Process Guide Workshop for Create-A-Pokemon.

[Dane]

maybe start ability and movepool discussion in the same thread and why have 3 days for selecting abilities just needs the discussion and then two topics/polls selecting abilty over two days.

I'd prefer to keep seperate threads for their discussion, otherwise it can become rather jumbled when making the ability poll. Easier to just make references in one of the topics if a specific ability makes a move/movepool more acceptable, or vice versa.

As for why the ability polls are three days instead of two (2/1 instead of 1/1), it's so people can debate on whether there should be a second ability, and what it should be, while being able to see the odds on favorite for the main ability. Perhaps a 1/1 would be better though, just because there's likely to be a spillover thread for the main ability (as there was for Revenankh)?

Secondary type i would extend to two days because i think their should be more discussion about the typing and people can post descriptions of the combination as was done with ghost/fighting.

Secondary type is two days long on both timetables.

 

[eric the espeon]

For both the type polls excludeing any type sounds like a VERY bad idea for this project, it is non-democratic and breaks with the spirit of this project to say you can't have pure dragon or normal just because there is not room for them in the poll, much better would be to have bold text voteing where you pick your favorite two (cooper used two polls open at once, that could work but I think bold text voteing would be more easy).

Another thing I dont like is removeing type combos that have been done simply because they have been done, voters will probably select new type combos>odd but we should not force that choice on them, maybe some people want a useable water/bug or a new dragon/steel.


For the polls that have >7 options we could have a poll lasting 1 day and put the top few (maybe 2-4 depending on what the TL thinks stands a chance) in the next round (lasting a day), then the top 2 into the last round if the votes are close (also a day). Haveing a single poll open for more then a day seams wasteful to me, why not move the best onto the next round as soon as every timezone has had a chance to vote.

 

[Dane]

For both the type polls excludeing any type sounds like a VERY bad idea for this project, it is non-democratic and breaks with the spirit of this project to say you can't have pure dragon or normal just because there is not room for them in the poll, much better would be to have bold text voteing where you pick your favorite two (cooper used two polls open at once, that could work but I think bold text voteing would be more easy).

Worked with Revenankh. It's mostly to prevent repeat typings (how enjoyable would Revenankh have been to make if he had been another Ice or Bug type like Syclant), ridiculously overused mono-types (water, normal), or mono types that would be stupid strong (Dragon).

Another thing I dont like is removeing type combos that have been done simply because they have been done, voters will probably select new type combos>odd but we should not force that choice on them, maybe some people want a useable water/bug or a new dragon/steel.

It's not just ones that have been done. It's one that have been done to death or are already represented by a very used Pokemon. Mono water, mono normal, Fire/Fighting, Ground/Rock, Grass/Poison, and other things like that. Why would we want a THIRD fire/fighting, or a who knows how many ground/rock or grass/poison?

For the polls that have >7 options we could have a poll lasting 1 day and put the top few (maybe 2-4 depending on what the TL thinks stands a chance) in the next round (lasting a day), then the top 2 into the last round if the votes are close (also a day). Haveing a single poll open for more then a day seams wasteful to me, why not move the best onto the next round as soon as every timezone has had a chance to vote.

I don't agree with this for style (nor build, if style was offensive or defensive rather than mixed), but it could work for everything else with multiple days. I'd still keep Main Typing with at least 2 days in this case though, for the reason I stated in my previous post. What's everyone else think of this idea of essentially forcing the inevitable spillover threads earlier than normal to cut back on time?

 

[Time Mage]

I figured, for secondary typing, that one day just wasn't enough and that it needed two. For the main typing, I'd normally say it only needs two, but since it's the first step, I gave it three. People may not realize the next project has started, so I gave it an extra day to compensate for that possibility.

As far as movepool specifics go, I figured most of the discussion for the moves would have already been discussed in the "Movepool Discussion Thread", though that could easily be given a extra day or two, depending on how long the rest of the process had taken.

Perhaps moving the Movepool discussion thread to begin at the same time as the ability or name discussion/submission thread to give a little more discussion time? (In fact, for now I'll make this small change to the movepool discussion timeslot in the large post, it can be edited later.)

Well reasoned. I am convinced, and therefore I retreat my proposals.

 

[eric the espeon]

Worked with Revenankh. It's mostly to prevent repeat typings (how enjoyable would Revenankh have been to make if he had been another Ice or Bug type like Syclant),

people will have a natural inclination to vote for new things, they will not go for another ice/bug, however some may feel that they want a bug/electric or ghost/normal next time, I dont see why we should say they can not even vote for these things.

ridiculously overused mono-types (water, normal),

No one wants a mono water or normal pokemon so they will NOT vote for it, however i thinl quite a few people would like a water/something or normal/something. lets give it a chance.

or mono types that would be stupid strong (Dragon).

A pure dragon would not be stupidly strong unless it had stats and movepool to match the OU dragons, look at kingdra is that stupidly strong? water/dragon is (IMO) a much better type then pure dragon, it loses the ice weak in exchange for the electric and grass resistences. What makes the base 600 dragons powerful is the fact that they all have great movepools and stats, not simply their types.

It's not just ones that have been done. It's one that have been done to death or are already represented by a very used Pokemon. Mono water, mono normal, Fire/Fighting, Ground/Rock, Grass/Poison, and other things like that. Why would we want a THIRD fire/fighting, or a who knows how many ground/rock or grass/poison?

how do you chose what is "done to death"? better to give the voters all options and hope they dont chose grass/poison or rock/ground. I doubt anyone on smogon would vote for those types anyway. Its not for the TL to remove options based on what has been done, its for the voters to regect those options.

 

[Time Mage]

We are not going to do many pokémon per year, as previously stated. So, better to enforce the variety, just to make sure it's there. If, as you say, people will vote for the new things, then not including the overused types won't have any impact, right?

 

[eric the espeon]

We are not going to do many pokémon per year, as previously stated. So, better to enforce the variety, just to make sure it's there. If, as you say, people will vote for the new things, then not including the overused types won't have any impact, right?

Because it does not fit with the spirit of the project (democratic, driven by voters), and haveing a few pokemon that have lready used types will not be a bad thing, i would personaly like a good pure fire type, or a nice bug/water, removeing these options from the voters is not fair IMO.

Enforceing varity is not a good way to go

....do add new type combinations but not systematically....

then in the next post

I agree fully with Brain...

(quotes from this thread http://www.smogon.com/forums/showthread.php?t=38248&page=2)

forceing people not to vote for valid options is not the way we should go with this project.

 

[Dane]

Because it does not fit with the spirit of the project (democratic, driven by voters), and haveing a few pokemon that have lready used types will not be a bad thing, i would personaly like a good pure fire type, or a nice bug/water, removeing these options from the voters is not fair IMO.

No one has suggested removing either of those those as options (in fact, I too want a good fire type, whether it's mono or not I don't care). The only time either of those weren't available would've been during the Revenankh poll, only because Bug had just been used with Syclant.

I can see where you're coming from, but in the case of the types that were just used, is it really that hard to draw from another type's movepool for a project before repeating a type? Remember, the exclusions are only for the Main type, not the secondary type.

The only popular one I can recall from Revenankh's thread that wouldn't be doable with this system would be Ghost/Normal. Perhaps allow normal as a main type selection, with a note that it will have a secondary type, since the main issue is with mono normal types.

 

[eric the espeon]

No one has suggested removing either of those those as options (in fact, I too want a good fire type, whether it's mono or not I don't care). The only time either of those weren't available would've been during the Revenankh poll, only because Bug had just been used with Syclant.
you did say that you wanted to remove type combos that had been used too much, i think all should be options even though i dont want a mono water i think people should have it as an option simply because its not hard to add (if we use bold text voteing) and there is no real reason to disalow it.

I can see where you're coming from, but in the case of the types that were just used, is it really that hard to draw from another type's movepool for a project before repeating a type? Remember, the exclusions are only for the Main type, not the secondary type.
for the part deux steel was knocked off the first poll just because it came close to winning the first CAP. This was wrong IMO.
Exludeing types should not be done lightly, you are changeing the very nature of the project from being guided by the TL to being controled by the TL. Useing bold text voteing it should be easy to put all 17 types as options.

The only popular one I can recall from Revenankh's thread that wouldn't be doable with this system would be Ghost/Normal. Perhaps allow normal as a main type selection, with a note that it will have a secondary type, since the main issue is with mono normal types.
hmmm... maybe but why not alow mono normal as you can be pretty sure no one will vote for it? if not you may ban mono normal as it is the most overused and boring type.

 

[Dane]

I'll agree removing steel last time was wrong. I think Hyra only did it because he wanted to use a standard vote rather than a bold vote, and without removing steel he'd have 11 options. Typing would be bold voting anyway now, whether these other types are put in or not.

More input from others about whether to allow or disallow some types would be helpful. I think banning mono-normal is a pretty safe bet though, since as stated it's so overused and boring.

 

[Time Mage]

Maybe we could allow all types, but indicating clearly that some of them would NOT have the option of being mono-type, like normal, water and flying. With bold votes, I like that option.

 

[Dane]

That sounds reasonable.

 

[latinoheat]

All types should be included because at the end of the day its what type combination that the whole community wants to see, not just the "commitee".

If something like pure dragon gets picked it is the tl's responsibility to make sure it does not become overpowered, if they can't do that then they should not be leading the topic to start with.



There are a number of existing type combinations that are very good but have been stuck on rather shit pokemon examples include:

water/bug
water/fighting
grass/flying
psy/flying
bug/ground

why should they be excluded.

Also as mentioned people gravitate towards newer things their is very little chance of another pure water or normal being selected.

 

[Dane]

There are alot of existing typings that are very good but have been stuck on rather shit pokemon examples include:

water/bug
water/fighting
grass/flying
psy/flying
bug/ground

why should they be excluded.

They wouldn't be, and never were included in the grouping of types that weren't allowed in the mock-up.

 

[latinoheat]

ok i just got the feeling that people were actually considered excluding existing dual typings. Either way this project should allow as much freedom as possible it is the job of the tl to make sure the resulting pokemon is not "broken".

If somehow a pure water or pure normal got over 50% of the votes then clearly alot of people think something is still possible with that typing. I seriously don't see why this is even being discussed.

 

[eric the espeon]

All types should be included because at the end of the day its what type combination that the whole community wants to see, not just the "commitee".

strongly agreeing with this sentement.

If something like pure dragon gets picked it is the tl's responsibility to make sure it does not become overpowered, if they can't do that then they should not be leading the topic to start with.

Very true, and even if it is overpowerd it will be placed in Ubers.

Maybe we could allow all types, but indicating clearly that some of them would NOT have the option of being mono-type, like normal, water and flying. With bold votes, I like that option.

maybe, but why bother banning something that no one will vote for? better to let the public dicide and if they realy want another mono water let them have it.

OH MY GOD 1111th post!!!!
(i just implyed both that god exists and that i own him, lol. Thats why i never say it in real life)

 

[latinoheat]

Also what is the stance on creating new moves and abilities, i know you made the new ability for scylant but was it a one time thing.
If not how will this be handled will users be able to suggest new moves etc

 

[Dane]

Very true, and even if it is overpowerd it will be placed in Ubers.

We're trying to make usable, ie: OU, Pokemon. Not uber Pokemon.

Also what is the stance on creating new moves and abilities, i know you made the new ability for scylant but was it a one time thing.
If not how will this be handled will users be able to suggest new moves etc

Based on what happened with Revenankh, new abilities and moves are looked down on but not forbidden. Basically, if it isn't really needed, don't bother.

*edit*
Btw, I made an alternate timetable based on eric's suggestion of forced spillovers:

Altered timeline, with forced spillovers to speed things along while maintaining structure:
Phase I: 9 Days + Spillover

• Main Type (2 Days)
• Main Type Forced Spillover (1 Day)
• Secondary Type (1 Day)
• Secondary Type Forced Spillover (1 Day)
• Style (Offensive/Defensive/Mixed) (2 Days)
• Build (Physical/Special/Mixed) (2 Days)

Phase II: 14 Days + Spillover

• Begin Art Submission Thread
• Base Stat Total (2 Days)
• Base Stat Total Forced Spillover (1 Day)
• Overall Stat Spread (1 Day)
• Overall Stat Spread Forced Spillover (1 Day)
• Finalization of Art Submissions (2 Days)
• Art Selection (1 Day)
• Art Selection Forced Spillover (1 Day)
• Begin Sprite Submission Thread
• Begin Movepool Discussion Thread
• Begin Main Ability Discussion Thread (1 Day discussion before polling)
• Begin Name Submission Thread
• Main Ability Selection (1 Day)
• Main Ability Selection Forced Spillover (1 Day)
• Secondary Ability Selection (1 Day)
• Name Poll (1 Day)

Phase III: 2 Days + Spillover

• Begin Pokedex Entry Submission Thread
• Movepool Specifics (1 Day)
• Begin Analysis Thread
• Sprite Poll Thread & Pokedex Poll Thread (1 Day Total, simultaneous threads)
• Etc (Pre-Evolutions, Height, Weight, Finish Analysis)
• Complete

Average time of project, not counting spillovers: 25 Days.

So... there are now three possible timetables in the mock-up. I've also removed the type restrictions from the mock-up, for now at least.

 

[Gothic Togekiss]

Okay, my take on the whole type restriction is as followed:

1. I do agree with Eric and Latinoheat statements about it.
2. I think a bold vote method for Main&Secondary type would work great if you want to shave off a little bit more time out of the project.
3. That's a lot of forced spillover polls on that timetable.

 

[Dane]

3. That's a lot of forced spillover polls on that timetable.

But they're pretty much only on things that have a very high chance of having spillover anyway. Other than the two stat ones, I could easily see all of the others almost having guaranteed spillover threads whether they were forced or not.

It's basically just taking some time off the initial polls for the spillovers that are highly likely to happen anyway.

 

[Hyra]

on the type thing, the only reason I cut the types down to 10 was to fit the voting system. If bold voting is being done, then allow all 17 types, simple as that.

On the rest of the stuff... no opinion as of now.

 

[eric the espeon]

Also what is the stance on creating new moves and abilities, i know you made the new ability for scylant but was it a one time thing.
If not how will this be handled will users be able to suggest new moves etc

new abilitys are fine IMO as long as DJD can program them, new moves are ok so long as they only fit on new pokemon , editing odl pokemon is a bad idea.

We're trying to make usable, ie: OU, Pokemon. Not uber Pokemon.

Ok then, they will be changed during the revision stage.

Begin Main Ability Discussion Thread (1 Day discussion before polling)

will the discution be in the previous thread?

3. That's a lot of forced spillover polls on that timetable.

true, but in realty those spillovers would happen anyway, my proposal would just shorten the first part of the poll to account for it.

on the type thing, the only reason I cut the types down to 10 was to fit the voting system. If bold voting is being done, then allow all 17 types, simple as that.

right

For the bold text voteing on the type and maybe stat total polls would it be good to have running totals updated every few hours? I know quite a few people (myself included) would be willing to help count, and it would help voters to know what stands a chance and whats a wasted vote.

also for the bigger polls (type stat total) will we be able to vote for more then one option?

Etc (Pre-Evolutions, Height, Weight, Finish Analysis)

If it is ok with the rest of you I would like to volunteer to finish any pre-evos in a single separate thread. From what i have seen there is enough interest in finishing Syclar to make it worth haveing a thread open for a week or so.
I know that CaP is mostly about competive bits but the pre-evos are not hard to do so lets just do them.

Flavor is more important than you think. If the first generation of pokemon wasn't so darn likeable (and wasn't backed by a large corporation), next to nobody would give a shit about competitive pokemon. The competitive aspect may be very important to the project, deep down it is flavor that reels people in and makes them care. Note that competitive worth and flavor are not mutually exclusive, just complementary. I suggest making all pokemon fit in some sort of pattern or story that doesn't have strong implications about their competitive worth but can help people like the new pokemon and care about them. Things that can make people care more about the project: evolutionary lines (even if only the full evo will ever be used), weird type combinations, fantasy pokemon like ditto/smeargle/castform, multiple evolution paths, starters, legends, background stories. You don't have to do all that, but just adding individual competitive pokemon will make the new metagame bland and you want to avoid that just as much as you want to avoid only caring about making a new set of starters, a new set of legends, etc.

 

[Deck Knight]

Big Deck Knight has not ignored you, however, he has edited in a Calendar which will be added here and at the beginning of the topic.

 

[latinoheat]

i still think base stats should come before any type of art thread is opened.

 

[eric the espeon]

i still think base stats should come before any type of art thread is opened.

I disagree, art should be open as long as possible and if the art and base stats dont fit perfictly is not that much of a problem.

Also where can i find a bigger or more clear vertion of that timetable? I find it hard to read.