1. Welcome to Smogon Forums! Please take a minute to read the rules.
  2. New to the forums? Check out our Mentorship Program!
    Our mentors will answer your questions and help you become a part of the community!

CAP 13 CAP 2 - Concept Submissions

Discussion in 'CAP Process Archive' started by Rising_Dusk, Nov 7, 2011.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. GtM

    GtM

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2009
    Messages:
    717
    Concept: The Great Pretender

    Description: A pokemon that makes the most of the ability Illusion, and can be used in a number of different ways to outwit and outmaneuver the opponent.

    Justification: Generation 5 introduced a lot of outlandish abilities, moves etc, and Illusion is one of the most unique traits yet. However, Zoroark is unfortunately a one-dimensional pokemon due to its severe frailty, lack of synergy with common playstyles and non-existant capacity for anything other than special sweeping. Team Preview only makes it harder for Zoroark to fool an opponent, and thus the Illusion ability doesn't have a chance to show its potential. If we designed a CAP around using the ability Illusion in creative and varied ways, it would allow us to explore how threatening it is on a defensive/support capacity, what combination of pokemon forms the best "cloak and dagger" core, and how the metagame would change if there was a possibility the "Scizor" ready to sweep in front of you could throw up entry hazards instead. I believe the introduction of a supporting Illusion pokemon would alter the way many people play the game, if it was viable enough on its own merits.

    Questions to be answered:
    • Does the ability Illusion have potential for supporting and defensive roles? What are the best ways to manipulate the situations that Illusion provides?
    • What qualities would a pokemon need to make the best use of Illusion, or to make the most convincing Illusion, in terms of typing, stats and movepool?
    • Would playstyles change if a defensive pokemon could masquerade as an offensive one that threatens a sweep? Would this pokemon centralise the metagame around it or would it be the other way around?
    • Would an Illusion-centered pokemon also be able to run a second ability viably? Would the possibility of a non-Illusion version of the pokemon make the Illusion version more convincing despite being shown on Team Preview?
    • Would running Zoroark alongside this pokemon completely mindfuck people?

    Explanation: There's so many ways to use the ability Illusion that remain currently unexplored. If the pokemon had immunities to attacks that it could lure in under the disguise of a partner, it could use Encore to lock the opponent in useless and guarantee setup, recovery, or status spreading. Likewise, Mean Look could be used to destroy Choiced sweepers that think Tyranitar can easily be killed by Close Combat, when it turns out the "Tyranitar" is actually a Ghost type! Although in this case, it might be better to go without immunities, since it might become as centralising as Shadow Tag Chandelure, which may not be desirable. This pokemon could also make use of the confusion that Illusion provides by simply setting up entry hazards (or alternatively Rapid-Spinning them away), inducing a field effect as the opponent wastes their turn, or just using Recover / Pain Split. Trick is also another option to be explored, since the possibility of your Dragonite being Tricked an Iron Ball by Virizion could induce paranoia in many opponents. If this pokemon could pull off a number of different roles, it may be able to outmaneuver opponents despite Team Preview, since they won't know what to expect even if they figure out when and when the pokemon is masquerading.

    The good thing about this concept is not only is it centered around the pokemon itself, it also hinges on the formation of new offensive and defensive cores that would allow the pokemon to make the most of Illusion. If this pokemon was sturdy enough and had a good enough support movepool, it could change the metagame as we know it in unpredictable ways. It's testing a completely new aspect of pokemon that's never really been touched on, and it was a lot of potential to produce a truly unique effect on competitive pokemon.
  2. ssbbm

    ssbbm

    Joined:
    May 14, 2010
    Messages:
    1,020
    my only complaint with sketch artist is that i'm pretty sure that the move that will be sketched will be spore /:

    100% sleep is basically too good to pass up on an offensive (and even a lot of defensive) pokemon.
  3. Spork

    Spork

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2011
    Messages:
    409
    I think that entry pretty much breaks the rules, GtM. Also, I'd see it as more of a subset of the "Psychological Warfare" concept already posted, since psychological warfare is pretty much Zoroark's aim in the first place.

    I'm all for "Let It Snow" so far personally, although I can see it failing somewhat easily. I'd personally like to see the concept description stating more directly that "this is a pokemon that NEEDS hail to devastate", because, for example, if we end up designing the perfect Blizzspammer/sweeper, and then we decide to give it Ice Beam, the Hail playstyle isn't going to be strongly encouraged.
  4. Woodchuck

    Woodchuck you spin mine head right round right round
    is a Battle Server Administratoris a Smogon IRC AOPis a Forum Moderator
    Moderator

    Joined:
    May 25, 2010
    Messages:
    2,138
    I like Sketch Artist and all, but I think there is a major concern a lot of people are overlooking.

    How do we implement it?

    Smeargle's movepool is simply everything. However, limiting a Pokemon to only one Sketch is REALLY difficult to implement unless you make a shitload of illegalities. The impracticality of making an "Only One" Sketch mon's movepool kind of makes the idea a lot less appealing to me.
  5. ssbbm

    ssbbm

    Joined:
    May 14, 2010
    Messages:
    1,020

    it may be possible to implement on pokemon showdown
  6. sonickid01

    sonickid01

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2006
    Messages:
    239
    Because it would be a ridiculous, borderline-stupid waste of time.

    Try to conduct a scientific experiment on plants measuring the effect of CO2 levels, soil acidity, air pressure, light intensity, humidity, oxygen levels, salt concentrations and presence of insects on their growth. No? If it isn't obvious why this would be a horrible experiment, then here's why:

    The point of any experiment is to test variables and their effects. They must be controlled very carefully one-at-a-time. The CAP process is a scientifically-minded experiment on the effects of different influences in the standard metagame. In order to conduct a good experiment, one must reduce the number of variables as much as possible in order to pinpoint what effects are caused by what.

    CAP's goal is to pick apart the metagame and see how it has evolved, how it can evolve, and what composes it. Your question seems to indicate to me that you're seeing it as a fun game to create whatever badass Pokemon we want for the sheer sake of frivolous entertainment. While the process and game are fun in their own right, let me assure you that the CAP is serious and dedicated toward discovering something about the way competitive Pokemon is played, and that testing 4 different concepts simultaneously packed into one CAP is not an efficient route toward that goal.
  7. I wasn't really into the Psychological Warfare concept at all, but after looking at The Great Pretender, out of line as it may be with the submission guidelines, I think that making use of the Illusion ability in the described way would be a really cool way of implementing the Psychological Warfare concept.
  8. jas61292

    jas61292 used substitute
    is a Forum Moderatoris a CAP Contributoris a Tiering Contributoris a Battle Server Moderator
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2010
    Messages:
    2,871
    As I have said, I love Psychological Warfare. And I also love Zoroark and Illusion. That being said, I do not think Illusion is the way to go for a psychological warfare concept. That has already been explored with Zoroark, and while he may not be the greatest Pokemon ever, certainly does his job well. I think if we are to do something with psychological warfare we should be trying something new that has not already been done.

    Also, as a side note, if you think "Team Preview only makes it harder for Zoroark to fool an opponent," then you are obviously playing Zoroark wrong. As far as I am concerned, Team Preview was a gift to Zoroark, especially for those who love that Psychological game, as it puts your opponent on edge. That is the kind of thingk a good mind game Pokemon should do. If your opponent is not expecting anything specific, catching them off guard is much harder. In my opinion, the best way to do something like this is with a Pokemon that can run a few different sets that are all disruptive. You get into your opponents head by letting them know something is coming, but not letting them know what.
  9. Darkamber8828

    Darkamber8828

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2009
    Messages:
    2,979
    uh

    make sketch an egg move???
  10. Fire Blast

    Fire Blast

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2010
    Messages:
    2,093
    Concept: Theoretical Threat

    General Description: A pokemon whose presence itself severly limits the opponent's options

    Justification: Team Preview has severly impacted the way in which we play. By knowing what the opponent has, players can identify what threats are significant. For example, if someone sees an Electivire on the other person's team, they will be careful when using Electric-type moves. Electvire affects their choices without even being on the field. This is what can be called a "theoretical threat." Unfortuneately, Electivire cannot abuse the boost it gains very well. If we were to create a pokemon that could limit the opponent's option in a similar way, it would show us the value of theoretical threat. However, we could also give the pokemon tangible threat, the opposite of theretical threat. This would allow us to compare the two types of threat with eachother.

    Questions to be Answered:
    -How much significance can theoretical threat hold?
    -Can the presence of one pokemon wipe out an entire aspect of the metagame?
    (If Electivire was stronger, would Electric-type moves be obsolete?)
    -How does theoretical threat compare to tangible threat? Which playstlyes prefer theoretical threat? Which playstyles prefer tangible threat? How does theoretical threat affect different playstyles? How does tangible threat affect different playstyles?
    -How can players use theoretical threat to their advantage?
    -How can players cope with theoretical threat?

    Explanation: The way I see it, this pokemon would have two abilities, one that supports theoretical threat and another that supports tangible threat. The ability that is used for theoretical threat would give the pokemon a boost (+2 Atk or SpA, +2 Spe) when hit by <attack>. Some things that could give this boost are: status, priority, <type>, or Taunt. This would allow us to see the significance that some of these moves have on the metagame. Without the boost this ability gives, this pokemon should be fairly weak but still usable. The other ability would give the pokemon more direct sweeping potential, without becoming so powerful that it completely outclasses the other ability. A good way of doing this could be to make it a fairly average sweeping ability (Clear Body/Natural Cure) that comes with the bonus of a few extra moves.
  11. GtM

    GtM

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2009
    Messages:
    717
    To clarify, I wasn't aiming for the similarity between my concept and psychological warfare. The point of the "Great Pretender" was to mislead, not to annoy. However, it looks like in retrospect it might be a novel way of filling that concept. :P Also, I posted the concept since, after having sent Rising_Dusk a message for permission and not receiving any response for or against, I thought it was just worth putting the ability Illusion up for consideration.

    And about Team Preview and Zoroark, putting the opponent on edge isn't really of great benefit considering in 90% of the games I've played against Zoroark, it's always been the lead in disguise. If Team Preview wasn't there, Zoroark could threaten a sweep out of absolutely nowhere, and players wouldn't suspect a thing unless they were using Scarf-Mienshao or Flygon as a scout. Maybe it's different in the higher ranks (if anyone uses Zoroark there) but in my experience, Team Preview has hurt teams with Zoroark more than it has helped it.

    That said, this whole debate has made me want to test out Zoroark properly again, maybe in UU. :)

    Also, whilst I really like the Theoretical Threat concept above, it's pretty well realized with Lightningrod Zapdos in DW already. You don't want to try using any Electric attacks against a team with that thing until you see it use Heat Wave, and by then you've lost your Ferrothorn anyways. Same goes with Sap Sipper Miltank in NU, I'm not really comfortable using either Ice, Fire or Grass moves on it since it can Thunder Wave me if I make a mistake. :(
  12. ryik7

    ryik7

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2010
    Messages:
    121
    I'm just gonna point out that we could combine several of these concepts if we wanted to.
    Sketch artist's requirements: sketch, only 1, stats better than Smeargle's

    psycho. warfare requirements: unpredictable and causes opponents to lose their marbles

    mine: in hindsight, it is quite similar to psychological warfare, but a CAP could fulfill either his concept or our concepts (well, I have to elaborate this, in my case mine obligatorily fulfills his also, meaning my concept pretty much has psychological warfare built in, in addition to the added job it has, which happens to be vague and ambiguous, as required by all submissions to an extent, but its basically flipping things through more direct means than just mindgames, not to imply it's superior; mindgames alone allow for more... something *completely lost train of thought* Ill edit it if I remember XP)

    You could probably throw in a bit more concepts.

    So that brings me to the question: are multiple inter-locking concepts allowed?
  13. LouisCyphre

    LouisCyphre heralds disaster.

    Joined:
    May 10, 2010
    Messages:
    2,618
    Concepts from one concept could be applied to others, but not wholesale.

    In order for us to learn anything, there must be only a single goal - and therefore, only a single concept. If concepts are too similar, one must simply be disposed of or saved for a (much) later CAP.
  14. jas61292

    jas61292 used substitute
    is a Forum Moderatoris a CAP Contributoris a Tiering Contributoris a Battle Server Moderator
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2010
    Messages:
    2,871
    Two things.

    1) I really like the Theoretical Threat concept. It explores something we have never really looked into, being new to 5th gen. To be honest, this almost ties in with the Psychological Warfare idea, as it is about how it make your opponent act in respect to what might happen, rather than what actually will.

    2) I completely agree with you GtM, people suck at using Zoroark. That, however, does not mean it is bad. It means that people don't know how to use it. Whenever I come across a Zoroark, it is essentially dead weight, because no one uses it correctly. However, I myself have had great success with it (in UU, but then, that is it's tier after all). Sure, It might be a better lead without team preview, but I believe its overall potential in the hands of a skilled player is greater than if there was no team preview.
  15. GtM

    GtM

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2009
    Messages:
    717
    Yeah, it's definitely not bad in the right hands. Also, I was talking about sending Previewless Zoroark in mid-game, kind of like a 4th Gen Lucario to just completely corner an opponent who didn't expect it.

    Also, I chose to ignore the "specific abilities are not allowed" rule because Illusion in itself defines the playstyle of a pokemon, as opposed to something like Adaptability which doesn't force a pokemon to do anything. It fundamentally changes how a pokemon is used regardless of what either player does, like Imposter, and as such I think it's an exceptional case. Gen 4 didn't have abilities like this which fundamentally altered game mechanics regardless of the actions of either player, and since the referenced rule was created for Gen 4 CAP 4, I'm not sure it should apply in this case. At least I'd like some justifcation for it not being allowed, as far as I'm aware this issue hasn't been raised at all so far in the Gen 5 CAP process.
  16. Korski

    Korski Distilled, 80 proof
    is a Forum Moderatoris a CAP Contributor
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2009
    Messages:
    2,131
    Well to be perfectly honest I don't expect anything specific to come out of the process for my concept, nor do I have any clue if it'll be a tank or a sweeper or whatever or what typing it should be or how it should change OU during playtesting. It's the concept for what I believe could be an interesting Pokemon, one that has a unique versatility that is more or less completely new to BW OU and that current OU 'mons are definitely not accustomed to dealing with. That's the goal. Yes, anything with Sketch would fulfill the concept, but the draw here is that we will be making the CAP with Sketch driving the discussions each time, so the concept would still immediately inform discussion like any other concept would. We all know the Concept Assessment phase is where all of the brick-a-brack gets honed in on anyway, and the typing example could used against almost any concept. There is a lot more to the concept than meets the eye, imo, and while I do not deny it has the potential to be challenging, it also has the potential to create a very unique and relevant Pokemon.
  17. Pwnemon

    Pwnemon judges silently
    is a Forum Moderatoris a Community Contributoris a Smogon Media Contributoris a Tiering Contributoris a Contributor to Smogon
    Doubles Co-Leader

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2010
    Messages:
    3,449
    Theoretical threat sounds really BAMF. Throwing my support behind that.

    As for how to implement Sketch Artist, it would require a shitton of illegalities but could work.
  18. Rising_Dusk

    Rising_Dusk
    is a Site Staff Alumnusis a Team Rater Alumnusis a Battle Server Admin Alumnusis a Programmer Alumnusis a Super Moderator Alumnusis a CAP Contributor Alumnusis a Smogon Media Contributor Alumnusis a Contributor Alumnus

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2009
    Messages:
    4,806
    Aaallright! That's that! Expect to see the first poll with my slate shortly!
  19. Deck Knight

    Deck Knight Well-shuffled and flush
    is a Forum Moderatoris a CAP Contributoris a Smogon Media Contributor
    Moderator

    Joined:
    May 27, 2005
    Messages:
    7,491
    This is Dusk's show, but I just wanted to post my general apprehension of any concept with questions centered around an opponent's state of mind. Vagueness can be useful as was the case with CAP1's Momentum, but Momentum could at least somewhat be conceptualized when looing at gamestate. If the opponent's best available option is either a switch or a sacrifice, you can safely assume you have gained momentum. What you can't assume is that you've broken your opponent's mind, because they very well be making a sacrifice in the short-term to get a safe switch to a threat that can force you out. You still have the momentum in that gamestate because your opponents options are much more limited than your own.

    Mostly I just want precautions against what happened with Neglected Ability, where the concept is so vague that it can't provide decent answers to the questions asked of it.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Users Viewing Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 0)