CAP 14 CAP 3 - Part 2 - Typing Discussion

Status
Not open for further replies.

Deck Knight

Blast Off At The Speed Of Light! That's Right!
is a Forum Moderator Alumnusis a Top CAP Contributor Alumnusis a Top Smogon Media Contributor Alumnus
Heh, almost 10PM. Guess I should update.

So this will serve as a 24 hour warning.

Current Slate:

Fire
Poison
Bug / Psychic
Fire / Poison
Ice / Rock
Ice / Steel

My current thoughts worry about the prevalence of so many variants of Fire and Poison, but I legitimately feel each one will end up playing differently. Fire/ Electric has been removed, replaced by Fire.
 
Fire
Poison
Bug / Psychic
Fire / Poison
Ice / Rock
Ice / Steel
Guess my bug/flying idea sucked. I'll go over my thoughts on those ideas then.

I would replace mono-poison with mono-ice, as poison really isn't a bad type, and isn't stereo-typed at all. Ice on the other hand, is commonly thought to be the worst defensive type, so creating a successful ice wall would definitely fit this CAP much better than any mono-poison type.
 

Okuu

Blame [me] for Global Warming!
is a Battle Simulator Admin Alumnus
i think people need to stop trying to suggest really bad typing and post reasonable typing that won't require awesome abilitys and/or ludicrous stats to make up for the massive flaws in typing which i feel is suggestions like ice/rock and bug/grass are going to lead us too.
If we're going by the topic, then we should be sticking to poor typings. As in, we're not trying to pick things because they're not commonly used in OU, but because they're so bad that they'd normally be laughed out of OU. Types that not only lack competitive value, but would normally be a liability on a team. If we had this topic a generation ago, we might've ended up with something like Volcarona as a result: a terrible typing, but with enough benefits that it became a viable threat in competitive play, despite glaring weaknesses.

Some of the main problems I'm seeing here:
  • People picking types that, while lackluster separately, are actually quite usable when combined.
  • People picking types that end up just being mediocre when put together.
  • People picking types that, while actually bad when considered alone, end up being quite usable once one figures in any item/ability resistances and immunities.

The last bullet in that list may be surprising to many, as it would seem that that sort of outcome is desirable in this discussion. However, you can't consider the abilities of a pokemon to be completely separate from their typing. If I end up having to face an Electric/Poison with Levitate, I'm not going to consider the fact that electric and poison are two defensively poor types. I'm going to see if I can resist a combined Electric/Poison STAB with a Pokemon that either has high offensive capabilities, walling capabilities, and/or a Psychic move to take advantage of that typing's one weakness, or at least avoid using something that only has moves that Electric/Poison/Levitate resists.

It seems that the main debate here revolves around whether or not such an example is desirable here. Should we be fixing a bad typing, and seeing if we can ignore the typical weaknesses behind it? Should we take a mediocre typing, and give it enough benefits to make it useful? Should we take a bad typing, retain the weaknesses of the type, and try to play out the potential benefits of that typing? Personally, I consider the ability and item of a pokemon to be part of its overall type. A Bronzong with Heatproof is a much different pokemon to counter than a Bronzong with Levitate. An Azelf with Fire/Grass/Psychic offensive spread can counter the second, but not the first. Similarly, a Landorus with Ground/Rock/Bug/Ice coverage could counter the first, but not the second.

Most of what I'm seeing here is revolving around the line of thought that we can take a weak type, remove the weaknesses, and make it good. But, in the end, it's hard to call that end product a 'weak type'. I like what Volcarona became, in that it still retains its intrinsic weaknesses and yet is viable in high-level play. Giving it highly competitive stats wasn't exactly an elegant solution, but it concluded with an excellent pokemon that is neither over nor underpowered in comparison with the rest of OU. That's the sort of outcome I'm seeking here: Something that performs well, despite still retaining the typical failures that go along with its type. Simply removing those failures outright seems to go against why we're doing this topic to begin with.
 

ZhengTann

Nargacuga
is a Forum Moderator Alumnus
I'm going to put my support behind Fire/Poison. Okuu, hope you don't mind if I quote you:-

.... Fire / Poison: Yet another unique typing. Fire and Poison have already been somewhat covered above, but not in a direct combination with each other. In a nutshell, it's the same defensive typing as Fire, but with a 4x weakness to ground, and an additional 2x weakness to Psychic, alongside weaknesses to Water and Rock. Offensively, the Poison type adds little coverage, so we're left with hitting Grass/Ice/Bug for super-effective damage, and with only the Rock type resisting any sort of damage. So, all in all, it's a typing with relatively few weaknesses, resistances, strengths, and opposing resistances. It doesn't necessarily need a varied movepool to be competitively viable, but it can be walled by a few pokemon (Any steel type that resists Fire), unless it was given access to moves of other types.
Okuu pretty much summed up what I have to say, which is in line with AJC's thoughts (here I go quoting again):-

i think people need to ...... post reasonable typing that won't require awesome abilitys and/or ludicrous stats to make up for the massive flaws in typing ...
And yeah, I would agree with that, since the focus of the CAP concept is about typing, not abilities/stats/movepool (sorry if this looks like poll-jumping).

Concerning the "outclassed" part, Fire-types and Poison-types in OU are mostly weather abusers (read: Venusaur, Toxicroak, Ninetales, Tentacruel) or supersonic sweepers (read: Gengar, Infernape). The former wouldn't have functioned as well as they did without incredible abilities, while the latter won't survive without their stats and extensive movepool. Therefore, I think there are quite a few niches we can explore to see if Fire/Poison is viable in OU without feeling like, "Hey, isn't this just a pumped-up version of a mon we've already seen?"

The advantage of Fire/Poison over its respective mono-type candidates would probably be the dual-typing factor, at least on paper. It will be more of a challenge to work around with since a 4x Ground weakness and additional 2x weaknesses makes it harder to switch in. As for the remaining dual-types, I think Fire/Poison trumps because its unorthodoxy makes it laughable in OU - after all, it isn't exactly stellar compared to the potential and capabilities of the rest of the slated candidates. To sum it up, I support Fire/Poison.
 
These typings have to be pretty bad for this concept, and Mono-Poison is not one of them. Neither is Fire unless we're making a wall. Mono-Ice is a much better option for making a wall anyway. Fire/Poison seems the most popular, and for once, I agree that it should be chosen. I'm not going to go into detail, because of what has been written directly above me, but this, as Ice/Poison isn't on Deck's list, will be the best option to go with.
 
No Luck Involved said:
I posted this in the previous thread:
Steel / 118.662
Water / 90.271
Flying / 84.177
Psychic / 77.258
Dragon / 63.735
Fighting / 59.005
Ground / 49.127
Fire / 43.384
Grass / 42.958
Bug / 42.247
Rock / 35.001
Electric / 34.681
Dark / 28.987
Poison / 28.108
Ghost / 16.803
Ice / 9.915
Normal / 8.968

It is a list of all the types represented in OU with their usage % added up. It gives you an idea of which types you are more likely to see in OU.
I cumulated the usage ratios of the weaknesses of every type combination with this table and tried to find out, which type has the most checks, say: the highest cumulated usage ratio. Fro example Mamoswines bad Ice/Ground type has a cumulated ratio of 354,282 (weaknesses: Steel, Water, Fighting, Fire, Grass).

The maximum of all single types and type calculations is:

437,281: Rock/Fighting

This type is weak to Water, Psychic, Steel, Fighting, Ground and Grass. No other type combination has a higher cumulated ratio.

Rock/Fighting is considered to be more an physical offensive type than a defensive one. However I don't want to have a Terrakion clone, I want something different. I am thinking more about a defensive Terrakion counterpart.

Rock/Fighting under certain circumstances has defensive potential. In Sandstorm its special defense is increased. This can help to cover the Water and Psychic weakness, because most moves of these types are special. Furthermore the Stealth Rock resistance can be useful, this CAP could bring a new supporter into the OU metagame, maybe an alternative to the fewer and fewer seen cleric Clefable, I am thinking about support moves like Gravity, Heal Bell or Wish. Last the Dark resistance makes it easier to switch out (which is very important for a supporter) because it can laugh about Pursuit.

What do you think?
 
I'm saddened that Deck's list doesn't list Ice/Poison (which would be my preferred option), as I think that would be a pretty cool Pokemon to make, but I think ice/steel is a decent substitute. I know the first thing that comes to mind form this is "dragon-killer", but the fact that we've never seen a part-ice type really succeed in OU (Mamo is rare and Weavile is laughed out of OU 90% of the time, sadly) should make it clear that part-ice is a bad typing regardless what your secondary typing is.

The main reason I support Ice/Steel is because it is just not anywhere near defensively good even with the added Steel typing. Hell, it's probably the least defensively useful typing that's part steel, due the the fact that Ice's weaknesses are multiplied instead of mitigated, with the sole exception of a neutrality to Rock. This means a Pokemon is now made 4x weak to fire. Dragon Killer? Not a chance, most dragons carry Flamethrower or Fire Blast. Mence has it, Expert Belt Hudreigon has it, Dragonite can use fire moves. Ability to survive against OU common OU mons like the weather starters? No way. Ninetales murders this thing with any fire move and Drought and Tyranitar just has to hit with a fire move. I suppose Politoed might have issues, but overall most lemon can hit hard against an Ice/Steel type. Even Scizor can hit for good damage with Bullet Punch due to the Ice typing, as if Superpower was going out of fashion for some reason.

Offensively, there's no doubt the Ice Typing has benefits, but the steel typing also has its uses. I don't need to explain Ice's Offense, as we all kow that too well, but steel...Bullet Punch anyone? Sure, it's not the best offensive type ever, hitting mainly for neutral (if that), but it has been shown to be a usable type (Scizor being an example).

That leaves us with a Pokemon whose Defenses are downright pitiful, as it won't be able to switch in on much, who packs offensive strength in...well, Steel moves (it's Ice moves won't be too useful when it can't switch in on anything weak to ice) and maybe the odd choice-locked outrage revenge kill. That seems like a pretty bad typing to me, but the are examples of how it could be made to work in OU now. Bullet Punch and Ice Shard come to mind, a defensive Pokemon with Gyro Ball is possible. It's a bad typing, but one that can be (and has been shown to be) used in OU.
 
I'm against ice/steel because I don't think anything being part steel can be considered bad typing, even if it is part ice. Steel is the most commonly used type of Pokemon and it is just too good to be considered bad.I really like the idea of ice/rock though.
 
I am for Ice/Poison as per my previous post. I know that Ice/Rock shares many of the same weaknesses but I really think that this CAP, due to the very nature of the concept could do without any 4x weaknesses because when it's already a bad type, why compound it.

If we decide we're trying to make this CAP fit a defensive role at some point down the line, having ANY 4x weakness pretty much digs it's grave right there as even non STAB attacks capitalize on the 4x weakness and makes random Hidden Power Fighting usage so much more of a threat.

Think how much of OU runs a fire coverage move just to try and catch Scizor on the switch in, and even in Rain it can score OHKO's because 4x weaknesses are so deadly when exploited.
 
but steel...Bullet Punch anyone? Sure, it's not the best offensive type ever, hitting mainly for neutral (if that), but it has been shown to be a usable type (Scizor being an example).
Scizor's Bullet Punch isn't good because of its typing, it's good because it's technician boosted priority, in fact, it's good despite it's typing, which is not what we are looking for.
 
Scizor's Bullet Punch isn't good because of its typing, it's good because it's technician boosted priority, in fact, it's good despite it's typing, which is not what we are looking for.
Actually, wasn't taht the whole point of this CaP? To take a bad typing and make it viable via some combination of stats, ability, attacks and whatnot? Frankly Bullet punch is a great example of how even a bad type offensively can be made usable to great effect through a combination of the pokemon's typing (for STAB), base stats (high base attack) and ability (Technician).

I would like to make it clear, though, that my vote is for Ice/Poison. I only made an argument for Ice/Steel due to Deck's list not having Ice/Poison on it. Ice/Poison i think is a much better typing in terms of 'bad typings to have', and wouldn't have to rely on an inherently good defensive typing like Steel to work.
 

Okuu

Blame [me] for Global Warming!
is a Battle Simulator Admin Alumnus
^
|
@Mari: Doesn't that chart mean that those are the defensive types used? I'm pretty sure that you'd be defending against Ice moves a lot more than you would be Poison moves. If I'm reading that correctly, it means that you'd have to look for offensive typings that are naturally good against those. Or, at least avoid types near the top of the list, so as to prevent oneself from using really common types.

@Marc6kteam: A Poison/Steel typing would actually have neutral resistance to the Psychic type, as Steel resists it. Again, add an Air Balloon, and you've got a typing that's only weak to Fire, and laden with several key resistances, including Grass, Rock, Ghost, Dragon, other non-important types, and a Poison immunity. Not to mention the temporary Ground immunity that Balloon offers.
|
V
 
I hope it's not too late but I don't believe anyone acknowledge the possibility of a Poison/ Steel type, it would have great variation and can be open to several moves that can make up for it's 4x weakness to ground, which is a popular type in OU ( which includes attacks types ). Also it would lose its fighting weakness allowing it to survive a Mach Punch user like Conkledurr ( if its stats permit it ). Its fire weakness would make it so that he could faint to almost any attack by a powerhouse like Infernape, and the fact that it is vulnerable to steel killers like Magenezone or the infamous Shadow Tag Chandeluere would also attributes to his bad typing. But there are also benifts like its many resistances and the fact that it can hit a good amount of typings with at least neutral damage. It would also be able to use a mix of special and physical attacks, between both steel and poison, so it can't be completely walled by just one poke ( other than a bulky steel type ) and don't forget the possibility that it can cause a status infliction and depending on what niche it would fit in to it has the possibility of being a gyro-ball user or even a rapid spinner. The possibility of this typing can be can be perfect for this CAP concept because its effectiveness relies entirely on a mixture of its ability, move pool, and stats.
Offensively:
- 2x Grass - 2x Ice
- 1x Rock

- 1/2x Poison - 1/2x Ghost
- 1/2x Ground - 1/2x Fire
- 1/2x Water - 1/2x Electric

No effect on Steel
Defensively:
- 4x Ground - 1x Physic*
- 2x Fire - 1x Fighting

- 1/2x Ice - 1/2x Normal
- 1/2x Flying - 1/2x Dark
- 1/2x Grass - 1/2x Physic
- 1/2x Ghost - 1/2x Bug
- 1/2x Dragon

- Immune to Poison


But Ice/ Steel has possibilities also, however I did notice someone mention that its only function would be a dragon slayer. However yes it has dragon resistance and ice stab, but some people forget that most dragon types it would face would hold a fire type move, and can be easily revenge killed by a Magnezone or a Lucario.

For Poison/ Fire it has a 4x weakness against Ground, and it's vulnerable to stealth rock. But it also can hold a status inflicter and can hit most things with neutral advantage.

Which further justifies my point that combining Poison and Steel would be bit more logical and more practical for stat building.

___________________________
My mistake thank you @Okuu
^

@Marc6kteam: A Poison/Steel typing would actually have neutral resistance to the Psychic type, as Steel resists it. Again, add an Air Balloon, and you've got a typing that's only weak to Fire, and laden with several key resistances, including Grass, Rock, Ghost, Dragon, other non-important types, and a Poison immunity. Not to mention the temporary Ground immunity that Balloon offers.
Also I would like to emphasize "temporary" because the balloon doesn't make it invisible to ground it would merly buy him a turn or two ( depending on if it's a switch in or something ). But along the lines of ability, I'm not saying we should give it wonder guard or heat proof or even levitate, it just needs an ability that prevents it from being over shadowed in its role or even generate a new role that only it can do. That might definetly make it desirable in OU.
 

Deck Knight

Blast Off At The Speed Of Light! That's Right!
is a Forum Moderator Alumnusis a Top CAP Contributor Alumnusis a Top Smogon Media Contributor Alumnus
Pretty much the only reason to have a Poison subtyping is for the Fighting resist. The Bug resist is helpful for eating U-turn, but the Fighting resist is the most important. Nevermind the type is still weak to Terrakion's Stone Edge.

Fighting/Rock is not a bad typing at all, lol. Why do you think Terrakion is Top OU? It's almost ridiculous enough a suggestion to make, I'm thinking about closing this out right now. Still, I am a bit worried about the over-presense of Fire and Poison...
 
I cumulated the usage ratios of the weaknesses of every type combination with this table and tried to find out, which type has the most checks, say: the highest cumulated usage ratio. Fro example Mamoswines bad Ice/Ground type has a cumulated ratio of 354,282 (weaknesses: Steel, Water, Fighting, Fire, Grass).

The maximum of all single types and type calculations is:

437,281: Rock/Fighting

This type is weak to Water, Psychic, Steel, Fighting, Ground and Grass. No other type combination has a higher cumulated ratio.
The fallacy of this argument is that you are confusing offensive and defensive types. A weakness to Steel doesn't mean much, because so few pokemon use Steel-type attacks, yet you have it matter more than weaknesses to Rock, Fighting, Fire, and Water.

Using that chart for offensive purposes, it makes much more sense, with the worst offensive typing being Normal/Poison with a score of 42.96 (or just Grass). I think it would be fairly interesting to try out a pokemon with such a strange typing. Aside from walling Necturna, it doesn't seem to have too much defensive value (especially with its Ground weakness), in addition to its horrendous offensive capabilities. I would like to see what we could do with this typing.
 

bugmaniacbob

Was fun while it lasted
is an Artist Alumnusis a CAP Contributor Alumnusis a Top Contributor Alumnusis a Top Smogon Media Contributor Alumnus
Well, I suppose I probably ought to weigh in at this point and I won't get another chance before the thread closes... although, I have to say that I don't think there is much more to be said at this point. All reasoning for most type combinations seems to boil down to personal preference - I have come to the conclusion that there is no objective way of comparing any of the typings proposed. Hopefully once a typing is finally chosen we can get a little more on-track and focused... I'm quite disappointed with some of the reasoning used in this thread and prior, my own included.

Fire
Poison
Bug / Psychic
Fire / Poison
Ice / Rock
Ice / Steel
I still support Bug / Psychic and Ice / Steel, because a) both of them are pretty horrible both defensively and offensively and b) both of them have some sort of viable, currently unfilled niche that they could potentially fill, as a direct result of their typing. For Ice/Steel, this could either take the form of a properly viable defensive Ice-type, in a similar vein to that of Ferrothorn, or an Ice-type attacker with usable resistances, or indeed as a possible universal dragon counter, something that I am very intrigued by indeed. I am perhaps less happy with Bug/Psychic but I still think that it opens up some interesting avenues - and more importantly, I think it's the most notable offensive typing on the board at the moment, simply because it is both offensively and defensively lacking, even between its two types, meaning that it's less of a straightforward powerhouse than one of the Fire-types (which would, I think, typically only use their Fire STAB moves), yet perhaps wouldn't necessitate a novelty ability or powerful stats to make it usable, unlike Ice/Rock, and has more exploitable defensive weaknesses than Poison. Perhaps I am being a little hypocritical in liking Bug/Psychic while disliking Ice/Rock and mono-Poison when their niches will, in all likelihood, be largely the same - however, I think that for me, Bug/Psychic is the most balanced of all the types and largely the least competent, without being overtly so.

With regard to Ice/Rock and Fire/Poison, I think I have already touched on why I don't like them. Fire/Poison has terrifically strong offensive potential and has Heatran-esque resistances and weaknesses, though I don't like how many people seem to be lauding it as a catch-all answer to Scizor, when such Pokemon are hardly uncommon - Zapdos comes to mind, for a start. Fire/Poison is largely a reasonably good typing regardless - the potential for Fire/Poison as a Toxic Spikes absorber that doubles as a strong attacker is huge, but then outside of this niche I don't really see much potential for it. Ice/Rock I see no potential for outside of braining whatever happens to switch into it and then running away screaming. This may be some peoples' cup of tea, and more power to them. But I'd prefer a more elegant answer to this CAP's concept.

Fire and Poison I have already made my position clear on. Fire is an excellent offensive and defensive typing that suffers through its weakness to Stealth Rock, and hence I feel is limited to an offensive role. Poison is hardly a bad type either, and any limitations in its coverage are easily solvable by stats and movepool. I feel as though these two options are far too easy, and hence that they are a waste of this CAP's potential. However, I would admit that Fire is a better proposition than Electric/Fire.

That's all I have to say this time. Onwards and upwards.
 

Okuu

Blame [me] for Global Warming!
is a Battle Simulator Admin Alumnus
Again, Poison isn't that bad of a type. It's mediocre, yes, but not bad. It only has two weaknesses: Ground and Psychic. With the presence of Air Balloon, the typical 4x weakness to Ground that a Poison/xxxxxx subtyping here has can be effectively eradicated, leaving only a probable weakness to Psychic along with whatever else the other type brings along with it. Not to mention, it naturally resists Fighting, which is probably the most prevalent offensive typing in the game. The main problem with Poison is an offensive one: It lacks the ability to hit many OU-popular pokemon for any respectable amount of damage. And, that's more of a problem with a Steel-centric OU than it is with the Poison type itself. No matter what you do to a Poison type, you still have to face the fact that it can't hit just under half of all of OU for more than 1/2 damage. And, for this CAP topic, we can't just rearrange OU to make Poison more effective. We would either have to increase the offensive power of this pokemon to make up for that, or simply not rely on the Poison aspect of its typing, and use it in a defensive manner, as pokemon like Gengar / Toxicroak / Tentacruel can do to some degree of effectiveness.
 

Bughouse

Like ships in the night, you're passing me by
is a Site Content Manageris a Forum Moderator Alumnusis a CAP Contributor Alumnusis a Tiering Contributor Alumnusis a Contributor Alumnus
Deck, if you are worried about the over presence of Fire and Poison, consider replacing one of the 3 with a Mono-Ice maybe? Although that makes Ice overrepresented too. Honestly, I have to agree with bugmaniacbob on one thing (even though we disagree on much else in his post.) Fire/Poison is terrific STAB.

Of RELEVANT things to OU, only Gastrodon, Jellicent, Terrakion, Tyranitar (and in CAP Stratagem) can resist both STABs. That's pretty dang good coverage. Yes it doesn't deal with Rain or Sand very well, but neither does MonoFire, which is far worse offensively and a bit worse defensively (due to lack of Fighting Resist.)

So Maybe Fire/Poison just really shouldn't be slated? I know it has lots of support here, but it's just NOT bad typing relative to other bad options.

I think Bug/Psychic presents an interesting challenge nonetheless (despite it's good offensive coverage) due to it's Celebi like typing. Celebi succeeds in OU largely due to it's help against Volt-Turn, but a Bug/Psychic pokemon doesn't resist Volt Switch, so I think it would have to find another niche.

The main spot I differ from bugmaniacbob is that I am VERY opposed to Ice/Steel. The reason I say this is that it's weaknesses (Fighting, Fire, Ground) while common are rarely grouped together. The only OU Pokemon that use moves of 2+ of those types are Heatran Infernape, and some Tyranitar. This means that when a Latios comes in, you can expect HP Fire, for example, since nothing else would break through and CAP3 would just retaliate with an ice move. Also, Ice/Steel is a great Pokemon for Rain teams as Tyranitar does not want to take Super Effective Steel hits. Plus it's the best Dragon killer. I'm just opposed to Ice/Steel.

As it stands, I'm leaning towards a Mono-Type or Bug/Psychic. (I've gone into my opposition of Ice/Rock at length before.)
 
...I still support Bug / Psychic and Ice / Steel, because a) both of them are pretty horrible both defensively and offensively.....
Bug/Psychic is one thing, but to call Ice/Steel a bad OFFENSIVE type would be ridiculous. Ice/Steel has STAB that can hit Ground, Grass, Flying, DRAGON, Rock, and Ice for super effective damage. That's pretty incredible. That hits T-tar, every dragon worth the time of day, and basically anything that flies.

Now defensively, yes its going to die a horrendous death from a lot of things. But offensively Ice/Steel would destroy a whole lot of stuff.
 
Personally, I think that Bug/Psychic is the most viable for this CAP because it just seems like the most "meh" typing. It has key resists to Fighting and Ground, sure, but those are often accompanied by Rock and Dark attacks. My main qualm with Ice/Steel is that if it has any way possible to be a Dragonslayer, it will likely be effective in that role because of its typing, but the concept was to fix a bad typing with stats, movepool, or abilities. IMO, Ice/Steel is more of a typing that has devastating weak points, but has the plethora of resistances from being a steel type and the niche of a general dragon counter.
My next option would be Fire/Poison because of the differences in style for the types (Fire offense, Poison defense) and I think it could fulfill the concept either way because Fire has a surprising amount of resistances for an offensive type, and Poison can provide nice neutral coverage against Fire and Water types that resist Fire.
 
I like the idea of Fire/Poison as well. Just the stealth rock weakness alone makes fire a usual hindrance, and with the overall "meh"-ness of Poison alongside it, I think they typify what this CAP wants to do.
 
Fire/Poison is terrific STAB.

Of RELEVANT things to OU, only Gastrodon, Jellicent, Terrakion, Tyranitar (and in CAP Stratagem) can resist both STABs.
You're forgetting Heatran and Tentacruel? I don't know about you but that looks to me like a pretty varied and dangerous list of hard counters.

It would be useful if you came up with a list of hard counters for your prefered typing as a comparison.

I still support Bug / Psychic and Ice / Steel, because a) both of them are pretty horrible both defensively and offensively and b) both of them have some sort of viable, currently unfilled niche that they could potentially fill, as a direct result of their typing
I don't understand how you can claim Ice/Steel is horrible defensively and offensively. It is a type that resists Grass, Ice, Psychic, Dark, Flying, Normal, Poison, Bug, Ghost, and Dragon as well as having good neutral coverage. It would be an interesting type for sure and to be a Dragon-killer its Ground and Fire weaknesses will need fixing up. But it is not a horrible defensive type especially when you go on to accuse Fire/Poison of having too many resistances.

Like you said, it has pretty much gotten to the point of personal preference now. We've heard most of the relevant points for the typings. I personally would be happy with any Ice or Fire type being given the CAP green light.

My personal preference would be Fire/Poison. It has the resistances to come in and threaten most Steel types (the #1 most used type in OU) and it has the coverage to discourage Water (Rotom-W, Politoed etc) and Dragon (Dragonite etc) types switching in on it. Defensively it is piss poor, but it has just the right resistances to find a specific Steel killing niche for itself. It has plenty of hard counters so it won't be an offensive juggernaut by typing alone, and it is two types that are in the bottom half of the usage spectrum. For me it ticks all the boxes of what the concept was looking for as well as what could be a very interesting design process that could go either way, and it has the potential to inject new life and a new dynamic to OU.
 

bugmaniacbob

Was fun while it lasted
is an Artist Alumnusis a CAP Contributor Alumnusis a Top Contributor Alumnusis a Top Smogon Media Contributor Alumnus
God I really didn't want to have to reply but I feel as though I am obliged to back up my reasoning, even such subjective reasoning as this.

The main spot I differ from bugmaniacbob is that I am VERY opposed to Ice/Steel. The reason I say this is that it's weaknesses (Fighting, Fire, Ground) while common are rarely grouped together. The only OU Pokemon that use moves of 2+ of those types are Heatran, Infernape, and some Tyranitar. This means that when a Latios comes in, you can expect HP Fire, for example, since nothing else would break through and CAP3 would just retaliate with an ice move. Also, Ice/Steel is a great Pokemon for Rain teams as Tyranitar does not want to take Super Effective Steel hits. Plus it's the best Dragon killer. I'm just opposed to Ice/Steel.
You would only need one of those 3 moves to hit it for super effective damage, and our CAP probably wouldn't be terribly difficult to switch into either. Unless we're giving this thing seriously high offensive and defensive stats, I don't see how it could simultaneously tank a Fire attack and threaten with Ice Beam. Of course you have to wonder why Latios would be coming in and not, say, Heatran or Vaporeon. Also it's a pretty poor dragon killer by itself, since it would almost certainly be killed in one hit without a damage-stopping ability or Air Balloon.

Bug/Psychic is one thing, but to call Ice/Steel a bad OFFENSIVE type would be ridiculous. Ice/Steel has STAB that can hit Ground, Grass, Flying, DRAGON, Rock, and Ice for super effective damage. That's pretty incredible. That hits T-tar, every dragon worth the time of day, and basically anything that flies.
Ice / Steel cannot hit any Steel-, Fire-, or Water-types (besides Skarmory and Gastrodon, I guess) for any damage at all. That's three very strong types that its STAB is completely useless against. It is a comparatively poor offensive typing.

I don't understand how you can claim Ice/Steel is horrible defensively and offensively. It is a type that resists Grass, Ice, Psychic, Dark, Flying, Normal, Poison, Bug, Ghost, and Dragon as well as having good neutral coverage. It would be an interesting type for sure and to be a Dragon-killer its Ground and Fire weaknesses will need fixing up. But it is not a horrible defensive type especially when you go on to accuse Fire/Poison of having too many resistances.
See above. Resistances mean very very little when you have very glaring weaknesses to very common attacking types - specifically, 4x Fire, 4x Fighting, and 2x Ground. After all, look at Rock/Steel - Bastiodon and Aggron are very easy to pick apart because of their weaknesses. It's not *horrible* by any stretch, but it's certainly not particularly good. It definitely makes switching in easier than for a standard Ice-type, but at the expense of almost certainly not living whatever the opponent happens to send your way. And I don't think I said Fire/Poison had too many resistances - that Stealth Rock weakness is very bad defensively - but it is an impressive offensive typing that also happens to have seven resistances to switch in on. Ice/Steel does not, in my opinion, really have that kind of offensive pedigree, though I suppose you could easily find a way to disagree if you really wanted to.

Not responding to this again unless I inevitably do.
 
Bugmaniac Bob's reasoning is sound. And it's also why I think that proposing any type with a 4x weakness to anything limits what you can do with this CAP defensively, perhaps too much.
 
Might as well try to pick one off the tentative slate...

I think that Bug / Psychic may end up being too easy to make good. You have:

  • STAB Stored Power / Psyshock
  • Great coverage with just STABs and Hidden Power Fire (or a different Fire-type move)
  • Competitive justification for Quiver Dance, mostly due to the above but also due to the concept itself
What I'm basically trying to say here is that Psychic has a lot of options in this generation, and it combines with Bug very well for a potent combination that may not be as bad as first thought.

Normally, a CAP project would not use specific future possibilities as justification for an argument in the present (e.g. "poll-jumping"). However, considering the very nature of this concept, specific possibilities are going to be important because "make this bad" is going to be largely off the table going forward. Sure, Bug / Psychic could be a physical attacker, and/or not have Stored Power, and/or not have Quiver Dance. But that seems like a convoluted way to refuse to admit that Bug / Psychic can easily be made good in ways like this.

The reason the Mewtwo example (and the Tyranitar example to an extent) in Theorymon's concept submission worked was that Mewtwo did not have *that one tool* that it needed to be the terror that it currently is in Ubers, and now it does. With this CAP project, everything we could ever use is already here. This typing is looking a bit like a Volcarona remix to me.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 1, Guests: 0)

Top