CAP 17 CAP 6 - Part 1 - Concept Submissions

Not open for further replies.

Quanyails: As I have already mentioned to you on IRC, I love your concept and the variety that comes with it. The only downside is that while there are a few options for an offensive CAPmon, your concept certainly leans towards a defensive or supporting Pokemon, which isn't a bad thing as such, but it does have limitations.

reachzero: I remember growing to dislike this concept. It's not that the concept is too limiting, it's that it's very ambiguous and I'm not sure how it would work out (very much like Aurumoth's Risky Business concept). Also, I am aware that many CAP-goers, including myself, have little knowledge of speed benchmarks, and so this would be a new territory for us (which could be considered a plus I guess). Overall though, I can't really see this concept working out.

Psylink: Mollux ;)

srk1214: Hmm. I don't think that there is a great deal to explore within the territory of phasing. We already have parashufflers and the likes, so it's not exactly new to us. There is also the fact that this concept is a little less broad than a typical concept of Gen V CAP, where we are set on one specific part of battling, and a small part of that. Simply put, there is not much to explore within the realms of phasing and so I don't think that this concept would work.

Yilx: Simple concept, and one which I like a lot. I don't really have any criticism of it; all I can say is to keep it as it is!

The Steam Punk: Eh, it is hard to create a CAPmon which can fulfill your concept when there is a huge variety of sweepers. The only way I can see it possible is if we created an extremely bulky Pokemon which can phase/heart swap or whatever, which is very limiting. Your concept is too set-in-stone in terms of paths we could go with the concept for it to be viable.

vyomov: I'd prefer to stray away from weather-based concepts as our last CAP heavily involved weather. Not to mention the fact that Syclant was intended to boost the viability of weather, and so this is very much a re-used concept.

forestflamerunner: We've already talked about your concept in IRC, nothing else needs mentioning.

LimaPro643: Sounds like you're already poll-jumping with the concept to be honest. Your concept is extremely limiting and could very much lead to an overpowered Pokemon.

Scorpio: Here's one that hasn't been mentioned much, but I like the sound of. It is a totally unique concept, and one which would be interesting to create. However, it's too hard to code and so its viability is damaged in that sense.

Base Speed: I'm not too keen on the concept due to its largely ambiguous nature, unfortunately. The fact that it can capitalise on luck is largely luck-based, in my opinion, due to over-predictions and other guessing games.

Will post more later.

Bull of Heaven

Scorpio: I'm interested in your concept, but the submission needs some work. Forme changing is practically unexplored in OU and one of the few things CAP has never touched. I don't doubt that we could do some very interesting things with it, and that it could be an exciting end to our fifth gen experiments, but this concept just isn'y ready to be submitted right now. Remember that CAP is primarily about the process and what it teaches is about the metagame, not the actual Pokemon we create. Instead of asking questions about the crested Pokemon, all of which would be answered through simple polls, you should be asking more thought-provoking questions about what we hope to achieve and how it will affect our understanding of the game. Give it some thought; I'd hate to see this concept go unslated just because it's underdeveloped.
Name: The Weatherman
General Description: A Pokemon that can completely counter all weather teams by turning the tables on them and using their weather against them, making the use of any weather a risk.
Justification: The OU metagame has become ridiculously dependent on weather. This Pokemon would allow us to see how other Pokemon would do in a metagame without omnipresent weather. We would be see how different strategies emerge and how teambuilding is impacted. Hopefull the OU metagame would be more diverse as more Pokemon might become viable.

Questions to be Answered:
-What pokemon would be better or worse if weather was less common?
-What new strategies would be formed if weather was less common?
-How would the overall pace of the metagame change?
-Will it be easier or more difficult to build consistently successful teams without omnipresent weather?
-Will the OU metagame become more diverse with less weather?
-Would there be weather teams that simply carry a counter to this pokemon?
-What use would this pokemon have other than countering weather?

Maybe such a drastic shift to the metagame is too much, but I feel that there are far too many Pokemon that aren't being used because they cant stand up to rain-boosted surfs/hydro pumps or sun boosted flamethrowers/fire blasts. Weather seems to dominate OU and limit the amount of Pokemon that are strong enough to keep up. There are many ways to create a Pokemon that could turn the tables on weather teams. My initial idea was some sort of "super air lock" ability. This ability would reverse the effects of weather entirely making fire type attacks more powerful in rain, blizzard have less accuracy in hail, sand damaging rock types and lowering their special defense, etc. That's just an idea, though.
LimaPro643: Unless I'm not getting something, this is basically (almost) every dragon-type in OU ever or Scizor/Ferro. Do explain further.

I'm not necessarily talking about a Pokémon that needs to be so powerful that it can demolish anything instantly. Plus, only a select few dragons are used as defensive tanks. Ferrothorn is a great example of one of the few Pokémon that actually can cause a lot of direct damage, depending on the Pokémon. Its Attack stat is good, but not so good to be a sweeper. Scizor has an amazing Attack stat, not to mention great defenses and typing with access to priority and good boosting moves. The only thing about Scizor is that it doesn't have the best of coverage. Despite all of this, I would never put Scizor in the same boat as its Bug/Steel wall-ish utility buddy Forretress.

The main thing I am trying to say is that this idea could be a Pokémon that could be either a wall or a sweeper, but may or may not have trouble trying to accomplish both, depending on the direction taken. For example, this Pokémon could perhaps not have good boosting moves such as Swords Dance or Quiver Dance... or Dragon Dance to set up, possibly forcing it to invest in its above decent attacking stats to do a lot of damage. Or, if the goal were for the Pokémon to be a wall, it might not have a pitiful damage output but might lack sweeping force.
Name: Bring Something Back
General Description: A Counterbalance to a previously Banned threat to make it one again Viable in OU
Justification: Gen 5 started a potential slippery slope in the creation and use of complex bans. Ubers used to be limited to Legendary, and on rare occasion Pseudo Legendary Pokemon. This generation threats like Blaziken and Exadrill have been kicked upstairs based on one factor such as an ability, instead of a generally overpowered makeup of a Pokemon itself. Weather Inducing abilities introduced the most complex ban to date with Swift Swim. In the interest of keeping the OU teir with as many options as possible, we could select a banned Pokemon, or Element, and see if we can create a facter that would limit the target's viability enough to return to OU, the challenge being that we don't want to create an overpowered Pokemon ourselves.
Questions To Be Answered: Can a Pokemon truly be overpowered due to a single factor, or does the entire makeup of the pokemon matter?
What does it truly mean to be overpowered?
Are there other ways of countering Uber threats that haven't been thought of?
Can a threat to an Uber Pokemon exist without being overpowered itself?
Could this specific counter be viable as a more general pokemon outside of its assigned nitche?
Will this information help shape understanding of forming potential complex banns in the future?

Explanation: I wasn't able to put this up as a final submission last time around, but I think it deserves another look. Gen 5 has included the most elements to date, yes, but it also has had the most discussion and implementations of Bans. Relatively recently, discussion has taken place over Auto Weather, and is it overpowered, even with a new generation approaching. We as battlers like to have viable access to as many elements as we can, and speaking personally, it annoys me when some are unavailable for seemingly one factor. Is it something we can do in playtesting? Bring back a previously banned pokemon? I don't know. But aside from simply bringing back an old toy to play with, it can really allow us to look at the individual, and combined characteristics that make a Pokemon too overpowered for OU. It also lets us explore ways to counter that may not have been thought of, and provides plenty of insight into the creation of potential complex bans in the future, as we may learn what truly is out of our control.
LimaPro643: Sounds like you're already poll-jumping with the concept to be honest. Your concept is extremely limiting and could very much lead to an overpowered Pokemon.
I honestly don't think that this Pokémon would be overpowered. If this Pokémon had few, yet common crippling weaknesses, it might not be difficult to take out. I also didn't envision this kind of Pokémon to be fast at all either, given its offensive and defensive potential. The main thing is "Wall or Offensive threat", not both. With above decent stats in each, it might be average defensively with investment in an attacking stat or average offensively when defensively invested, yet still able to cause decent damage or take a few neutral hits either way. Nothing is set in stone in regards to typing, but many weaknesses would go against the fabric of the concept.
Name: Down with the King

General Description: A Pokemon designed to act as a direct counter to a specific Uber Pokemon to such an extent that said Uber may enter the OU metagame without becoming an overly dominant force without CAP 6 being fit for Uber status itself.

Justification: The Smogon Meta's shift restlessly when new material is introduced which alters how the game is played. Some Uber Pokemon drop and some OU Pokemon rise, changing how the Meta functions. CAP 6 would explore this process by dethroning an Uber Pokemon and seeing what happens when it joins the OU rabble. This would allow us to see how a single Pokemon can influence the shifting of the meta while demonstrating how the separation of OU and Uber only exists as a vague line because of how Pokemon act against each other in different ways.

Questions to be Answered:
  • What are some of the characteristics that make a Pokemon fit to be Uber, and what separates it from other Pokemon in OU?
  • While Ubers tend to have higher stats then other Pokemon this is not always the case, what do Pokemon without huge stat advantages have that gives them such a powerful presence?
  • Has the introduction of a new Uber Pokemon grossly affected how other Pokemon function? What is different and what is the same?
  • While CAP 6 is designed to defeat this Uber Pokemon, how does its presence affect other Pokemon in the metagame? Is it required on teams in case the new Uber Pokemon is too powerful without it?
Explanation: My main influence for this concept is Kyurem-B. As a powerful Uber Pokemon it was deemed fit for OU because it was flawed to the point where it could be handled in OU. As well a Pokemon like Deoxys-D, who was once UU, has now ascended into Uber because it does not have a counter that can assure it does not cause undue harm. The OU metagame exists fluidly, with individuals passing osmotically through the barriers between the different tiers when it fits them. Gen V saw this happen many times during its time, which is why I feel like now would be a good time to explore the shift because Gen VI is rapidly approaching. We have been given the opportunity to observe this process in CAP 6 and I believe we could use it to our benefit. As well I feel like this concept will really excite conversation because we don't only have to speak about CAP 6s influence but also the Uber Pokemon's. I feel like if we were to pick this project the best Uber candidate would be one lower in the tier but still recognized as a threat.
I didn't actually notice your post before mine jynx, since I don't specify "previously banned" I'll leave it to the mods to determine if its too close.


Knows the great enthusiasms
is a member of the Site Staffis an Artistis a Programmeris a CAP Contributoris an Administratoris a Battle Server Admin Alumnusis a Live Chat Contributor Alumnusis a Tiering Contributor Alumnus
CAP Leader
Name: Last Man Standing

General Description: A pokemon that performs particularly well in last pokemon endgame strategies, without being an overpowered all-purpose setup sweeper.

Justification: Endgame planning is a big part of competitive battling strategy, and in previous generations, last pokemon strategies were a legitimate factor in competitive play. But the art of the "last pokemon comeback" has waned in the 5th generation. There are many OU pokemon capable of pulling off a sweep with proper team support, but very few OU pokemon (if any) are best suited to sweep when they are the last remaining pokemon on the team. By making a competitive BW pokemon that can excel as a last pokemon, we will explore and analyze a wide variety of endgame scenarios, and learn more about endgame planning and positioning in general.

Questions To Be Answered:
  • What is "the endgame" in competitive pokemon? What does that term really mean?
  • What are the most common endgame scenarios in current BW OU play?
  • What are good endgame strategies?
  • Which existing pokemon are most helpful in successfully executing endgame strategies?
  • What is the difference between a generically good pokemon and a good "last pokemon"?
This concept came about when we were talking in #cap about Curselax in the 3rd generation. Back in the day, Snorlax was a great pokemon that could play a variety of roles on OU teams, but it was notorious for its ability to stage comebacks as the last unfainted pokemon on a team. When talking about BW, we remarked how there really is no "modern day Snorlax" that can reliably perform as a last pokemon. Sure, there are plenty of pokemon that can sweep at the end of a game, and there are plenty of stories about endgame comebacks based on luck or other battle factors -- but there is no well-known "last pokemon" in BW OU play.

Focusing on the last pokemon is a vehicle to allow the CAP community to discuss endgame play in general, which is often mentioned, but has never been analyzed in detail. This will be an opportunity to involve oldtimer battlers from previous gens and mix them with new battlers from the current gen, as we dissect endgame planning, attempt to resurrect a strategy from yesteryear, and make it relevant and balanced in the wild world of current competitive play.
Name: Adaptations for Different Relations!

General Description: A Pokemon with the unique ability to fulfill different roles in different situations; starting the match with one role and finishing with another, perhaps?

Justification: Throughout my experience in competitive gameplay, I've seen a plethora of roles that are filled by specific Pokemon; I've even seen individual Pokemon with very different roles that work well. However, not once have I seen a Pokemon that is flexible enough to fulfill a different role against an enemy's role- each Pokemon seems to be set in their responsibilities. Sure, the occasional Sweeper has been known to be a temporary wall, and once in a while a wall has revenge killed. But why is this so rare in the metagame? The inclusion of an "adaptable" Pokemon would answer this question as well as setting the path for new multi-responsibility Poke's.

Questions To Be Answered:
  • Is it possible for a Pokemon to hold multiple roles in the same match?
  • If it is even possible, would this lead the Pokemon to become too overpowered?
  • Would the introduction of a multi-role Pokemon cause Pokemon that previously held those roles to become underused?
  • Would the introduction of a multi-role Pokemon lead other Pokemon to adapt and to hold new unseen roles in the metagame?
  • Would there even be a point in including such a Pokemon to a team, or would it be a waste of space?
Explanation: I think that introducing a Pokemon with the ability to adapt to the pressures put on them by the other team and/or fulfill different roles in a match would be an interesting antithesis to the one-track roles of Pokemon today. My inspiration first came from the ability Speed Boost; I thought to myself how fun it would be to send, say, a defensive wall out to the field and watch it slowly become fast enough to take out the enemy's entire team. This got me thinking about the roles that each Pokemon in a team has; sweeper, attacker, wall, etc. What I didn't quite understand was why none of the Pokemon I've encountered in the past have been able to do multiple tasks for their teams. Thus was born my idea for an adaptable role that would be one of the most non-linear things the metagame has ever seen.

I hope you like it! As you can probably tell, this is my first time doing this, so go easy on me ;)EDIT: I dun goofed when I posted it, so I went back and fixed everything.
Name: Gravity Gold
General Description: A pokemon that uses gravity to cover it's flaws.
Justification: Gravity is so underused in any metagame, it's almost unheard of to use it in OU. This could give stall a boost to compete with offensive teams, making flying types and levitating pokemon, such as Hydreigon or Tomohawk, vulnerable to both types of spikes. CAP has never experimented with gravity, and it could be interesting to see how much a pokemon can take advantage of it's effects.

Questions to be answered:
  • Will weather teams shut this pokemon down?
  • How could we use the effects of gravity in effective ways?
  • Could this give stall a drive to compete with offensive teams?
Explanation: My main hope for this concept is to make more people want to experiment with something as unique as Gravity. I wouldn't be surprised that more than 60% of people on showdown even know about gravity, much less use it. In my eyes, popularizing Gravity could only be an improvement in the way teams are built, encouraging more unorthodox choices. It could be as simple as replacing close combat with cross chop on swords dance Lucario, or maybe you could try something like a choice band Toxicroak with Gunk Shot, DynamicPunch, Stone Edge, and Earthquake.
Name: Extremely Hazardous
General Description: A Pokemon designed to control the flow and impact of entry hazards for one or both teams.
Justification: Some players in OU believe entry hazards to be broken, others find them to be completely necessary for a fun, competitive metagame. This Pokemon would allow us to do more research on the effects of hazards on the metagame and how dangerous they are when used correctly.
Questions To Be Answered:
  • Does the possibility alone of hazards on the field severely limit certain Pokemon from being viable in OU?
  • Does removing hazards from the field allow for some playstyles to become more effective than others?
  • Do some Pokemon absolutely require hazards to be on the opponent's field to be effective?
  • How crucial are hazards to the balance of the metagame?
  • Do some Pokemon become less viable if they are unable to place or prevent the placement of hazards?
  • What reasons are there to use some hazard setters as opposed to others? For what reasons would you use hazard removers over other hazard removers?
  • For what reasons would you use Spikes and Toxic Spikes over Stealth Rock?
Explanation: There have been countless arguments started in the OU subforum of the site over whether or not hazards are broken. There was even a thread made to start discussion about said topic, which ended in the OU PRC deciding there will be a hazardless ladder near the start of 6th gen. Many people believe banning hazards would simply just cause a shift in the main types that are used, with Fire, Flying, and Bug Pokemon seeing much more usage. I believe the CAP Community is capable of creating a Pokemon that is influential enough that it can control all aspects of hazards in the metagame, as well as be able to abuse whether or not hazards are present. I would like to point out, this is not simply a Pokemon that removes hazards. This Pokemon is supposed to abuse hazards on both ends, whereas it could also place hazards if it wants, or abuse hazards as to whittle down the opponent to achieve it's own goal (it could use the residual damage to help nab KO's through stall, or need one layer of Spikes to OHKO Tyranitar with a move, for example).
First time posting one of these, please let me know if there's something I need to fix. Feedback is greatly appreciated.


It's all coming back to me now
is a Forum Moderator Alumnusis a Community Contributor Alumnusis a CAP Contributor Alumnusis a Contributor Alumnusis a Battle Server Moderator Alumnus
Couple of things

Name: Bring Something Back
General Description: A Counterbalance to a previously Banned threat to make it one again Viable in OU
General Description: A Pokemon designed to act as a direct counter to a specific Uber Pokemon to such an extent that said Uber may enter the OU metagame without becoming an overly dominant force without CAP 6 being fit for Uber status itself.
Id like to point out, that just because an Uber is "countered" by something in OU, doesn't mean that said Uber would still be OU. For instance, Gastrodon counters Kyogre, Claydol prolly counters most Groudon, Heatran countered Genesect, Jirachi countered Tornadus-T etc etc. So already, your concept is a little vulnerable because one single pokemon being good is hardly going to make an uber drop down, since it doesn't actually make the uber less broken, and just centralises the meta around CAP 6, hardly something thats healthy. In addition, these ubers (correct me if I am wrong) won't be playable in the playtest, making it harder to judge how successful the CAP was.
Thanks to everyone who liked my concept :D. I didn't think it would be that popular. I have put a few more questions in "Questions to be answered" that should hopefully be more process-oriented and less final-product-oriented, like Bull of Heaven suggested.

@Eagle4: ...hoo boy, didn't think of that. I'm going to have to do some more thinking about that when I don't have finals coming up. :/
Scorpio and Eagle4: I don't think 'coding' would be an issue here. It's more of the concept is along the lines of "Make Meloetta good " or "Make a usuable Darma-Z", which I personally find quite interesting to explore; what makes those mons "bad"? Why aren't they viable? Is it the transformation mechanics or just the fact that they're trying to do too many things at once? I'd like to see you expand on yours, Scorpio.
Name: Quickstaller

General Description: A defensive pokemon that possesses the tools and traits to efficiently "Quickstall", effectively using its speed, or other means of "outrunning" the opponent to gain an advantage on offensive pokemon.

Justification: As I'm sure most frequenters in the BW OU environment have noticed, stall as a whole has taken a big hit in effectiveness and viability. With the power creep, combined with numerous other factors such as weather, being brought about by BW, stall has fallen by the wayside simply because it can't keep up with offense most of the time. Yes, stall has gained some cool upgrades such as Ferrothorn, Jellicent, and Eviolite Chansey, but even those assets can barely hope to keep pace with the offensive juggernauts infesting the metagame. Quickstall, which was a style of play that was to my knowledge first explored in DPP Ubers, could possibly help solve this problem. Quickstall focuses on using fast defensive or normally offensive pokemon to drain, neuter, or otherwise chip away at opposing offensive pokemon. If this playstyle was capable of keeping the even more offensively oriented Ubers tier in check, then I see no reason it can't do the same for BW2 OU. A pokemon perfectly tailored towards using it's traits to Quickstall could be just what stall needs to fall back into the limelight.

Questions To Be Answered:
  • What exactly is Quickstall?
  • What aspects of Quickstall would allow it to be effective in todays metagame?
  • Are faster, maybe slightly less defensively oriented pokemon the optimum way to handle offense of today?
  • What moves will serve to be optimum tools for a Quickstaller?
  • What speed benchmark will allow for CAP 6 to handle offensive pokemon the best?
  • Can a single pokemon geared towards utilizing the traits defined by Quickstall be a medium through which stall can consitently combat offensively oriented teams in today's metagame?
Explanation: Around the time the BW metagame was being settled, it was becoming quickly apparent that stall was simply not as viable as it once was. Some people relished in the fact that offense had finally become the clear dominant playstyle, while others clamored for ways to vault stall back to its former glory. As for myself, I fell under the the latter category. I would rather see a variety of viable playstyles than an abundance of pokemon that promote a specific playstyle, mostly because I feel it adds more to the game as a whole. With that said, I stumbled upon the concept of Quickstall a while ago, but never got around to fully utilizing it to its full potential. Now, though, I feel that with all other attempts to reinvigorate stall having failed for me, Quickstall might be the last hope for the defensive playstyle. CAP 6 would provide the perfect opportunity to investigate Quickstall, allowing for the creation of a pokemon who can help enlighten us on this sub-playstyle. On top of that, we can utilize the process of exploring Quickstall to provide a springboard towards discussion and research of BW offense, stall, and other branching topics.
Name: Joke of all Trades
General Description: A Pokemon who, despite having solid stats in all areas, isn't overly good at filling any niche.
Justification: Versatility. A word used so much it's practically lost its meaning. However, versatility in Pokemon seems to be a Pokemon which can use a moveset people won't see coming. A basic scarfed Walrein, for example, can be used effectively because the other player immediately assumes it's a stall set. However, what if there was a Pokemon that was truly versatile? Viable, but not excellent, in all areas? That's where this Pokemon comes in. Despite its relatively mediocre stats, at least compared to, say, Skarmory, its versatility will make it unpredictable, and, to an extent, more dangerous than its counterparts. However it can be shut down easily if your opponent predicts correctly.
Questions To Be Answered:
  • Can a single Pokemon pull off most, if not all, common playstyles without a gargantuan moveset?
  • How is this Pokemon preferable to other Pokemon with equal-stats, like Jirachi or Celebi?
  • What moves/abilities will this Pokemon need to effectively pull off multiple playstyles?
  • What makes this Pokemon in OU, rather than a lower tier relating to its stats?
  • How low can a stat total be in OU without a special feature e.g. Drizzle Politoed?
Explanation: Developing your own competitive strategy is hard work. Usually a Pokemon's best options are on a simple page on a certain website, and other moves, though surprising, are usually a worse choice. The closest most teams get to customization is switching to a different Hidden Power type. This Pokemon would almost work like a toy to the advanced, and a good place to start for budding customisers. There would be a whole range of sets, and prediction would rely a lot more on logic than... um... prediction. However, a(n) de/of-fensive Pokemon placed in from a(n) of/de-fensive would throw off the scent greatly. I see this as sort of an experiment; a Pokemon that can be modeled to perform anything, without being overly good at it. Like I said, a Joke of all Trades.
ummmm i've had this saved on my computer for a while but it's basically identical to another submission :/ I'll post it regardless and youse guise can decide how to approach it.

Name: Perfect Formeula

General Description: A pokemon that can actively change forme mid-battle and maintain momentum in the process.

Justification: I believe this concept will allow us more thoroughly examine the roles of momentum, defensive & offensive synergy, moveset & EV construction and "setting up" in OU, all through the lens of a gameplay mechanic that remains wholly unexplored.

Questions To Be Answered:

-Is it feasible for a pokemon to actively change forme in OU and maintain/gain momentum in the process?
-Can we make it so offensively "setting-up" with an active forme-change could be a move well-spent?
-Can we make it so an active forme-change could, in some way, optimally support a team, and therefore be a move well-spent?
-Can a single pokemon act effectively as ~two threats at once?
-Are four-slot movesets expansive enough to ALLOW a pokemon to act as two disparate threats at once,
or will one forme always take precedence as a result? Will we end up with formes with vital similarities that can make effectice use of the same moves?

Explanation: I need to emphasise the forme-change as ACTIVE, i.e., TRIGGERED & CONTROLLED BY THE USER MID-BATTLE.

I think the idea of switching pokemon WITHOUT ACTUALLY SWITCHING is intensely interesting in a hazard-fuelled, voltturn-filled metagame with such emphasis on momentum. The clearest path to take here is to design two formes that have some fundamental duality, i.e. they threaten and are threatened by different things and there are therefore (mostly) no 100% counters to the two as a single entity, and also bestow the non-standard forme with innate advantages that make its use viable and desirable. This project could give us access to immeasurable situation-specific information about moveset size & construction, bait-&-switch tactics, the importance of bypassing hazards, etc., and would allow us to explore a vibrant and fundamentally unique concept not yet encountered in OU.

There are, of course, aspects of the concept that could be contentious (to say the least). Forme-changing is a mechanic wholly distinct from the well-charted, competetive pillars of stats, movepool, typing and ability and it relies on some intrinsic quality exclusive to its capable pokemon. The concept would therefore likely REQUIRE custom mechanics, especially if choosing to change forme via some move (which seems likely, considering the concept description). Changing forme in a non-passive way (i.e. Flower Gift) allows the user to always have control over the pokemon, all the while allowing for ability slots for both formes (which seem to be of potentially vital importance). I feel that some form of purism is a necessity, but that the potential of the concept transcends its importance as a deciding factor.

Note that I do not think we should necessarily rule out forme-changing abilities - all three can be activated through use of a move, be it weather or Substitute, and therefore can potentially be actively utilised to aid momentum, whilst the passive qualities can potentially be useful and SHOULD BE DISCUSSED. If we were to utilise an ability, I would argue that the precedent set by them is only how the forme-change occurs, and not how the formes themselves should be constructed (i.e. Hail-Forecast-Mon shouldn't need to be Ice-type, Flower-Gift-Mon shouldn't need to have both formes be identical).


new website is weird af
is a Site Staff Alumnusis a Forum Moderator Alumnusis a Community Contributor Alumnusis a Contributor Alumnusis a Smogon Media Contributor Alumnus
I've had this concept in planning for a while, and while I'm aware that it's similar to homeslice's concept, I think it differs enough in its aims to be worth posting.

Name: Hazardbuster

General Description: A Pokémon designed to reduce the presence of hazards in the OU metagame as much as possible.

Justification: It is undeniable that entry hazards are of paramount importance, affecting our decisions both during the team-building process and on the battlefield. By removing/mitigating their impact on the metagame as much as possible, we will discover which strategies/Pokémon become more viable in a less hazard-friendly environment, which strategies/Pokémon become less viable, and how general team-building and gameplay choices will diverge from "standard battlefield conditions".

Questions To Be Answered:
  • In what ways do entry hazards affect our team-building decisions and the viability of certain Pokémon and playstyles?
  • In what ways do entry hazards affect our in-game decisions, prediction, and risktaking?
  • What are the advantages and disadvantages of current hazard-removal Pokémon, and how can CAP6 fill their roles more effectively?
  • What are the advantages and disadvantages of current hazard-setting Pokémon, and how can CAP6 deal with them more effectively?
  • Which entry hazards have the most impact on the metagame, and which are the hardest to remove/mitigate?
  • What are the most effective general methods and strategies of hazard-mitigation, and how can CAP6 excel at supporting them?
  • Do current hazard-removal techniques inherently sacrifice too much momentum to decrease entry hazard usage?
Explanation: Hazards have been a part of competitive Pokémon since Gen2, and their presence becomes stronger with each passing generation. Some Pokémon such as Yanmega and Moltres are uncommon mostly because of the proliferation of Stealth Rock, which some Pokémon such as Multiscale Dragonite and Volcarona would arguably be overpowered without hazards chipping away at them. Furthermore, while anti-hazard strategies have been developed over the years, such as Rapid Spinning and the recent addition of Magic Bounce, the users of these utilities usually carry several disadvantages that make them outclassed outside of these roles (eg Donphan, Forretress, Xatu) and can be relatively easy to stop, and most must sacrifice their team's momentum to fulfil their tasks. As a result, entry hazards overall are worth using on any team despite these counter-strategies. Designing a Pokémon that not only excels at removing entry hazards or keeping them off the field by other means (Rapid Spin, Magic Bounce, fast Taunt, sheer offensive pressure), but also does so while remaining generally useful on the team otherwise, would allow us to investigate the effects of a hazard free metagame, or at least as hazard-free as reasonably possible. Starmie would be a fairly good comparison for the role of this Pokémon, although CAP6 would obviously be more specialised.

I disagree with the notion that a hazard-based-concept CAP6 should also be able to ensure hazards for its team. Having a more versatile Starmie/Espeon would be somewhat centralising already, and I accept that this is necessary to investigate the desired metagame, but making the same Pokémon excel at providing hazards would tip it into ridiculousness. Furthermore, making CAP6 simultaneously the best hazard remover and hazard provider would achieve little; everyone would use CAP6, and whether a team had hazards on the opponent's side would come down to who's CAP6 was removed first. We wouldn't get to see a metagame with reduced hazard presence, just one where everyone uses the same hazard setter. A CAP that specialises in removing hazards would provide a focused Pokémon and a focused concept, while a CAP that both removes and provides hazards would have serious 4MSS, and could lead to inconclusive outcomes.

While it may not be possible to complete remove hazards from the metagame with just one Pokémon, it would be reasonable to lower the usage of hazards enough to change usage statistics by a significant degree.
Couple of things

Id like to point out, that just because an Uber is "countered" by something in OU, doesn't mean that said Uber would still be OU. For instance, Gastrodon counters Kyogre, Claydol prolly counters most Groudon, Heatran countered Genesect, Jirachi countered Tornadus-T etc etc. So already, your concept is a little vulnerable because one single pokemon being good is hardly going to make an uber drop down, since it doesn't actually make the uber less broken, and just centralises the meta around CAP 6, hardly something thats healthy. In addition, these ubers (correct me if I am wrong) won't be playable in the playtest, making it harder to judge how successful the CAP was.
To be honest, Solstice's is better worded anyway, so I'm backing out and letting him submit it so the votes aren't split, and simply throw my support behind the other post. As for the other point, part of the project would be to see if we could make CAP 6 do it's job without becoming over centralizing.

Base Speed

What a load of BS!
Hey all, thanks for all your feedback and likes on my concept, keep 'em coming.

Firstly, I'm going to address some of my feedback.

@Yilx and ginjaninja: Thanks for taking the time to read my concept and give some really deep analysis here. Much appreciated. In response to your request to remove ambiguity, I've rehashed an explanation paragraph and added in a clear statement that random number generator luck has no place in the concept. If there's still more refining needed here, let me know.

@GlassAbsol: I've taken into account your doubts on the do-ability of the concept and expanded the part of the explanation on how we could make it in response, adding in some more possibilities as well as some examples of pokemon that already act as "punishers" sometimes. I hope you'll find it more inspiring now, but if you don't, feel free to get in touch, and I'll try again.

@Eagle4: I'm sorry to hear you're not a fan of my concept. We sort of half discussed your feedback on IRC but never got to finish. Basically, ircc, the luck you're referring to is prediction luck, rather than random number generator luck (which I've ruled out now). I guess that makes it a valid point but a lot of people see what you call luck as a skill. Actually, there's no right or wrong answer but what I don't see is how (either way) it would be a big detriment to the concept, so unfortunately you'll have to explain that bit to me. Despite all this, I think we could have a really good discussion on luck vs skill in prediction if my concept won, and I'm glad you bought it up.

Now, to give some feedback of my own:

I'll start with a note on weather and hazard based concepts. Some of them are great, well written and sound like they'd be awesome to do, but we pretty much just did them with Malaconda. Sorry to shoot your ideas down but I personally want to try something a bit different.

@Quanyails, reachzero, Yilx, Deck Knight and DougJustDoug: this is just a quick message to show I support your concepts. There's not much I'd change about them (of course, two have already had a whole CAP to refine themselves, after all). Thumbs up to you guys.

@srk1214: This could be great fun. However, I'd like to know how we'd make the pokemon's typing and abilities relevant to your concept, as we could end up being very very focused on the movepool for this. Any chance of adding a bit of a "how we might make this" section to your currently rather short explanation?

@LimaPro643: All your questions to be answered can already be answered with "Yes. Just look at what happened with Aurumoth" so it's very clear we're on dangerous ground here. First of all, some deeper questions that we don't know the answer to need to be asked, and secondly, you really need to put some sort of discussion into your explanation about how we'll avoid making this guy broken, otherwise people will just be scared off.

@scorpio: I won't sugar coat it, a lot of your questions to be answered suck. Questions like "How are we going to make this not suck/not be broken?" are just assumed for every single CAP and the how-exactly-are-we-going-to-make-my-idea-work type questions you've asked aren't great either. The questions are supposed to be learning opportunities for the wider game. (Some of your questions are OK and should be kept, by the way).You should be asking questions like "Why are there no form changing pokemon in OU? What aspects of them are causing them to fail? Is it the form changing itself, or other inadequacies?" instead.

@DarkSlay: Definitely a good concept and one that I hope gets slated. However, it's a tad confusing. Your general description talks about a pokemon focusing on its team rather than itself, which brings to mind a support pokemon, but then you begin to talk about versatility. Don't get me wrong, I love what you're saying about versatility, but your general description doesn't match. Surely "focusing on the team" instantly wipes any self-centered setup off the table and rules out the pokemon being a sweeper or a wall and thus reduces versatility a lot. If that's just you trying to add specificity to the concept and try to avoid making a broken CAP, then fine. But be clearer about it and discuss what you've said in your general description in the other parts of the concept submission. And if that wasn't the intention, then perhaps change the general description to something clearer. All in all, a solid submission though.

Will post again later to address some more concepts. I hope my criticisms have helped those I've given it too and I apoligise if I've come across as rude or blunt to anyone.


is a member of the Site Staffis an Artistis a Super Moderatoris a Community Contributoris a CAP Contributoris a Battle Server Admin Alumnusis a Smogon Media Contributor Alumnus
CAP Head Mod
Name: Inspiration through Translation

General Description: This Pokemon performs a role in the current Overused metagame identical to that of another Pokemon’s role within another metagame.

Justification: The state of the Overused metagame is about as solidified as it is going to get for the fifth generation of Pokemon. However, many of its players are still unhappy with how the metagame plays, and opt out to play other tiers and metagames (both past generations and other current tiers). In choosing the metagame that is widely celebrated, and pinpointing a Pokemon’s role that brings success to that metagame, is it possible to convert our current Overused metagame to become more enjoyable?

Questions to Answer:
· What makes a desirable metagame? What doesn't?
· Which metagames exhibit desirable characteristics? What makes them that way?
· Which Pokemon lend themselves most towards making that metagame desirable?
· What roles of those Pokemon are absent in our current metagame? Why are they absent?
· How can we revive or rebuild that role within the current Overused metagame?

Explanation: If you’re familiar with Voodoom’s concept (CAP 11), this follows the same rhythm in that it attempts to build a Pokemon with the assistance of a currently existing Pokemon. Where they differ is that Voodoom worked at forming a core, while this concept aims to replicate a Pokemon’s role from another metagame into our current Overused metagame. The goal here is to teach us about the “enjoyability” of a metagame, which is something we haven’t delved into in the past. What makes a metagame fun? What are the reasons for that?

I’m purposefully leaving this concept vague in order to give us maximum flexibility. This concept is open to literally any metagame. We could dive all the way back to second generation and look into forces like Curselax and Zapdos. We also have the flexibility to work with a current metagame that differs from Overused, such as Underused, Neverused, or even something obscure like Balanced Hackmons. The role that the Pokemon performs can be as centralizing as Kyogre in current Ubers, or as obscure as Scraggy being a late-game setup sweeper in Little Cup. Our goal would be to discuss which metagames are fun, and more importantly, why they are so enjoyable. Once we pinpoint that down, we can work towards creating a Pokemon that would shift Overused in that direction.

As a result of the vagueness, we may need to have some extra polls and discussions here, similar to how we voted on which Pokemon to pair Voodoom up with during CAP 11. Those extra topics and discussions give us a bit of a break from the typical CAP process, which also leads into some curious conversations. Our conversations will also be subjectively based around obscure concepts like fun and enjoyment, which should allow us to learn more about what kind of a metagame we’re all striving to play. This concept will lead to conversations that we've never had before as a Create-A-Pokemon Project, and that’s worth exploring.


oh my gosh you found me
is a member of the Site Staffis a Super Moderatoris a Contributor to Smogonis a Tournament Director Alumnusis a Community Contributor Alumnusis a Researcher Alumnusis a Tiering Contributor Alumnusis a Smogon Media Contributor Alumnusis an Administrator Alumnus
Secret Boss Mod
Name: One Hit Wonder

General Description: A Pokemon that is the reverse of versatile, sporting exactly one good set with no variation and nothing else.

Justification: One of the largest complaints about BW as a generation and OU as a metagame is that there is just too much to prepare for. When a Pokemon comes in you can never know exactly what the Pokemon is going to pull out, even something like Ferrothorn has room for variation on its standard moveset depending on the hazards its carrying, Leech Seed, Thunder Wave, Power Whip, Gyro Ball, or if it's really tricky a completely different Choice Band set. Is it possible for a Pokemon to be viable in OU with only one possible set going for it? Is it even possible to remove versatility from Pokemon at this point?

Questions to Answer:
- What is versatility, and where does it come from for a Pokemon? Does it hinge on movepool, abilities, items, stat spread, a combination of all?
- Is versatility in a Pokemon required to remain viable in the BW OU metagame and generation?
- How does knowing exactly what is needed to counter this Pokemon change playstyle and team building?
- What minimum combination of factors need to come together (ability, typing, movepool) to make sure a Pokemon is viable in OU?
- Is it worth using a Pokemon that has no surprise factor?


In tournaments and top competitive play, the players' best weapon is the weapon of surprise. What I want to know is if it's worth using a Pokemon that has zero surprise value, but is still considered "good" in the metagame. What needs to happen for a Pokemon to remain a good choice for competitive teams? What kind of limitations need to come into play to have it so a Pokemon only has "one good set?" Is it even possible to remove versatility from Pokemon at this point in BW with the gigantic amount of items available?

We've already seen what happens when we let a Pokemon have creativity go out the whazoo on multiple occasions (it creates god-like Pokemon coughAuramothcoughKrillowatcough) but never the reverse. This concept actually leaves a lot of room for creativity and a lot of discussion will have to take place at each stage to make sure we are keeping the Pokemon viable but won't have any wiggle room once we're done. One of the earliest stage discussions will have to be whether we want this Pokemon to be offensive or defensive which will then determine the rest of the stages. However that early stage determination still leaves room for creativity on the kind of role that Pokemon will play on the team, whether it be supporter, wall, sweeper, wallbreaker, etc. In the end though the point will be to have a Pokemon with exactly one role and only one role.


the pastor of disaster
is a Forum Moderatoris a CAP Contributoris a Super Moderator Alumnusis a Tiering Contributor Alumnusis a Battle Server Moderator Alumnus
Yilx, thinking about your concept today, it finally occurred to me what was bothering me about the wording: it's the mix of terminology between "wallbreaking" and "corebreaking". In BW2 OU, most cores are not composed of walls--though many teams have 1-2 defensively-minded Pokemon to protect them from being swept by a few unusually dangerous threats. This doesn't change the fact that most teams do, in fact, have cores; it just means that often these cores are composed of offensively-minded Pokemon. Full stall in the sense it was used in DPP and before is far less of a threat in BW2, and the brute-force wallbreakers we have, such as Thundurus-T and Kyurem-b, are almost overqualified for the task of overwhelming most defensively-minded Pokemon. I could see the value of "corebreaking" without using brute force, but I don't really understand why "wallbreaking" would be necessary when such powerful brute force wallbreakers exist. In fact, in order to break walls, your concept would need some way to lure walls in, which is very difficult to accomplish when the very concept of the Pokemon precludes the sort of brute force that usually brings walls in to begin with. In other words, I think the concept would be stronger and more coherent if you steered the wording away from "wallbreaking" toward "corebreaking", whether the core is more offensively or defensively oriented.
Not open for further replies.

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