The Pokemon Analysis - What have we expected, and what do we expect now?

[Aldaron*]

OK. Updated OP with what I "expected" when I first started this.

With explanations and the like.

I also have to say I don't really get your point Mekkah ._. I'm just pointing out the analyses need to be improved lol, not saying anyone needs to devote time to it specifically.

The point is primarily to get the team perspective view out there for all future analyses, and to, as time permits, update the old ones.

I also slightly disagree with your sentiments MS. Smogon's responsibility is to document and assist with competitive Pokemon as much as possible.

EDIT: O, this should be obvious but...ignore grammar and stuff for now...I am only concerned with the philosophy behind this currently, not shit like standardization, spelling and grammar lol.

[jumpluff*]

I can only help with grammar and stuff, but in any way I can assist, I would gladly help with this. It's an ambitious undertaking but I would love to see this introduced. Maybe we'll never finish every analysis, but even getting some done to me is a huge improvement.

I am concerned about one thing, though... The metagame changes a lot so I think there would need to be a continuous updating process... which might overcomplicate this.

[Tangerine]

I would have made this thread ages ago since I have talked to Jump regarding this but I never made a thread in IS because I didn't want to do it. I would argue something like this is something that is required of the site, considering most of the site's analysis right now is a really just "Gyarados gets a DD and sweeps" with a lot of fluff and damage calculations. What people need is knowledge of how to use these Pokemon, and I think this is a definite move forward for a "competitive" Pokemon site. arguably this is what I wanted for the magazine but if you guys can make it standard on analysis that would be great.

I would say this should be #1 priority for the site. It will put us miles ahead of any "competition"

[Blue Kirby]

I've chatted to Tangerine in the past about this, and we've definitely talked about it in times gone by too. I don't think this is unreasonable by any means, and I do actually think in some regards it could be taken further. However, this is a fantastic start and already a large undertaking, so yeah this has my support 100%.

[Mekkah**]

I also have to say I don't really get your point Mekkah ._. I'm just pointing out the analyses need to be improved lol, not saying anyone needs to devote time to it specifically.

Having trouble making it more clear but here goes. The analyses have trouble reaching the standards we have at the moment - just look at how active C&C is. Raising the bar creates more work and keeps many people busy when there is possibly other work to be done. In addition, the thing about big undertakings in Pokemon history is that they tend to start with a huge bang, and then slowly die off.

That is all. I'm still okay with this because I want to give it a chance and everyone else is extremely for it.

[Stallion]

Its our job I know, but I dont think that doing it in incredible detail is the right way to go about it. People will never learn to get better at pokemon if we tell them that they need Pokemon X to open up for a sweep for something else, they will just be sheep and use it because they were told to. I know for a fact I did that in ADV, and I was rubbish then lol.

I think that adding to the counters section saying something like "Vaporeon is really the crux of all Gyarados sets, so to achieve the best results use a pokemon to lure it in".

Yeah I know this is really vague and general, so giving an example or two just to generally give them the idea is good and will help battlers get better, but telling them to use a Choice Band Tyranitar with a Gyarados because it destroys Pokemon X and Y is pretty much just building their teams for them.

Ehh I dunno, I seem to be in the minority here with my concerns. I think the premise behind this project is really good, and you are striving for a good cause. As long as you can help newer battlers without promoting the "sheep mentality" and allow them to think creatively and pro-actively in the future when building their teams then I'm all for it. If they do fall into the "sheep mentality" however, they will never get any better so you're good intentions will be kinda counter-productive.

[Aldaron*]

Thanks for your opinion.

[Lee]

This seems like a great idea and I'd be happy to help out wherever possible.

[Aldaron*]

Posted this in AW.

http://www.smogon.com/forums/showthread.php?t=53061

All of the IS members who said you would help, now is the time to start. Post what you are reserving for yourself in that thread.

C & C mods feel free to edit OP as you see fit.

EDIT: Nvm. Everyone is getting a chance.

[Caelum]

Originally Posted by Fat Aldaron

C & C mods feel free to edit OP as you see fit (though obviously use your judgment. If user fuzznip tries to reserve one...don't let him ._.)

So, what is your explanation going to be to a user like fuzznip for denying them a reservation? It looks like elitist favoritism if you allow analysis reservations from individuals you prefer.

[Blue Kirby]

Didn't we only allow badged users to make reservations when Platinum rolled in to begin with?

[Caelum]

Originally Posted by Fat Blue Kirby

Didn't we only allow badged users to make reservations when Platinum rolled in to begin with?

Yes, but Aldaron was suggesting judging on an individual basis. For example, non-badged member A gets a reservation whereas we don't allow non-badge member B to have one.

[Aldaron*]

Elitist favoritism? Only if you are a simpleton and believe that enforcing standards of higher quality based on past performance is "elitism."

But that's pretty much an irrelevant argument anyway.

I'm giving everyone a chance.