CAP 16 CAP 5 - Part 1 - Concept Poll 3

Status
Not open for further replies.
Theorymon

Theorymon

Have a wonderful day, wahoo!
is a Site Content Manageris a Forum Moderatoris a Community Contributoris a Smogon Discord Contributoris a Pokemon Researcheris a Top Contributoris a Top Smogon Media Contributoris a Social Media Contributor Alumnusis a Community Leader Alumnusis a CAP Contributor Alumnusis a Battle Simulator Moderator Alumnus
We're on the homestretch concept wise, its the final round! Like the last poll, this poll will be a single bold vote, which means that you vote for only one of the submissions. The details of bold voting can be found here. A typical vote might look like the following:

My Preferred Entry

If the voter wishes, he may post comments on his vote below the actual vote. Only the vote itself should be bold and none of the supplementary text should be bold.
Click to expand...
Note that any posts that do not contain a vote will be moderated and the poster warned. If you feel compelled to say something in your own vote, you may do so, but please don't try to incite a discussion here. Keep discussion to the IRC channel, #cap, or to the voices in your head.

IMPORTANT: When voting, use only the name of the author! The list of possible votes includes:

Base Speed
reachzero
​

This poll will be open for 24 hours. The concept submissions are quoted below in order of submission.


Base Speed said:
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?

Explanation:
Types have many complex interactions to explore - not just with one another but with abilities (eg, Magnet Pull, Water Absorb), moves and field effects (rain, Stealth Rock, etc), and sometimes even trends in the pokemon with the type. What I'm trying to present is a clear destination whose journey leads to good discussion and analysis of a large aspect of pokemon, whilst still being enjoyable. I feel one of the main strengths of the concept is that it has a wide variety of potential implementations which will help to promote discussion and creativity. The idea of a "bad" or a "good" type is rife throughout all areas of competitive pokemon, with CAP being no exception, so it seems valid to explore it.

A lot of people have asked how I envision this working. The short answer is it depends on which types we decide to take down and up. However, some general ideas can still be given:
Obviously we would want CAP5 to have the right type match ups for the concept. Resistances or immunities to the types we want to take down and weaknesses to those we want to bring up are ideal but not mandatory. Immunity granting abilities are a valid option to patch up not-so-ideal type match-ups later down the line. Between the two, we'd probably be hoping to make moves of certain types less spammable.
Statwise, the build very much depends on what we're targeting as well as the previous steps, so it's difficult to say much. I would suggest decent special defense to prevent people utilising hidden power rather than pokemon of our "bad" types, but that's not a necessity.
Choosing to target certain types might require CAP5 to have specific aspects: for example if we try to bring down water then an anti-rain element would be worth considering and if we're trying to bring up a stealth rock weak type then looking into anti-hazard methods would be a valid option.
Obviously, we should be mindful of specific threats of the targeted type(s) throughout, but we tend to do that well anyway.

Note that I haven't specified how many types we should target. This is really important. One of the big learning opportunities will be when we decide how ambitious we think we can be, as this will provoke discussion on just how firm type dominance is and contribute a lot to answering my first question in particular. I don't want that to be missed because I've said "we should focus on X number of types". That's for the community to decide.

This concept shares some similarities with Mollux in that they both try to make "bad" typings "good". However, the learning opportunities of Mollux were very much focused on the build of a pokemon itself, opting to alleviate typing's weaknesses by combinations of ability and movepool. I'm trying to look more on typing in relation to the build of the metagame and and what new opportunities existing pokemon will have in the modified metagame, without the presence of certain types.
Click to expand...
reachzero said:
Name: Setting the Pace
General Description: This Pokemon plays very differently against Pokemon slower and faster than it, exploring the concept of speed benchmarks.

Justification: Speed is one of the most defining aspects of a metagame. How "fast" or "slow" a metagame is largely defines the style of play and the usefulness of various moves, yet the concept of speed benchmarks remains largely unexplored. Pokemon fundamentally relate to other Pokemon on the basis of "faster" and "slower", and this concept would teach us about that relationship. Speed is a complex subject, since maximizing a Pokemon's speed is not always the best way to maximize that Pokemon's effectiveness, yet there are certain Pokemon that make such a great impact in terms of their maximum speed that they must be accounted for. Many Pokemon need to decide how much speed is enough, and understanding speed benchmarks will help us to understand that decision-making process.
Questions To Be Answered:

  • How do the important speed benchmarks in a metagame get set?
  • How do they react to new Pokemon that directly relate to those benchmarks?
  • Which moves and strategies most greatly impact slower Pokemon?
  • Which moves and strategies most greatly impact faster Pokemon?
  • How does the utility of a tactic change based on the speed of the Pokemon involved?

Explanation: A speed benchmark is the number that separates a slow-slow Pokemon from a merely slow one, a slow Pokemon from a midrange one, etc. For instance, Breloom and Politoed set the benchmark that no Pokemon of middling speed wants to dip below for OU at 263. In DPP, Tyranitar set this number at 245. Many moves such as U-turn, Baton Pass, and Substitute play very differently depending on the relative speed of the Pokemon and its opponent. Scizor is especially representative of this issue, as a slow Pokemon that commonly uses Bullet Punch and U-turn, both of which are moves that greatly impact and are impacted by Scizor's effective speed. Essentially, this Pokemon would tell us about the effect of speed benchmarks by playing very differently against Pokemon faster or slower than it, setting such a benchmark. The actual speed number is unimportant to the concept.
Click to expand...
Well, as Mario would say, Let's a go!
 

Lster728

Base Speed

I honestly don't see how reachzero's idea is feasible... Like yea we can make a Poke with an odd speed factor, but what will that teach us?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

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

  • ... and 1 more.
    • Top