CAP 26 - Part 1 - Concept Submissions

Status
Not open for further replies.
Name - These Shackles Make Me Mortal (Rewritten from 2MN's submission for CAP24)

Description - A Pokemon of brutal, unimaginable power, who by some combination of lacklaster/actively detrimental ability, dubious typing, and poorly optimized movepool, balances out into something appropriate for a competitive metagame.

Justification - Archetype: Over the course of Pokemon's lifespan, a lot of Pokemon have been created with a lot of philosophies. One of the more interesting ones is obscene power tempered by critical flaws. This has been manifested in a lot of different ways, and ended up in a lot of different places. Pokemon like Slaking, Archeops, and Regigigas have been chronically locked to the bottom tiers by their shortcomings outweighing their upsides, while the glass cannon Deoxys-Attack has remained firmly in Ubers, despite its tissue paper defenses making it fold to even weak, resisted attacks.

These are examples of what not to do, though. The examples of what might qualify as an incredibly powerful Pokemon with critical weaknesses that actually hit the sweet-spot for competitive play could be as extreme as Kyurem-Black, a Pokemon with Ubers-tier stats held back by a pool match-up with hazards, a lack of effective STAB attacks, and poor defensive typing, to any number of consistently powerful pokemon with a 4x weakness, such as Landorus's ice weakness, Ferrothorn's fire (and fighting, really) weakness, Charizard and Volcarona's cripping 4x Stealth Rock weaknesses, or even the wide variety of fast, frail pokemon, especially those weak to important priority.

The goal of this concept is to strike that perfect balance: A pokemon which, at a glance, should be incredibly powerful, but nonetheless is a balanced roleplayer in the CAP metagame.

Questions to be Answered -

- How do different kinds of strengths and weaknesses interact? Are we better off creating a pokemon whose weaknesses directly offset their strengths (like how Kyurem's attacking stats are held back by its poor movepool), or should they be 'unrelated'?

- How strong can be a pokemon be while remaining balanced, and in what ways? Would it be better for the Pokemon to do one thing incredibly well, or could it be given a wealth of different strengths all at once?

- Conversely, how bad can a weakness be while still allowing a Pokemon to remain usable? It's hard to imagine a usable pokemon with Truant (outside of the Entrainment gimmick builds),

- What sorts of weaknesses have not been previously explored or seen in competitive play? There are some weaknesses which are tried and true - OU has been overrun with fast, powerful, and frail pokemon since the earliest generations. We could make something like that, and it would fulfill the concept, but it wouldn't be an interesting approach.

Explanation - Obviously, as mentioned, this is based on 2MN's submission for a previous CAP. However, it is a concept I personally think is very interesting. It really fascinated me, in Gen V, when the decision was made on release that Kyurem-B was totally fine in OU, in spite of its monstrous 700 BST and awe-inspiring (especially at the time) 170 base attack. It turned out to be a completely correct decision, and three generations later, it remains in OU, somehow having struck that perfect balance. Its since also been joined by Hoopa-Unbound, which with a similar 680 bst and obscene attacking stats, panned out as even dropping to UU (from which it is currently banned, so at least it has that going for it). In general, I'm big on interesting gameplay, and laser focused weaknesses to target definitely lead to more interesting gameplay, in my opinion.
 

Estronic

mechanical fever
is a Contributor to Smogonis a Smogon Media Contributor
Name: Consistency or Complexity
Description: A Pokemon that is able to utilize two kinds of similar sets: a set that has the same average level of usability, vulnerability, and reward output and a set that highly rewards complex play and advantageous situations but is extremely vulnerable after possibly even one mistake.
Justification: This Pokemon would fall under Actualization. Most Smogon metagames have many types of Pokemon, and this concept utilizes two: the "o'reliable" type, which in general is average all around but still yields good results, and the "strategic" type, which is much more rewarding for more complex play but can be in a real bad spot even after one mistake. This Pokemon would be able to fit into both of these types, and its sets for each type would be very similar, possibly only taking one change in ability, item, or even move for it to switch. A Pokemon that I think loosely fits in with this archetype would be Kartana, specifically its Choice Scarf and Choice Band set. Its Choice Scarf is pretty reliable and doesn't require a lot of critical thinking. On the other hand, its Choice Band set is much more rewarding with its increased attack power, but the loss of Speed means that it can't reliable face other Pokemon because they're faster; however, when played correctly with prediction, its reward is much bigger than the Choice Scarf set's. Again, I said Kartana is a loose example of this idea, since it arguably can be placed in the same bad position for both sets. This concept aims for CAP 26 to have minimum of that as possible. In simpler terms, you will be able to choose out of two similar sets, with essentially them being low risk, low reward and high risk, high reward, but of course it's more deeper than that. It also appeals to a wider audience of players with different playstyles; one person may choose the more consistent set if they want to feel more comfortable when playing, while another may go for the other set if they want to be rewarded for their technical play, though one mistake might mess them up big time.
Questions To Be Answered:
  • How different does the Pokemon's sets have to be for it to completely switch in terms of playstyle? Can it only be one, simple change? Can it be completely changed with a different ability, item, and even move?
  • Can it be considered that such sets off of a Pokemon have skill floors and skill ceilings? If so, how different do the skill floors and skill ceiling of both sets have to be from each other for it to fit the original concept?
  • How would an opponent have to play around such Pokemon before revealing its set? After?
  • How can a Pokemon be consistent in terms of usability, vulnerability, and reward output? It is possible to balance it out?
  • How can a Pokemon be considered "complex" and require a "technical" playstyle? How huge should the reward be for correct usage? Punishment for mistakes?
Explanation:
This concept is based around the differences between Marth and Lucina in Super Smash Bros Ultimate. Although the have the same exact moves, Marth is more defensive, relies more on spacing, and can be rewarded earlier KOs when played well, while Lucina is more aggressive, consistent, and is more easier to play. This is due to merely only one simple change within their swords, Marth's sword has more damage output and knockback at its tipper but is much more weaker throughout the rest of it, whereas Lucina's sword does the same damage and knockout everywhere but lacks as much punch as Marth's tipper. It's interesting how a simple change in two of basically the same character can cause them to have drastically different playstyles, and it would be interesting to see that played out in Pokemon. Sure we already have similar occurrences in Pokemon, but nothing really close in completely changing the skill floor and skill ceiling of a Pokemon in its entirety.
 

SHSP

is a Forum Moderator
Moderator
Concepts so far are looking excellent! There's a lot of good stuff here, excited to see how it grows. I'm planning on popping in and giving my .02$ on them fairly regularly, so lemme get into that now on them:

Pick your Poison: What I really like about this concept is that it is not too strict on it's interpretation. If chosen, there are a lot of different angles to attack this idea from and a lot of directions to go in. On the other hand, that broadness isn't always a good thing for a process such as ours, and a concern myself and the TLT both noticed was how feasible it is: out of many options, how likely is it that all remain equal, compared to the likelihood of one separating itself from the rest? I think the meat of the idea is in the third question- tailoring such a mon to be team specific.

The Sweeper Stopper: I remain unconvinced that a single mon could curb the majority of set-up sweepers in a diverse and very powerful metagame such as USUM's. In addition, this idea of "beat sweepers" seems redundant with the past projects of Tomohawk and Arghonaut, which both still can fill this role. I feel there is more to flesh out here, in terms of differentiating from those. (Also going to take a second and use this as a platform: CAP 26 will not impact the Council's decision to address Necturna now. Concepts that say "but what if we don't nerf it" will not change the council's decision.)

The Alolan Varient: I think the name does this concept no favors, and neither does the implied limitations on stats. At its core, a concept that is "how can we do this, but better" is intriguing but very underdeveloped. As it stands, this is more flavor than function; if there is something in this, it's in the re-application of past concepts but with the benefit of hindsight.

Discount Zygarde: Hilarious name aside, my immediate worry is in this concept's scope. Tying to the second question asked, several of these moves have either proved themselves very niche (Soak for Pyukumuku, arguably Smack Down and Gravity for Lando-T) or not particularly viable as is. I worry that we find partway through that the moves themselves, not the abusers, are the issue with their viability. I can certainly see it working at the same respect- and arguably moreso on the mentioned defensive possibility. I feel there's certainly more to be discussed and fleshed out here- especially in questions asked, and on the initial concept blurb rather than specifically the moves that make it possible.

Eviolite Abuser: Ignoring the effect it would have on extraneous process parts, I'm not sure how much is able to be taken from this concept. Outclassing an evolution offensively thanks to Eviolite seems very difficult, even if there is a significant difference between them (think Scyther-Scizor, where Scyther would rather run an offensive item), and defensively how much is there to be done that isn't covered by Chansey, Pory2, etc. I'm intrigued to see where this concept argues to differentiate from these.

Locked and Loaded: I feel there is a lot more to work with here than the concept as of now details and can use some fleshing out, although the subject matter of it seems difficult to address regardless. I'm not sure how feasible this concept is to succeed considering what it attempts to make usable as a primary option.

Gotta Go Fast: The first part of the concept- outspeed everything- is something feasible. The second- win- is where this can get messy or problematic. There is a very small middle ground to hit when giving something one of the most powerful tools in the game with the implied speed. It also mentions that a problem exists in nothing being totally committed to solely speed- is this a problem? I feel the meat of the concept is in the first question: what to do with speed, and why?

The Future Is Bright: I think the explanation of this concept is very well stated and details the upsides of it quite well. It's limiting without being too narrow and open without being too broad, and enables an interesting process.

Set Customization: Similar to Pick your Poison, this tunnels in on the teambuilding aspect of it. Customization as a whole is a tricky concept to pin down, and I'd like to see focus on that last question- its impact from a metagame perspective is just as intriguing and important to the process as the process itself with such an end-product focused concept.

Stings Like Hell: Worries here stem from the crux of the concept- Fell Stinger is almost a poor man's Battle Bond with a LOT more limitations, and I'm unsure how effective it can be in a metagame as strong as this.

Celebrity Entourage: Birkal's concepts never fail to disappoint. This is one of the most interesting concepts, although one of the trickiest to wrap ones head around. I'm overall not sure what to make of this as it's so odd, and honestly to consider it fully I feel I would need to go back to some replays and see the differences between players myself.

Underdog Promoter: Described as a reverse-Arghonaut, it seems fundamentally more partner-focused than that concept. The idea of only being checked by the specific underused mon is both unhealthy and unfeasible, so it ties itself directly to the danger of being a partner concept.

The Punisher: This concept as written up is very broad in its definition of "tactics;" I feel like more description would be very helpful. What exactly defines a "tactic?" What methods do we have at our disposal to punish them uniquely from their average counterplay?

Pebbles and Caltrops: I like the emphasis on standing out from existing hazard controllers- it gives this concept a bit more depth than otherwise. The last question mentioned also adds intrigue considering the whole of the "hazard game;" how that is won or lost is more than just setting or removing and opens up other avenues.


The rest of the concepts I'll be getting to either later tonight or tomorrow afternoon, and if anyone has any q's feel free to ping me and we'll chat! Again, I'll be getting posts in real regularly about these and I'm super stoked about how they've gone!
 

LucarioOfLegends

Real Life Schrodinger's Cat
is a CAP Contributor
Name: Snowball Effect

Description: A Pokemon that gets stronger the longer it stays on the battlefield.

Justification: This is in the Actualization category, as it focuses on exploring the importance of time on the field and how to both lengthen and maximize that time by the aspect of getting stronger over it.

Questions:
- In the context of this concept, what is "strength"?
- What methods are there of gaining "strength" that work best over a longer period of time?
- How can we best prevent this Pokemon from switching out of battle to keep it from losing strength?
- In what way should this Pokemon be getting "stronger" over time?
- Are there any specific deterrents to staying in that this Pokemon should be able to safely combat?

Explanation: Generally I think that there are a lot of possible for this concept, and its focus away from switching could be a really interesting point of discussion in CAP. In terms of methods, I think there are quite a few that could be seen as usable. There are moves that make the Pokemon stronger through stat boosts, such as Flame Charge and Power-Up-Punch, as well as setup moves that make them stronger since you get the opportunity to actually use them, which can work on both the offensive and defensive spectrum. Could be a lot of fun and a really interesting focus.
 

david0895

Mercy Main Btw
is a Pre-Contributor
Name: The return of the fallen king

Description: A Pokemon that it is defined by the move King's Shield.

Justification: This falls into the Actualization, as it focuses about a move that it's unseen in the metagame.

Questions:
  • What benefits can bring this move to the metagame?
  • Can the metagame adapt to this move?
  • Can this move be balanced with an adequate user?
Explanation: King's Shield is a very particular move that is not seen both in OU and CAP since that its best user (Aegislash) is banned and the other one (Smeargle) is unviable. The double Attack reduction can be scary, but the inability to block status move can open the door to some nice counterplays.
 
Name: Reversal
Description: A Pokémon with access to moves able to reverse a Pokemon's attack right back to the attacker.
Justification: It mostly likely fits into the category of Target. Since the beginning of time, sweepers have dominated the metagames of not just CAP, but of most conceivable categories-even now, we are going through a suspect test for Crucibelle. While nerfing that Pokemon isn't inherently bad, I have always found that increasing the viability of another Pokemon is more dynamic and more interesting. So, instead of buffing another Pokemon, why not use the opportunity of CAP to create a new one? Reversal would function as checks to the majority of big offensive threats to the metagame.

It would also fit into the category of an Archetype, as it functions as an emergency counter to the fast sweepers, the bulky priority-users, the whole group. Think of Sword Dance Scissor or Quiver Dance Auromoth. In many conditions, once they have been give the chance to setup even once they can tear through entire team's. Sweepers like these are prevalent in the metagame, and very often these sweepers become too powerful for the metagame to sustain. Pheromosa, Marshadow, Zygarde, Azumarill-their ability to sweep or to setup and sweep, in all of these cases, were deemed too powerful for their previous metagame, and these examples are few out of an ocean.
Questions To Be Answered:
  • How can a CAP that can check most, if not all, attackers be balanced?
  • How can CAP 26 be made in a way that doesn't make it too viable an answer to offensive Pokemon?
  • Would all of these 'Counter'moves be allowed on the same Pokemon? Or would it be restricted?
Explanation: The goal of Reversal is to create a CAP that not only utilizes fairly undervalued moves but to have a Pokemon that could answer almost any threat in the metagame, but never being able to take them all on at the same time; something that could be quite powerful, but loses it's edge once the opponent knows it's moveset! It would be a guessing game for the opponent every time the Pokemon is played; what moves is it using? Another goal of Reversal is to create a more sustainable metagame; with such a defensive force, the offense that defines the competitive CAP metagame would be quite mitigated.
 
Last edited:
Name: Be the change you wish to see in this world!

General Description: A Pokemon that can make use of in-battle form changes effectively.

Justification: Form changes are one of the most interesting but inconsistent niches in the OU meta. Introduced in Generation 6 with X and Y, Aegislash was often seen as a the most powerful Pokemon of the XY meta, singlehandedly bringing true counters such as Mandibuzz and Hippowdon into the OU spotlight. Eventually, Aegislash saw usage rates that were too high, and was seen by many as too polarizing for the OU meta, and as such, was eventually banned to OU. Interestingly, introduced in Generation 5 in the Unova region, Darmanitan was another concept similar to Aegislash with an altered stats allocation when using the hidden ability Zen Mode, allowing Darmanitan to switch between normal and zen mode variants. However, Zen Mode is considered a non-competitive ability, despite it’s ability to create a more flexible set. Released in the same generation, Meloetta, sporting it’s Aria and Pirouette forms is generally considered unusable, despite its respectable stat total. Finally, in Generation 7 with Sun and Moon, Minior was speculated to be a powerful Shell Smash sweeper, given it’s great moveset, offensive typing, and incredible speed once it’s signature ability, Shields Down, has activated. Unfortunately, Minior fell short of it’s speculated power, and has resided in PUBL since Gen 7.
Here, we see four different Pokemon: Aegislash, Darmanitan, Meloetta, and Minior, all with form activation requirements: Stance Change, health restrictions, move usage, and again, health restrictions, respectively. However, of these four Pokemon, only Aegislash was able to carve itself a foothold in the meta, eventually propelling it to Ubers status. So the concept I would like to explore is Form changes, and more specifically, how form changes can be utilized in a way that allows a Pokemon to be powerful and capable of employing it’s forms effectively, while making sure it does not become too powerful for the OU metagame. This concept would be Actualization and Archetype. Currently, there are no viable Pokemon that can utilize form changes. Obviously, in Ubers, Aegislash is still a great choice as a Tank and fairy check. Overall, none of the other form changes are usable even in their tier, as Darmanitan is unusable in Zen Mode form, and Meloetta doesn’t run Relic Song. Minior’s mediocre offensive and defensive stats in both forms doesn’t give it the bulk or firepower to be a strong sweeper until late game. Looking for a Pokemon that is able to use Form Changes correctly would be incredibly useful to figure out what makes Aegislash Ubers material, a Generation past it’s release, and what makes Meloetta, a legendary Pokemon, a flop.

Questions To Be Answered:
How can form changes be effectively utilized?
Why are Form Changing Pokemon exceedingly rare in general and in usage?
What are the differences between activation requirements? Why?
Is one type of activation requirement more viable than others?

Explanation: Form changes are one of the most interesting mechanics in Pokemon. First introduced with Castform, it has been used infrequently, and oftentimes have been weak, with a few notable exceptions. A CAP that can use form changes effectively would be interesting in terms of playstyle dynamics, and how a CAP like that could cement itself in the metagame.
 
Name - A Coat of Many Colors
Description - A Pokemon that takes advantage of multiple resist berries.
Justification - This concept falls under the category of Actualization. The concept hearkens back to older metagames such as DPP and BW where a Pokemon utilizing these berries to accomplish its goal was much more common. This Pokemon would be able to viably use several of the available resist berries to fill its role on any given team. Multiple resist berries would allow CAP to explore an idea synonymous with older generations and see how well it applies to Ultra Sun and Ultra Moon.

Questions To Be Answered:
  • Does one resist berry typically receive more usage?
  • Compared to older generations, do the resist berries help this Pokemon perform its role as well or better than it would have otherwise?
  • Does the option of other viable resist berries change up the move types that are used to attack this Pokemon?
  • Has the role a Pokemon with this item performs changed due to generational shifts?
  • When focused on, how does the viability of this item compare to other generations?
  • How does the purposeful implementation of the multiple resist berries compare in usage to other viable items used for the Pokemon's role?
Explanation -
I first got the idea when I saw Heaven Jay toying around with Coba Berry Tomohawk. At first I thought this a huge waste, but then I saw how well it was performing, and how it ended up becoming a viable item .The berries are low in usage and generally have not seen play in the later generations due to things such as power creep, or other viable sets coming to fruition. However, I do feel as if they are an avenue that is worth exploring. This Coba Berry set reminded me of other sets from older generations such as Rindo Berry Swampert, Occa Berry Bronzong, or Chople Berry Heatran. This really got me thinking, what if a Pokemon could viably use 3 or 4 resistance berries, such as Occa Berry, Yache Berry, or Passho Berry? How would these sets compare to the sets of old? Of course those are just examples, but I feel like this concept gives us an interesting idea to play around with while also not being too constricting on what can and cannot happen at any given stage. I feel like the main thing to watch out for with this concept is not letting the berry resistances take center stage. While I know that may sound a bit farfetched, I personally feel the best way to let this concept shine is to look at how the resistances and extra longevity given by these berries can help CAP 26 perform certain roles in the meta. Basically, make it less on what the berries literally do and more on how those berries can help bolster the viability of the CAP in any given role to new heights.
 
Last edited:
  • Name - Off-Role Item User
  • Description - A Pokémon who can viably use an item which sees competitive use in a role that normally doesn’t use that item.
  • Justification - This concept is an Actualization concept. Often, choice of item is defined by which role a Pokémon is in, with relatively low deviance within a role. This makes Pokémon within a role naturally converge towards a specific playstyle beyond the fact that they share a role. A Pokémon which can use an item in a role that doesn’t normally use that item would have a different playstyle from other Pokémon in that role, and could potentially demonstrate that other members of the role can use that item effectively.
  • Questions To Be Answered -
    • What items could be used in a role that doesn’t already use them?
    • Why aren’t these items used that way already?
    • What could encourage people to use an item in role where it doesn’t normally see use over normal items for that role?
    • Why are the items which see common use tied to the roles they are associated with?
  • Explanation - An example of this concept would be a status setter who uses a choice scarf, or a sweeper who uses rocky helmet. Even if the Pokémon doesn’t exclusively use their off-role item, just having a viable set that uses the item off-role would still fulfill the concept and tell us more about why items get filtered to certain roles.
 

Yoshi

All my enemies started out friends
is a Pre-Contributor
Name – Alchemist

Description – This Pokémon aims to shake up battles through means of status and other utility moves.

Justification – This is mainly an Archetype concept, as it is a concept that has been promoted in the past, but with the tools and metagame that has been created since that point, can be done in a modern and effective way. The primary focus of this concept is to spread status and other utility moves. It can be taken down several different routes through combinations of these moves, and the secondary focus of the concept.

Questions to Be Answered
  1. What advantages would this Pokémon have over other status and utility spreaders?
  2. What status and utility move combinations can work well together?
  3. What types of moves do Pokemon benefit from the most?
  4. What archetypes desperately need support to work? What types of support do they need?
Explanation – One thing that I notice about the CAP process is that it leans towards creating offensive Pokemon a lot more than Pokemon that have the main focus of bulk or utility, moreso the latter than the former. Therefore, the idea of having another utility Pokemon to use besides Fidgit and Cyclohm may be beneficial for the CAP metagame. However, while the primary focus would be using status and utility moves, there should be more to this concept to just that. This would end in a Pokemon like Pyukumuku, which might not necessarily be the most beneficial concept for the metagame. That’s one of the things that might make this concept great. While status spreading and utility is the primary focus, there are several other routes that can be taken with this concept as well, depending on the direction the community would want to see this concept go down.
 
Last edited:
Name: Counter-Move Abuser
Description: A Pokémon that thrives off the holy trio of 'Counter-type' moves: Foul Play, Counter and Mirror Coat.
Justification: It mostly likely fits into the category of Target. Since the beginning of time, sweepers have dominated the metagames of not just CAP, but of most conceivable categories-even now, we are going through a suspect test for Crucibelle. While nerfing that Pokemon isn't inherently bad, I have always found that increasing the viability of another Pokemon is more dynamic and more interesting. So, instead of buffing another Pokemon, why not use the opportunity of CAP to create a new one? Counter-Move Abuser would function as checks to the majority of big offensive threats to the metagame.
Questions To Be Answered:
  • How can a CAP that can Counter most, if not all, attackers be balanced?
  • How can CAP 26 be made in a way that doesn't make it too viable an answer to offensive Pokemon?
  • Would all of it's 'Counter-type' moves be allowed on the same Pokemon? Or would it be restricted?
Explanation: The goal of Counter-Move Abuser is to create a CAP that not only utilizes fairly undervalued moves but to have a Pokemon that could answer almost any threat in the metagame, but never being able to take them all on at the same time; something that could be quite powerful, but loses it's edge once the opponent knows it's moveset! It would be a guessing game for the opponent every time the Pokemon is played; what moves is it using? Another goal of The Enemy Within is to create a Passive Threat within the metagame; something that is very threatening, but is only threatening...against the threats!
I was going to do a big review of all of them but ain't no one got time for that, so instead I want to help some on my favorite concepts and this one is my favorite so far, because I was thinking of a similar concept last night.

My name for it would have been "Aikkido - Master of Reversals"; what you really want is a 'mon that can someone punish extremely offensive 'mons by using their offenses against them. Your explanation and justification say that, but I'd consider changing your name and broadening your description. Instead the description is - well what I just said; this 'mon will utilize some combination of moves, abilities, and typing to turn an attacker's strengths against them.

What you identify feels crucial to the meta to me. A current issue (I hate to say "problem") is that the CAP meta is heavily oriented towards offense and set-up sweepers, and presumably still will be even after any incoming Necturna changes. But the answer currently is to just run more/better/different offense and try to out-predict opponents, as things are so powerful as to be overly hostile to a super passive 'mon like Chansey. What we need is a 'mon that is still inherently defensive and only as dangerous as the things its countering, but that isn't a 'mon that just tanks hits and doesn't deal damage back.

Now we've seen what such a 'mon looks like - Wobuffet. Wobbuffet is in ubers, So I'd love to see you change your description to allow more broad exploration instead of locking us into just using Foul Play, Counter, and/or Mirror Coat - what are other ways a 'mon might "use an attacker's strengths against them"? Mirror Coat and Counter are the most obvious ways to do this, but not neccesarily the only ways.
 

SHSP

is a Forum Moderator
Moderator
Back for a second round of finishing initial concept thoughts:

David vs Goliath: Interesting premise, but seems like a shaky execution. Targeting power creep as mentioned is very difficult especially without knowledge of what's yet to come, and attacking high statted mons seems fine until you realize there's usually a lot more than high stats that give viability- ability and typing arguably matter more.

Cyclohm 2: Electric Boogaloo: With the additions of three gens worth of underused abilities, this concept shouldn't step on Cyclohm's toes too much, but I wonder what more is there to take from this that we haven't already handled? How exactly can we differentiate this concept from the past one to grow from it?

Need for Speed: This concept reminds me a lot of Naviathan's in having multiple ways of boosting for a common goal. It's a bit narrower- and the "unconventional" methods of speed can surely be debated in viability or feasibility for success here- but it gives a solid direction without being too overbearing.

Fine, I'll Do It Myself: I'm interested in this one but I'm also very unsure of it. A totally self sufficient mon is a unique idea that could open up a lot in teambuilding, but it seems simple for one, and easily could just be used as a really good setter for the rest of the team and miss the mark completely.

King of the Drops: The depth in this concept surprised me, although I don't think that the idea of relying on opponents stat drops is particularly feasible and that removes a lot of it. Playing around with one's own stat drops seems more interesting, but also far more difficult to do (especially in creating those drops fairly).

Unconventional Conventionalist: I like this concept's openness to what is "unconventional," as well as it's premise. My only primary worry is why these ideas would be unconventional- are they underused, or less than considered... or are they just bad ways of going about these roles? That third question I view as the crux of this concept.

Villain Number One: Gimmick mons are interesting, but most of the time they are gimmicky for a reason. The idea of what is "trickery" as the concept demands is left rather open ended, but this seems like it would require a lot of careful planning to make this gimmick role stronger than any other "normal" option, and could be argued too broad.

All-Terrain Mon: The emphasis on creating an entire team archetype with the very little terrain support present now worries me greatly about this concept's feasibility. Ignoring that, it seems like a very difficult partner concept, especially considering the quite varied effects of the terrains and the limited options we have to pair this mon with them.

These Shackles Make Me Mortal: Hello again, old friend. Shackles is a concept that was slated back when it was introduced for CAP 24, and the idea behind it has not changed. It's a discussion of strengths vs weaknesses at both's extremes, and as such it does not leave much room for a middle ground in my eyes. To use an example made in the post itself: Hoopa may be balanced now, but it was banned in gen 6 in the opposite direction: the edge of this can be razor thin.

Consistency or Complexity: I find this one fascinating but also relatively difficult. To use the analogy used- Marth was almost certainly better in Smash 4, and in Ultimate Lucina stands alone above. One has always been better than the other, depending on the status of the game, and I'm not sure it's possible for two sets with the same endgoal to be evenly balanced like desired.

Snowball Effect: This one is another that falls into a sweetspot between broadness and narrowness, where there's not too many options we have no direction, but there are enough to not limit the process. Not switching is a unique idea to attack, and one where I think the end product can both be healthy and create an interesting process.

Return of the Fallen King: Another move-focused one, Kings Shield gives me pause. The move is inherently very strong, for one, and secondly doesn't really give much of a direction to go. In addition, if we have to ask "can the metagame adapt to this move," that may not be a good sign for what is to come.

Counter Move Abuser: I will echo Hawk above who suggests a broadening from just specifically the counter moves. I'm significantly less sure about this concept than him, though, and a lot of that stems off of my own thoughts on the CAP Metagame. I don't view it nearly as aggressive and offense-dominated as you do, and this role of "turns offense against itself" seems less necessary, although still very interesting of an idea as a whole.

Be the change you wish to see in this world: I don't believe a form change concept can be done outside of a very specific set of circumstances, and ergo don't think this is legal.

Coat of Many Colors: A unique concept with a lot of potential- berries have had a bit of a resurgence with the 50% recovery ones, and as mentioned resist berries saw a lot of use for quite a while. My concern is why they fell out of use in the first place: were they powercrept pretty solely by better options (Helmet on Chomp, for example)? A lot to unpack here in what can be done to take advantage of a one time move weakening.

Off-Role Item User: Especially in the explanation given, this one seems at best very difficult and not far from unfeasible. Most roles run the same items because they fit the role the best- I can't really see a scenario where a sweeper would run Helmet over an offensive item, or a defensive mon run something like Life Orb.

Alchemist: Spreading status as the core of a mon is interesting if not simple, but pointing it so drastically in "neutralizing offense" seems to again target that "pure offensive" metagame that I'm not so sure exists. In addition, this seems to be a case of making a simple project to push for a metagame change, instead of balancing metagame impact with the process's goal. I feel that a mon devoted to spreading multiple statuses or using multiple utility options at once is an interesting route to take this concept.


Again, I'd like to reiterate that I am extremely open for workshopping concepts posted in a PM or anything of the sort, and will be around in the CAP discord and online here for any questions or the like. These are looking great!
 
  • Name - Hidden Power Physical
  • Description - A Pokémon with access to multiple weak physical attacks it can use to patch holes in its coverage, lure standard checks and decrease predictability.
  • Justification - This is mostly an actualization concept, inspiring the use of weak coverage moves, but from Physical side, where they aren't generally seen. They are meant to be used in a similar way as Hidden Power makes things work on the Special side, to patch significant coverage holes or to lure and hit mons this would otherwise have hard time actually damaging. This is a situation rarely seen on the physical side that more often than not specializes rather on direct use of brute force. One Pokémon I can see attempting this is possibly Hitmonchan in PU with his access to all the Elemental Punches as well as Bullet Punch, but you mostly see even this one rather going for AV Spinner set utilizing mostly just Earthquake for coverage. There is also Physical Krilowatt trying this to some extent, but that is just subpar to its Special set. Notable case is also HP Ice Lando-T that used to opt even for using its far weaker Special attack to get its desired coverage against Zygardes or other Landos-T.
  • Question to be answered:
    • What is the cost of coverage over power and when is it viable to make such power sacrifices?
    • Is there a way to make this mon not use one option as the only one actually viable?
    • What makes a weak coverage attack viable over its more powerful but less covering competition?
    • Many physical coverage moves at around Hidden Power power level have some effects, be them primary or secondary. Can those be a reason for moves to be used? Or is there a way to mitigate their impacts or transform them?
    • Does the use of such a varied threat promote the use of blanket physical counters instead of specific defensive tools?
    • Unlike Hidden Power, this would by definition have access to all such moves at once. What are the implications of the possibility of running two or more weak coverage moves?
    • When playing against such a versatile threat, what value is set scouting or having multiple ways to tackle different sets?
  • Explanation - I'm amazed how just the existence of one move (Hidden Power) make Special attackers feel so vastly different and harder to predict than the physical ones and basically singlehandedly give them more coverage, while Physical tend to reach more immediate power instead. This role reversal might open some interesting options when teambuilding as well as playing especially against this mon. There are also multiple ways to make the otherwise weak moves useful, whether it is by using Ability, set-up or just raw power and prediction to dent would-be check.
 
Still WIP; just slightly more formatted
  • Ring Target
  • Description
    • This mon is a counterpart to the "Perfect Partner" concept, but operates from the other side of the field, by providing a safer environment for a chosen lesser used Pokemon within the Meta and by targeting the chosen mon's unique selling points as it's own specific weaknesses. And without intention, I see this as a potential tangent to "These Shackles Make Me Mortal".
  • Justification
    • This concept is a combination of Target, and partially Actualization. There are a number of CAP-created pokemon which are complete persona-non-grata to discuss in the tiering threads, and so this is intended to specifically target their utter lack of viability within the metagame - while the Actualization aspect comes from being a viable team member, but one which has an inbuilt specific weakness that is designed around only our targeted mon can come in and remove from the game. It is important that the CAPMons we create are continued to be used, otherwise there will be continual power creep which will gradually remove them from game, updates or no (there is no requirement for it to be a CAPMon, but I think these will be a higher priority). As to Actualization, I can't help but feel that finally finding a niche for the lesser used mon, that people can actually use them in a game, without simply factoring in that they're using pokemon that are not up to scratch.
  • Questions To Be Answered
    • 1. What Mon(s) do we choose to support by the new CAP26?
    • 2. What reasonings are there for their failure to make an impact within the metagame?
    • 3. What are their current identifiable abilities that are something that can be capitalized upon with the correct target to threaten?
    • 4. Are there other pokemon in the meta who share such qualities, or who would benefit from a pokemon having that intentional "back door/exhaust port?
    • 5. If so, do we want them to similarly benefit, or do they risk overshadowing the chosen mon - and if they do, what can help with that prevention?
    • 6. Can this weakness be built into the mon, and still allow it to operate in the CAP Meta, and can it done in such a way that this will allow the target mon the ability to operate with greater
  • Explanation
    • It has been made rather clear that "These Shackles Make Me Mortal" are an interesting concept to work around, and unintentionally, it has been made aware to me that this is a similar potential use, in that it trades some of the potential "free slate" that this concept offers us, for a slightly more defined one based on which mon are choosed to be our target "charity cases", and allow the death star to be bombed by the XWing of the Chosen mon?
    • In the past, there are plenty of discussions over how one single mon's presence can influence an entire metagame, and whether this can be good or bad. Have a look at Shell Smash Necturna, for example; this has lead to Weavile becoming a viable mon, simply for its ability to Pursuit Trap or Priority Ice Shard this mon into the ground. This is an organic development of the meta responding to a threat in the best way it could do, and Weavile's ability to revenge kill a set up SS-Necturna has see it return.
    • Many mons are stated as having the ability to fulfil a role, but then that role is not present, and it is only Weavile's ability to strike
    • This is a fantastic learning opportunity, where a hole has been identified within the meta, not so much of role, but of specific pokemon. This exercise would allow us to examine the meta in depth, provide answers as to why something has failed, and what can be done to prevent it, without specifically tinkering with a pokemon yet again.
    • For example, with Koko
 
Last edited:

DougJustDoug

Knows the great enthusiasms
is a member of the Site Staffis a Top Artistis a Programmeris a CAP Contributoris an Administratoris a Battle Simulator Admin Alumnusis a Live Chat Contributor Alumnusis a Tiering Contributor Alumnus
CAP Leader
As with most CAP projects, we have lots of meh concepts submitted. But there are a few that are really interesting, and I am looking forward to more.
Most of the uninspiring concepts are falling into two categories:

Make something bad/unused into something good/useful

With literally THOUSANDS of pokemon and movesets in the modern game, there is almost always a good reason something is bad or unused. Usually, the thing in question is inherently bad and no amount of CAP creation magic is going to save it, without messing with fundamental mechanics or whatever. Don't get me wrong, we have done some good "reclamation projects" in the past, and I've loved them. But most of the time, these concepts are falling into the fanboy trap of wanting to take some poor wounded puppy aspect of pokemon play, and they want CAP to nurse it back to health. Resist the temptation... please.

Narrow concept which would make one step fun and the rest of the steps boring as hell

Look at your concept and ask yourself if literally every step in the CAP process would have 5-7 viable polling options in every step -- including the steps after big things like Typing and Primary Ability have been decided. Most people just don't play forward their Concept in terms of the actual CAP process. They simply think about how cool it will be when the pokemon is finished. As we say, "CAP is about the journey, not the destination". If we can't have lots of interesting steps with many different interesting ways to build the pokemon THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE CAP PROCESS, then it's a bad concept.

Most concepts are justified as an Actualization. That justification is just BEGGING for you to focus only on the end result, and NOT think too much about how the project will actually get there. Pro-tip: If you want your Concept to get slated, do yourself a favor and give the CAP process some thought with regards to your Concept. I guarantee any good TL will.
 
  • Name - Hidden Power Physical
  • Description - A Pokémon with access to multiple weak physical attacks it can use to patch holes in its coverage, lure standard checks and decrease predictability.
  • Justification - This is mostly an actualization concept, inspiring the use of weak coverage moves, but from Physical side, where they aren't generally seen. They are meant to be used in a similar way as Hidden Power makes things work on the Special side, to patch significant coverage holes or to lure and hit mons this would otherwise have hard time actually damaging. This is a situation rarely seen on the physical side that more often than not specializes rather on direct use of brute force. One Pokémon I can see attempting this is possibly Hitmonchan in PU with his access to all the Elemental Punches as well as Bullet Punch, but you mostly see even this one rather going for AV Spinner set utilizing mostly just Earthquake for coverage. There is also Physical Krilowatt trying this to some extent, but that is just subpar to its Special set. Notable case is also HP Ice Lando-T that used to opt even for using its far weaker Special attack to get its desired coverage against Zygardes or other Landos-T.
  • Question to be answered:
    • What is the cost of coverage over power and when is it viable to make such power sacrifices?
    • Is there a way to make this mon not use one option as the only one actually viable?
    • What makes a weak coverage attack viable over its more powerful but less covering competition?
    • Many physical coverage moves at around Hidden Power power level have some effects, be them primary or secondary. Can those be a reason for moves to be used? Or is there a way to mitigate their impacts or transform them?
    • Does the use of such a varied threat promote the use of blanket physical counters instead of specific defensive tools?
    • Unlike Hidden Power, this would by definition have access to all such moves at once. What are the implications of the possibility of running two or more weak coverage moves?
    • When playing against such a versatile threat, what value is set scouting or having multiple ways to tackle different sets?
  • Explanation - I'm amazed how just the existence of one move (Hidden Power) make Special attackers feel so vastly different and harder to predict than the physical ones and basically singlehandedly give them more coverage, while Physical tend to reach more immediate power instead. This role reversal might open some interesting options when teambuilding as well as playing especially against this mon. There are also multiple ways to make the otherwise weak moves useful, whether it is by using Ability, set-up or just raw power and prediction to dent would-be check.
This is an interesting concept, but one that I'm not sure is super viable. It feels like we had this conversation with Smokomodo as part of CAP 25 - not that Technician is the only way to make a "weak" coverage move worthy of a move slot, but it is a primary way. Part of the problem these moves face is that the tradeoff isn't worth it because Physical moves tend towards higher BP. Most reliable special moves are 80-90 BP (think Scald, Flamethrower, Thunderbolt, Psychic, Moonblast, Aura Sphere) and one usually makes serious sacrifices to run a 100-120 BP move in terms of losing out on secondary effects, PP, and/or accuracy. Meanwhile, almost every type on Physical has a 100-120 BP move that has less shaky accuracy, or at least this is true of the best physical attacking types (Dragon, Fighting, Rock, Fire). The power difference means that it is much harder to find a x4 weakness worth spending a slot on a "useless" move, whereas on the Special side you're sacrificing only 20-30 power which you gain back in spades even with just a SE hit.

Still, a fascinating concept. I might include a note on whether or not you think abilities are needed to bring out the power of these moves or if doing so is actually anti-concept.
 
Name: Two for One Deal!

Description: A Pokémon designed to perform a role (setup, status, check a Pokemon, ect.) and then remove a threat from the opposing team at the cost of itself.

Justification: This concept is an Archetype submission. A strong example of this rare archetype is Mega Banette, who anti-stalls with priority Taunt and, when that role is sufficiently accomplished, can threaten a trade later with priority Destiny Bond - potentially holding back important threats that would otherwise win the game. Pokémon of this archetype - which modern OU and CAP largely lacks - would offer the resources to pursue a game plan and then support the team by trading itself for an opposing Pokemon that could otherwise tear the team apart.

Questions to be Answered:
  • Past successful users of this archetype, such as Explosion Steelix and Mega Banette, have incorporated other archetypes or roles such as "physical wall," "anti-stall," and "hazards lead" to gain additional value above a 1-for-1-trade where nobody wins. This raises several questions:
    • Should our Pokémon be designed only with "Trading-to-remove-threat" in mind, or should it be optimized with a secondary role?
    • What other roles can our Pokémon perform that will effectively synergize with the "Trading" Archetype?
    • Should our Pokémon utilize only the most effective of these roles, or would a larger range of options be more healthy for it?
    • Can the unique ability to threaten a trade be used to perform role(s) under conditions in which other "hazard setters" or "anti-stallers," for example, would lose their effectiveness?
    • What tools should our Pokémon be given in order to provide worthy competition for other Pokémon who share our secondary role(s)? How can we avoid the addition of "Pokémon Trading" coming at a disproportionate cost or benefit to the usage of our secondary role(s)?
    • Must our Pokémon be confined to a "team support" kind of secondary role, or can our Pokémon potentially be an offensive/defensive/speedy powerhouse?
  • While there is plenty of room to explore this concept in conjunction with additional roles, it is equally important that we understand how to implement this tool in the most effective and healthy way.
    • What is the full range of options available to kill almost any opposing Pokémon?
    • With how much consistency should we enable our Pokémon to trade with an opposing one? Must our Pokémon be able to effectively target the Pokémon that it wants to trade with if trading is to provide a meaningful advantage?
    • Of our potential options, how many should our Pokémon be afforded to trade with opposing Pokémon? Is the unpredictability of multiple trading methods necessary to make our Pokémon a consistent threat?
    • In what ways can trading be utilized as counter-play to facets of the existing metagame? Which team/Pokémon archetypes are most susceptible to "unfair trades," and does that mean that we should focus our trading there or increase our potential to trade against other archetypes? To what extent should trading be used to "target" the current metagame?
    • What ways should be enabled as counter-play to trading? Is trading too inherently inconsistent of an advantage for us to leave extra holes for counter-play? Are there ways to create counter-play without decreasing trade consistency?
    • How acceptable is it to just barely miss out on a trade? Would it be good for specific Pokémon to be able to avoid a OHKO? Or should most "trades" require prior chip damage?
Explanation: This concept offers a lot of potential options and room to explore. Not only is it important that we work through the various ways in which our Pokémon can implement "trading," but the options for secondary roles to capitalize on that benefit are expansive and keep creative options open. I considered Justifying this concept as Actualization, but upon further consideration this concept is foundationally Archetypal. Unlike an Actualization project which prioritizes the means a Pokémon employs at par with or above the end result in justifying the concept, Two for One Deal! employs an Archetype who's end goal is to support the team as an emergency check for almost any Pokémon - in addition to whatever it can accomplish with its remaining move slots and other positive attributes. It just so happens that most moves that can brute-force their way through any Pokémon end up killing the user.

There are a number of moves that can be used to successfully construct our Archetype, and by enlisting and combining these features into our Pokémon's sets we can bring out its full potential. Many of these moves synergize with specific, currently unused typing and/or ability combinations.
  • Explosion - The most obvious candidate to utilize trading.
    • Self-Destruct can be used as an alternative if we wish to decrease trading power
    • Thanks to its normal typing we gain a lot of extra options
      • The -ate/-ize abilities can be used to adjust the move's power, typing and immunities
      • Scrappy can be used to remove the move's immunities
      • STAB Explosion + a free ability slot would give us a reason to make a normal-type CAP
    • Explosion synergizes well with a Z-Crystal, giving us more options for a secondary role ("Two-Time Nuke 0 Setup Wall-breaker")
  • Destiny Bond - The next most obvious and arguably most reliable trading method
    • Requires minimal prediction if coupled with Prankster or if put on a fast Pokemon with some minus priority moves (See Mega Banette)
    • Potentially offers greater consistency at the cost of being unable to trade on demand
    • Has more defensive counterplay in switching out / status while being a disincentive or total road block to offense/sweeping
  • Final Gambit - Much more strict for securing a KO, but could possibly work the best on a high-speed CAP
    • Once again, has Scrappy to avert failing against ghost types.
    • Would likely force a CAP running it into keeping itself undamaged. On a revenge killer with high speed + HP and low defenses it could potentially revenge kill anything barring priority/chansey if it is willing to give itself up
  • Mind Blown - While not exactly like explosion, I would say that it is just barely strong enough as a nuke to consider.
    • This gives us or first real specially-based option to trade with opponents
    • Trades typically aren't done with Fire typing
    • The largest benefit would be, of course, the fact that you don't always die after using it the first time
  • Healing Wish - Doesn't kill an opponent, but can essentially revive a team mate. I would say that it supports the spirit of the concept.
    • As a status move, it is interrupted by Taunt but doesn't interact with the opponent, potentially reducing counter-play
  • High-Recoil Moves + Reckless and/or Low HP
    • Gives us the widest range of moveset options while likely constraining stats and ability
    • Allows trading through an offensive roll, and frees up base stats via low HP
    • Can be used with unique moves such as Light of Ruin
While many of these methods are decent on their own, I believe that the real potential lies in giving our CAP multiple potential options to add strength through unpredictability.
 
Last edited:
Name: Last Laugh (Tank counter attacker)
Description: A Pokemon that uses its lack of speed to its advantage by using counter-attacking tactics and moves.

Justification: This Pokemon aims to Target the fast speed and high attacking capacity of the CAP meta-game. As there are many tanks and walls in the cap meta there are equally if not more hyper offensive Pokemon with high speeds and although it is easy to suggest nerfs game balance is often broken with nerfs so instead the playing field needs to be evened by adding Pokemon that counter the play style of the top powerful Pokemon with tactics that are not commonly used therefore making users entirely change up their team instead of using of previously successful formulas and therefore making the Pokemon fall under the Actualization category too.

Questions To Be Answered :
>Can CAP 26 bring change to the meta through new play-style methods?
>Will CAP 26 bring a presence on the field that makes the opponent rethink their existing strategy?
>Will CAP 26 create a meta game where other previously unusable tactics now become viable ?
>Will CAP 26 feel different to other Pokemon that have similar play styles?

Explanation: There are many good tanks in the game but often they will never truly be viable in the "big leagues" due to their BST,Typing or their overall move-set and sometimes they are truly missing something that could make them great. Pokemon such as wobbuffet utilize its slow speed to counter attack however it struggled to counter one of its biggest weakness being ghost. Snorlax is a good example of the kind of idea that my proposed Pokemon plans to achieve however there are times when sending snorlax onto the field is guaranteed to be unsuccessful as snorlax has a limited coverage due to its typing and normal stab moves not being super effective against anything. I feel a pokemon that combines the elements of shuckle , snorlax, fortress and wobuffet could make for a tank that truly feels unique and plays in such a way that an opponent has to rethink how they will approach the enemy team. CAP meta is heavily focused on Pokemon that can hit hard and move fast with the occasional offensive tank build but even they fall victim to good coverage move-sets and hyper offensive teams. Although every type combination will be weak to something I think a Pokemon with a low number of weaknesses ,high survivability and a strong field presence would be good for the meta to truly bring change to the offensive speed meta.
 

Deck Knight

Seize Your Doom
is a Top CAP Contributoris a Forum Moderator Alumnusis a Top Smogon Media Contributor Alumnus
Name: Sketch Artist 2: The Alolan Landscape

Description: A Pokemon that learns Sketch exactly once, re-made for the Generation 7 environment.

Justification:

This is an Actualization concept. A lot has changed between the fulfillment of the original Sketch Artist concept and today. There is an additional type, the type effectiveness chart itself has changed, Z-moves bring an entirely new dimension to what qualifies as a "good" move, and there are more unique support moves and interactions between moves and abilities than ever. A one-time Sketch Pokemon made in the current environment would be different from Necturna not merely because of the example set by its predecessor, but by everything that has changed in the environment around it. Necturna was also made for Generation 5 OU in the Weather Wars generation. A Sketch CAP made for Gen 7 CAP is in a different world altogether.

Questions To Be Answered:

  • Which new move effects would be the most interesting or competitively effective to combine?
  • With access to so many new unique move effects, which ones provide the most competitive utility or versatility? Would a move be used *just* for it's Z-effect or only if it had utility in general?
  • To what degree do Z-Moves affect consideration for a useful or balanced move on a set?
  • What kind of teams benefit most from a Pokemon that can build in have one "wild card" move that takes into account even the Z-effects of moves?
Explanation: The original Sketch Artist covered a lot of fascinating ground, but in the era of Generation 7 which introduced Z-Moves, the potential for a new Sketch Artist concept that can consider all of these moves is entirely new territory. What makes it fascinating is that Necturna was built in the Weather Wars generation and while it has one-time sketch, it also ended up with a pretty strong statline too. Generation 7 isn't lacking for any of these strong effects, but they are all temporary (Weathers and Terrains). It would be fascinating to examine movesets that rely on a completely off-the wall or niche combination like Z-Heal Block or Z-Mirror Move that just otherwise would not be explored.
 

Birkal

We have the technology.
is a member of the Site Staffis a Top Artistis a Super Moderatoris a Community Contributoris a Top CAP Contributoris a Top Smogon Media Contributoris a Battle Simulator Admin Alumnus
CAP Head Mod
As with most CAP projects, we have lots of meh concepts submitted. But there are a few that are really interesting, and I am looking forward to more.
Most of the uninspiring concepts are falling into two categories:

Make something bad/unused into something good/useful

With literally THOUSANDS of pokemon and movesets in the modern game, there is almost always a good reason something is bad or unused. Usually, the thing in question is inherently bad and no amount of CAP creation magic is going to save it, without messing with fundamental mechanics or whatever. Don't get me wrong, we have done some good "reclamation projects" in the past, and I've loved them. But most of the time, these concepts are falling into the fanboy trap of wanting to take some poor wounded puppy aspect of pokemon play, and they want CAP to nurse it back to health. Resist the temptation... please.

Narrow concept which would make one step fun and the rest of the steps boring as hell

Look at your concept and ask yourself if literally every step in the CAP process would have 5-7 viable polling options in every step -- including the steps after big things like Typing and Primary Ability have been decided. Most people just don't play forward their Concept in terms of the actual CAP process. They simply think about how cool it will be when the pokemon is finished. As we say, "CAP is about the journey, not the destination". If we can't have lots of interesting steps with many different interesting ways to build the pokemon THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE CAP PROCESS, then it's a bad concept.

Most concepts are justified as an Actualization. That justification is just BEGGING for you to focus only on the end result, and NOT think too much about how the project will actually get there. Pro-tip: If you want your Concept to get slated, do yourself a favor and give the CAP process some thought with regards to your Concept. I guarantee any good TL will.
Mostly quoting this post to show my full agreement with Doug. We just got done with our first ever framework CAP (in-game starters) where we made THREE Pokemon that featured a narrow concept that really only focused on one stage of the process: abilities. It wasn't as boring, because we did it three times over, and it did provide some interesting concepts in moveset discussion. And while I think CAP25 was generally successful and featured a lot of lively discussion, I am in no way interested in repeating that again.

I would much rather focus on something metagame related. We have a pretty knowledgeable TL and TLT to work with, and doing a concept that is basically "let's feature this move" doesn't appeal to me as strongly as a result. Some concepts I'm definitely interested in as a result are:

1) Pick Your Poison by Lyd addresses 4MSS when teambuilding and reminds me of making a mon like Clefable with lots of good options.​
2) Set Customization by gibygiby is a cool way to chat about EVs and natures, which gets very metagame specific.​
3) Celebrity Entourage by me, because it'd be awesome to get experience from a battler with high-end battling experience.​
4) A Coat of Many Colors by Snorlax in the way takes an insanely cool item to see in battle (resist berries) and gives us a tangible way of looking at when they're practical to use.​
5) Alchemist by Yoshi tackles a perceived issue in the metagame (overcentralization of offense), and while the concept in its current state is a little too broad for my taste, it's at least a more interesting concept than "this Pokemon has X move."​

If we were to do a less metagame-centric concept, I think Sketch Artist 2.0 and Hidden Power Physical are probably the most interesting, especially since their main selling point occurs so late in the process (moveset). I'm just one voice on this, but I hope others agree with me that it'd be nice to have a concept that digs a bit deeper into the CAP metagame.
 

snake_rattler

Bold to assume that I won't have the last laugh...
is a Forum Moderatoris a Top CAP Contributoris a Contributor to Smogon
Moderator
Name: The Return of Speed

Description: This Pokemon's speed tier is in a range from around Base 120 to around Base 150. (About Tier II to lower Tier I on USM CAP Speed Tiers).

Justification:
  • The goal of this concept is to understand the role of a Pokemon's high Speed stat in its viability; thus, this is a Target concept. Some of USM CAP's best Pokemon, including Tornadus-T, Greninja, Weavile, Tapu Koko, and Mega Alakazam have high speed tiers. However, other fast Pokemon like Mega Aerodactyl, Crobat, and Zeraora have almost no place in Gen 7 CAP, but find themselves in solid usage in UU. Some of ORAS CAP's important Pokemon like Mega Lopunny, Mega Manectric, and Talonflame (Gale Wings definitely defined it, but Base 126 speed allowed it to use Flare Blitz and U-turn freely and to run Specially Defensive with minimal speed investment). Gen 7's banned Pokemon like Dugtrio (Arena Trap ban killed this Pokemon's viability), Naganadel, and Pheromosa also have very high speed tiers. It's well-known and clear that a large Speed stat can play a large role in viability, and there are other factors at play when determining viability, so let's figure out what those are.
Questions To Be Answered:
  • What makes Pokemon in this speed tier metagame staples?
  • How much do these Pokemons' speed stats play a role in their viability?
  • Why do other Pokemon of this speed bracket fail to make a mark?
  • Does this Pokemon need a high power ceiling to be useful? Does it need other traits?
Explanation I find it interesting CAP's shied away from making fast Pokemon lately. While Kerfluffle comes close to a Base 120 Speed tier, other even faster submissions (ones with speed stats of 135!) lost that stats poll. Mega Crucibelle also had stat submissions with high speed. Stratagem has Base 130 Speed, but that was literal years ago. The Speed stat is competitively well-explored, yes, but I'm interested in moving out of CAP's comfort zone and see how high speed stats factor into the USM Metagame.
 
Name: Type Exploit

Description: This Pokemon is designed to exploit the overuse of one or two (potentially more) common types.

Justification:

This is a Target concept, as it seeks to address very common and strong types, and thrive as a result of their common use. Addressing these common types is important because it increases the diversity of the metagame and makes sure teambuilding does not become a perfunctory checklist, at least in regards to types. Furthermore, it helps explore the inner workings of what makes a type good (coverage, resistances, movepool, etc.) and how a single Pokemon can dissuade the use of multiple types.

Questions To Be Answered:
  • What makes a type work well in the current metagame? Is there more importance in its defensive or offensive prowess, or a combination of the two?
  • What current weaknesses do the best types in the CAP metagame have? How well are these weakness, typing-based or otherwise, handled by other Pokemon of the same type?
  • What does it mean to "exploit" a type? Does the Pokemon simply check or threaten out the type, or does it instead use it as set-up fodder, for whatever the Pokemon may be trying to set-up?
  • How effectively can one Pokemon take on multiple types? Is it reasonable for it to take on two, or even three?
  • Should good types be taken on offensively or defensively? Should our Pokemon be able to do both, and if so, should it change its approach depending on the type in question?
  • Is super-effective coverage the only factor in being useful against a type, or are there others? How much of a role does a Pokemon's ability and non-STAB moves play in its effectiveness against one type?
  • Is it reasonable to have a "bad" type take on a good type (e.g. Ice to Dragon), or will that just detract from the Pokemon's overall viability?
Explanation:

At first glance, this may look like Malaconda's original submission (Type Equalizer), and while, admittedly, they are similar, Type Equalizer and Type Exploit serve very different purposes. While Type Equalizer is focused on trying to make one "good" type less prevalent, it also split that attention with trying to make one less used type more prevalent. Type Exploit, on the other hand, is focused solely on thriving off of the most used types, and, while they may lower in prevalence after the Pokemon's release into the metagame, the Pokemon places no interest in trying to make these types less prevalent. Nevertheless, the introduction of this Pokemon is designed to make a player think twice before putting a Pokemon of a specific type on their team, and overall increase the diversity of the meta. Plus, since Malanconda's submission, an entirely new "good" type has been introduced - the Fairy-type.

Looking at the current USM CAP Viability Rankings (and I'm just saying this as of the time I'm writing this), there are 8 Steel-types, 7 Flying-types, 6 Fairy-types, 6 Water-types, and 6 Grass-types in the S and A ranks alone. Of course, these numbers don't represent all good types (there are also 5 Electric, Psychic, and Dark-types), but it does give a good general outlook on how some types dominate the metagame, as opposed to there not being a single Normal-type in the S and A ranks. However, there does not seem to be a single good Pokemon thriving off the presence of these types. In fact, looking at the now-nerfed Mega Crucibelle and soon-to-be-nerfed Necturna, it seems like the Steel-types of the meta (at least) have thrived as a result of a myriad of potent offensive threats they can check, not the other way around. Thus, it would be nice to dig deeper into the CAP metagame and discover what truly makes the Steels, Flyings, and Waters of the meta work, and what way a Pokemon can truly capitalize on the prevalence of these threats.
 
Last edited:
Name: Extreme Makeover: Typing Edition Season 2

General Description: This Pokemon uses abilities, movepool, and stats to make a typing that is usually considered poor defensively and/or offensively a major selling point of the Pokemon.

Justification: This is an Actualization concept that is a sequel to the adorable Lava Lamp Snail. Since Mollux came out back in Gen 5, we've had a great new typing appear and shake up the idea of what a poor defensive typing is. On top of that, many other changes to the meta, such as the resolution of the Weather Wars that defined the era that Mollux hails from, have changed what tools could be used to help out a poor typing succeed on the merits of the typing alone.

Questions To Be Answered
  • What does it take for a Pokemon to overcome its "bad typing" so much that its typing becomes good? How reliant is it on stats/ability/movepool to succeed?
  • How might the inherent qualities of a Pokemon with a poor typing help it be a selling point? If it is poor defensively then how would the resistances/immunities it does have be used to sell it? If it is poor offensively then what could it possibly threaten or handle in a way that makes the typing useful?
  • How do the changes to the game since Gen 5 affect our approach to this process?
  • How might the steps taken in this process be applied to help other similar typed Pokemon?
Explanation: As alluded to in the Justification, a lot has changed since Mollux's creation in Gen 5. In addition to the Weather Wars going away with the abilities changing to work similar to the moves that summon the weathers they are based on, Auto-terrain abilities (as well as a slew of other new abilities), Z-Moves, and the Fairy-typing which has changed the meta by being such a solid typing that it has changed how valued some typings are. (which incidentally made Mollux better as it wound up having a 4x resistance and a Super Effective STAB vs the type) As a result, revisiting this concept would allow us a chance to examine other ways the changes to the game have affected matchups by getting us to play more attention to type interactions.

Plus typing based concepts seem the most interesting to me because it is so hard to get duplicate results if you don't pick the same typing. For example, with Mollux it was decided to make it a Fire-type that didn't care about being in the rain, and a rather heated discussion cropping up over which ability, between Drought and Dry Skin, would help it most. However if the third place winner of Ice/Steel or runner-up of Ice/Rock had won, the choices would have been make a Dragon Killer or a fast hit-and-run kind of attacker with the ability possibly having gone to shore up a few of its more common weaknesses (likely Heatproof, Thick Fat, or Levitate) and a fairly standard kind of moveset. Heck, if the slated Bug/Psychic had made it then Magic Guard would have likely been discussed as a way to handle its weakness to Stealth Rocks during the abilities stage. So with that in mind it is easy to see that for this concept the unique wants and needs for a typing to succeed are generally different enough to the point that as long as we don't pick Fire/Poison again, the outcome is guaranteed to be different.

Finally on a more amusing note, if we want to follow any kind of pattern thing, then the CAP projects for the previous generations have actually included one type-based concept per generation (Stratagem for Gen 4, Mollux for Gen 5, and Crucibelle for Gen 6). So, unless you count the framework for the last project since it involved making Starters, we're probably due for one anyways. :P
 

SHSP

is a Forum Moderator
Moderator
As concepts keep getting refined, I want to echo the statements of Birkal and Doug above in what makes a concept stand above the rest. There is a bit of a "Goldilocks" zone that means a concept is not too broad that it leaves us with no direction, but not too narrow that limits it too much. Direction is key to this process, and if a concept can't provide that for us, it adds a lot of risk to its success.

On to some individual concept thoughts...

Celebrity Entourage: I mentioned earlier on that I really had to do my homework on this one, and a weekend of binging SPL replays later, I come back with a lot less concerns about it's feasibility- as a concept. I think it asks a lot of us as a community, and a lot of the TLT and I, but I am sure we can handle it if it came to it.

Hidden Power Physical: I find this concept interesting but the biggest question I ask of it is how much can be done with it. Hidden Power can be a tricky option, but many pokemon only end up running one type of HP to patch up coverage gaps. How feasible is it we create a mon that wants to use multiple, yet relies on them/has enough gaps in coverage to?

Ring Target: I don't think at a fundamental level adding one mon to a large meta is enough to bring back to viability another in an otherwise unfavorable metagame. To me, either the created mon is overcentralizing and unhealthy and necessitates this mon, or it is anything else and answered by better options.

Two for One Deal: I find this concept really fascinating as to its goal, and I think that some examples of its roles are already visible (Lead Lando-T). I would imagine that the element of "trading" is overshadowed in importance by the role it takes beforehand, however- how much is this just "staple a trade mechanic onto a mon?"

Last Laugh: CAP 26 is not stopping council from nerfing Necturna. Now that we've taken care of that, I find this concept kind of tough to understand. It reads like it wants a good tank with a low speed stat and a hole in what it can do? It also has a flawed ideal of the CAP metagame and how defensive mons work in general.

Sketch Artist 2: Here we go again. A more interesting rehash than Cyclohm 2 in my eyes, Sketch Artist still rings alarm bells in my head. As a concept and an idea, I think it is excellent... but I'm very unsure of the process itself. In a metagame with all of the options of Z moves and extremely powerful other options, is this really feasible to have a solid discussion that defines it's options and an end product that isn't extremely unexplored regardless?

Return of Speed: Speed has been a very popular topic in these subs so far, and I think the specificity of this one's very interesting and a lot more helpful than "mon that goes fast" or "mon that gets fast." My number one worry on this concept is in direction: is this too broad? What roles are realistically available for us to manage?

Type Exploit: I think the most important part of this is in the discussion of what makes types effective compared to other types. I do worry it is asking too much, however: attacking several types at once in a rather diverse metagame without factoring in the difficulty of dual types or weird roles seems like a lot.
 
Name: original item abuser
Description: this pokemon can use efficiently an uncommon item or a common item in an uncommon way.
Justification: the concept falls under Actualization. It aims to explore the full possibilities of an item.
Questions To Be Answered:
  • Which items or item-based strategy are uncommon due to the lack of good users and not to the lack of viability?
  • Why are the current pokemon unable to use those items/item-based strategies efficiently?
  • How can a pokemon make good use of the chosen item/item-based strategy?
  • Is it possible to make that item/item-based strategy better than classical item such as the choice items, the leftover or the life orb?
  • How will that item impact the role and counter of cap26?
Explanation : While some items are seen in nearly every teams, such as the scarf or the leftover, other, that could be viable, are very uncommon, like the eject button, the weakness policy, the scope lens, the red card or the plates. There are some users for each of those items, which prove that they can be used, but they are very rare or absent of the CAP metagame. For example, The eject button can be used on a partner of magneton in UU to trap scizor on the U-turn. The weakness policy can be used on dragonite or aurumoth but Z-moves are generally prefered. Mimikyu can use the red card but this mon is not super viable and prefers other items, like Z-moves or the life orb. Sniper kindra can make an efficient use of scope lens in RU, but it's only niche in CAP is swift-swim. Eventually, some plates are used (koko is a good user of zap plate, for instance), but other are completely unused.

On the other hand, some items have a lot of possible uses but are always used in the same way. The best example of this are the Z-moves, which are nearly always used offensively (with some expetions, like Z-celebrate/happy hour, Z-belly drum and Z-haze) but that could be effectively used with some non-offensive move. For example, manaphy has shown that the waterinium Z can be used with rain dance while kartana is a good user of tailwind + flyinium-Z. However, manaphy is uncommon and Z-tailwind kartana is considered as gimmick and nearly never played. Berries can also be used in an unusual way thanks to moves such as natural gift or belch, as breloom has shown when he was UU with his bluck berry set that was used with natural gift to pass amoongus and scizor. They are also a lot of berries that are not used but that could be viable, such as the lepa berry, and the salac berry (which can be used by unviable pokemon like kommo-o).
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

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

Top