# CAP 31 - Part 7 - Stat Limits Discussion

Status
Not open for further replies.

#### spoo

##### bike ride in the rain
Moderator
The T-Value thing is somewhat new and I can’t find an explanation of it for non-math majors anywhere, but whichever T-Value reflects that base speed is likely to be the central focus of the CAP’s competitiveness is the one I support. Small T, then? I think Amamama made it make a little bit of sense with the recovery comment, but based on that I think this will be a variable that will have to change depending on each submission’s inclusion or exclusion of recovery options. It’s all really just a lot, honestly lol. The T-Value itself is comprised of three variables, evidently. Do we need to discuss the “expected number of targets to be assigned to the designated role” also?
The first time we started dealing with T-values was for Chromera and it was also super confusing for me at the time (I was the one leading the stage too, lol). This is not an in-depth explanation as I still don't understand the specific math myself, but I figure a basic rundown might be helpful for others in this thread who are also less sure on what the T-value does

The T-value (turns value) represents the number of turns we can expect to be on the field before getting a KO. It essentially has to deal with how speed is "weighted" on a stat build, where a lower T will "punish" high-speed stat spreads more. If you think higher speed has a huge effect on our strength, you will want to place more weight on it with a lower T-value, and vice-versa if you think speed affects us less. Here are two spreads, a slow one and a fast one, with near-identical PS/BSR under the default T-value.

T=1.87523 (the default)
T=1
T=4

As you can see, speed's effect on PS/SS/BSR is weighted more for lower T-values; the slower+stronger spread has higher stat ratings with T=4, while the faster+weaker spread has higher stat ratings at T=1. Ultimately this means that lower T-values give slower spreads more leeway, while higher T-values incentivize the opposite. Some of this is oversimplifying, so perhaps someone smarter than me will explain this more in-depth, but this is broadly what T affects.

Personally, I think a T-value between 2-3 will be good for us (ie, CAP 31 will be on the field for 2-3 turns on average before claiming a KO). We don't want to overly punish fast spreads because that's still a totally valid approach to CAP 31; however, EdgeQuake (and single-STAB) coverage really appreciates a high Attack stat, and especially given our access to speed-boosting options, I believe setting T to somewhere between 2-3 is appropriate.
--
Will also echo the above posts in that there isn't a super compelling reason to have a cutoff on base stats. The main reason speed should be capped would be for balancing purposes –– eg, Venom-E's speed was capped at 120 because it had no business outspeeding Syclant + Weavile –– but I don't think outspeeding fast threats will warp our C&C that much, and it's already been established that a faster Diamond Storm is a great tool. I personally would not want CAP 31 above 120-126 speed at the absolute most, because A) we can already boost with DD/SG, and B) it takes too much away from areas I deem more valuable, such as our ability to switch into Zeraora and wallbreak effectively. Aside from personal preferences, though, it's probably not necessary to limit spread submitters in this regard.

Last edited:

#### Agile Turtle

How important is speed to CAP 31’s success?

I don't think high speed is important for the success of this mon, to be honest with you. There's merit in both a slow build and fast build for this mon. I personally would prefer faster, because I like the possibility of 31 activating the defense boost before being attacked, but I also like the idea of a slower and more naturally bulky 31.

2. What speed tier should CAP 31 strive for? What can we afford to be slower than? The inclusion of several optional setup moves, especially ones that boost speed, warp this discussion heavily. Consider the cases of no boosting, swords dance, dragon dance, and shift gear when suggesting speed tiers. Are there other optional moves that impact speed as much as the ones already listed?

I can see this thing being faster than zeraora, or I can see it being as slow as like, gastrodon. Probably unnecessary to say but I think we should at least be faster than slowbros/kings and toxapex. There's definitely merit in going for a slower build if designing around dragon dance/shift gear allowing it to outspeed even more opponents after a second boos. There should be a limit to the amount of speed allowed on a swords dance build, or a significant hit to attack to balance. The other thing to think about is rapid spin. I feel like rapid spin matters more in the context of speed boosting when used in conjuction with swords dance, but it still slightly matters alone. Consider Excadrill, a mon with access to both. Excadrill almost always carries rapid spin because it's great utility, and it appreciates the speed boost. Excadrill also carries Swords Dance sometimes, but on pretty much all swords dance sets it also carries rapid spin.

#### Wulfanator

##### Sableye used Foul Play!
I appreciate all the discussion we have had, and I believe I am ready to present preliminary limits. Please feel free to challenge the decisions made and suggest edits. I intend to revisit this in 24-36 hours and move on to stat submissions if there is minimal discussion.

T=2.5Base LimitsSwords DanceDragon DanceShift Gear50% Recovery
PS
140​
-5​
-15​
-30​
SS
100​
PT
130​
ST
130​
BSR
590​
-10​
-20​
-30​
-10​
Speed Limit
126​
108​
89​
79​
PT+ST Limit
220​

Following the discussion, I decide to select T = 2.5. This anticipates 31 will remain on the field for 2 to 3 turns before getting a KO. Given the desire for a strong offensive presence, physical sweepiness and our base attack are going to be the most import element of 31. By selecting a larger T-value, this allows higher speed variants to not sacrifice as much of their attack stat when considering their PS and BSR. Given that a T-value of 2 or 3 were the most suggested, it was easier to land somewhere in the middle on this decision.

Individual limits were left very open. I considered the PS limits of high performing ground-types when setting the base PS limit for 31. We should have the flexibility to carry the same offensive prowess as Garchomp/Landorus-T if submitters want to fixate on this limit. This lead to the selection of 140 PS. Both tankiness limits were also set rather high to consider stat distributions similar to Latias and Metagross where they have a respectable offensive presence while being considerably more bulky in one of their defenses. This led to 130 tankiness limits. I will also be imposing a PT+ST limit of 220 to restrict the ease of building low speed, serviceable attack, and reliable bulk builds. BSR was set intentionally high for builds not considering the strongest of our optional moves. Given ground’s limited resistances and the lack of STAB on Diamond Storm, it is necessary to not be so heavily restricted. This lead to 590 BSR. This is comparable to mons like Landorus-T and Heatran. Finally, SS was set to 100. This enables special fire coverage well, but is unable to detract from 31’s physical offense.

I have included a speed cap of 126. While some users have expressed their support for no speed cap, I think it is still in our best interest to include one. Given the generous PS limit and T-value, it is tempting to want to ride the limit and leads to some less than desirable Attack+Speed combinations. 126 seemed like the most reasonable extreme to consider since it allows us to outspeed and threaten Weavile with Diamond Storm. Anything faster is not as valuable. It is rather easy for us to be bulky enough to eat hits from Zera and Koko given our BSR and tankiness limits, so there is not a need to outpace them to threaten them meaningfully.

In the table I have provided, you will notice I have added further restrictions to the moves that will potential be the most volatile if left unchecked: Swords Dance, Dragon Dance, Shift Gear, and 50% Recovery. In the event that a user wants setup+recovery, these restrictions are cumulative. For example, if a user wanted to consider both Swords Dance+Recovery, the limits would be 135 PS/100 SS/130 PT/ 130 ST/570 BSR with a 108 Speed Limit. The PS limits for setup moves were given reductions to be comparable to existing mons with similar functionality. Overall BSR was also dropped to limit compensating the drops in attack for more bulk. Speed caps were also reduced to allow for more counterplay after boosts. 108 specifically allows for Adamant Choice Band Weavile and Kartana to check us. At 89, we have secured Scarf Tapu Lele as way to pressure Dragon Dance at +1 speed while allowing for a more niche check in Arctozolt under hail. Finally, Shift Gear was limited to 79. Similar to Necturna, it is difficult to limit speed in a meaningful way when a pokemon has access to a +2 speed boost. I even considered the possibility of no limit, but I ultimately imposed a speed limit comparable to Autotomize users and allowed the possibility to outspeed max speed Heatran before a speed boost. 50% Recovery had BSR limited in a way to be comparable to something like Zapdos when not paired with setup but equal to or below something like Dragonite when considering it paired with setup.

You will notice that I have avoided addressing things like Taunt and Pain Split within the table. This was a deliberate decision since we have had two powerful projects in Venomicon-E and Equilibra that have considered these moves respectively. Instead of imposing limits, I expect users to reflect on these projects and the conclusions we made when considering these moves. Using these lessons learned, I expect users to be able to self-regulate how these two moves impact the limits and BSR.

Given the complicated nature of these stat limits, it is difficult for me alone to set them so I deeply appreciate any and all feedback.

Last edited:

#### Brown4Sides

I think the Speed limit for Swords Dance should be increased slightly to 110. Checking Kartana with Fire coverage should be on the table IMO, as if one wants to run a low enough Sp. Attack so that only Kartana is only taken into consideration, said Fire coverage would likely never be used unless we outspeed Kartana. And increasing our SD speed limit by 2 points will not suddenly turn us from balanced to broken. Besides, we are still checked by Choice Scarf variants.

EDIT: Yeah basically what spoo said, the speed limits in general are more harmful than beneficial. I would keep the BSR/PS hits of the optional moves though, sets accounting for Shift Gear will clearly need a lower power level than sets with no setup at all, and I think these BSR hits are a positive thing. But the speed caps are too restrictive and should be removed IMO.

Last edited:

#### spoo

##### bike ride in the rain
Moderator
I think the individual stat limits and overall BSR limit are fantastic. 590 is a very generous BSR, but it should be clear at this point that CAP 31 absolutely needs an overall limit like this; we're competing for a teamslot with some incredibly high-powered Pokemon, and we're pulled in a number of opposing directions stat-wise ourselves. The individual limits, as described, also allow for a ton of flexibility within the overall BSR limit.

However, I would like to argue for the removal of the extra penalties to Speed, PS, and BSR for our optional defining moves. I have a decent amount to say, so it'll be simpler if I lay reasons out individually:

The penalties aren't necessary
In the stat stages since we started doing defining moves, we've faced near-identical dilemmas where spreads with certain defining moves should clearly be set at a lower power level than spreads without them. This has worked very smoothly in the past without the imposition of hard-and-fast penalties; users are quite capable of self regulating their spreads in these situations, and when they aren't, the SL steps in to regulate. I think the penalties are trying to solve a problem that doesn't really exist. Discretion from stat submitters and from the SL already prevent too much volatility or BSR abuse from taking place.

They're overly limiting
Since the inception of defining moves, the stats stage has taken on a lot more complexity. This should be welcomed; now, users have even more tools to submit their "vision" for a CAP's stat spread. A strategy of hard penalties on a move-by-move basis removes some of this complexity, and restricts possible submissions for users. If a stat submitter wants to submit a Swords Dance spread with 126 Speed and 100 Attack, who cares? A Dragon Dance or Shift Gear spread with 120 Speed can still be balanced by a low Attack as well. Imagine someone submits a spread with Shift Gear that comes close to the PS limit, but has awful defenses; perhaps this spread is "bad" subjectively, but is that a reason to bar its submission? Why is it that Dragon Dance spreads can't ever outspeed Scarf Lele? Or that Swords Dance spreads can't outspeed Kartana? As long as these spreads make sacrifices in other areas, I think hitting these benchmarks are fine, but stat submitters can't pursue those routes right now. These penalties seem to unnecessarily limit the freedom of stat submitters.

They're overly limiting (p. 2)
This is less of an issue with the premise of hard penalties, but the specific penalties themselves. Why would anyone submit a Shift Gear spread when they have a massive 30 PS and BSR axed? Or why would anyone include reliable recovery and take the -10 BSR, when they could instead design their spread around Pain Split and low HP for no penalty at all? The current limits also imply that the strength difference between Dragon Dance and Swords Dance is the same as between Swords Dance and having no boosting at all. Is Shift Gear really three times as strong as +2 Attack, especially when Diamond Storm already insulates us from revenge killing? A spread with Swords Dance/EdgeQuake/Taunt is punished three times less hard than a spread with Dragon Dance/EdgeQuake/Recover. If we keep these penalties in place, I think they should still be reevaluated.

Hard penalties can't account for complexity
This is related to some previous points. Right now, a spread with Flamethrower/EdgeQuake/Stealth Rock would be competing on the same level as a spread with Taunt/EdgeQuake/Pain Split. The provided solution is to self-regulate BSR levels with Taunt and Pain Split, but why is this not the case for every move? If anything, we have much more knowledge of how Swords Dance and reliable recovery can affect the stats stage than Taunt and Pain Split, given the former two actually made it into our last CAP and Libra was a whole generation ago. SD/EdgeQuake/Recover is also treated the same as DD/EdgeQuake/Taunt, even though I would argue the former combination is stronger overall. My point is that these moves often interact with each other in complicated ways, and hard-and-fast limits can't account for that complexity.

In sum, I believe that the BSR, PS, and Speed penalties, in attempting to reduce BSR abuse and volatility in our final product, end up doing more harm than good to the stat submission stage. If they are kept, I think they should still be reevaluated as I don't believe they are fully accurate right now (and again, likely will never be due to how different combinations of moves can interact differently).

Edit: to be doubly clear, I don't think that these optional moves should get away with no penalty in practice. Someone who accounts for SD, Taunt, and Recover in their spread should, in no world, be at an equal BSR or PS to someone only accounting for Rapid Spin and Overheat; this is the whole point of having defining moves. But I think using personal discretion on a case-by-case basis is a much better way of judging and imposing these penalties than having hard limits imposed from the outset.

Last edited:

#### Zetalz

##### Expect nothing, deliver less
We had a good talk on discord regarding spoo's post so I thought I'd share some of my thoughts about it here. The issue of extra limits vs user discretion comes down to the practicality of hard restrictions (slightly more controlled submissions, easier for the SL to evaluate each spread) vs the freedom of self-imposed limitations (slightly more chaotic submissions, harder for the SL to evaluate each spread). Neither of these approaches are necessarily better than the other and do not have to be mutually exclusive as you imply in your post, spoo. The state of CAP 31 right now has it in a spot where it is significantly more open-ended at this stage than recent past projects, since there is no definitive role that everyone is on the same page about it's created this scenario where many users have wildly different ideas and directions they want to take 31 down. While this is not an inherently bad thing (quite the opposite in fact, very fun stuff), it does put more pressure on our current SL to have to evaluate every user's own vision of balancing 31. This is exacerbated when you have people self-limiting their spreads as not everyone has the same ideas on move power level, or certain combinations of moves being as strong as others might. Having to put more pressure on the SL to analyze and work out what each user's subjective idea of limiting their spreads are is an inherently more time-consuming (and probably stressful) process than having hard limits already in place.

You make a big point of it being arbitrary that Taunt/Split don't have hard limits given to them like the others, stating that it makes the other limitations feel arbitrary. I would counter that giving them hard limits when they are not as defining as boosting or recovery for the rest of project would feel equally arbitrary. This point is largely subjective so I don't want to dwell on it too long, but I disagree on the front that you can't leave some things to user discretion and not others. Again, there's value in both and no one right answer to it.

Personally I'm quite happy with the limits as is, but in the interest of spoo's re-evaluation proposal since I don't entirely disagree with it, I think the PS limits on the boosting moves would be the most succinct thing to go over. I think either imposing a harsher drop on SD or a softer hit on DD and SG could be in order. Something like SD -10 PS, DD -15, SG -20 or keep SD where it's at and DD -10, SG -15, the BSR hits on DD and SG are probably enough to not have to limit PS so drastically. Speed caps are fine, I personally like have at least a minor insurance that some kind of offensive counterplay remains for 31 since it's gonna be trickier to revenge than other mons.

#### Brown4Sides

Speed caps are fine, I personally like have at least a minor insurance that some kind of offensive counterplay remains for 31 since it's gonna be trickier to revenge than other mons.
I understand your concern about wanting to keep offensive counterplay intact. But increasing the Swords Dance limit to 110 or 115 still leaves Dragapult, Choice Scarf Kartana, Choice Scarf Tapu Lele, and Weavile as potential checks for us. Increasing it to 126 or 131 still leaves the former three as checks, and Weavile still has Ice Shard if we have not gotten a Defense boost. Even if we are 144, we are still outsped by Scarf Lele and Scarf Kartana. I'm not saying we should go to all the way to 144 or even 131, but making a fast Pokemon does not automatically make us uncheckable. Granted, our Diamond Storm boosts will make it harder, but even at 131 we are still checked by Scarf Lele and Dragapult which are special attackers. There is no harm in faster Swords Dance spreads at the very least, they are already suffering BSR and PS hits to ensure that they won't get out of hand.

EDIT: I forgot about Scarf Blacephalon, who also outspeeds CAP 31 if it is 144 and does not care about Diamond Storm boosts

Last edited:

#### Korski

##### Distilled, 80 proof
Bummer, I’m disappointed to see the general speed cap included in the BSR limits and the brushing off of the four posts preceding it. Would it be fair of me to ask a couple of questions challenging the decision? I have so many!

Can someone provide an example of a “less than desirable Attack+Speed combination” that simply cannot be trusted to submitters to balance elsewhere in the design? What is the speed cap for [none of DD/SD/SG]? It’s not listed. 126? Why? Certainly it can’t be because “anything faster is not as valuable.” That’s not an administrative argument (no offense) and it can most likely be debated properly in the next thread instead of decided by fiat in this one, imo. The only things above 126 Spe are Tapu Koko, Stratagem, Dragapult, and Zeraora. Do you want to ensure offensive counterplay from Pokemon we intend to beat, or to protect two Pokemon that do not have any specific interactive roles vs. CAP? Are we so married to fat booster that actively pre-banning other options becomes necessary? And is defensive counterplay so unacceptable, considering we are designing this CAP to be on offense and target offensive Pokemon, to match up well into things like Toxapex, Rotom-W, and Slowking-Galar anyway, and to be checked specifically by Equilibra and Corviknight? How is Corviknight meant to check SD CAP, ever, for example?

At the risk of sounding harsh, I can’t see how capping base speed in this instance resolves any issues unless you are shadow-polljumping here and presuming a particular defensive presence and movepool. This CAP has like zero resistances and a few posts seem to suggest it ought to be a comfortable switch-in to damage from the likes of Heatran and Zeraora and also be a multi-stat-boosting wallbreaker with an SR-resist, Recovery to truck offense or Taunt to block status, and two full immunities. I feel like base speed should be the least of our concerns when it comes to placing hard limits on stats before submissions even open. I am personally worried to see all the Latios/Metagross spreads competing for Garchomp’s and Landorus-T’s teamslot, if I’m being honest.

It doesn’t add up to me to try and warp the process this hard without a solid basis for the uncompetitiveness of it, and thus far I’m not convinced there is one. Why not ban a certain amount of tankiness, then, or recovery, for the DD subs? Or ban Taunt for the SD sets? These are equally arbitrary options if you’d like, especially considering the well-acknowledged agreement that a generalized build has not been established yet (merely shadow-established by topic leadership?). The optics of exercising this level of control are not good, imo, and I am a former mod and TLT member and I do know how to measure these considerations from a leadership standpoint.

I likewise disagree with Zetalz that the stats leader is owed any ease or difficulty when it comes to evaluating the stat spread submissions. It is not the stats leader’s job to evaluate the spreads at all, truth be told, beyond the submissions’ overall balance and justifications. Instead it is entrusted to the stats leader to guide discussion and to curate a balance of options for the community of voters to make *their own* evaluations. The stats leader is free to vote in the poll but is not free to manipulate the process to their liking or cut off ideas they disagree with at the knee.

And in all honesty after saying all that, I think the BSR limits Wulfanator has proposed are actually very good. The individual limits are all generous enough while the BSR makes it impossible to ride them too close. If I could ask for maybe a +5 or so to PS + SS to avoid having to dump an unusable SpA too low, I would humbly do so, but other than that I really think the limits alone are excellent and can be trusted without adding any more restrictions to them.

#### spoo

##### bike ride in the rain
Moderator
They're overly limiting (p. 2)
This is less of an issue with the premise of hard penalties, but the specific penalties themselves. Why would anyone submit a Shift Gear spread when they have a massive 30 PS and BSR axed? Or why would anyone include reliable recovery and take the -10 BSR, when they could instead design their spread around Pain Split and low HP for no penalty at all? The current limits also imply that the strength difference between Dragon Dance and Swords Dance is the same as between Swords Dance and having no boosting at all. Is Shift Gear really three times as strong as +2 Attack, especially when Diamond Storm already insulates us from revenge killing? A spread with Swords Dance/EdgeQuake/Taunt is punished three times less hard than a spread with Dragon Dance/EdgeQuake/Recover. If we keep these penalties in place, I think they should still be reevaluated.
At this point I doubt the penalties are getting removed so I would at least like to elaborate on this point.

I would personally bring DD's penalties down to match SD's level. I do not see one move as clearly more powerful than the other. The Speed boosting of DD is certainly strong, but there are a few reasons why I believe it isn't strictly a better option than SD. First, we already match up well into two of the most common speed control options in Tapu Koko and Zeraora, meaning Speed boosting is slightly less impactful. Second, wallbreaking power is huge for us; it's been well-rehearsed that mono STAB EdgeQuake coverage is rather middling, and the extra attack from SD is monumentally important against threats like Landorus-T, Ferrothorn, and Corviknight. Third, the +2 Defense boost already insulates us from revenge-killing in the same way that a Speed boost would, once again meaning Speed boosting is perhaps less impactful overall.

I would also seriously reduce Shift Gear's penalties. I don't think the move is as strong as it's made out to be, and currently there's very little incentive to ever account for it instead of DD (especially if we reduce DD's penalties like I suggest). Again, a lot has to do with how Speed boosting is less likely to break CAP 31. I would change the PS penalty to -10 and the BSR penalty to -20.

I think the BSR penalty to reliable recovery should be changed from -10 to -5. This is mostly because I don't think there's significant enough incentive to use it over Pain Split right now, but I also believe it's just not strong enough for a -10 cut in general. While it's implied that Pain Split isn't "free" either, it's still confusing to submitters to have one form of recovery explicitly penalized and the other not; I think it helps reduce discrepancies to ease up on this penalty a little bit, and just better reflects the strength of the option as a whole.

Finally, I also still really believe that the Speed cuts specifically should be axed. There is overwhelmingly more support in this thread against them than for them. I see the benefits –– I really do –– but I still don't think they're necessary. Out of all the penalties in the table, these are the ones that limit stat submitters the most. A spread can be fast as long as it is balanced overall.

#### dex

##### And then, Hefest got this run
Despite being the one who proposed the Speed limits, I think it is perfectly fine either way for the limits to remain or to be nixed. The point of the limits was to guide stat submissions in a helpful way towards a more cohesive unit, but it is fine either way.

Capping Speed is not a new concept to CAP. Chromera had a Speed cap of 120, if you remember. It is a helpful defining factor that can do well towards making not only submissions easier but also simplify the job of the stats leader. The Speed ranges are quite varied, and I do think it would be fine to do away with the Speed limits, but they are not wholly detrimental as they have been portrayed.

I do think that there should be some penalty towards using a setup move that lessens overall BSR and PS. I think the suggestions spoo has above are good enough for it, but the penalties should remain. It should be clear from the onset of the submission that a submission is designed with a certain move in mind. Setup moves can be super powerful, as was seen with Venomicon-E; BSR and PS penalties for setup moves helps in this regard. As for a penalty for consistent recovery, I do not think one is totally necessary; however, -5 seems pretty fair, especially when considering something Jumbao-esque stat-wise. Perhaps a penalty towards tankiness and not BSR would be more appropriate, but -5 for BSR works.

#### Agile Turtle

I have to echo Korski here, I don't see why there needs to be a limit on the speed. Capping at 126 is strange, is it really just to protect Dragapult and Stratagem? We're trying to beat Zeraora and Tapu Koko anyway. Why is weavile the top benchmark we're allowed to outspeed?

Regarding recovery, I think it's fine if users are more incentivized to build around pain split than a more reliable recovery option. It's frankly a little bit cooler, and even on lower HP stats a move like recover is still usually more reliable than pain split, and pain split is typically less reliable as the battle goes on. That's not to understate the power of pain split here, I think it's a super awesome move, especially in the context of an offensive mon that can deal damage and gain a second wind in one move. But I more want to emphasize that recover and pain split don't always function the same. (there's cooler counterplay to pain split too)

There should still be a BSR reduction on recovery, because a mon with dragon dance and recover should not have the same stats as a mon with dragon dance and without recover. I don't think there should be a significant reduction in tankiness limits when it comes to recovery, because much like the speed thing, I don't think we should outright limit this mons capability of being say, a special sponge. It doesn't make sense to limit that right before stat submissions when we've otherwise left it as a valid possibility thus far. Let that be balanced by an overall BSR reduction rather than a tankiness reduction. That said I do think the tankiness ratings are very generous.

Also in regards to the special sweepiness rating, it's too low. If special fire coverage is indeed meant to be an option, give the people who like that option the tools to make it one. At the current speed limit of 126, the highest special attack stat achievable within our limits is 77. To get the 2hko on ferrothorn uninvested with a neutral nature, a special attack stat of 89 is needed. At 126 speed and 89 special attack, that's a special sweepiness rating of ~111. This is admittedly something I care significantly less about, but don't say something is an option and then not let it be an option. Special Sweepiness limit should be increased to 115.

Last edited:

#### Zetalz

##### Expect nothing, deliver less
Also in regards to the special sweepiness rating, it's too low. If special fire coverage is indeed meant to be an option, give the people who like that option the tools to make it one. At the current speed limit of 126, the highest special attack stat achievable within our limits is 77. To get the 2hko on ferrothorn uninvested with a neutral nature, a special attack stat of 89 is needed. At 126 speed and 89 special attack, that's a special sweepiness rating of ~111. This is admittedly something I care significantly less about, but don't say something is an option and then not let it be an option. Special Sweepiness limit should be increased to 115.
It is important to note that SpDef Ferro is not the standard Ferro set in CAP, physdef is. Into standard Ferro the current limits are adequate enough, Flamethrower can sufficiently 2hko Ferro with a neutral nature, or anything stronger even with a negative one.
0 SpA Abomasnow Flamethrower vs. 252 HP / 4 SpD Ferrothorn: 184-220 (52.2 - 62.5%) -- guaranteed 2HKO after Stealth Rock and Leftovers recovery
0- SpA Abomasnow Fire Blast vs. 252 HP / 4 SpD Ferrothorn: 204-240 (57.9 - 68.1%) -- guaranteed 2HKO after Stealth Rock and Leftovers recovery

#### Wulfanator

##### Sableye used Foul Play!
Hey everyone. So truth be told, I was not expecting to take nearly as long to get final limits posted. I have been taking the feedback you have all provided over the last few days and been working to push the existing limits in a direction that hopefully will be more acceptable to everyone regardless of where you stand on the issues with dynamic limits. After some reevaluation, discussion with the TLT, and many calcs, I have settled on these limits moving forward.

T = 2.5Base LimitsSwords DanceDragon DanceShift Gear50% Recovery
PS​
140​
-5​
-5​
-20​
SS​
100​
PT​
130​
ST​
130​
BSR​
590​
-10​
-10​
-15​
-5​
Speed Limit​
126​
PT+ST Limit​
220​

The most noticeable changes are the reductions to Dragon Dance and Shift Gear. The limit of Dragon Dance was eased back to be in line with Swords Dance. Even though Dragon Dance is not as immediately threatening with the fire power it offers, the speed boost offered is still a reasonable concern to have for the move. Both PS will be reduced by 5 and the BSR will be reduced by 10. The reduction in BSR only accounts for the limit imposed on PS and prevents reallocation into the other limits. This is not an additional restriction. Shift Gear on the other hand is a weird case. Given 31’s ability to operate at some of the lowest speed tiers with Shift Gear, PS was restricted in a way to account for this. -20 PS was used to limit a user’s ability to drop speed in exchange for a monstrous attack stat (159/78 is possible at a PS of 140). Compared to Dragon Dance and Swords Dance, the BSR penalty does not fully account for the drop in PS. It allows users the ability to reallocate some of the lost PS into either tankiness or special sweepiness. A lesser reduction of -15 BSR should hopefully compensate for the weak attack stat faster speed stats face or the low speeds stronger attack stats face.

I previously referred to less than desirable attack+speed when addressing the speed limit of 126. While perhaps not the best wording on my part, the real target of my commentary was the fact it is rather easy for users to drop a few points of base attack in exchange for large amounts of speed when considering the fastest base speeds. For example, when adhering to the limits of 140 PS at a T of 2.5, 122 ATK/126 SPE and 120 ATK/144 SPE result in similar PS ratings (139.28 vs 139.26). That is a difference of 2 base attack and 18 base speed. Since the change in attack is so negligible, it only incentivizes maxing out the base speed of the Pokémon. This problem is present regardless of T-value, so adjusting T down to increase speed’s weight in the equation is not a solution. There was a similar trend I noticed back with the old calculator during Astrolotl’s project in that once you exceed a particular speed threshold, the PS value stopped changing (since you have successfully out speed everything in the game). This means that you could give it any speed with no consequence and that is sort of what is happening here. While we are no longer in a meta where Zeraora is the fastest thing in the game, we still see remnants of this problem. Once you start to reach the higher speed tiers, there are fewer Pokémon left to out speed and the gaps between base speed grows. We are reaching base speeds where raising it has few consequences so there is little reason not to take the max. Given our concept and selection of Diamond Storm, 126 speed is the minimum needed to out speed and threaten all unboosted Diamond Storm targets. If there was a more significant tradeoff at higher speeds, I would be more inclined to consider no speed limit, but, under the current circumstance, I cannot allow it in good conscience. As for the remaining speed limits under boosting, I have done away with them and you will be expected to adhere to the 126 limit for all spreads.

As for comments regarding offensive counterplay, Stratagem (ignoring potential grass coverage) and Dragapult exert an immense amount of pressure on these fast & frail builds. Their ability to overwhelm 31 should be a welcomed and valuable balancing factor when considering faster spreads. To compensate for the speed limit, the original tankiness and BSR were set in a way to allow these average bulk builds to still perform well into Tapu Koko and Zeraora despite not being able to out speed.

Finally, the BSR penalty for 50% recovery was reduced to a -5 to have them be more competitive to spreads that account for Pain Split with lower HP. The general lack of resistance mono-ground has compared to other Pokémon also indicates that the penalties should be less. This probably should have been a part of the default table given that the combination PT+ST limit is 220, but setup is a very distracting and worrisome element that occupied most of my attention. This should be more than sufficient in circumventing issues with bulk and recovery.

Other than that, the other limits will hold. As a reminder, limits are cumulative. For example, if a stat spread is considering SD and Recover, then the limits for that spread would be 135 PS/100 SS/130 PT/130 ST with BSR 575.

Before passing the limits over to SHSP for approval I do need a moment to address this:
It doesn’t add up to me to try and warp the process this hard without a solid basis for the uncompetitiveness of it, and thus far I’m not convinced there is one. Why not ban a certain amount of tankiness, then, or recovery, for the DD subs? Or ban Taunt for the SD sets? These are equally arbitrary options if you’d like, especially considering the well-acknowledged agreement that a generalized build has not been established yet (merely shadow-established by topic leadership?). The optics of exercising this level of control are not good, imo, and I am a former mod and TLT member and I do know how to measure these considerations from a leadership standpoint.

I likewise disagree with Zetalz that the stats leader is owed any ease or difficulty when it comes to evaluating the stat spread submissions. It is not the stats leader’s job to evaluate the spreads at all, truth be told, beyond the submissions’ overall balance and justifications. Instead it is entrusted to the stats leader to guide discussion and to curate a balance of options for the community of voters to make *their own* evaluations. The stats leader is free to vote in the poll but is not free to manipulate the process to their liking or cut off ideas they disagree with at the knee.
We as TLT members are elected to the positions of SL and TL because we are deemed to be well-experienced in both the meta and community. We are entrusted with the ability to make administrative decisions for the project. Within these responsibilities, there is a level of expectation that we will exercise our knowledge and intervene when the project stands to get problematic despite a majority opinion. That is why we are tasked with determining intelligent community consensus. As someone who has worked on 60% of the projects this generation in a leadership position, I feel beyond qualified to recognize a problematic decision and am able to course correct to ensure reasonable products. Given the unexplored territory of open-ended role plus the wide array of defining moves, constructing a solution that avoids shooting ourselves in the foot AND still being accommodating to user freedom is a hard task to ask of any user. It is hours of calculations, pushing the limits, and recognizing what can be problematic. Limits are intended to better guide inexperienced users. My job as stat SL is to not grant excessive freedoms that only stand to hurt users or the submission process. Leaving full discretion to users only serves to disadvantage new users since a lack of familiarity with the project or meta can result in questionable spreads. Just because a spread is within the limits does not make it automatically fine. This does not impede the democratic process of CAP or negatively impact user freedom. This is not a manipulation of the process. This level of control is needed to streamline all stages and help guide users in a way that their contributions will be both recognized and meaningful.

With that out of the way, I hand the conversation over to SHSP.

Last edited:

#### SHSP

Moderator
Wulf, the TLT and I have been talking this over for a good bit, and I'm 100% behind him with this last post and finalized limits. I appreciate the community's patience with us, both between talking it out internally and just our busy schedules as of late, and I'm excited to get Stat Subs going!

Status
Not open for further replies.