CAP 25 - Part 2 - Concept Poll 3

Status
Not open for further replies.

DougJustDoug

Knows the great enthusiasms
is a Site Content Manageris a Top Artistis a Programmeris a Forum Moderatoris a Top CAP Contributoris a Battle Simulator Admin Alumnusis a Live Chat Contributor Alumnusis a Top Tiering Contributor Alumnusis an Administrator Alumnus
Moderator
This is the final head-to-head poll to decide our winning Concept!

This will be a single bold vote, which means that you vote for only one of the submissions. A typical vote might look like the following:
My Preferred Entry

Any comments that the voter has would go below the votes in non-bold text. Bold text is used to determine what the user's votes are, so none of the supplementary text should be in bold.
CAP uses automated scripts to count votes. For this reason, it is very important for all ballots to be submitted correctly. If you do not compose a legal ballot, your post will be subject to moderation.
  • The scripts count bold words in ballots, so do NOT bold anything in your ballot other than the options you are voting for.
  • Do NOT put any formatting other than bold in your post.
  • Only one option per line.
  • The spelling of options must be EXACTLY correct and must match the spelling listed above.
  • Capitalization and spaces are ignored by the vote counting scripts, but you probably should not depend on it.
Composing a proper ballot is easy. Enter BBCode Edit Mode (the A in the upper right corner). Copy/paste the options directly from the OP to your ballot as plain unbolded text. Delete and/or rearrange the options to suit your preference and the poll type. Bold your vote text using bold tags or re-enter rich text mode, highlight your vote and click B. Spelling or formatting errors may spoil your ballot, so be careful!

Please post only your votes in this thread. Do not respond to other posts, or your posts will be moderated and you may be warned. You are allowed to say whatever you like in relation to your vote at the bottom of your post, but please do not look to begin a discussion. Keep those comments to the PS! CAP chatroom or the CAP Discord channel.

Asking for votes for your submission or for the submissions of others is not allowed. Anyone found to have done so risks punishment at the moderation team's discretion. If you find that someone has broken this rule, please contact the CAP moderation team with your evidence and no one else. Mini-moderation of this rule is also considered a serious offense and can be punished.

IMPORTANT: When voting, use only the name of the author! The list of possible votes include:

Deck Knight
Mr Holiday


This poll will be open for 24 hours. The concept submissions are quoted below in order of submission.

--

Astounding Ability Actualization

  • Name - Astounding Ability Actualization
  • Description - These Pokemon each maximize the potential of their given, separate abilities by coordinating their movepools and that ability's competitive effect.
  • Justification - This is an Actualization concept much like Cyclohm's original "Neglected Ability." In my research on what made Pokemon with "Starter Level" stats effective, the common denominator was they all had abilities they used to full effect with their other competitive aspects. This framework gives us a unique opportunity to A-B test some fairly powerful abilities we usually shy away from and bring out an effective competitive starter trio.
  • Questions To Be Answered -
    • Which Abilities are best suited to a full, comprehensive exploration of their specific mechanics?
    • Why does Ability seem to be the common factor in taking "starter-esque" Pokemon into prominence (e.g. Protean and Battle Bond Greninja, Contrary Serperior, Speed Boost Blaziken to Ubers, etc.)
    • What is the threshold where maximizing an ability goes toi far, such as Blaziken's combination of Swords Dance, strong attack and mid-grade speed, and high BP STABS with Speed Boost or Protean Greninja's huge speed and just-varied enough movepool in prior Generations?
    • How will introducing three specialized Pokemon into the metagame at once impact it overall?
    • Which type combinations along with the starter types are best suited to maximizing the potential of a specific ability, and why?
  • Explanation - Competitive Pokemon has suffered from a massive power creep for a long time. In order for a Pokemon to be effective, not only does it have to be fairly good generally, it also can't be directly outclassed. Considering our Framework, our Pokemon are already competing against Heatran/Volcarona, Toxapex/Keldeo/Greninja, and Ferrothorn/Kartana for offensive or defensive roles. However, each of those Pokemon have their own flaws that give our FWG CAP Trio space to explore if we are focused on a key niche for each of them.

    Let's take Grass for example, and Tough Claws. Tough Claws boosts one of the most incredibly CAP-relevant moves, Grass Knot, because it is a special contact attack. Only Mega Metagross ever even came close to utilizing this combination, and Mega-Meta was banned (for other reasons, of course). Grass could also use it's huge number of healing options with Triage, including priority Strength Sap that even outruns Bullet Punch. Nearly every Fire attack has a secondary effect chance perfect for Serene Grace or Sheer Force. Water has a few specific moves that would also love Serene Grace, but would also appreciate breaking through Gastrodon and Mollux with Mold Breaker. Suffice it to say, this concept gives us an ability to meet our Framework demands and think through a huge combination of synergistic types and abilities in a single project.

Once More, with Feeling!

Name: Once More, with Feeling!

Description: These CAPs would be designed to take ideas/concepts/gimmicks from past Pokemon, that either looked good on paper but didn't work in practice, or that just never worked in the first place, and revamp them into competitive viability.

Justification: This is largely a Target concept, focused on identifying Pokemon from the past that, for one reason or another, weren't able to cut it in the OU/CAP metagame and redoing the same underlying idea of that Pokemon in such a way that it could be competitively viable. This is not intended to "fix" bad Pokemon, so much as it is to find good ideas which were poorly executed in the past, and determine what, if anything, can be done to bring out the idea's full potential. This Concept can also fall under Actualization, by achieving the goals set by past Pokemon that were never fulfilled, ideally shedding light on what made them fail in the first place.

Questions to be Answered: Why did the selected Pokemon fail to make it in the OU/CAP metagame? Was their underlying idea or concept simply bad, or was it poorly executed? Are there simply some concepts, ideas or strategies that can never work in OU/CAP, or is it possible through the right combination of Stats, Typing, Moves and Abilities? Can these ideas be kept balanced while making them viable, or are they entirely broken when working properly? Is it worthwhile to pursue these failed ideas, or is it better to simply stick with the "accepted" norms of competitive Pokemon? If so, will this cause other, less "standardized" ideas and concepts to gain in popularity, or will the accepted norms always remain as such?

Explanation: Oftentimes in Pokemon, we have a Pokemon design that, on paper, looks to be perfectly viable and threatening, but when it's actually used in practice it can't quite live up to it's own hype. For example, when people first saw Rampardos and it's 165 base Attack, they assumed it would be a vastly powerful physical threat, one which every team would have to prepare for. However, when people actually started to use it, they found that Rampardo is plagued by a myriad number of problems (Less than ideal Stats, interesting but not very helpful Ability, etc.) that kept it from shining in the OU format. Other times, we have Pokemon that seem built for a very specific, if sometimes gimmicky, strategy, one which never gets used in OU. When I first saw Toxapex, with it's unique Ability in Merciless and varied ways of utilizing it, I immediately saw a strange kind of tank/wall breaker, using critical hits to plow through statistically superior foes. Competitive players, however, saw a wall with a useless main Ability. I think it would interesting, and potentially very informative, to see if ideas like these, that are considered to gimmicky, or that have been poorly executed, can be made viable in OU/CAP. With the special Framework of CAP 25, we can select 3 "failed" ideas of the past and see if they can be made viable.
 

nyttyn

From Now On, We'll...
is a Forum Moderator Alumnusis a CAP Contributor Alumnus
Deck Knight

both could probably work but i'd rather have more focus out the gate.
 
Mr Holiday

My two favorite concepts are here which is great so we win no matter what, but I am more excited about trying to rehabilitate failed ideas.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 1, Guests: 0)

Top