I've been following this CAP project from the get-go (account-less, though) as well as viewing prior projects in varying stages (Tomohawk's latter moments, bits of Necturna, Aurumoth, etc.) and feel that it was indeed successful in creating a capable CAPmon that isn't broken, it had fallen short - accidentally and not preempted - of accomplishing its goal, imo.
Name: Type Equalizer
Description: A pokemon whose presence in the metagame increases the usage of one or more underused types and simultaneously decreases the usage of one or more overused types.
Justification: Take a look at the OU usage statistics for January and you'll see that 9 out of the top 10 pokemon have either steel, water, dragon or fighting as one of their types, and extending it to the top 20 shows 16/20 with those types. We should also be asking ourselves why these trends exist so strongly and what can be done about them. In creating this CAP,we'd have to discuss in depth many different aspects of what makes a type and opinions can ultimately being tested in the playtest.
Questions To Be Answered:
- Is a types usefulness relative to the metagame or is it intrinsic? (Ie. Can any type be the "best" type given the right circumstances or do type match-ups, available STAB moves etc mean some types will always be better than others?)
- What exploitable weaknesses do "good" types in OU have? Are their currently pokemon that can exploit them and if so, how do they function differently to CAP5?
- How (if at all) will the targeted types adapt to the situation created? Will people choose different movesets, abilities, etc or will they just use them more/less? How is this linked to the way CAP5 functions strategically?
- What effects will the changes on certain types' presence have on the metagame?
- Which members of the targeted types will benefit and suffer from this most and why?
- By creating CAP5, have we learnt any new ways to counter good types or use bad types?
Early on, it was decided to abuse Sun - which in and of itself is not necessarily a bad idea, it promotes alternate weather and increases the occurrence of Fire, Grass, Dark and other types; however, among the many other discussions, emphasis was placed further and further away from type equalization and eventually digressed towards Harvest abuse, and even though comments and points are made towards type equality throughout, it did, ultimately, change the subject. And, even still, it is later found it still finds spots on Rain teams - primarily, even - and therefore the secondary concept was not thoroughly realized.
I would suggest for future projects threads to discuss chosen changes and make sure all arguments would directly be beneficial to the concept... Although perhaps this is only opinion. All and all, I simply suggest such a thing, perhaps simply to keep in mind, in the future.
...Also, I'm new to Smogon as a poster. Hi.
