Process Guide Workshop for Create-A-Pokemon.

[latinoheat]

i agree with time mage on the voting system.

Why should people who have so little interest in this project to begin with that they can't even select 10-15 names, even be allowed to vote and influence what people who actually are interested get to use.

If people are against the whole counter voting idea this brings this may be require abit more effort but couldn't we try getting people to pm the topic starter instead, i know this would be alot of work for the mini mod so maybe if we just got a committe of 8 or so people and each handle one poll then the work is spread out.

 

[Dane]

I know all the problems it causes, but we have to start the art submission thread as soon as type is determined.

But if people were complaining that art wasn't matching the stats of Pokemon when they already knew the typings, basic build, and style of the Pokemon, how is it going to be any better if all they know are the typings? It seems that there really isn't any way to make the art and concept of the Pokemon work together without just giving art it's own time period, at which point everything else screeches to a halt for a week or so. At least, not without upsetting some people apparently.

But, why? I provided a specific reason that makes this method better, and that's the fact that a second poll will never be necessary. I think it's a HUGE advantage over the other polling methods. Not only saves a lot of time (1-2 days for every extra poll, that adds quickly), but it saves us from choosing some arbitrary % at which it isn't no longer necessary to make a second poll. The less arbitrary decisions, the better.

And how do you propose how much something needs to win by in this sort of thread? Things can still be off by a single vote, a couple of votes, etc. What's the cutoff?

Also, I don't know what's wrong with forcing people to rank 5-10 options. If you are concerned about the ego of the proposers of those options, well, tough luck, it is inevitable, some things are liked more than others, and you can't do anything about it. Getting a pitiful 1% in a normal poll is equally as ""bad"".

And, if you think the process can get "muddled", that's because it isn't done well. Enforce a set of rules, and make them clear, that's all the necessary things. This are the rules I'd use with this polling method:

- You have to give each option a position, from 1 to (number of options). You have to rank them all, or the vote will not be counted.
- The option that has less points at the end is the winner.
- You have to bold your options. A non-bolded vote will be ignored, no exceptions.
- You can only edit your vote until one day before the poll ends, to prevent counter-voting. All votes last edited after that threshold will be ignored.
- Only Topic Leaders can post vote tallies. If anyone posts a vote tally before the time for the poll expires, he will be disqualified FOR THE REMINDING POLLS OF THE PROJECT.

With those rules, I don't know how the process can go wrong.

You don't see how it can go wrong? Let's say you want your idea to win. You would obviously put your vote at #1. Then, whatever's in the lead, you put at #10. Whether you normally would think it the worst or not isn't important, it's in the lead and you don't want it to win.

Just because only Topic Leaders could post tallies, doesn't mean the voter can't count it up themselves. It wouldn't be that hard to count it yourself if you really wanted to win.

The fact that you'd be allowed to edit your vote, which I'm not completely against normally, in this sort of structure it hurts. Combined with the previous problems, the ability to edit your vote would either encourage "snipe voting", where you wait until the last few minutes to input your vote, or "fake out voting", where you post the opposite of what you want and then edit it at the last moment.

However, I think that the first thread of all should be one called "Role" or "purpose" or "Goal", or something like that. Before type, before, style, build, stats, etc, we should get a pretty good idea on WHAT we want to do. In the previous parts, the defining characteristic has been decided somewhere in the middle (Syclant as a mixed attacker in the BST polls, and Revenankh as an ideal Bulk-Upper after futuresuperstar's speech in his BST submission). If we sit down first and discuss what kind of pokémon we would like: A good batton passer, maybe? A Garchomp counter, perhaps? A rapid spinner? The ultimate spiker? A cleric? A staller? There are endless possibilities we could explore, and I think it's more interesting to have an idea of what we want to do before actually starting the process, and find that we can't do this thing or the other because something we chose before.

With both those examples, you didn't have a role for it until it was known what it's typing and stats would be. Syclant wasn't a mixed attacker until he was decided to be a Mixed Attacker (which would be known by the time you got to stats, with the current guidelines), and Revenankh wasn't a Bulk Up idea until it was known he would be a balanced Physical Pokemon.

It would be hard to have enough people agree with a role or concept for a Pokemon when they know nothing about it other than it's a "Pokemon". If you have the typings, build, and style, you can then come up with a role for that Pokemon that fits those polls, as well as being niche.

Also, I haven't seen anyone suggest the method we should use to determine which BST submissions are used in the poll and which aren't. Either the TL decides it (being proposed by the Selection Panel should give him/her enough credibility), or there is another group in charge of deciding this. I propose a mixed approach, in fact: a committee (so many double letters in one words, stupid English... ¬_¬) formed by the TL, a member of the Selection Panel, and the one whose BST submission won last time decides which BST submissions enter the poll. The reason behind choosing the last one is to prevent the same entrant to win twice in a row, but at the same time give him/her the right to influence the BST selection.

How many people actually submit BST spreads and give reasons? If reasons aren't submitted (good ones, not just "I want it to hit hard"), then they shouldn't be considered. If you go with a committee for just deciding the options, it adds extra time to the process.

If people are against the whole counter voting idea this brings this may be require abit more effort but couldn't we try getting people to pm the topic starter instead, i know this would be alot of work for the mini mod so maybe if we just got a committe of 8 or so people and each handle one poll then the work is spread out.

The message box only allows 50 messages, what happens if that fills up before the TL can tally the votes? It seems like this isn't very viable.

 

[DougJustDoug]

But if people were complaining that art wasn't matching the stats of Pokemon when they already knew the typings, basic build, and style of the Pokemon, how is it going to be any better if all they know are the typings? It seems that there really isn't any way to make the art and concept of the Pokemon work together without just giving art it's own time period, at which point everything else screeches to a halt for a week or so. At least, not without upsetting some people apparently.

I do not think there is a perfect answer to the problem of "When to start the art thread and how long?". No matter what we do, there will be downsides.

Starting Earlier
Pros

• Artists have more time, and can produce higher-quality art. Not necessarily more appropriate for the pokemon, but better renderings art-wise.
• Artists have time to exchange ideas and inspiration
• The community has a chance to see the art develop, possibly influencing voting in ongoing polls
• A larger number of total art submissions

Cons

• Artists don't know everything that will ultimately be used to judge the art
• Good artistic submissions may not "fit" the results of polls that occurred after the art submission

Starting Later
Pros

• All relevant information is known prior to all art submissions
• All submissions should "fit" the known aspects of the pokemon

Cons

• Artists have little time to exchange ideas and incorporate feedback
• Fewer total art submissions
• Lower art quality (purely from an artistic standpoint)

Long Dedicated Art Submission Period
Pros

• Good quality art
• Lots of submissions
• The art is appropriate to all known pokemon attributes
• Time for artists to exchange ideas and process feedback

Cons

• The rest of the project comes to a dead stop while submissions are gathered
• The project loses momentum and interest from non-artists

It's entirely a matter of opinion as to which set of pros and cons is preferable. I prefer starting early. But, that's just my opinion. As long as we know the hazards at the outset, then we can just set the expectation with everyone that there are certain problems that are unavoidable. That applies to either solution.


I wasn't a fan of the ranked voting. Yes, it did save some time, but the ability to significantly manipulate the process is a huge turn-off. I don't see a viable way to eliminate the possibility of manipulation.

Multiple rounds of polls are a bit wasteful, but I don't think they need to be too bad. We should really think about one-day polls in most "non-first-round" polls. All the meaty discussion is covered in the first round anyway. So, the later round is just to finalize voting results. Like I said earlier, the first-day leader in a poll almost always wins. I have been surprised by this, but it has been true the vast majority of the time. Voting percentages really don't change much after the first couple of hours of voting. We can use that to our advantage, by having very short one-day polls in most cases where multiple rounds of polling is required.

 

[Dane]

That's why I was wondering how long the artists felt was enough time. Leaving it as I initially wrote it, they'd have 5 days, knowing the basic build and style of the Pokemon. Perhaps would could add a 2 day break between the Overall stat poll and when the art poll began? This would allow for full knowledge of the pokemon for 2 days, as well as a good idea of what it was going to end up as up to a week in advance.

Does a week seem appropriate for the art? It seems like the best compromise between the start and end times.

 

[Time Mage]

And how do you propose how much something needs to win by in this sort of thread? Things can still be off by a single vote, a couple of votes, etc. What's the cutoff?

Ah, I'm glad you bring this to the table.

The beauty of preferential voting is that winning, even by a single point, means a totally fair win. Why? Because by casting preferential votes, you're saying "I want #1 to win, and if it doesn't, I want #2 win, and if it doesn't, I want #3 to win, etc...), essentially voting, at the same time, in all the possible polls you could imagine after a first close poll. Since you are stating your preference for each option, this is not the case as in the normal polls, that you have the very reasonable doubt of knowing if the voters of the non-winning entries would have voted one or another: That data is in their vote in the case of preferential voting.

You don't see how it can go wrong? Let's say you want your idea to win. You would obviously put your vote at #1. Then, whatever's in the lead, you put at #10. Whether you normally would think it the worst or not isn't important, it's in the lead and you don't want it to win.

Just because only Topic Leaders could post tallies, doesn't mean the voter can't count it up themselves. It wouldn't be that hard to count it yourself if you really wanted to win.

If a single voter counts and tallies ALL the previous votes and then counter-posts accordingly, that's fine. Because I'm 100% sure that the ones who will do that will be a very small minority. Look at what happened in the preferential voting with Revenankh: The counter-voting only began when the provisional tallies were posted.

The fact that you'd be allowed to edit your vote, which I'm not completely against normally, in this sort of structure it hurts. Combined with the previous problems, the ability to edit your vote would either encourage "snipe voting", where you wait until the last few minutes to input your vote, or "fake out voting", where you post the opposite of what you want and then edit it at the last moment.

Let me reply you with one of the rules I proposed:

- You can only edit your vote until one day before the poll ends, to prevent counter-voting. All votes last edited after that threshold will be ignored.

That single rule prevent "snipe voting" and "fake out voting" entirely, since you can't edit your vote for a whole day before the poll ends. I thought of that problem, y'know. Besides, that problem of "waiting to the last moment to vote" is much more prominent, and much more difficult to deal with in normal polls. How many times have you read "I'll wait to see what options are ahead, and then I'll vote based on that".

With both those examples, you didn't have a role for it until it was known what it's typing and stats would be. Syclant wasn't a mixed attacker until he was decided to be a Mixed Attacker (which would be known by the time you got to stats, with the current guidelines), and Revenankh wasn't a Bulk Up idea until it was known he would be a balanced Physical Pokemon.

It would be hard to have enough people agree with a role or concept for a Pokemon when they know nothing about it other than it's a "Pokemon". If you have the typings, build, and style, you can then come up with a role for that Pokemon that fits those polls, as well as being niche.

It's not exactly a specific role, like "bulky water rapid spinner who tanks well on the special side and has access to grass moves", but rather a direction. What will be interesting to add to the metagame? We talk about it, maybe vote, I don't know, and get a general idea of what we want. I'm proposing this because when people vote a type, or a BST, most of the time they have a role in their mind they would like to be played by the pokémon, and vote accordingly. Then, when the final type(s) and BST are decided, many, many people find that the type they wanted is in, but then the BST is not suited for the role they imagined, essentially not fulfilling the idea that led them to vote for that type. Or vice versa. If we get a general direction of where we want to go, then people can vote with that in mind all the time. You can get many different pokémon from a general idea, it's not like that limits the creativity. That only guarantees that the role the pokémon is intended to play and its characteristics will fit from the beginning.

How many people actually submit BST spreads and give reasons? If reasons aren't submitted (good ones, not just "I want it to hit hard"), then they shouldn't be considered. If you go with a committee for just deciding the options, it adds extra time to the process.

As I said, I would consider it OK if the TL is the one in charge of filtering the BST submissions. Being chosen by a committee should be a good enough guarantee of his/her knowledge and judgment. But, while I don't dislike that idea at all, I prefer a mini-committee for that.

 

[DougJustDoug]

That's why I was wondering how long the artists felt was enough time. Leaving it as I initially wrote it, they'd have 5 days, knowing the basic build and style of the Pokemon. Perhaps would could add a 2 day break between the Overall stat poll and when the art poll began? This would allow for full knowledge of the pokemon for 2 days, as well as a good idea of what it was going to end up as up to a week in advance.

Does a week seem appropriate for the art? It seems like the best compromise between the start and end times.

I looked at the Revenankh art thread for a reference. The thread opened on January 30th. Many submissions came in the first few days. That surprised me. For some reason, my impression was that the thread was somewhat inactive for a while before it really heated up. I was wrong. The minute that thread opened, submissions started pouring in. KOA's winning submission was made fairly "late" in the thread on February 6th on the 8th day of the thread. The bulk of submissions were in by February 9th. A couple more submissions that did not even make the poll, were made on February 11th.

Based on that information, it seems reasonable that art submissions could be completed within a 7 day time period. If the deadline is set up front, I think artists would do what it takes to get their ideas submitted. I think we should give the TL leeway to make the call on whether to extend the submission time, and by how long.

 

[Dane]

The beauty of preferential voting is that winning, even by a single point, means a totally fair win. Why? Because by casting preferential votes, you're saying "I want #1 to win, and if it doesn't, I want #2 win, and if it doesn't, I want #3 to win, etc...), essentially voting, at the same time, in all the possible polls you could imagine after a first close poll. Since you are stating your preference for each option, this is not the case as in the normal polls, that you have the very reasonable doubt of knowing if the voters of the non-winning entries would have voted one or another: That data is in their vote in the case of preferential voting.

The problem though is the counter voting. If someone votes the current #1 (which wouldn't be hard to calculate, I'll explain later) as their #10, then all of a sudden it has 11 rank points, just because someone doesn't want it to win. Or even, not so much that they don't want it to win, but they want to bring down the current #1 so that their choice has a better chance of winning. In theory this method could work well, except for the people who vote against the grain just to bring their own option higher.

If a single voter counts and tallies ALL the previous votes and then counter-posts accordingly, that's fine. Because I'm 100% sure that the ones who will do that will be a very small minority. Look at what happened in the preferential voting with Revenankh: The counter-voting only began when the provisional tallies were posted.

I don't recall that, but how are you sure counter-voting hadn't already begun? Just because someone doesn't say "voting for X so Y doesn't win", doesn't mean they didn't. Besides, it isn't hard to count up tallies. Takes all of 5 minutes per page.

Let me reply you with one of the rules I proposed:

Didn't realize you said "one day until", but that still means that people can be countervoted until that last day. Or just sniper vote so as to get the most out of your vote, etc.

That single rule prevent "snipe voting" and "fake out voting" entirely, since you can't edit your vote for a whole day before the poll ends. I thought of that problem, y'know. Besides, that problem of "waiting to the last moment to vote" is much more prominent, and much more difficult to deal with in normal polls. How many times have you read "I'll wait to see what options are ahead, and then I'll vote based on that".

It prevents "fake out voting", but not "snipe voting". You can still wait until the last few minutes to input your vote, you just couldn't edit it. Honestly, there's no way to stop this, but it makes it harder to do if they can't see the actual poll numbers and have to rely on just what people are saying.

It's not exactly a specific role, like "bulky water rapid spinner who tanks well on the special side and has access to grass moves", but rather a direction. What will be interesting to add to the metagame? We talk about it, maybe vote, I don't know, and get a general idea of what we want. I'm proposing this because when people vote a type, or a BST, most of the time they have a role in their mind they would like to be played by the pokémon, and vote accordingly. Then, when the final type(s) and BST are decided, many, many people find that the type they wanted is in, but then the BST is not suited for the role they imagined, essentially not fulfilling the idea that led them to vote for that type. Or vice versa. If we get a general direction of where we want to go, then people can vote with that in mind all the time. You can get many different pokémon from a general idea, it's not like that limits the creativity. That only guarantees that the role the pokémon is intended to play and its characteristics will fit from the beginning.

Nothing stops any given type from being something else. It can be discussed during the typing thread, or during style/build. It's not a bad idea, but it would be hard for people to agree on a single thing that is needed/wanted when you don't even have the typings done or anything.

In all, the preferential voting idea isn't bad, but it's flawed. The problem arrives in that it could end up being the 4th or 5th most wanted thing wings. That seems rather counterproductive.

 

[Gothic Togekiss]

Have we decided yet on a method of selecting topic leaders and a system on which they follow? Seem to me that we're stuck in a loop with no way out of it.

About the BST submission, why can we get the people that submitted BST in both CAP project to be the committee for it or better yet, be the official BST givers?

 

[Dane]

For selecting topic leader, I think Doug's is the most workable option.

For process, it seems mostly hammered down now, just got to iron out some details.

 

[Gothic Togekiss]

Okay but I still missed the process on the BST thing since in the past, topic leader just selected like 7 people he/she though were respectable and knowledgeable enough for the task. I would like to know if that still going to be done or it's going to be about the same as how we choice a topic leader?

 

[Time Mage]

In all, the preferential voting idea isn't bad, but it's flawed. The problem arrives in that it could end up being the 4th or 5th most wanted thing wings. That seems rather counterproductive.

I don't think so many people is malicious enough to actually counter vote with all those measures against it, but whatever. I don't think I'll be able to convince you.

What about everyone else, though? This kind of topics need the opinions of many people. You don't have to write long replies, like Dane, Doug, Deck and me, but knowing which ideas people think are good, and which aren't is necessary for this to progress.


WE NEED YOUR CONTRIBUTION, NOT ONLY YOUR VOTE!

 

[Aki]

Playtesting

The Test

Why is playtesting important?

Playtesting is important because it fits it into the CAP Tier list.

What is the playtesting process?

Playtesting is taking the theorymon out of paper and pitting it against the Metagame to which it was designed for. It would be pitted against solely teams made up of that metagame. It would especially be tested against it's counters, and what it is supposed to counter.

How long is the playtest period?

"Private" Playtesting should go for about 4 days, to test all sets against counters and what it is supposed to counter, and the metagame it is supposed to be in in general.
"Public" Playtesting would be a public reaction to the CAP, and this would finalise the Tier list position. It should take <1 week.

How does playtesting help assess a pokemon’s usefulness in the CAP metagame?

Playtesting makes sure the pokemon is not Broken or underpowered. It also takes the pokemon off paper and is the final process before it is properly released, so minor tweaks can be made.

Analysis

What is the process for creating an analysis?

Using the base stat's and movepool and typing to come up with reccomended guidelines for a pokemon's usage.

What features are important in an analysis?

Making use of a pokemon's notable moves in the movepool, Making sure all viable sets are identified (IE Nasty plot revenankh is viable, sorta, but specs isnt.), Counters, and what each individual set counters.

Should analysis occur before, during, or after playtesting?

IMO The analysis should start as soon as the base stats, typing and movepool are up. This would be to put shit to paper. When the private playtesting is started, This would test the viability of these sets. The analysis should not be a short period, it should be drawn out to ensure it's not just theorymon, and to make it accurate.

 

[Dane]

There are three options I can see for BST values:

Committee Made BST -
A committee of some form, possibly same one that chose TL, each creates a BST spread for the Pokemon using the build, style, and concept discussed previously. Those spreads are then voted on by the public. These would need to be done somewhat quickly, preferably within one day of the BST Total thread completion, so as to not halt the process. Short explaination for why the spread was created would be helpful, such as why the numbers were chosen. Should be somewhat thorough, such as "Has X speed in order to outspeed <Pokemon>", or "Has enough <Attack type> to OHKO <Pokemon> with standard STAB attack". Not something as simple as "I want it to hit hard" or anything, that much should be obvious from the number itself.

Committee Chosen BST -
Members post potential spreads, either in an intermediary thread between BST Total and BST Spread, or during the BST Total thread. This would have to be accompanied by an explaination for the spread, giving reasons for why numbers are chosen. Should be somewhat thorough, such as "Has X speed in order to outspeed <Pokemon>", or "Has enough <Attack type> to OHKO <Pokemon> with standard STAB attack". Not something as simple as "I want it to hit hard" or anything, that much should be obvious from the number itself. The previously discussed committee would then choose what they considered to be the best group among those with explainations. Chosen amount would be 10 or less total spreads, so as to fit on a poll.

Topic Creator Chosen BST -
Members post potential spreads, either in an intermediary thread between BST Total and BST Spread, or during the BST Total thread. This would have to be accompanied by an explaination for the spread, giving reasons for why numbers are chosen. Should be somewhat thorough, such as "Has X speed in order to outspeed <Pokemon>", or "Has enough <Attack type> to OHKO <Pokemon> with standard STAB attack". Not something as simple as "I want it to hit hard" or anything, that much should be obvious from the number itself. The Topic Creator would then choose what he or she considered to be the best group among those with explainations. Chosen amount would be 10 or less total spreads, so as to fit on a poll.


*edit*

I don't think so many people is malicious enough to actually counter vote with all those measures against it, but whatever. I don't think I'll be able to convince you.

What about everyone else, though? This kind of topics need the opinions of many people. You don't have to write long replies, like Dane, Doug, Deck and me, but knowing which ideas people think are good, and which aren't is necessary for this to progress.


WE NEED YOUR CONTRIBUTION, NOT ONLY YOUR VOTE!

I could see it working on some threads, such as BST spreads/totals, maybe movepools, dex entries, and things like that. But some of the really important things, like typing, build, and style I see majority rule being slightly more important than weighted voted. I do agree more input from others would be helpful.

 

[Gothic Togekiss]

*edit* Oh, and for the typing, I like the way Hyra did it. Remove the types used for the last Pokemon (in this case, Ghost and Fighting), Flying, Normal, Dragon, and Water. Make them available as secondary types if need be, but not primary. The only problem here is that 11 options are left with 10 vote slots, so it'd likely need to be done via Bold voting, at least for the first go.

Agree that Hyra's method on the typing was good though I alway though removing Dragon out of the poll as main type was kinda unfair to the type. I mean, sure the typing is pretty powerful but we are mature and smart enough to make a balanced and decent pure Dragon type or part type. We need to not fear Dragon types but to embrace them lol

Dane~ Of the three, I like committee made and topic leader chosen the best. Committee chosen get's a honorable mention since it's also good. Personally I like the old "TL picks which BST go" thing but that might be because I got chosen twice for good reason.

 

[Dane]

I just liked the idea of taking Dragon out of the main type listing (but leaving it as an option for secondary type listing) because there are enough powerful dragons as it is. I wouldn't mind having a dragon type be made, but it should be the secondary part of the Pokemon, not the main. Think Kingdra (Main Water, Secondary Dragon) vs all the other dragons.

 

[DougJustDoug]

Re: BST options

I actually like the idea of the TL picking a number of people to submit BST's. I like that it is somewhat of an honor to be selected. It's a small reward for active participation on the project. I also like that it allows the TL to exercise a little "executive privilege". I think all the people that have been chosen in the past, took the job very seriously. Most BST submitters spent a lot of time and effort creating a nice variety of spreads, and gave good supporting information on their spreads. That's the sort of community contribution I want to encourage on this project. I think the TL should continue to hand-pick a team to submit BST's.

Re: The TL Selection Panel

So far, there has been support for my idea and no opposition. Most importantly, there has been no concrete alternatives presented. I'll give it to tomorrow, if anyone wants to oppose or add anything to my proposal. After that, I'll open a nomination thread for a TL. I'll also get with Hyra and Cooper and start collecting ideas for panelists. After we get an idea who wants to be a TL, then we will name the Selection Panel.

So, if anyone has a problem or modifications to the method I proposed earlier, I suggest you speak up now...

 

[Gothic Togekiss]

Palkia is Water/Dragon too but I get want you mean. I have no problem with Dragon being an option for the secondary type but I though it would be also nice if Dragon was on the main type listing as well for reason like wanting a pure type dragon, etc....

 

[Gothic Togekiss]

Re: BST options

I actually like the idea of the TL picking a number of people to submit BST's. I like that it is somewhat of an honor to be selected. It's a small reward for active participation on the project. I also like that it allows the TL to exercise a little "executive privilege". I think all the people that have been chosen in the past, took the job very seriously. Most BST submitters spent a lot of time and effort creating a nice variety of spreads, and gave good supporting information on their spreads. That's the sort of community contribution I want to encourage on this project. I think the TL should continue to hand-pick a team to submit BST's.

This pretty much sum my true feelings onto why I liked the TL chose option most of all. This small "reward" really does make people feel warm and fuzzy inside lol.

Re: The TL Selection Panel

So far, there has been support for my idea and no opposition. Most importantly, there has been no concrete alternatives presented. I'll give it to tomorrow, if anyone wants to oppose or add anything to my proposal. After that, I'll open a nomination thread for a TL. I'll also get with Hyra and Cooper and start collecting ideas for panelists. After we get an idea who wants to be a TL, then we will name the Selection Panel.

So, if anyone has a problem or modifications to the method I proposed earlier, I suggest you speak up now...

Don't really have any alternative on how to select TL since the whole "nominate yourself for TL" seem like a good idea. I would myself if given a shot though I believe that for the upcoming CAP(after a mummy friend) I believe that Dane has a better shot than me given on all the post made in this thread by him compared to me. Heck I even talked about it in another post in another thread:

Wow....I'm touched you consider me capable enough of being the next Topic Leader, really. To be honest, I had both dreamed and dread about this day. I dreamed that I would have my chance to prove everyone I can be a good Topic leader and dread it because I fear I would screw up and cause the whole project to crash and burn. If you want my honest opinion I believe that Dane make a better topic leader than myself since I'm more of a follower than leader type of person. I'm not saying I wouldn't jump at the chance to be Topic leader or anything but I'm just putting my two honest cent into this.

In true, if given the chance I would nominate and support Dane for TL for the next CAP project.

 

[DougJustDoug]

Can we come up with a standard naming scheme for projects and topics?

The project name should be something that works as a prefix for every topic. "Create-A-Pokemon Part Deux" was cool for the last one, but I don't know if we can keep going with that theme. We don't need the 'Create-A-Pokemon' prefix any more. To call each project a "Part" doesn't seem right by itself. We could be boring and go with "Project III...", "Project IV"? Meh.... We can do better, but nothing comes to mind....

Also, each topic should have some indication of the purpose of the poll, not just a number.

 

[Dane]

"CAP the III - Part X (Purpose)" where X is the step that said project is on, and purpose being what step it is (Main typing, art, sprite, movepool, etc). There would then be "CAP the IV", "CAP the V", "CAP the VI", and so on and so forth.

So with the next project, it would start out as:

"CAP the III - Part 1 (Main Typing)"

 

[Gothic Togekiss]

"CAP 3, Smogon's Return"...okay in all seriousness "CAP 3, Part X" with X being normal numbers like 1, 4.5, 5 billion, etc.

 

[Deck Knight]

This is why having a full-time job makes this difficult. So much to respond to X_x.

But, why? I provided a specific reason that makes this method better, and that's the fact that a second poll will never be necessary. I think it's a HUGE advantage over the other polling methods. Not only saves a lot of time (1-2 days for every extra poll, that adds quickly), but it saves us from choosing some arbitrary % at which it isn't no longer necessary to make a second poll. The less arbitrary decisions, the better.

Also, I don't know what's wrong with forcing people to rank 5-10 options. If you are concerned about the ego of the proposers of those options, well, tough luck, it is inevitable, some things are liked more than others, and you can't do anything about it. Getting a pitiful 1% in a normal poll is equally as ""bad"".

I wouldn't mind a force ranking if it were something like "pick the top 3-4," but basically given our community, a single 9 point bottom rank can basically destroy a spread's chance of winning. It takes 3 more third place votes just to get back to parity, and in the meantime another spread can pull away. There's also the fact it is a nightmare to count. In a 9 Spread option a total of 45 points are allotted in each and every vote. Since one spread will be given 9 points no matter what for a valid entry, it encourages a lot of counter-voting. If we use 3-4 options, we'd use top rank gets the most points (in this case a number of points equal to the number of options, e.g. a placement of 1 wins 4 points if there are 4 entries in an eligible vote).

And, if you think the process can get "muddled", that's because it isn't done well. Enforce a set of rules, and make them clear, that's all the necessary things. This are the rules I'd use with this polling method:

- You have to give each option a position, from 1 to (number of options). You have to rank them all, or the vote will not be counted.
- The option that has less points at the end is the winner.
- You have to bold your options. A non-bolded vote will be ignored, no exceptions.
- You can only edit your vote until one day before the poll ends, to prevent counter-voting. All votes last edited after that threshold will be ignored.
- Only Topic Leaders can post vote tallies. If anyone posts a vote tally before the time for the poll expires, he will be disqualified FOR THE REMAINING POLLS OF THE PROJECT.

I assume the Bold is what you meant to say. This applies for any kind of poll.

On Base Stats:

Since we're doing solely OU pokemon, we relaly only need 500+ options like 500, 510, 525, 535, 580(trio), and 600.

As far as submission, our last model worked well.

 

[latinoheat]

the whole base stats should be over 500 because there OU is such a bad idea, its kinda getting boring just giving the pokemon a huge bst to make them OU.

 

[Dane]

There's really no point in trying to make a low BST OU Pokemon though. That's just adding an unneeded handicap. If we want to try it, that's when you would vote for 500 or other lower 500 numbers.

 

[Gothic Togekiss]

Edit: Correction, Forretress have a BST of 465 and it's OU, Breloom has 460 and it's OU too. I could go on but the point is High BST doesn't equal OU material.