CAP 16 CAP 5 - Part 10 - Movepool Limits

Not open for further replies.
I think the argument comes down to dracoyoshi's and srk's opinion that Malaconda should have moves it would be expected to have in the real game, most of which are harmless and purely for flavor and artistic license, and will never be used in a practical set, and capefeather's position that in giving Malaconda access to too many VGMs will allow submitters too much freedom, not constricted by a limit and having to make tough, practical decisions on which VGMs make it in their set.

Both arguments are valid, so why not compromise? Wouldn't excluding artsy, but useless flavor special attacks like Energy Ball from the VGM limit satisfy the wants of both parties? We still limit all practical VGMs and Malaconda can still have gimmie moves like Energy Ball.

So much controversy. My Malaconda move set will make everyone happy. It's just going to be Magnet Rise and Baton Pass. And also Ice Fang...You know, for dragons. ;)


Even ghosts stray from the path of righteousness
is a CAP Contributoris a Forum Moderator Alumnus
Pokemon don't always get obvious moves. Even so, you have enough room to put on all of the "mandatory" moves and still have room leftover to flavor it as you please. I have done it with 55/30 - 60/30 should be more then enough if you aren't trying to shove everything into your movepool.

Refer to if you still have concerns about being forced to not give CAP5 all of the moves that "obviously fit" it.

Edit: Dy8 you didn't address my argument. I provided a pokemon with as many, if not more features then Malaconda who gets by with 51 moves - I don't see how Malaconda can't get by with roughly the same number under your argument, and you have failed to address that, instead launching onto a tangent about how Scoliopede is "a perfect example of how Pokemon's physiology affects movepool."

In addition, seriously? Serperior can be used as a comparison because of physical charasteristics so it being a starter is irrelevant, but Scoliopede's lower move pool is because " early in-game bug?" Chose a line of logic, and stick with it - your argument right now is wildly inconsistent.

Also even scoliopede's fucking pokedex entry says it has horns how can you say it doesn't have horns.
Pokedex said:
With quick movements, it chases down its foes, attacking relentlessly with its horns until it prevails.

Base Speed

What a load of BS!
Hey all

Just thought I'd quickly say that I have no problems with the currently planned movepool limits. I'm making a movepool right now and I'm having no real trouble staying within them, even with special VGMs. Let's go for it.
Early game bugs typically have more limited movepools than other Pokemon. Starter's get some moves exclusive to them, such as the Pledge moves, but do not have anymore expansive movepools than non-starter Pokemon. They get more moves from events, but that's because of their status. They get moves that match their physiology as much as well, although I will admit there are some odd ones out (like Emboar getting Scald.) I'm not intentionally shifting my argument; I didn't address Serperior getting more moves because it is a starter because outside of the elemental beams and pledges, I don't see it, so maybe it's just me. I don't want to start a back-and-forth argument in this thread, so I'm done with it.

I've worked on a movepool and feel I made a realistic and competitive movepool with 65/30, although some of my more favored moves had to get the shaft ( R.I.P. Memento, I'll never forget thee.) So I take back saying 65 was the minimum. It's actually more of the sweet spot.

edit: you got me with the horns though I admit defeet
Based on the feedback, I am setting the limits to 65 Total Moves, 35 Very Good Moves. Ultimately, if so many people are looking at removing the type-move special moves, then perhaps a limit of 30 is a bit too much. There is some suspicion that some people may just be using questionable flavour logic, but enough people have mentioned it that the increase is probably a safe bet.

fwiw, all Gen V Grass-type Pokemon get


and all Gen V Dark-type Pokemon get


Deck Knight

Tornadic Cyclohm
is a Forum Moderatoris a CAP Contributoris a Smogon Media Contributor Alumnus
So here I am again going to ruin everyone's fun by pointing out brute obvious facts of movepool aesthetics.

The fact is, STABs and "every mon" VGMs always take up a substantial portion of the movepool. Lets start with the basics:

Hidden Power
Sleep Talk

That's 8 VGMs there, so now we've got 22 left w/ 60/30.

Lets add in STABs, including all the moves we've discussed and Tutors/TMs:

Dark Pulse
Foul Play
Sucker Punch

Power Whip/Wood Hammer/Leaf Blade
Energy Ball
Giga Drain
Grass Knot
Seed Bomb

That's 12 more, so we're now up to 20, just with aesthetic STABs and discussed STABs, leaving 10 moves left. This is further diminished if you want to offer people options like Power Whip and Leaf Blade etc.

And I'm not even to support moves yet, which would in most pools include Taunt, Rapid Spin, Glare and Knock Off. There's another 4 down, leaving 6 left.

Add U-turn, Dragon Tail, Roar, Aromatherapy, Synthesis, and Spikes and that completes the 30.

30 is simply too low if we do not want a series of cookie-cutter movepool submissions, where the only difference lies in say whether someone likes Ice Fang but not Spikes and so excises their movepool that way - or deliberate cuts out superfluous STABs to make room for more competitive moves.

Aersthetics is not a flavor argument. I take my movepool aesthetics very seriously because I want the product we produce to be comparable to existing Pokemon and not just be a jumbled mass of competitive moves placed in whatever slots they can (cape knows I detest Tomohawk's movepool aesthetics). It's about being complete and presenting an image of a realistic Pokemon.

Therefore my suggest is a modest increase to 70/35 to account for the fact that at least a few movepool submitters take seriously the idea of replicating in-game learnsets including their flavor rules - which include moves that others don't think of adding to their movepools because they never come up competitively.


used substitute
is a Forum Moderatoris a Community Contributoris a CAP Contributoris a Battle Server Moderator Alumnus
So just to preface this, as I had said back in the stats limits thread, we do not really have any actual rules in place for what influence the TL has regarding the movepool limits stage. This is something I fully intend to address during the next round of policy review, but unfortunately that will not happen until after we are done here so I do not really know exactly what I am allowed to do here.

With that said, I do not particularly agree with the VGM limit of 35. In my opinion, the arguments for a limit of 30 were fairly convincing, whereas the ones for 35 consisted more of general complaints of how it affects what they were personally considering for a movepool. This stage is intended to decided what shape movepools should take, and not fit limits around people personal ideas for a movepool. Even so, I would not have been comfortable issuing a decree on my own changing any of the limits, due to the lack of real defined power on my end. However, since capefeather's post, I have chatted a bit with him on irc, and he agreed that it would be a fine idea to lower the VGM limit a bit.

We did acknowledge that there were some good arguments in favor of a movepool larger than 30 moves, so what we agreed upon was to make it more of a compromise and set the limit at 33. The total moves limit will be left alone, so the final movepool limits for this cap will be 65 total moves / 33 very good moves. I think this is a limit that will satasfy most people, should allow for ample variety without allowing people to give too many good moves just for the hell of it.
Not open for further replies.