Policy Review Policy Review - CAP Clause on the new CAP Ladder

Forum Rules said:

If you are not an experienced member of the CAP community, it is strongly recommended that you do not post in this thread.

This thread is intended to contain intelligent discussion and commentary by experienced members of the CAP project regarding CAP policy, process, and rules. As such, the content of this thread will be moderated more strictly than other threads on the forum. The posting rules for Policy Review threads are contained here: http://www.smogon.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1412586&postcount=2

Click to expand...

I have been worried about the "accessibility" of the CAP metagame to normal competitive pokemon battlers. Our mission is to experiment with the current metagame -- not to create a new metagame entirely. I realize that with every new creation, we are inevitably creating a new metagame. There's no way around that. However, I would like to make sure that the CAP metagame never diverges so far from the normal metagame, that it becomes unplayable by normal metagame players without an inordinate amount of training.

Because this project seeks to leverage the experience of Smogon battlers, we need to ensure that the CAP metagame remains somewhat closely aligned with the metagame that most Smogoners play. Otherwise, this community will get smaller and smaller, less and less relevant within Smogon -- and eventually it will dwindle and die. I don't want to see that happen. And now that we are on the precipice of implementing our fourth CAP pokemon, I think it is time to take some steps to ensure that the CAP metagame remains playable by all experienced battlers with a minimum of advance preparation and education.

As such, I propose that we implement a new clause on the CAP server that will be enforced on the new ladder: No team can have more than one CAP pokemon in the team lineup.

It's a simple rule, with big consequences. Essentially, it ensures that any time you are battling on the CAP server, you will never be blindsided by a wildly different metagame. This is assuming that we do not ever create a single pokemon that shifts the metagame that greatly.

For all the complaints about the overpowered-ness of Syclant and Revenankh, I don't think anyone ever accused them of making the metagame unrecognizable. Basically the same general battle strategies that are used in normal play can work against those two. One is a powerful sweeper, the other is an awesome tank. Yes, it helps to have a flying attack to stop Revvy from setting up and mowing you down -- but it's not a requirement. You can bring any good team to the CAP server, and assuming you know a few basics about the CAP pokes (typing, key moves and abilities, etc) -- you can play with your team and strategy and likely succeed.

You cannot play regular teams on the servers with truly modified metagames. If you don't believe me, head over to Captain's server or AA's server and you'll see what I mean. Those servers have intentionally created a completely new metagame, and that is what makes those servers great. The CAP server is not that. We will never be that. I don't want to try. Guys like Captain and AA have done a great job in that area, and I don't want to compete with them.

We have our own niche -- our metagame is different, but not too different. That's one of the keys to the CAP project's success. If you love the current metagame but always wished that...
then the CAP project is the place to be! The lure of this project (not the goal actually) is the pokemon we create. That's what people want to play -- the pokemon! But if the combinatorial effect of all these pokemon makes a completely new metagame, then we are in trouble. Because, as new metagames go, ours isn't very good. Places like Captain's and AA's do it much better.

For all the work that goes into our pokemon, we have absolutely no process for designing the metagame around it. I don't think we should try. I think we should try to limit the effect of new pokemon, so that they never create a vastly different metagame from the Smogon standard.

We are already experiencing a metagame shift with the three pokemon we have already created. Although it was not intentional, we made three pokemon weak to Flying. As such, Togekiss is much better on the CAP server, than in the standard metagame. This sort of shift is inevitable, but needs to be limited if possible. For example, I'm a little worried about the combined effect of a Persistent Trick Room Fidgit with Revenankh. What will Revenankh do if, in addition to Bulk Up, he effectively gets a speed boost under Trick Room with every Hammer Arm? Imagine if Rev can run Shadow Punch instead of Shadow Sneak, since he will be the fastest Pokemon on the field under Trick Room and one or two Hammer Arms. I may be wrong, and the Figit+Revenankh combo is not the reason I am proposing this clause. I'm using it as an example.

We are not designing or controlling the combinations of our pokemon. Therefore, I think they should not be allowed to be combined. That ensures that each pokemon will be used as they were designed -- as a singular addition to the standard competitive metagame.

I don't want any accomplished competitive battler to ever come to the CAP server with a good team and get thrashed 6-0.

"Lol, what an idiot. He lead off with Gyarados -- what a noob. He also used Gengar and Garchomp, can you believe it? I was giggling when he tried to pull that Yache Swords Dance bullshit on me -- like that's gonna do ANY good here. Doesn't he know that those pokemon are totally shitty here on the CAP server....

Click to expand...

I know I'm exaggerrating, but it's not that inconceivable in the future. If there is, at most, one CAP pokemon on a team, it is highly unlikely that good standard teams won't work on the CAP server. You may be surprised by a new wrinkle or two, but not overwhelmed. In fact, I would like to institute some new playtesting programs to encourage people to play on the CAP server as the "control group" -- intentionally NOT using CAP pokemon, to ensure that our game remains accessible.

I've already checked the programming, and it is suprisingly easy to implement a "CAP Clause" on the server. I think this is a necessary step we should take to ensure the relevance of our metagame and our project as a whole.

I disagree with the "one CAP pokemon per team," for the following reasons:

1. No other pokemon are restricted in that manner.

NONE of our CAP Pokemon are either individually or in combination any more powerful than pokemon available in the standard metagame. There will never be a time when Tyranitar + Garchomp, two vastly superior pokemon on an overall basis to most of our CAP projects, is not a viable combo because of anything we make. Revenankh with Air Lock, Hammer Arm, and Ice Punch does defeat the combo fairly well, but not any moreso than say Earthquake/Ice Punch Swampert. A Fidget with Gravity is just begging for Garchomp to come in. Probably your own.

2. CAP will, inevitably, be a different metagame eventually, if not already. There is no use pretending it is otherwise, since the uptick in Togekiss' popularity will remain no matter what we add or subtract, regardless of any 1 CAP per team rule. If Fidgit doesn't remove all conventional thought around metagame threats in and of itself, I'll be surprised.

3. 6 CAP Scenario

Let us say we complete CAP 6, and someone decides to run a team with all 6 Cap pokemon. Aside from the glaring Flying weakness, this team will still have many exploitable weaknesses. I suppose you could argue that with no standard pokemon, it has no relevance to the standard metagame, but then, simply having 6 viable pokemon outside of standard as potential threats already distorts the metagame. Just like you can't slap 6 standards into the Team builder and expect a good team to go out, using multiple Caps does not ensure victory either.

4. Can't neccesarily avoid one CAP's impact vs. another's.

Even with a 1 CAP limit, two different teams' choice of CAP pokemon can still influnce each other. Scylant is generally SOL against Pyroak and I doubt Revenankh lives is much fear of Fidgit.

5. Even threats may adjust team building.

The fact is, people are going to get a different experience on a server that explictly states it has more options. If people want to play standard they can go to Smogon's server. While two or more CAPs on a team would add a lot more "what if's" to our metagame experiment, It is wishful thinking to assume Nintendo will ever craft anything remotely like our designs.

I suppose my question comes down to: Is the "data" we're looking for any more applicable if we only allow 1 CAP per team rather than 2 or more? Simply the threat of a CAP pokemon already alters the way one might build a team.

EDIT: only *allow* one CAP per team. I am a dipstick.

I agree with what deck knight has said =/

Besides, if people want the same metagame they can keep to official or smogon, making
one CAP per team isn't going to change the fact that the CAP is changing the
metagame. A team is going to have to be able to counter all of the CAPs
regardless of whether or not more then one is allowed in a team...

For example, not every team out there is gonna have a garchomp, or a blissey, or gengar, but most teams out there are going to want to be
prepared when they do face it.

@Phalanx, not really, so far, any flying type that could take a single
hit from syclant could eat up the CAP project...

Revenankh, weak to flying
Syclant, weak to flying
Pyroak, weak to flying
Fidgit, not weak to flying, but earthquake and earth power both have no effect

Newsflash, Skarmory rapes every CAP except Pyroak =/

Back to doug: People are going to need to learn about these pokemon when they play the CAP server anyway, having
a team filled with CAP's and a team with only one isn't going to change that.

I also disagree with the CAP clause for all the reasons Deck Knight posted. However, I mainly disagree with your belief that the CaP metagame is not accessable enough. Really, innaccessability to the CaP metagame isn't as big of an issue as you may think. As a co-admin and policy maker of Captain's Modded Server, it is true that the metagames of CMS and (to a lesser extent, AAMS) differ much more sharply from standard than the CaP project intents to. However, based on my experience with both metagames, the main reason their metagames are far different is that they go so far as to change stats and even game mechanics. The Create-A-Pokemon project's purpose is to add new pokemon to complement the standard metagame, not to destroy it. Yes, the current trio of CAP pokemon have had a profound effect on the metagame, but that is to be expected. It's not as though they made the metagame completely unfamiliar territory.

Yes, there are many random people who glance over our server and bitch about losing to a Revenankth or Syclant sweep, but anyone that even pays attention to how the CaP process works should have no problem understanding our metagame. To put this into perspective, a user who was not a regular of the Create-a-Pokemon server (and project) but also a highly respected battler on smogon (Earthworm) managed to win the first CaP tournament even though more experienced members of the project such as myself participated. The main reason he along with the several other smogoners who participated were successful was because he actually took the time to learn about the CaP pokemon and project. Yes, if you don't take the effort to learn what the CaP project is all about, even a skilled battler may be thrashed 6-0 by a Revenankth. But as experience shows with the CaP pokemon (and other smogon tournaments), the Create-A-Pokemon metagame is not innaccessible to those less experienced with it, and hopefully, with the new website that darkie is working on, it will only become even easier to get involved. Thus, I think limiting the usage of our creations on the basis of innacessability undermines the goals of this project.

I have to agree with Deck Knight here, the damage is done. By creating this project in the first place we should've known it was coming to this since it is inevitably going to create it's own metagame, a limit shouldn't be placed upon this just because of this. Togekiss is overly popular on this server but that is because of how it counters most of the CaPs, but that's going to stay this way no matter what limit you put on it. The presence of the CaPs will still remain with this clause anyways, plus we have the Smogon Server to play on if we want the metagame without these Pokemon. There should be no limit, as even a team of 6 CaPs will be weak to something, and this weakness will always be exploited as Deck Knight has said. I say we have no restriction, as people have other servers to play on if they don't like the metagame that is already in effect. Plus with the add of a Smogon Server, this limit isn't needed anyways. All in all, forget about a limit or restriction, let people use up to 6 CaP, a good battler or any skilled one will still be able to play through, exploit weaknesses, and grasp the victory.

This might be helpful.

Lol, WTF at beef 2.0, if they don't want to play against CAP Pokemon, they
can get the hell out of the server,

I really don't have a position much on this either way. I entirely see Doug's point and why he wants to do this, but I also realize that this might be unnecessary limitation. Anyways, Smogon's metagame is about to be different, so we should just assume that the good players can adapt. Honestly, if you are new to competitive Pokemon, you shouldn't start on a modserver (which we are).

What if we make clauses excluding a certain number of CAP Pokemon per team.
Like 1 CAP clause, 2 CAP clause, etc.
I think that would be a bit more plausible than having everyone limited to just a single CAP Pokemon.

I don't care about the clause really, but I don't want it enforced on the ladder =/

I see Doug's point that 'CAP clause' would make CAP 'noob friendly'.

However, I don't see why it should be noob friendly, honestly.

When people started playing in the Standard metagame for the first time, they had to learn the metagame and fix their teams repeatedly to succeed. Suppose they got sick of it and gave the UU metagame a try. Again, they needed to learn that particular metagame. The same thing goes for Ubers...

... and the exact same thing holds for CAP. People can't expect to get into a new metagame and start owning right away. That is presumptuous beyond belief. If they want to start playing well, they need to adapt to the metagame, whatever it is... and CAP's is no exception.

Deck Knight said:

2. CAP will, inevitably, be a different metagame eventually, if not already. There is no use pretending it is otherwise, since the uptick in Togekiss' popularity will remain no matter what we add or subtract, regardless of any 1 CAP per team rule. If Fidgit doesn't remove all conventional thought around metagame threats in and of itself, I'll be surprised.

Click to expand...

This one i am going to piggy back on.Every pokemon we create bring us further and further away from the standard metagame,it can't be avoid but i think have said it before let every pokemon that is create have some measure to counter the pokemon created before that will help some. Also if needed we create a counter balance pokemon in this case a solid flying pokemon(cough,cough flying fighting) would be nice addition to game.It would be highly irresponsible to keep making high level competitive pokemon with out putting checks to balance them.

I know i have said this in past.After every 6 pokes created we to sit back an evaluate all the pokes individually(i guess now collectively) and their impact on the game and make adjustment to them.

I'm going to go against the one CAP clause. Once people notice that they will have to change their teams here (however small the changes are). The new CAPs will be not as big a problem. It will be easier to learn once we get the website with analysis for anti-CAP pokes. The main problem is new people not reading the analysis about existing CAPs.

I really do not like this idea.
Why limit our own creations just to fit in with the normal meta, sure we want it to be recognizable to OU players (thats why we leave all existing mechanics and Pokemon alone) but the difference that the CaP's provide is what makes the server popular. If someone wants to come and play on our server they should have prepared (learned their common movesets, and got a way to beat them on their team) for all of them (if not and they lose, its almost the same as not keeping in touch with the latest trends and being surprised by a new set) so if you are revvy weak you are still going to lose to those players who use it but less players will be using it 'cos many would chose 'ant or want to experiment with something else.

I don't see how this would help CaP in any way, and would love to try out another mono CaP team (my mono Syclant team was ok... but having 6 4x fire weaks is bad..) at some stage.

I don't see the point of this. If you are making this so that a person with a standard OU team has a decent chance against a CAP team then that won't really make much of a difference.

I use a team of Bronzong / Heatran / Gyarados / Celebi / Tyranitar / Garchomp in OU at the moment, and it wouldn't have any problem against any CAP pokemon. People new to the CAP server probably won't have the sprites and knowledge about the pokemon's movepool anyway in the time it takes them to realise the moveset and typing, Revenankh or something will have 2 bulk ups at least and Syclant may even get a couple of Tail Glows so basically if they don't know anything about at all about the CAP pokemon to begin with they'll lose against a skilled user of the aforementioned pokemon regardless.

The solution would not be to limit the number of CAP pokemon on one team but to pursue the current method of trying to educate people about the CAP pokemon and then any slightly-above-average player can deal with the CAP pokemon, even using standard pokemon. If people cannot read THIS IS A MODDED SERVER on the welcome screen or even work out that the Create-A-Pokemon server may be modded, the chances are they aren't intelligent enough to be a decent battler anyway.

I remember this being talked about in the server.

I think the one point people are missing is that Doug isn't talking about a different metagame being bad, but an unrecognizable one being not what we want. What we have now (I'm not sure about the inclusion of Fidgit, as I haven't been able to get on Shoddy to see if he's even implemented yet...) doesn't seem unrecognizable at all; I can easily make a team for Smogon that works perfectly fine in CaP without trying.
---

Err... I'll finish this later... I gotta go.

I am wholeheartedly against this.

While I was promote accessibility as much as feasibly possible, I would never wish to sacrifice the dignity of the project to do so.

Lowering the standards of the CaP game is akin to lowering its dignity. If a good player comes over to the CaP server and gets thrashed by a combination of Revenankh, Pyroak and Fidgit, he needs to realize that he has work to do.

Allowing only one CaP Pokemon on a team severely limits and really changes the development of this game.

I'm all for enhancing the accessbility of our metagame, but I am completely against accomplishing the fact if it means lowering any standards.

I can see Doug's point, but I dont think it's a necessary clause. Our goal is to obtain a better understanding of the Metagame. IMO this clause would limit that. It kind of deters the knowledge we're looking to gain. I understand server population is a big deal, but accessibility shouldn't be an issue to our project. A team of 6 CaPs could definitely freak out some new players, but it they're not willing to be a little open minded and try to understand the nature of the project; they're not really helping us. We're not looking for players with a "Fuck this shit!" mentality. Besides, truly experienced and accomplished players shouldn't have an issue conforming. Some sweeps by the CaP pokes are expected, but those willing to do some research and devise new methods of countering our CaPs are the members we want. Yes, it's true that the CaPs have had a major impact on the metagame, but I wouldn't say we're veering towards "unaccessible". CMS for example could probably fit under that bracket. As their changes to the standard meta are far more drastic compared to ours. One, we haven't even touched any of the original 493. Two, our type charts are the same. Three, our attacks are the same. As long as our meta follows the basics, everything should be recognizable.

I know the idea is proposed out of Doug's best wishes for the server, but I think it will limit the project harshly. =/

Hmm, I definately see your point Doug.
But, what this really comes down to is that any experienced or even knowledgeable player
will recognize that the server is modded and do some research before jumping in with their
standard team. I also don't think a mandatory CAP clause would bring many more players to the server.
If they don't want to be bombarded with new pokemon, they will most likely just go to the SU server.

However, I could see making the CAP clause and not enforcing it just in case someone wanted to
have a CAP free (or limited) battle without having to switch servers.

OK. I won't push this proposal any further. I appreciate that everyone considered the proposal seriously and took the time to present reasoned arguments against it. Since no one else supports the idea, I will let it drop.

Less important than the proposal -- I want the community to be aware of the risks of an inaccessible metagame. We need to have a clear idea of the purpose of the CAP server. As it stands right now, we have very few regular users on the server. For the first several months of the CAP server's existence, we had a built-in audience, because we were effectively the only alternative to Official. Now that Smogon U is up and running (and a few others) -- there are many places people can go for standard battles.

So, we are left with the community of people that want to play the CAP metagame. For some reason, that community is getting smaller and smaller. Which is odd, because the forum community is doing very well. Why the disparity? Of course there will be far more forum participants than server users. But, the number of server users is dwindling to the point that our playtesting statistics are becoming meaningless. If our server is meant to be a tool for validating our creations, there is a certain baseline usage required to gather information.

If we want the server to be a place that we use for a few days every two months when a new pokemon comes out -- that's fine, actually. We can fire up a few battles amongst the diehards and see if the pokemon play reasonably well. At the current level of server usage, that's where we are headed. Like I said, that's fine. But, we don't need a bunch of moderators, drivers, tournament organizers, ladders, leaderboards, server infrastructure, etc... -- if the server is going to be a seldom-used tool for testing CAP pokemon amongst a few dedicated playtesters from the CAP project.

I also do not want to prostitute the CAP project, simply for the purpose of attracting a bunch of Shoddy noobs to hang out on the CAP server all day. I have no interest in serving out regular Shoddy battles to users who don't want to play with CAP pokemon. I have no intention of making a "CAP Clause" that enables you to exclude all CAP pokemon from a battle. If you really want a standard battle, there are lots of other places to play. The CAP server is a mod server and always will be.

So, is it possible to have both? Can we have a very different metagame AND be popular enough to gather legitimate statistical evidence about our creations? I don't know. But, right now, it doesn't look like we can have both. That was the motivation for my proposal.

I understand the reasons that our server *should* be accessible to the rest of the world. But, right now, I don't think it is accessible enough to attract a large audience. And that is perfectly fine with me. But, we might want to lower our expectations and level of support for the server, since it may not have enough usage to warrant it.

That is mostly do to most people on Smogon, not even participating the creations. I think it also has to do with the fact that many established players, tutors, and the like, mostly think of the CaP Project as a joke. I mean how many established players have you've seen on the CaP Server? Most people will follow these established players and act the same way towards this metagame. If we want this to be an established metagame (or whatever you want it to be even though it is eventually gonna become a separate metagame), we need to first start by getting the people that are actually great at battling, into this metagame. As the established players grow, more established players will come along and join them, so will noobs but we will still have a wide player base that can actually improve the playtesting. I think we should try and get more tutors (which I consider great and established players) to play the CaP metagame or try it out for a long time, other than a tournament. Maybe if there was an incentive this could be achieved easier.

Sikh Assassin said:

That is mostly do to most people on Smogon, not even participating the creations. I think it also has to do with the fact that many established players, tutors, and the like, mostly think of the CaP Project as a joke. I mean how many established players have you've seen on the CaP Server?

Click to expand...

This is a very good point, and is something that I have already alluded to before. Yeah, CAP kinda has a 'joke' image to the established community, except for a few of them (for example, myself :jump:).

This really should be looked into. As Sikh Assassin says, if the established members of the community start to take CAP seriously, the others would follow suit. Maybe I should start advertising CAP to my fellow 'elite' members?

I've actually seen many badged members on the server, because more and more are participating in the forum. The problem isn't the lack of "elite" members, its the overriding sentiment that the perceived leaders of the project do this because they can't play the standard metagame. Getting more "elite" members to participate will help, but we need something more. This is where my (soon to be) two new PR threads come in. The ideas I am proposing should help more experienced players get acclimated to the metagame, via a tutoring program and establishing a baseline minimum of knowledge among voters.

I'm not saying badged members as some badged members aren't good in competitive metagame yet either. I am talking about big shots like husk, imperfectluck, Taylor, Jabba, Brawley, et cetera, the list goes on, and from my meetings with them, and me being friends with most of them, they don't necessarily consider the CaP Project serious. They think it's too fanyboy-ish and trying too hard. Some think it is not right to play with Pokemon that aren't even real or "official" as you might say. Yes I know a few badged members go on in a while such as darkie, matty, Aldaron, and X-Act but that's about it. I've seen Earthworm on once in the past but that's it. A community grows, the same goes for a subforum, and it takes time, and effort. Trying to make this process faster will inevitably cause our growth to stop. Limiting our grow, and backfiring at our own creations will do the same. The CaP clause will cause more problems, and won't stop the ones it is trying to stop.

Conclusion:

No CAP clause will be implemented.