[Gen6] CAP Metagame Analysis Discussion Thread - Full Dex in OP!

[cbrevan]

Hey guys!

This thread is for discussing CAP analyses that have already been put onsite. Given that the metagame shifts from time to time, it's inevitable that some of our uploaded CAP analyses are/will be outdated in one way or another. Here, we can discuss possible revisions and consolidate our opinions in a cohesive manner. Posts may address any of the following:

• Changing the slashing on [set] of [Pokemon]
• Removing mentions of ___ from an existing analysis
• Adding a new set to an existing analysis
• Revamping an analysis entirely to better fit the current metagame. If you believe this to be the case, the QC team will discuss it and determine if it's in need of a full revamp, or if it can be handled by CMS edits.

Basically, as long as what you're going to say entails something about an uploaded CAP analysis, you should probably post here.

This is not the thread for reserving an analysis! Post in this thread instead. Also, any suggestions for an analysis that is still being written up should be posted in its respective thread.


Relevant Links

• CAP Metagame Analysis Reservation Index
• [Required Reading] Writing CAP Analyses
• Spelling & Grammar Standards

List of Pokemon with uploaded 6th Gen CAP Analyses (47 Pokemon as of July 5, 2016)

Index

CAP

1. Aurumoth
2. Cawmodore
3. Colossoil
4. Cyclohm
5. Fidgit
6. Kitsunoh
7. Krilowatt
8. Malaconda
9. Mollux
10. Naviathan
11. Necturna
12. Plasmanta
13. Pyroak
14. Revenankh
15. Stratagem
16. Syclant
17. Tomohawk
18. Volkraken
19. Voodoom

Non-CAP

1. Azumarill
2. Beedrill
3. Breloom
4. Chansey
5. Clefable
6. Diancie
7. Ferrothorn
8. Garchomp
9. Gardevoir
10. Heatran
11. Jirachi
12. Lopunny
13. Magnezone
14. Manaphy
15. Manectric
16. Metagross
17. Medicham
18. Pinsir
19. Rotom-W
20. Sableye
21. Scizor
22. Serperior
23. Skarmory
24. Slowbro
25. Sylveon
26. Talonflame
27. Tornadus-T
28. Venusaur

 

[snake]

Hi! I was wondering the other day why Dazzling Gleam was in OO for Jirachi's mixed attacker set when it has Moonblast. It's a very minor nitpick, but I thought I'd mention it. Aurumoth has Water-type coverage slashed first for its sets, when Fire-type coverage seems more common (Overheat for QD and sometimes HP Fire for TG).

 

[Ununhexium]

Hi! I was wondering the other day why Dazzling Gleam was in OO for Jirachi's mixed attacker set when it has Moonblast. It's a very minor nitpick, but I thought I'd mention it.

Because Bisharp is a threat!!

Haha jk I'll fix it

Edit: nvm I can't do it on my phone fsr but if nobody else gets to it I'll do it tomorrow

 

[sparktrain]

Changed Dazzling Gleam to Moonblast on Jirachi.

Hi! Aurumoth has Water-type coverage slashed first for its sets, when Fire-type coverage seems more common (Overheat for QD and sometimes HP Fire for TG).

I agree here for the most part. Overheat gives it basically perfect coverage outside of Heatran, and in tandem with Illusion lets it lure numerous Steel-types very well. I even think that Overheat is optimal on Tail Glow sets since it still hits harder than HP Fire after a drop. As far as slashing order for TG goes, I'd probably go Fire coverage first, Water coverage, then Ice (possibly with a few of the moves cut down to just mentions, because five slashes is a bit much).

I'd also like to see TG Aurumoth's EV spread updated. The current one is basically max HP and SpA with no Speed, which I personally wouldn't use on a serious team since there are things Aurumoth really needs to be outpacing. 72 HP / 252 SpA / 184 Spe is a better alternative imo; still max SpA, outspeeds offensive Tomo, remainder thrown into bulk + hits a Life Orb number.

 

[snake]

Something else I've thought of: I like Leftovers Serperior > Life Orb Serperior in most cases because then it can switch in multiple times; however Life Orb should probably be slashed first anyways

 

[OLD GREGG (im back baby)]

I think toxic could be slashed into stratagems aoa sets because it tends to bring in the Tomo, Tankchomp, AV Colo, etc..very easily and all dread toxic.
I've been using a set of 252/252 timid with LO. Paleo wave smacks stuff that don't resist and I also run fire blast with earth power to smack all that would be immune to toxic. It's simple but effective and worth a mention IMO.

 

[snake]

I can see Tomohawk and Tank Chomp...but Colossoil? Either you get Toxic bounced back, or then you activate Guts and Knock Off can actually OHKO you (assuming Levitate since you said Paleo Wave). Tbh, I'd just rather have the fourth coverage move in Energy Ball (or Giga Drain), but I can see the merit in Toxic for Tank Chomp and Tomohawk.

 

[Exclaimer]

I think toxic could be slashed into stratagems aoa sets because it tends to bring in the Tomo, Tankchomp, AV Colo, etc..very easily and all dread toxic.
I've been using a set of 252/252 timid with LO. Paleo wave smacks stuff that don't resist and I also run fire blast with earth power to smack all that would be immune to toxic. It's simple but effective and worth a mention IMO.

Tomohawk dies to HP Flying (and takes 70%+ from HP ice), Tankchomp and Landorus die to HP ice, and AV colo has Guts. Toxic is a bad idea on an attacking mon like Stratagem because it works on hyper-offensive teams and doesn't want to drop coverage for chip damage when it could just smack stuff around with its LO-boosted (And tech occasionally) coverage moves.

Me and sparktrain are thinking of slashing HP ice on strata sets. With Tankchomp and Landorus becoming more common, it's become a legitimate option for OHKO'ing both of them on Technician variants.

 

[Ununhexium]

Doesn't tomohawk take the same from HP Flying and Ice

 

[snake]

252 SpA Life Orb Technician Stratagem Hidden Power Flying vs. 252 HP / 4 SpD Tomohawk: 291-343 (70.2 - 82.8%) -- guaranteed 2HKO after Leftovers recovery
252 SpA Life Orb Technician Stratagem Hidden Power Ice vs. 252 HP / 4 SpD Tomohawk: 291-343 (70.2 - 82.8%) -- guaranteed 2HKO after Leftovers recovery

HP Ice will be neutral when Tomohawk Roosts though

 

[Exclaimer]

HP Ice will be neutral when Tomohawk Roosts though

Tomohawk takes more than 35% from a neutral HP ice, forcing it to spam roost to stall out Life Orb recoil, which can be abused by a switch into your team's ice/fairy/electric attacker. Also has to be extremely healthy to survive HP ice/stealth rocks/vacuum wave.

 

[sparktrain]

Something else I've thought of: I like Leftovers Serperior > Life Orb Serperior in most cases because then it can switch in multiple times; however Life Orb should probably be slashed first anyways

Having messed around a bit with Leftovers on Serperior myself (although mostly in tandem with Leech Seed) I wouldn't be opposed to Leftovers getting a mention in the analysis.

And yeah, as far as HP Flying vs. HP Ice goes on Stratagem, the only difference with the Tomohawk matchup is that Tomohawk can potentially stall out HP Ice variants by spamming Roost until Stratagem dies to Life Orb recoil. Despite this, I still agree that HP Ice is a legitimate option on Stratagem in the current metagame. Bulky Ground-types that are 4x weak to the move are growing in prominence, and the analysis was written at a time where Tank Garchomp was virtually unused in CAP. With no HP Ice, Garchomp is free to set up Stealth Rock on Stratagem, as Earth Power and Energy Ball are roughly a 3HKO at best (depending on Garchomp's SpD investment), whereas Technician HP Ice cleanly one-shots it.

 

[snake]

Seems to be a misunderstanding: to clarify, I wasn't saying HP Ice was a bad idea. I was responding to:

Doesn't tomohawk take the same from HP Flying and Ice

I think HP Ice is a great idea!

The revenge killing Talonflame set is not the best set imo now. Bulk Up is very good with the meta oriented towards stall. SD is great too. Maybe we should reorder the sets?

 

[sparktrain]

The revenge killing Talonflame set is not the best set imo now. Bulk Up is very good with the meta oriented towards stall. SD is great too. Maybe we should reorder the sets?

The ordering for Talonflame's sets was actually updated a while back to reflect this. The current order is SD, BU, Revenge Killer.

http://www.smogon.com/dex/xy/pokemon/talonflame/cap/

 

[snake]

Ok dumb question: where are we updating these sets? I've just been looking on the forums...

 

[sparktrain]

For CAP Pokemon, the CAP Pokedex. For all others, the Smogon Strategy Pokedex.

 

[snake]

Oh ok...I had no idea the CAP Pokedex even existed or the fact we got tabs in the Strategy Pokedex...

Is Defensive Plasmanta really better than offensive? Not too experienced with it; it's just that offensive just looks better.

 

[sparktrain]

Is Defensive Plasmanta really better than offensive? Not too experienced with it; it's just that offensive just looks better.

I personally think that offensive Plasmanta is easily the better set in the current metagame. Defensively speaking, I almost always find myself opting for Cyclohm instead (unless I'm terribly weak to Fairies), as reliable recovery makes it a much more durable check to Talonflame, Cawmodore, and such. I may be biased here, however, so I'll give our resident Plasmanta expert cbrevan a tag.

While we're on the topic of Plasmanta, I think that Dazzling Gleam is good enough for an actual slash on the offensive set now. It's seen decent usage as of late, and it's certainly warranted imo. This is due to the gradual shift towards faster AV Colossoil spreads to keep up with threats like Hoopa-U, which sacrifice bulk as a result, falling into solid 2HKO range for LO Timid Plasmanta's Dazzling Gleam (especially so with entry hazards factored in), meaning that Colossoil can no longer switch in safely. Of course, bulky AV Colossoil spreads are still common, and Dazzling Gleam is still an easy 3HKO on these, so the number of times it can switch in is limited. Thoughts on this would be welcome.

 

[cbrevan]

Yeah sparktrain is right, offensive Plasmanta is the better of the two sets in the current metagame. Decent speed tier and ability to hit incredibly hard lets offensive sets better pressure the offensive teams that have become more common in the recent months, and more importantly Offensive Plasmanta can get past some of its checks that have become more common lately, such as Landorus-T and Garchomp, a lot more easily than Defensive sets are able to. Offensive sets also fit better on the offensive teams that have gotten more prevalent.

Dazzling Gleam is pretty good right now, as sparktrain pointed out, the shift towards more speed creep on Colossoil means Plasmanta actually has a decent shot of 2hkoing some Colossoil now with it, which is enough to warrant it a third slash with Encore / Taunt imo. Its also pretty nice for coverage on Dragon types, such as Garchomp, Cyclohm, Latis, etc, when Plasmanta opts for HP Fire.

 

[snake]

"Sturdy SubSeeding wall with good attacking prowess"

- Create-a-Pokémon Pokédex (Pyroak)

I feel like this description doesn't fit Pyroak anymore. It hardly ever runs SubSeed, and it's attacking moves are normally using Lava Plume to burn the opponent, Giga Drain to check water types and heal, and Earth Power to hit Heatran and Mollux. The only two words left that actually fit its description (IMO) are "sturdy wall," which is entirely true. I feel like it could be "sturdy wall that makes use of its unique resistances" or something would work better.

 

[Exclaimer]

That's what it was intended to do; it doesn't really have anything to do with what it currently does now.

 

[snake]

Oh those descriptions are concept-based and not CAP meta based? I understand that, but then again we keep updating the strategy analyses for the current CAP meta. It might be a little odd for someone to see "SubSeeder" and then not even see Substitute in the analysis. Just a thought.

 

[Arcade]

Hey, I'm thinking of trying an analysis soon and I've pored over the CAP forums but I have not seen any template. Knowing me, its probably hiding in plain sight, but is there a template which I could use if I were to make an analysis?

 

[sparktrain]

Oh those descriptions are concept-based and not CAP meta based? I understand that, but then again we keep updating the strategy analyses for the current CAP meta. It might be a little odd for someone to see "SubSeeder" and then not even see Substitute in the analysis. Just a thought.

I'm in agreement that Pyroak's current description doesn't do a great job at defining its role in the CAP metagame. In fact, I feel this way about more than just Pyroak's. After looking over each description, I noticed that they're all rather inconsistent with each other in terms of how they describe the CAP. Some briefly describe the CAP's original concept, some just list a few of the CAP's traits without referencing its original concept, and Aurumoth's is just "Legendary Bug." This makes me hesitant to touch the current descriptions, as I'm not entirely sure what the ideal purpose for them is (directly referencing the CAP's original concept? general description of the CAP's traits? niche in the CAP metagame?). Anyway... I'd like to talk to Doug and get his opinion on this before we seriously consider any changes to this part of the hub. Let's stick to the analyses themselves for now.

Hey, I'm thinking of trying an analysis soon and I've pored over the CAP forums but I have not seen any template. Knowing me, its probably hiding in plain sight, but is there a template which I could use if I were to make an analysis?

Yes, there's an analysis template in the OP of the analysis reservation index.

 

[DougJustDoug]

The CAP Website (sometimes called the CAP Subsite) is the website for the entire Create-A-Pokemon project. The CAP Pokedex is not just a Strategy dex, it's the index to each pokemon as a CAP creation. Not like the Smogon Strategy dex, which only concerns itself with battle strategies.

The CAP site lists Credits for the people who led the creation of each pokemon, galleries of artwork for each project, categorized movepool tables, etc -- stuff that typical Smogon strategy dex pages have no need for.

But the CAP site also is intended to house competitive strategies too, even though it has been debated over the years as to whether we should have "historical analyses" in there or not, or current strats for the CAP metagame. A while back, we agreed that old strategies for historical reference are not terribly useful, and we'd rather have a resource for current strats. So that's what we're doing. But we are not co-opting the site JUST for CAP meta strategies. We still use the site to link the complete projects.

As for the short, one-line descriptions in the CAP pokemon index -- Those are typically descriptions of the pokemon as they were created, not how they are played in the CAP metagame. So stuff like Pyroak being called a "Subseeder" is because that was the primary driver of its creation. Even though, 'Roak may not even run a subseed set in the CAP meta. But the pokemon, as a creation project, was built to be a sub-seeder (even though CAP didn't have formal concepts back on CAP 3).

Those descriptions are not some scientifically-derived thing. They are just teasers that I write when I add a pokemon to the CAP dex. I have debated just removing them entirely, because EVERYONE has their own opinion as to what should be written there for each CAP mon. And I don't want the descriptions to go the way analyses across all of Smogon have gone -- where we give a bazillion words to describe every little thing. Whenever we have open discussion on the one-liners -- they quickly become long, obtuse paragraphs.

I kinda regret that I ever put those stupid one-liners in there in the first place. But we only had 4 pokemon made back when I put the site up for the first time. And I wanted to put eye-catching teasers that would entice people to click on the pokemon to see their dex page. Which had the artwork displayed prominently and all that. With the hopes that people would see the site pages and decide to get involved in the CAP project. It was just a little advertising flourish on my part.

The CAP Website overall could use a lot of work, and that is irrespective of my discussions with Chaos about integrating CAP more deeply into the Smogon strategy dex. But this leads into a MUCH more involved discussion, and this isn't the time or the place for that.

So let's just focus on the analyses here. And if there is anything I can do to help, in terms of CAP site programming (which is VERY different than the Smogon site and SCMS), let me know.