Latino's mentioned this on the server before, what about an Anti-roll of sorts. The role was to break the stereotype of a type. Like a special Rock Tank.
I knew there were exceptions... but you see my point? Like completely go against the stereotype of a type. Its Latino's idea btw, I'm just borrowing it so we can narrow down the definition.
No, it isn't legal.My point was: is having a type dependent role without saying a specific type legal?
Okay, so let's take your illegal role and call it "Type Stereotype Breaker", thats the best I can do based on your description. Let's come up with a fictional name -- Rockshitz. Now let's fill in the RMT section:<Pokemon Name Here>
Stats
Moves
Blah
Blah
Blah
I'm using <Name> as my <insert role here>. I've never been satisfied with the other <insert role here>'s in OU, and this one really gets the job done well. <Name> can do a lot of things on a team, but with this moveset and EV spread, it does a fine job as a <insert role here>. Other people might think that <other pokemon name here> is a better <insert role here>, but I prefer <name> for this particular team. If you look at the rest of my squad, and consider the strategy that I am using, I think you'll agree with my choice here. Comments welcome.
Does that make any fucking sense? Hell no. "Type Stereotype Breaker" is not a Role.Rockshitz
Stats
Moves
Blah
Blah
Blah
I'm using Rockshitz as my type stereotype breaker. I've never been satisfied with the other type stereotype breakers in OU, and this one really gets the job done well. Rockshitz can do a lot of things on a team, but with this moveset and EV spread, it does a fine job as a type stereotype breaker. Other people might think that Probopass is a better type stereotype breaker, but I prefer Rockshitz for this particular team. If you look at the rest of my squad, and consider the strategy that I am using, I think you'll agree with my choice here. Comments welcome.
It fits perfectly. Heck, you could post that in the RMT thread right now and get some quality rates... ;-)Rockshitz
Stats
Moves
Blah
Blah
Blah
I'm using Rockshitz as my Special wall. I've never been satisfied with the other Special walls in OU, and this one really gets the job done well. Rockshitz can do a lot of things on a team, but with this moveset and EV spread, it does a fine job as a Special wall. Other people might think that Blissey is a better Special wall, but I prefer Rockshitz for this particular team. If you look at the rest of my squad, and consider the strategy that I am using, I think you'll agree with my choice here. Comments welcome.
This makes sense. It's not the most common Role in the world. But it works, since this is obviously part of a Gravity team.Rockshitz
Stats
Moves
Blah
Blah
Blah
I'm using Rockshitz as my Gravity user. I've never been satisfied with the other Gravity users in OU, and this one really gets the job done well. Rockshitz can do a lot of things on a team, but with this moveset and EV spread, it does a fine job as a Gravity user. Other people might think that Fidgit is a better Gravity user, but I prefer Rockshitz for this particular team. If you look at the rest of my squad, and consider the strategy that I am using, I think you'll agree with my choice here. Comments welcome.
Why, you have a problem with polls? This will replace the concept poll, if you had read the OP.So does that mean there will be a...
*groan*
Role Poll?
No I just didn't like how Role Poll rhymed.Why, you have a problem with polls? This will replace the concept poll, if you had read the OP.
Role[I]
n.[/I][LIST=1]
[*]A character or part played by a performer.
[*] The characteristic and expected social behavior of an individual.
[*] A function or position.
[*][I]Linguistics.[/I] The function of a word or construction, as in a sentence.[/LIST]
No, I actually included quite a bit of explanation why the quality would be diminished. I even included some analogies to make it clearer. If you missed it, here's the end of it:I must ask why you believe it interferes with the quality of the community analysis and therefore diminishes the quality of the community decision.
I read your post and it didn't seem to actually state why this would occur, just that it would occur.
If we are evaluating a bunch of wildly different concepts like:
"Steel pokemon with Adaptability."
"Low Defense, High SpAttack DracoMeteor Abuser"
"Scrappy Normal/Ghost with Rapid Spin"
"130-speed Encoring Tail Glow Baton Passer"
Some of these might be viable, depending on the aspects not specified. Some of them might be completely broken fundamentally. How in the hell are we supposed to discuss all of those in a single conversation? We'll be debating abilities, typing, stat combinations -- ALL AT THE SAME TIME. There's no way we can analyze any one issue properly with that many issues on the table. How could we possibly feel confident that we made a good decision? It's just like the gymnastics judge being forced to look at a bunch of sports simultaneously and then make a very specific decision about one of them. It's a ridiculous way to judge...
It won't be the same discussion as usual. The usual way we discuss Typing is by ONLY discussing Typing. In your example, just to discuss "Tankish Electric", we have to evaluate, at a minimum, three competitive aspects:I assume you mean the "quality of the community analysis" to mean the discussion that takes place that analyze the effects of certain aspects of the pokemon on the metagame.
The main question I ask is, how does me submitting "Tankish Electric" stop these discussions? In order to win the vote, I will still have to put forward the pros of the proposal, and people will have problems with it and present cons. And that will spark the same discussion as usual...
You make it sound like the entire community will be scrutinizing and discussing your "Tankish Electric" idea. They will not. It will be one concept amongst hundreds. Even if we toss out all the ridiculous ideas, your idea will still be one amongst dozens. There's no way we can have an intelligent discussion about your idea when the posts that pertain to your "Tankish Electric" are intermingled with the millions of other "sub-discussions" going on. That's not an analysis. It's total chaos. In fact, that's EXACTLY what we had with past movepool discussions. That's why we continue to break up the movepool discussion into smaller pieces -- so we can actually have some intelligent analysis, instead of a total shitstorm of posts on a million different things.However, if you put slight specifics in the role such as "Tankish Electric" then you can begin intelligent discussion right away.
Sounds good to me. Honestly, I think a very clear "ONE CONCEPT SUBMISSION PER PERSON" would do wonders for the thread, as long as people could post intelligent discussion and criticism if they want.I wholeheartedly agree with the "one submission per person rule". That will reduce a lot of the spam. It may constrain a few creative contributors, but I think it would be better for the community as a whole.
Right now, I'm thinking we should just leave the Concept Submission pretty much like it was. State very clearly that no submission can dictate a specific result of any later poll, and let the submitters figure out how to work within those limitations. If people come up with some really poor submissions, they can be culled by the TL and/or rejected by the community.