Process Guide Workshop for Create-A-Pokemon.

Status
Not open for further replies.
I think what eric wanted to say is that Syclant's rating is too high (it's listed as having 'Fantastic' stats!).
 
X-Act said:
I think what eric wanted to say is that Syclant's rating is too high (it's listed as having 'Fantastic' stats!).
Click to expand...

Yes thats it, especially combined with good STABs a decent movepool, and Tail Glow+Sword Dance.

Also even though I have not commented on your stat ratings I have read them and think they are excellent, one of your best works.
 
Deck Knight said:
I have a comparison screenshot in my Angelfire stuff. 'Nuff said.
Click to expand...

LOL its almost twice as much.....

However 'ankh has unresisted STABs, Bulk Up, decent defensive typing and ShedRest to compensate for the not so amazing stats, making it just as hard to stop.

Syclant has a shallow movepool (come on it has only like 4 usable Sp. attacks outside Hidden Power, and its not that much better in the Phy. department), HORRIBLE defensive typing (two 4x weaknesses to quite common attacking types, with few resists), its STABs are good but they don't work well together (fire and steel each resist them both).
 
To be clear: a Pokemon having an overall rating of 600 is not twice as good as one having an overall rating of 300. The number doesn't really mean anything, except that the larger it is, the better. But, to give you an idea, there are 51 Pokemon between Syclant (593 rating) and Revenankh (300 rating). There are then 100 Pokemon between Revenankh (300 rating) and Grumpig (200 rating), and 200 isn't even half of 300.
 
So for future CAPs, I think it would be great if we established on a main concept that is wanted in the current metagame before doing anything else. Or perhaps after typing, but I do think it should be done early. Examples are a new Rapid Spinner, something with weather, a status absorber, a Baton Passer, etcetera. A submittal/vote system similar to Main Ability could be done - people voice their opinion about an idea, and then in the end they are all added to a bold voting poll.

I say this because it prevents bickering about what the Pokemon should and shouldn't be able to do, and gives you a clear direction to work towards when designing stats, trait and other factors.
 
Mekkah said:
So for future CAPs, I think it would be great if we established on a main concept that is wanted in the current metagame before doing anything else. Or perhaps after typing, but I do think it should be done early. Examples are a new Rapid Spinner, something with weather, a status absorber, a Baton Passer, etcetera. A submittal/vote system similar to Main Ability could be done - people voice their opinion about an idea, and then in the end they are all added to a bold voting poll.

I say this because it prevents bickering about what the Pokemon should and shouldn't be able to do, and gives you a clear direction to work towards when designing stats, trait and other factors.
Click to expand...


I agree completely. We got somewhat lucky with Syclant and Revenankh. They kinda naturally settled into a niche and purpose. This latest Fire/Grass creation has been all over the place. I think it has really hurt the process and the product.

Your process suggestion is a good way to address the problem and I think we could implement it exactly as you suggested. I think we should do it at the very beginning.
 
completly agree, start with a topic just discussing concept and work from there. IMO the most successful project was Revenankh and the reason why is because everyone agreed on the concept early and stuck with it.No one really went of on a tangent to make it something it wasn't meant to be and even when it threatened to do so hyra did an excellent job of keeping it together.

I still don't really see any new concept behind scylant.
 
Maybe if Mekkah says it people will understand. I suggested it before:
Time Mage said:
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.
Click to expand...
And got pretty much rejected. The role is the most important concept, the one that defines the rest of the characteristics (even typing in many cases). Something has to be done about this.
 
Time Mage said:
Maybe if Mekkah says it people will understand. I suggested it before:

And got pretty much rejected. The role is the most important concept, the one that defines the rest of the characteristics (even typing in many cases). Something has to be done about this.
Click to expand...

LOL. You did totally suggest this. And as I recall, I agreed with it. But, maybe I didn't actually post support. I don't know who shot it down, but we need to resurrect this idea.

I think the latest ideas around weather as a "theme" or "goal" for an entire project could teach us some valuable lessons on how to structure future projects that determine the goal first.
 
latinoheat said:
its been suggested alot, it finally took a huge fuck up for people to see why it should be this way.
Click to expand...

Yeah, because we were so lucky with Revenakh and Syclant, we had no experience with a project not having a goal by the ability stage. Our original goal was shot down (Sunny Day abuse) and nothing stepped in to fill the void.

We already have a goal for the next two CAP projects because of this. But for later occuring projects, we need the Goal step so that we have something to design around. Just remember, Goal could also just be a piece of art we really want to use, which is probably the way Gamefreak does it. We don't have to do it this way, but if there is an old piece of art someone wants to propogate as a goal, we should not shoot them down.
 
Yes, there should definitely be a thread specifically for discussing possible concepts for our Pokemon. This way, we will have already set in stone what we really want in our Pokemon, and we can usually balance out the ideas so that the Pokemon does not become "overpowered." The Greenhouse fiasco really did prove why a basic concept should be established before we go into creating the Pokemon. (However, as Hyra mentioned, ideas may be shot down along the way, but we also have more discussion time with a Concept Thread, and this could prevent us from going along with an "empty" project.)

Also, (I'm not sure if this has been mentioned or not, but it probably has) I think the art has too prominent of a role in this project. As the goal of the project is to create good competitive Pokemon, and art has little to do with that, we should keep the art as one of the last things that are tackled so we focus more on the competitive aspect of the project. The competitive characteristics (movepool, type, stats) should influence the art, not the other way around.
 
Mekkah said:
So for future CAPs, I think it would be great if we established on a main concept that is wanted in the current metagame before doing anything else. Or perhaps after typing, but I do think it should be done early. Examples are a new Rapid Spinner, something with weather, a status absorber, a Baton Passer, etcetera. A submittal/vote system similar to Main Ability could be done - people voice their opinion about an idea, and then in the end they are all added to a bold voting poll.

I say this because it prevents bickering about what the Pokemon should and shouldn't be able to do, and gives you a clear direction to work towards when designing stats, trait and other factors.
Click to expand...

Co signed for the truth
 
I love the idea of a "Concept" thread. Just one problem: every single CAP changes the metagame drastically. Whereas Revenankh added an immense possibility to stall on the CAP server, Woodman kills practically all stallers, and will do even more if it gets Scrappy and/or Rapid Spin.

But spilling out ideas for now is not bad at all, as long as they are presented well and it doesn't become one huge clutter. I have several ideas in mind for limiting that, one being the obvious "one concept a person" one which I'm not overly fond of (limiting creativity is always a problem), but it seems the easy way out for now.
 
I also have reservations about a wide-open "Concept" discussion at the beginning of every project. I definitely want the concept to be decided from the outset, but I'm worried we'll have an uncontrollable discussion that doesn't really narrow the field for us.

Perhaps we could do it like stat spreads. We have an open concept discussion for a few days. Then the TL could pick several people to each make a Concept Submission. We then would vote on the submissions. This would allow everyone to contribute initially. But the people that participate heavily and make good, well-reasoned posts, would be "rewarded" by being part of the submission panel. This style has worked very well for stat spreads. Perhaps we could do the same with Concept.
 
I like that idea, because it also cuts down on what happened with this Fire/Grass Pokemon. We seemed to decide on a concept, be hyped about it, and think up possibilities for it. Then the next poll or two come around, and all of a sudden the concept changes.

Kingdra of the Sun
Bulky Wall Breaker
Leech Seeder
Wall to Rival Blissey
Mini Drought User

I believe at one point, all of these were brought up and impacted votes. It definitely needs to be voted on early, and stuck with rather than "unofficially" chosen.
 
That's because I figured it would be discussed, and then stuck to once an idea was liked, before we even got to the ability portion of the process. Apparently I was wrong, so it seems needed.

Plus, the hardlocking vote is what I like, not just a "concept thread".
 
We would need to be careful on the specificity of the Concept Submissions. Since we have polls to determine each aspect of the pokemon, we don't want the entire pokemon determined by the details of the Concept.

For example, I think this would be the appropriate level of detail for a concept:

Concept: "Kingdra of the Sun"
Description: A balanced pokemon with a varied movepool under normal conditions. But, it will have an ability that allows it to become a dangerous sweeping force in sunny weather.
Click to expand...
This would be too specific and restrictive:

Concept: "Kingdra of the Sun"
Description: A big flaming lizard pokemon with 90-100 in all attacking and defensive stats. It's speed will be 80-90, and it will have Chlorophyll for an ability -- so that when Sunny Day is in effect, it will be able to sweep opponents with powered up Fire Blast and Overheat. It should also have Swords Dance and Flame Wheel to take advantage of its decent Attack stat.
Click to expand...

The latter description basically eliminates most of the creativity in the typing, art, stats, ability, and movepool polls.

It is hard to provide solid concept descriptions without basically designing the entire pokemon right off the bat. I'm worried we'll see too many Concept Submissions like the second one above. If we pick good submitters, this can be mitigated. I think the TL's discretion will be required to keep it in check.
 
DougJustDoug said:
We would need to be careful on the specificity of the Concept Submissions. Since we have polls to determine each aspect of the pokemon, we don't want the entire pokemon determined by the details of the Concept.

For example, I think this would be the appropriate level of detail for a concept:


This would be too specific and restrictive:



The latter description basically eliminates most of the creativity in the typing, art, stats, ability, and movepool polls.

It is hard to provide solid concept descriptions without basically designing the entire pokemon right off the bat. I'm worried we'll see too many Concept Submissions like the second one above. If we pick good submitters, this can be mitigated. I think the TL's discretion will be required to keep it in check.
Click to expand...

Perhaps a "Concept Discussion Thread" should be set up now for those who are already debating the next CAP's (Rapid Spinner and Auto-Weather).
 
Back on track, unless i've totally missed something we really need to decide on another order for stuff to be done in. This CAP Was all over the shop for the reason that people were trying to work with concepts but utterly failing due to the simultanousness with the Art polls.

Too lazy to do a huge big draft, but it should go:

Concept -> Art -> Bst -> Movepool
 
maybe more like

Concept -> Type -> Art -> Bsr(base stat range, useing X-Acts stat thingy) -> Movepool

Or we could let the consept evolve naturaly as the polls go on.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top