]

For what it's worth, writing, speaking, or any other form of modern English, "like" >>>> "such as"
(will respond seriously later; but good rebound of a discussion)

[PK Gaming]

oh man i am so ready to help out with this project like you wouldn't believe.

not going to jump down anyone throats (like to be fair, even though Infernape is pretty mediocre nowadays, the analysis was made during the early parts of BW1) but this is something that definitely needs to happen.

[Windsong]

Let's get it.

Ready to help out Aldy.

[Amarillo]

I'm assuming this is going to happen throughout all tiers?

I'll help where I can.

[Ray Jay]

Some other people on the LC moderation team and myself actually did something similar to this a good while back, so of course I'm happy to help.

[JabbaTheGriffin*]

the strongs would be glad to offer our services (both advising and writing)

[yee]

Happy to be a part. Continuing improvement from this site is very important to me.

[kokoloko*]

Lol cbb and ginku in C&C is funny. Anyway the UU C&C team is gonna do their stuff.

[MikeDecIsHere]

I'm a terrible writer, but I'm willing to offer my assistance wherever it need be.

Edit: would like to be part of the advisory team:

Done pretty well in tournaments and just qualified for the recent Suspect test.

[Pocket]

For OU C&C, should we make an Overview revamp thread similar to the Checks & Counter revamp thread that was posted half a year ago? Of course it'll be open to anyone willing to provide their assistance, unlike the previous revamp attempt.

[alexwolf]

Great idea Aldaron! Making overviews more realistic and to the point is certainly something that needs to be done. I have caught myself sometimes, adding some unecessary fluff, and unconciously trying to make a poke seem better than it is. And this happens beause anyone that does a job voluntarily, likes what he does, and sometimes this gets to him unconciously (i don't know if this is true in general, but i always write analyses of pokes that i at least like a bit using).

I agree with Pocket that the way to go with this project should be something like the c&c project. Also i believe that the c&c project should get going again, as it was a very helpful project, that unfortunately has died out. Finally i also agree that anyone should be able to contribute to this project, regardless of badges or fame. If the text that he writes is good enough, then it will pass through GP, or else it will be simply disregarded.

EDIT: Oh and i will help too yeah :D

[kd24]

it would be a positive step so i will help out

[LizardMan]

I suppose I will help too. I don't think I have a group/specific idea where to start.

[Aldaron*]

Just moved this over here to get any people who can't see Inside Scoop in the loop.

I guess I'll take the lead for the OU part of this project.

Post if you want to help, and specify if it will be advisory (you are a good player, as evidenced by qualifying on Suspect the past two times or doing well in tournaments recently) or actually writing.

I'll be asking the writers to take what the advisers say very seriously, as I expect the OU Overviews to represent, concisely, exactly what a Pokemon is in OU.

Cheers.

[Nachos]

I'll give writing and advising a go.

[undisputed]

I'd be down to help with both. I'm not the most talented writer, but I'd be happy to put in some work.

[Steven Snype]

Heyo. I'm willing to help if you want some help w/how to word your analyses to fit these quality players' advice from a GP perspective, and also have experience w/OU as well.

[yee]

I'll have both.

[alexwolf]

I can do the writing part!

[Huntofthelion]

I'd be up for helping with advising, sounds like a great project.

[ala]

I'm up for advising and while I'm not the strongest writer I could give it a shot.

[Poppy]

good writer / player for ubers (if that is relevant)
regardless, i'm still happy to write for ou if needed

[NixHex]

I am a good writer and a competent OU player. I need more excuses to procrastinate so count me in!

[PDC]

I may not be a good writer, but I am perfectly good enough to give advice on overviews and stuff. I would love to help out!