Ask a Simple Question, Get a Simple Answer (CAP V. 3.0 READ THE OP!)

Cool Shades the Kid CAP has decided against Megas for older CAPs to keep an historical archive. In addition, Megas will become an obsolete concept in Alola, since they're likely just bringing the XY/ORAS Megas, rather than adding new ones.

Anyway, Fidgit needs an item to function, and it would prefer using its Base Form.
 
Hi! This is my first post in a long time...Oops. I signed up and never bothered to contribute anywhere. Anyways, I wanted to ask a question:

I had a few Pokemon ideas floating around in a word doc + preliminary designs and wanted to talk with someone by PM to peer-review it. Who could I message?
(If they don't work here, I have other uses for them. I'm not too worried about rejection.)
 
Last edited:

DHR-107

Robot from the Future
is a Member of Senior Staffis a Community Contributoris a Smogon Discord Contributoris a Pokemon Researcheris a Smogon Media Contributor
Orange Islands
Hi! This is my first post in a long time...Oops. I signed up and never bothered to contribute anywhere. Anyways, I wanted to ask a question:

I had a few Pokemon ideas floating around in a word doc + preliminary designs and wanted to talk with someone by PM to peer-review it. Who could I message?
(If they don't work here, I have other uses for them. I'm not too worried about rejection.)
Hi ObeliskTD,

Create A Pokemon is a community based project. We vote through different stages and discuss the best way forward. Initially, we always talk about a Concept which we build the Pokemon around. If you check out Kerfluffle's Final Product Thread here: http://www.smogon.com/forums/threads/cap-22-final-product.3583326/ The concept was defined by it being a good user of Parting Shot, a move only Pangoro had access too previously.

If you want to read more about the process or CaP in general, try our our new users guide which can be found here: http://www.smogon.com/cap/articles/newcomers_guide
 
Hello,
This is Mawwy

I have a question you have probably heard before.
Why are some of the moves so odd like necturna...
It has,
Blue Flare / Blot Strike / HighJump Kick / DarkVoid / HyperSpace Fury / Dragon Ascent / Obvillion Wing...

Uh you get the idea, basically every move its not supposed to have...
If I'm missing something, I'm sorry I wasn't here when it was made.
It at least needs a back story to why it has all these moves.

Bye,
Love Mawwy
 
For future CAP's could we have a beta reading thread that goes on for half the time as concept submissions thread. I feel that since the concept is the only thread where you don't get to make WIP it would be nice for people to get some early feedback and advice for their ideas, and it would get rid of the multitude of repeat concepts like the ever famous jack of all trades.
 
Hello,
This is Mawwy

I have a question you have probably heard before.
Why are some of the moves so odd like necturna...
It has,
Blue Flare / Blot Strike / HighJump Kick / DarkVoid / HyperSpace Fury / Dragon Ascent / Obvillion Wing...

Uh you get the idea, basically every move its not supposed to have...
If I'm missing something, I'm sorry I wasn't here when it was made.
It at least needs a back story to why it has all these moves.

Bye,
Love Mawwy
Hiya, welcome to Smogon.

Necturna is a special CAP Pokemon because it has access to Sketch, and can use it just like Smeargle, to use any move in the game. However, it only gets to use Sketch once. That's why some odd moves are in the data; those are moves that people have used as their Sketch move.
 

LucarioOfLegends

Master Procraster
is a CAP Contributor
I
have a question.

Can you state moves in your CAP concept to use as support for it, as long as the concept doesn't specifically ask for said moves?
 

HeaLnDeaL

Let's Keep Fighting
is an Artistis a Forum Moderator Alumnusis a CAP Contributor Alumnus
Can a type be mentioned as an example in a concept, and not as an indication of what you want it to be?
During the Explanation section of a concept, examples of outcomes are allowed to be briefly introduced or briefly discussed. In reference to typing specifically, if the concept relies heavily on a single typing or only a few different combinations, then that is usually a warning sign that the concept isn't flexible enough. As such, it's usually best (but not required) to showcase more than one typing example in the explanation if a typing is mentioned at all. So, in short, yes, a type can be mentioned as an example, but only during the Explanation section. However, if the concept is incredibly rooted to a single typing, then that might be more akin to poll jumping and wouldn't be allowed.

Can you state moves in your CAP concept to use as support for it, as long as the concept doesn't specifically ask for said moves?
In the Explanation section, yes can use examples of moves for support. However, do note moves that define a Pokemon's role are allowed to define the concept itself. A recent example would be CAP22's concept, which revolved around the use of the move Parting Shot. In any case, moves in the Explanation section can be used to provide examples and support the possibilities of the concept. If providing examples of moves for a concept that isn't move-based (or providing examples for additional moves to a move-based concept) it is important to not mandate the usage of these moves and still show enough flexibility that the concept can succeed without these moves. For a crude example, if the concept is something like Weather Abuser, you could talk about using Weather Ball or Solarbeam in the sun, but you should not ever mandate these moves as essential and it is advised to show that the concept is not tied to these moves but merely has them as an option.

The basic premise for these questions can follow through for almost all competitive aspects of a Pokemon within a concept. The Explanation section has a ton of flexibility and allows for examples of typing, abilities, and moves to be given. That said, the general gist of the concept should be understood without the explanation (the explanation expands upon it, and in this expansion examples of specifics are allowed to be stated). The key here is not to try and force or mandate an ability/typing/move (or non role-defining move) into a concept, and rather to illustrate options. Also note that explanations don't even have to contain examples of moves/typings/ability (it's allowed, not required).

So, in general, showing examples of options is good, forcing a single or only a few options is bad. If you find yourself coming up with a concept that can only be achieved through a very shallow concentration of moves or abilities or typings, then that's a sign that it is not a good concept for the CAP project.
 
Hello, this is my first time on here, and I just wanted to ask a couple questions:

I have a few ideas floating in my head, both for single-stage Pokemon and evolution lines. Do I post each idea one at a time, or do I post an entire evolution line at the same time?

Also, I have some ideas for some new abilities and moves; are those allowed, or just the new Pokemon?
 

DougJustDoug

Knows the great enthusiasms
is a Site Content Manageris a Top Artistis a Programmeris a Forum Moderatoris a Top CAP Contributoris a Battle Simulator Admin Alumnusis a Smogon Discord Contributor Alumnusis a Top Tiering Contributor Alumnusis an Administrator Alumnus
Moderator
Hello, this is my first time on here, and I just wanted to ask a couple questions:

I have a few ideas floating in my head, both for single-stage Pokemon and evolution lines. Do I post each idea one at a time, or do I post an entire evolution line at the same time?

Also, I have some ideas for some new abilities and moves; are those allowed, or just the new Pokemon?
Create-A-Pokemon is a community based project. We start with a basic idea for a Pokemon, called a "Concept" and then build the pokemon in steps from there. We discuss and vote on each step as we go.

If you want to read more about the process or CAP in general, try our our newcompers guide which can be found here: http://www.smogon.com/cap/articles/newcomers_guide
 
Hello. Haven't been involved with CAP in a looooooong time, since Cawmodore. I had an old account back then, but I've decided to try and get involved again.

With that said, is there a date set for CAP 24 to begin?
 
HatfulofBomb CAP 23 has not even started, since we only worked on the second Project this year. We needed time to adjust to the newly released SM metagame, so we had to transition from ORAS slowly.
 
Hey all! I was getting interested in CAP and its history so I am reading all the previous projects and how the whole process of creating a pokemon with a community developed. Very cool that some people are still here from the very beginning wo much years ago!

I was reading something about that at some point, during the creation of pyroak, a new evolution of an existing pokemon was in the make. How did this turned out? If I recall correctly, there is not a CAP-pokemon that has evolution-ties with an existing pokemon. Is there still a thread somewhere about that?

http://www.smogon.com/forums/showthread.php?t=38366&page=8

I already read this one where they are talking about the thread where this project began but thats not the thread itself.
 

HeaLnDeaL

Let's Keep Fighting
is an Artistis a Forum Moderator Alumnusis a CAP Contributor Alumnus
My history with CAP doesn't go that far back, but from my understanding Project Upgrade/Project Evo efforts resulted in votes at the start of several CAP projects in which users were asked if they wanted to build a new Pokemon from scratch or if they wanted to evolve an existing one. I believe that the option to evolve an existing Pokemon never actually won those polls, and later CAP decided not to continue offering that option because of optic reasons (among these were concerns about what would happen if GameFreak themselves made an evo for that same Pokemon later down the road, and in addition general fanboy concerns could also be seen).

If anyone has more insight on this matter than myself, they are free to correct my answer in spots of inaccuracies.
 
I havent done anything CAP related (or anything competitive pokemon related, really) since Plasmanta was finished. Can someone possibly give me a tl;dr about policy changes and whatnot since then? In particular I'd like to know what happened to the concept workshop because I vaguely remember that being a thing before I stopped doing stuff, and it seemed like a cool idea.
 

HeaLnDeaL

Let's Keep Fighting
is an Artistis a Forum Moderator Alumnusis a CAP Contributor Alumnus
Since Plasmanta:

-The concept workshop was closed because it failed to generate enough momentum. Not enough concepts were being submitted and barely anything was ever approved. This left the TL with far too narrow of a path to move forward with concept slating. Instead, concept submissions now happen after the TL/TLT votes once again, but now there are a bit more requirements in terms of concept justification. There's a toolkit of sorts, and every concept needs to justify itself with the aid of one of the pre-set categories that aim at making sure the concept creates a unique role or fulfills an aspect of metagame exploration.

concept justification rules said:
Justification Utilizing the CAP Concept Toolkit, craft a concept that can fit into at least one of the following categories: Actualization, Archetype, or Target. Please explicitly state the category names as applicable to your specific justification and explain.
  • Actualization: What is the feeling your Concept Pokemon INSPIRES when used properly in the metagame, do existing Pokemon come close to that, and why or why not?
  • Archetype: What does your Concept Pokemon DO - functionally - in the metagame, and why does the metagame need something with that role? Use Smogon's Pokemon Dictionary to assist with role definitions.
  • Target: What does your Concept Pokemon ADDRESS in the metagame, and why is addressing that target important?
-The build triangle of "bulky, strong, fast, pick two" was essentially dropped because Gen6 standards tended to ignore it anyway. It could still theoretically be used for stats justifications, but is not a requirement.
-The moves stage has been shifted to competitive movesets (which includes attacking and non attacking moves into a single thread), and after movesets are decided complete flavor movepools are built and voted upon. Movesets do not require polls as long as the community has a consensus.
-CAP has inched along trying to distance itself away from having a BSR thread, as most of the recent BSR threads do not offer constructive conversation and simply resulted in the the TL/TLT picking limits based on highly limited community input. And if we're being real here, few people truly "understood" how to submit good BSR limits. It is unsure at this point what the full fate of BSR limits in the future will be. Perhaps they will be disregarded altogether, leaving the TL/TLT to give advice prior to the stats slate instead, or perhaps the TL/TLT will decide limits on their own rather than waste a week for a thread without the activity or results to justify its existence. Or who knows, maybe we'll go back to having a BSR thread itself.
-CAP playtests have been effectively moved away from a ladder format to a tournament format.
-The last CAP, Kerfluffle, was made for the CAP metagame rather than OU. It is completely unknown whether CAP will stay making for the CAP metagame or if CAP will move back to OU during Gen7. A PRC topic on the matter will appear soonish after the metagames have had a chance to begin to stabilize.
 
Last edited:
Thanks for the detailed answer, this cleared up pretty much all of the questions I had going in my head. I'll watch the next CAP closely to get a feel for the updated process.
 

HeaLnDeaL

Let's Keep Fighting
is an Artistis a Forum Moderator Alumnusis a CAP Contributor Alumnus
The people on PRC can chime in and help contribute to discussions that decide policy decisions. You do not need to be on PRC to contribute to the main CAP process.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 2, Guests: 1)

Top