CAP 27 - Part 1 - Concept Submissions

[CharSiuEmboar]

Name - Conditional Entry/Mercy Killing
Description - a number of effects only work, or have an increased effect while a target or condition is in place on the battlefield. This pokemon uses these 'conditional' effects as the core of its operation, either as a threat of its expected inclusion, or its actual inclusion. It does not necessarily require the ability to inflict its own ability reliably, nor does it have to specifically focus on one single condition to target.
Justification - this concept is closest to the Actualization justification - the mechanic of specifically targeting a pokemon under the effect of a condition is not one that's particularly explored yet, despite numerous ways of setting the condition, and the moves typically high power and useful rider effects
Questions To Be Answered -

• These moves have existed since Gen 1 (eg Dream Eater), and gradually expanded upon. Despite the conditions themselves being quite widely applicable, there is little competitive use of the conditional move being triggered: is there a cause for that?
• Which conditions (whether status or otherwise, volatile or otherwise) have moves which specifically target the condition?
• What ways exist in the meta to consistently apply the conditions?
• Are there any noticeable gaps in the ways of inflicting the conditions?
• Clerics, Spinners/Foggers and being able to switch out are easy answers to the Concept threat; is it desired that these are viable answers to the concept, to either influence the meta in their use, or have them become something that's intentionally targeted or "pulled"?

Explanation - I like to think that the above is enough to explain what the concept does - it doubles down on a pokemon that is already going to be struggling under the effects of a condition. This is lightly piggybacked on 'Toxic Terror" - and potentially "Trickster Cleric/Offensive Utility" concepts. There are plenty of "conditions" that tend to be aimed for when building teams and sorting EV spreads, but it doesn't like to be left up to the chance of RNG and skill of an opponent to not have a conditional move take effect.

With all of the various ways in which the conditions can be propagated and spread over the course of a battle, this mon is meant to capitalise on the condition, and pressurize a target through the potential way in which the condition can enable CAP27. That CAP27 doesn't necessarily have to inflict the condition makes it one that is rather less limited - Toxic Spikes, Thunder Wave and Scald are all frequently thrown out in the game.

 

[Birkal]

Final Submission

Name: Futureproof

Description: This Pokemon is not only competitively viable in this generation of Pokemon games, but for many more to come.

Justification: With eight generations under our collective belt, patterns have begun to emerge in our competitive metagames about which Pokemon are consistently viable, even across several generations. Through this concept, we'll explore which Pokemon continued to stay competitively viable in our current, vastly-shifting metagame, study which ones have remained viable since their introduction in previous generations, and predict and target which ones will likely continue to be viable, even as future Pokemon are added via downloadable content and future generations.

Questions To Be Answered:

• Basic: Which Pokemon have stayed competitively viable since their introduction to Pokemon? What has made them so attractive to use over several generations?
• Basic: Which Pokemon have started as competitively viable, but lost their viability as future generations piled on more threats? Which aspects made them lose favorability in teambuilding? Inversely, which Pokemon have become increasingly more viable, and why?
• Intermediate: What traits tend to be highly viable in a single generation, but have become less viable due to straight nerfs or newly-introduced mechanics? How do inherent stats and typings play into these traits?
• Intermediate: Which strategies are adaptable across generations? Do specific teambuilds, support Pokemon, movepool sizes, or offensive threats tend to age better than others?
• Intermediate: Theoretically, which Pokemon that are currently absent from the SS metagame would find viability if they were included? How can we predict their viability, and how could we use those predictions to build a futureproof Pokemon?
• Advanced: How well can we predict GameFreak's changes to the world of competitive Pokemon, and how Smogon will respond to them competitively? Can we find patterns in past metagames that will help us predict the future of Smogon's metagame? To what degree of success could we feasibly find in those predictions?
• Advanced: Do Pokemon maintain viability based on their hard-coded stats, or the developing metagames of past generations? Does having viability in a generation increase the odds of its viability in the future? How much does human choice play into a Pokemon's viability?

Explanation: At the start of a generation, I feel it is important to explore the concepts which most define competitive battling in that generation. I've previously composed concepts about the inclusion of Fairy-types and Z-Crystals for their respective generations. And while Dynamaxing was the most defining competitive factor of this generation, its banning has made apparent the secondary vital change to Generation 8: the culling of past Pokemon.

It will be easy enough to catalog which Pokemon have remained popular in our metagame over the past several generations. Gengar has found viability since RBY OU to some degree, but more recent examples in competitive Pokemon like Tyranitar, Togekiss, Ferrothorn, Rotom-W, Excadrill, and Toxapex have become staples in the metagame, despite having obvious weaknesses and counter-strategies. What exactly has allowed these Pokemon to stay viable? What can we learn from them to make something ourselves that we can reasonably predict to be futureproof?

The discussion becomes even more interesting when you consider the nuances of the CAP metagame. Which of our creations have remained competitively the most viable after their creation? Which traits are not necessarily strong, but allow for them to be consistently chosen during teambuilding over other CAPs? And furthermore, what even defines viability in the first place? Is it purely statistical, or will competitive players grasp to the familiar at the beginning of a generation, only to set the standard for what is competitively viable in the newest metagame? Is it a mix of the two, and if so, to what degree? The two advanced questions listed above excite me the most, as they will give us answers to meaningful questions about how new metagames are formed and viewed.

We don't often get to gaze into the future here in CAP, but I'm eager to gather enough data and anecdotes to make a reasonable prediction about what it would mean to make a viable Pokemon for future generations to come, even with the swirling chaos that is our metagames combined with GameFreak's startling unpredictability. Even though we can't predict everything, simply discussing and studying viability across generations will teach us a great deal about how to respond to future generations.

 

[Jho]

Just a quick announcement that concept submissions will close 48 hours from now! Be sure to get your submissions out of WIPs and into Final Submissions before then or they won’t be considered legal!

 

[Dratios]

Final Submission

Name: All or Nothing

Description: This Pokemon has the stats, typing, ability, and/or movepool to effectively use the move No Retreat.

Justification: This is definitely more of an Actualization concept, as the only current Pokemon with access to No Retreat, Falinks, is not able to use it to its greatest potential (although it is adorable), based on its sad placing in NU. "Effective" use is kept intentionally vague, as I'd rather like to discuss with members of the community what that would entail. This CAP would encourage and possibly reward risky play by sacrificing the key to offensive momentum, switching, for an omniboost - a chance to punch a massive hole in an opposing wall, to clean up weakened opponents, or to chip down the opposing team for another team member to come and finish the job.

Questions to be Answered:
- What defines "effective" use of No Retreat?
- Would No Retreat be a necessity for this Pokemon to be good? What would it do before it clicks No Retreat?
- What role would this CAP serve? Late-game sweeper? Early cleaner?
- No Retreat + Shed Shell negates the drawback of being unable to switch. Is the loss of an item slot enough of a drawback to justify being able to No Retreat multiple times? Does this violate the initial concept?
- What keeps Falinks from being an effective user of No Retreat?
- What stat distribution or other traits would be necessary to justify going for an omniboost over, say, Swords Dance or Dragon Dance?
- What traits would be necessary for this Pokemon to have to justify using it over literally any other setup sweeper in the tier?
- What amount of breaking/sweeping/cleaning potential outweighs tanking any sense of offensive momentum you might have?
- Is it too much to expect one Pokemon, albeit with an omniboost, to be able to respond to essentially all 6 of the opponent's mons?

Explanation:
I love omniboosts as a concept, so when I first learned about No Retreat, I was hooked. You sacrifice one of the most fundamental tenets of maintaining momentum, switching, for a chance to make a dent in an opponent's team. I honest-to-goodness hoped that Falinks would have the stats to make use of it, but that sadly panned out to not be the case. While the concept of "risk vs. reward" has been attempted to death, and a great deal of the community agrees that Aurumoth did not fulfill that concept, I think this would be a way to take a more nuanced look at those concepts. Both the risk and the reward are very clear-cut, but there's so much more that comes to play here - when do you time your omniboost, what effect does the threat of No Retreating have on the opponent's playstyle, et cetera? I think this move has a great deal of potential that I would love to explore with the CAP community.

 

[MrDollSteak]

Here's the final round of my thoughts on the other submitted concepts! I hope that my feedback has allowed

A Coat of Many Colors
I think this is certainly an interesting concept, but one that I suspect will be quite polarising in terms of the result. I worry about how it can be possible to force a Pokemon to use a berry over other defensive or offensive items, and one that I think may subsequently impact its viability, especially if it needs multiple type resist berries to be effective. This suggests to me that it will be quite exploitable. Nevertheless I think it would lead to a very interesting project, the typing stage in particular!

Aftermath
The mention of Plasmanta makes me a little sceptical, but I think that you raise some interesting questions. I think the key is in where exactly the angle is, do we want the Pokemon to faint? Or do we want it to just not be the end of the world if it faints. I really like that you've addressed the question of "At which point in the game would be optimal for us to faint?" It's one that I think is the most interesting, and can really set up what the direction of the project is.

Landorus-T 2: Centralizing Boogaloo
I agree with the premise for the most part, and agree that having a particularly centralising Pokemon can somewhat contradictorily lead to a more varied game. The only concern I have at this point is in trying to replicate Landorus T, as opposed to just its versatility. I think an emphasis on the idea of a versatile Pokemon is the most interesting aspect of the concept, particularly when it comes to set diversity. That being said this is a potentially dangerous concept due to the idea of deliberately trying to create an inflated Pokemon, and hitting the right balance of versatility and power will need to be carefully monitored.

Ability Role Reversal
I actually really like this concept, up there with one of my favourites. I think that there's always something inherently interesting about exploring the depths of popular existing mechanics and seeing how they can be applied in niche ways. I think the fundamental concept of using defensive utility options being used to facilitate aggressive options is particularly exciting on first impressions.

One-Hit Wonder
While on first glance it strikes me as quite a shallow concept, I think it does actually have room to be quite interesting. I think the key to this is as mentioned in the post thinking about the support or other options the Pokemon will have access to, that don't overshadow its primary offensive move, but make it more than a one dimensional threat.

The No-True-Scotsman
This is quite a confusingly worded concept so I don't quite understand what it's saying. I think that its aiming to use certain tools in unconventional ways but it strikes me as very vaguely defined. I think the questions also don't do a good job of explaining what the project aims to do, or what will be learned through the concept.

AN AGENT OF THE LOW TIERS
As someone that talked to you on discord, I think you misunderstood was what I was saying. I think the concept here has some room to lead to a good project but in its current state is a bit too vague. The concept assessment will likely be dedicated to finding a specific Pokemon from the lower tiers to replicate, which in itself I think is already quite a problem as it will lead to confusion. I personally think it would be better to consider an existing lower-tier Pokemon that plays in a unique way and pitching your concept around that.

Reversal
This concept throws me off a bit because of a lack of definition. From what I gather, the concept is actually centered, contrary to its title, around the moves counter, mirror coat and metal burst to punish offensive Pokemon. I think the concept also doesn't really address why these moves in particular are the best to counter offensive play styles. You mention a lot of setup sweepers but a question I immediately think of is, if a sweeper sees CAP 27 and expects Counter or Mirror Coat why not just continue to set up? Are you envisioning the Pokemon to survive +6 Physical or Special hits?

New Trade Deal
I really like this addition. While it naturally has some similarities with Aftermath, I think the angle is what makes it interesting. Rather than thinking only about when is a good time to faint, it's also thinking about which Pokemon need to be taken out and weighing up the likelihood of this happening. At a brief glance I personally believe that Final Gambit and Explosion would be the more balanced options to fulfil the approach, but there are likely a few other ways this project could go. I like this concept a lot, and will say it again.

Teamfight Tactics
I think there are some interesting questions alluded to, but is overall quite vague in what it hopes to achieve. I think a more specific area needs to be considered. What aspect of team building hopes to be addressed? You mention general team support roles such as Trick Room, but by not focusing on a specific goal, its unclear what the Pokemon will aim to do.

Wonder Warrior
I like the specificity of this concept, and it certainly raises some interesting questions. I personally think the emphasis should be one as opposed to all due to their differences. While I'm personally not in the mood to attempt another move based concept so soon, I think the rooms are interesting enough to raise some interesting questions. I'm personally most interested by Wonder Room and how this CAP and also its teammates could hypothetically take advantage of it.

Futureproof
I like the ambitiousness of this project, but I worry about how it can be attempted without creating a generically good Pokemon. I think this particular generation also raises some natural counterarguments against future proofing, whereby moves central to a Pokemon's concept could unwittingly be removed. With this in mind I think trying to imagine where the game could go will naturally be quite difficult, and effectively make this project just be design a good Pokemon for the current meta game.

All or Nothing
This is another specific concept that I think raises interesting questions about how to use a move effectively and defines what can be learnt from it well. That being said, as I have mentioned before I think attempting a move concept immediately after Equilibra is something that I'm personally not that interested in. I think No Retreat is certainly an interesting move, and could make for an interesting Pokemon, but it doesn't strike me as particularly hard to imagine how to use effectively, being primarily a question of stats.

 

[StaticG0703]

Final Submission

Name: Exponential Growth
Description: Utility for items, moves or abilities that relate to damage increasing over time; The Metronome, Echoed Voice, Ice Ball, Rollout, and/or Speed Boost (may have missed something but can't recall off the top of my head). Conditionally this presents a niche of a CAP that hypothetically can act as a sweeper that doesn't need to rely on boosting moves to be effective.
Justification: Evidently this concept falls in-line with Actualization first and foremost, as it doesn't fill a role previously-defined by many other Pokémon and its impact on the meta-game is untested theory-crafting.
Questions to be Answered:
- What move qualities result in some being valued over others? Why are instant gratification moves such as Focus Blast or Stone Edge preferred despite other moves being stronger and more accurate with added penalties?
- How does a Pokémon's role on a team vary depending on its effectiveness at a specific time in a match?
- Can a Pokémon defined by a specific play style still vary in usage based on its stat spread?
- In what ways would CAP 27 affect the meta game, if at all? Would this challenge any common threats that are currently popular?
- Which is more effective: access to STAB, access to a wide move coverage, or a mix of the two? Where do we typically draw the line?
- Is CAP 27 reliant on team synergy or can it function well on its own?
- How reliant should CAP 27 be reliant on items vs. being reliant on its moveset?

Explanation:
Some components of this strategy exist for very specific Pokémon examples and exude a glint of hope (Speed Boost being the most highly-rated candidate), but less as a means of making it viable and more with intent to exploit a team's specific weaknesses. Ideally, CAP 27 would not only represent itself as the proponent of this in the effort to make it viable, but may also lead to the expansion on Pokémon that take advantage of this strategy, even if still niche. In a way the genesis of this idea revolves around a spin on what made Pokémon such as Cloyster effective through both early and later generations - both in move coverage, effective support options as a setter/spinner, and as a Smash sweeper.

This opens the possibility of a Pokémon that builds off of momentum; maybe being defined as a one-note physical sweeper, a tank with some support options, or (my personal favourite) filling a stall-breaker role. It may force switches or force your opponent to try and lure so as not to wreak havoc in the later half of the match, allowing for some counter play.

As well, the typing combo has potential to threaten the prominent offensive Pokémon in the meta (Jumbao, Tornadus-T, Landorus-T, Collosoil, etc.) while a lack of setup can, in theory prevent the CAP from becoming too over centralizing to defensive staples like Ferrothorn or Heatran. Not to mention Ice types in general need more love...

Overall the idea is rather self-explanatory all things considered, and it has some constraints and maybe some discouraging similarities to CAP 26's concept. However, within these face-value attributes. there's leeway for CAP 27 to be defined by and make use of a mechanic that has considerable promise in my eyes.

 

[Birkal]

Futureproof
I like the ambitiousness of this project, but I worry about how it can be attempted without creating a generically good Pokemon. I think this particular generation also raises some natural counterarguments against future proofing, whereby moves central to a Pokemon's concept could unwittingly be removed. With this in mind I think trying to imagine where the game could go will naturally be quite difficult, and effectively make this project just be design a good Pokemon for the current meta game.

Hey, thanks for the feedback. I feel that this concept is also ambitious, which is why I submitted it, but also very topical.

I've seen a few people mention your point about us making 'a generic good Pokemon' and wanted to address it here. Even with the examples I gave (Gengar, Tyranitar, Togekiss, Ferrothorn, Rotom-W, Excadrill, and Toxapex), you would be hard pressed to find anything generic about any of these Pokemon. Some have prevalent x4 weaknesses (Tyranitar, Ferrothorn), while others have only one or two weaknesses on the type chart (Rotom-W, Excadrill). Some have fantastic BSTs and stat distribution (Tyranitar: 600 BST), while others are middle-of-the-road (Toxapex; 495 BST). Some have expansive movepools with lots of usable moves (Tyranitar, Togekiss, Gengar), but others get by with much smaller means (Rotom-W notably has like 60 moves, and is pretty limited to the sets it can run). Some have abilities that define them (Ferrothorn's Iron Barbs), while some find niche use for theirs (Excadrill, while having two potent abilities, is not reliant on its abilities for its viability). Some are wallbreakers, some enable stall or semi-stall, some set-up sweep, some provide field effects... the lists go on and on.

The point I'm trying to make is that the term 'good Pokemon' is a lot more nebulous than people give seem to think. Pelipper and Dugtrio have poor base stats, but get by due to stellar abilities. Jirachi and Mew both have great typings and BSTs, which beefy movepools to devise a lot of sets. Gyarados and Kommo-o both are staples in the metagame due to their offensive wallbreaking power, despite having x4 weaknesses. We have a lot of flexibility in how we create viability. The process comes to life when we discuss which path is best for creating long-lasting viability throughout the future.

 

[KeeganSkymin4444]

Final Submission
Concept: Item-Based Roles

Description: A Pokemon that utilizes two different items to perform two distinct roles.

Justification: This concept is in the Actualization category. We’ve seen Pokemon where one or more items are clearly the best choice for them, but we haven’t seen a viable Pokemon that is defined by how they use separate items to accomplish different things on a team.

Questions to be Answered:
- What does a Pokemon relying on two items need in order to exemplify the traits of those items?
- How would a Pokemon with two roles defined by their choice of item have said roles differentiated from one another?
- How would a Pokemon with item-based roles deal with item removal without being entirely invalidated?
- How would we incentivize a specific pair of items to be used, with other item options being less appealing?

Explanation: Pokemon is full of so many items, all with highly unique effects that can change how a player responds to a situation while playing. For example, a player might have a Sitrus Berry, and the foe knocking them down below half health wouldn’t worry them as much the first time. A Pokemon with a Choice Scarf will be sent out against normally faster Pokemon, and a player with no way to read a switch otherwise will likely click Knock Off to cripple an incoming Pokemon. Bottom line, choosing an item for a Pokemon changes how you use it. What if we took that to its extreme, hinging how a Pokemon plays on an item it is intended to hold? We see this done with abilities like Poison Heal, where the best item to hold is the one that activates your ability. So, what about having two items be the best item for a Pokemon to hold, but have those items heavily alter how the Pokemon is played? For example, a Pokemon with HDB might be encouraged to utilize hazard removal, while a Pokemon with Choice Specs will accomplish more dealing damage, and a Pokemon with Weakness Policy might encourage SE hits, but capitalize off them with powerful setup. So, if we find a pair of items that can provide a pair of roles different from one another, we could in turn build a Pokemon that could accomplish either of them with access to the same stats, moves, and abilities.

 

[Jho]

There were a LOT of good concept submissions this time around and thank you everyone who submitted something! Sadly not all of them can be slated but, after a lot of discussion between the TLT members, we have put together a slate which I feel offers a lot of diversity and will give us a great process and unique experience no matter which one we choose to go with. Without further ado, our slated Concepts for CAP27 will be:

Quanyails’s Tempo
Quziel’s Role Switching it Up
-Voltage-’s Offensive Team Support
Lyd’s Good ‘Ol Switcheroo
snake_rattler’s One-Hit Wonder
sunMYSER’s Contrast Is Key

explanation

From a post I made in the subs thread about some of my favourites you will know that I liked Good 'Ol Switcheroo and Role Switching It Up from early on and so did a lot of other people judging from conversations in this discord, and ITC (in thread consensus). I also got the impression that people quite liked Tempo and I was a fan of having a concept which focussed on a fundamental aspect of battling on the slate, from discussions in here it seemed that it could be a really great learning experience. From there, there were a lot of good options to consider so I asked the TLT about some options I was considering to see what they thought of them, and how they judged peoples perceptions of the concepts. These concepts I asked about were Contrast is Key, Offensive Team Support, Aftermath, FutureProof, One-Hit Wonder, Asymmetrical Warfare, and Compress to Impress, as these had stood out to me as interesting concepts with a decent amount of support in the community, though not as much as others and I wanted the opinions of the TLT. Since i wanted to narrow this down to 5~6ish submissions for the slate, and 2 options of the ones i had asked about were omitted due to their posts not following the OP in someway, we ended up with the slate we have