CAP 17 CAP 6 - Part 10 - Movepool Limits

[jas61292]

This is the stage where we set limits to CAP 6's movepool ahead of the actual movepool submissions. Cawmodore's stats generate a Base Stat Rating of 283 (Good). According to the on-site article, a Very Good BSR corresponds to a Excellent movepool limit of 85 total moves and 40 "Very Good Moves". However, we may end up going higher or lower depending on the Pokémon. That is where this thread comes in. The actual list of VGMs can be found in this article.

Also, please note that there is no vote at this stage! Our Movepool Leader (DarkSlay) will be gathering the community consensus at the end of this thread and making an executive decision.

---------

CAP 6 so far:

Name: Cawmodore

Name: Show Me Your Moves!

General Description: A good user of moves with effects not frequently used in the OU metagame.

Justification: There are many moves in Pokémon with great effects, but they often end up unused. Moves such as Gravity, Snatch, and Safeguard have potential in OU, but they are neglected for several reasons: the moves are apparently overshadowed, have poor distribution, or are inefficient compared to another strategy. This CAP uses a combination of typing, ability, and stats to make these underused moves not only feasible, but also capable.

Questions To Be Answered:

• What mechanics of Pokémon determine how viable moves are?--not only the Pokémon's typing, stats, and ability, but also its interaction with playstyles and momentum.
• What new strategies might emerge by giving a new OU Pokémon underused moves?
• What challenges do Pokémon that use lesser-used moves face compared to ones that use a more standard moveset?
• If the Pokémon has options of staple OU moves (high-powered STABs, offensive stat-boosting moves, reliable recovery, Substitute), will those moves be useful to it, even if it's specialized toward a separate and distinct strategy?
• Can underused moves increase other underused moves' viabilities?
• Can one user of a strategy unrecognized in a metagame massively influence a pre-existing playstyle?

Typing: Steel / Flying
Abilities: Intimidate / Volt Absorb / ???
Stats: 50 HP / 92 Atk / 130 Def / 65 SpA / 75 SpD / 118 Spe

 

[DarkSlay]

This is a very crucial stage in the development of Cawmodore. We’re looking to maintain the integrity of our conceptual direction, a viable Belly Drum user, while also giving it a well-thought out movepool both competitively and flavor-wise.

In terms of VGM’s, the first raw number that comes to my head is 25 VGM’s. I believe that we can all agree that a Belly Drum user that is tailored to run a specific set does not warrant a broad movepool whatsoever. I am still in between 20 VGM’s and 25 VGM’s, but I’m leaning towards 25 to give us some more breathing room regarding special moves and flavor picks. I’d like some confirmation on one of those two numbers in this thread. If you disagree with those two numbers, feel free to explain your position as well!

In terms of total movepool, I’m thinking 55 or 60 moves, leaning towards 60. For similar reasons as above, it’s a fairly small movepool overall, and Cawmodore does not need a ton of moves to fulfill its goal. Something like 55 or 60 gives us some flavor leeway, but again I’m interested in seeing the community’s opinion on just how limited we want Cawmodore to be, so the number right now is flexible.

That’s all from me. Fire away, and I’ll be reading/responding to posts as the thread progresses.

 

[Bughouse]

I think you could not be further off the mark. We have disallowed most every move that could be a potential pitfall to the project. The danger of keeping the limits where they normally would be is minimal. 85/40 is where it would normally be. Does this mean that someone can easily make a movepool with Roost and Acrobatics and Drill Peck and Drain Punch etc etc? Sure. But anyone particularly dedicated could make a horribly ugly movepool that shoves all those things in regardless of size.

Here's a list of the required VGMs on this CAP:

Hide

Belly Drum
Toxic
Substitute
Protect/Detect
Sleep Talk
Rest
Aerial Ace
Return/Frustration
Hidden Power
Facade

So that's 10 VGMs to start. While I could easily narrow down a movepool to fit within those lower limits, I don't see why we should have to go so far away from what is pretty standard CAP procedure. Increasing the moves or VGMs won't result in anything different competitively, since we've done a good job with our allowed options. But since you've indicated a desire to lower the limits, I'll try to bargain it back up a bit.

I'd be kinda ok with 65/30 and I'd be even happier at 70/32. I may end up coming in at 60/25 anyway, but flexibility is good for submitters.

 

[Pata Hikari]

Yeesh that is a ridiculously tiny movepool, if the required moves takes up nearly have of the list then yeah, 25/60 is way too tiny. Unless with want Cawmodore to be completely monodimensional, we need more good moves then 25.

 

[Rising_Dusk]

We've disallowed every move that is a potential threat to the concept, and otherwise I feel there is very little danger of straying outside of the bounds of the concept with what we have left available to us. I see no reason to stray from the bog CAP standard here, and highly doubt I could even find 45 VGMs worth putting into this Pokemon's movepool based on the disallowed and allowed lists. I think any movepool I might come up with would probably have no more than 25 VGMs regardless, but I just don't see that as argument for limiting the CAP to that level when we've already cut out so much. Give the kids some space to make a movepool that makes sense for the Pokemon because the concept is already pretty safe.

 

[jas61292]

I want to say I side with DarkSlay's assessment in that I think a small movepool is good for CAP6. Frankly, to run a Belly Drum successfully, you need 4 moves. To be able to run a Belly Drum set with a bit of variation, you need 6 or 7. At least two of these 6 or 7 are going to be on the list of required moves that srk posted. That means a total of 14-15 very good moves that you absolutely need. With a limit of 25 very good moves, that leaves 10 or more moves there for full customization, and thats not even counting the differences in opinion on what are those 6 to 7 moves we need. To say that these limits are restricting to what the CAP can actually do is to be ignorant of the fact that, no matter how big our movepool is, only 4 are run on any given set.

Movepool limits serves a dual purpose in the CAP project. They set limits that simultaneously keep the versatility power of the CAP in check while also making sure the movepool is not unrealistic compared to real Pokemon. The former I think is done very well by the lower limits proposed by DarkSlay. As for the latter, people should remember that this is a 5th gen Pokemon. Klinklang has a movepool with 23 VGMs. Vanilluxe has 22. It is very, very easy to create a realistic Pokemon within these limits. Of course, not all Pokemon are this limited. But it is not unusual. My point here is that the small movepool is perfectly realistic, and that we can certainly do everything we want within one, meaning that would not be reason alone to increase its size. On the other hand, an abundance of moves and options could very easily take away Belly Drum from being the premier set, and that is not something we really want to do. For a concept as focused as this one, higher limits can really only be distracting.

As a side note, I find the notion that "We have disallowed most every move that could be a potential pitfall to the project"/"We've disallowed every move that is a potential threat to the concept" to be ridiculous and irrelevant. There were controversial moves that many people thought would indeed be a threat to the project that ended up being included. Simply being voted in and supported by you guys does not mean they could not be mistakes. I'm not saying they necessarily will be, but to claim we should have lax limits because of this is to dismiss the opinions of many off hand, and ignore history where in past projects, moves that were voted in and seen as even necessary by many ended up being disastrous. Allowed does not equal non-harmful, for if this were the case, a stage such as this would be totally irrelevant.

 

[Bughouse]

As a side note, I find the notion that "We have disallowed most every move that could be a potential pitfall to the project"/"We've disallowed every move that is a potential threat to the concept" to be ridiculous and irrelevant. There were controversial moves that many people thought would indeed be a threat to the project that ended up being included. Simply being voted in and supported by you guys does not mean they could not be mistakes. I'm not saying they necessarily will be, but to claim we should have lax limits because of this is to dismiss the opinions of many off hand, and ignore history where in past projects, moves that were voted in and seen as even necessary by many ended up being disastrous. Allowed does not equal non-harmful, for if this were the case, a stage such as this would be totally irrelevant.

Just to be clear, I voted to disallow Drain Punch and Roost. The point remains, in your own words,

...a total of 14-15 very good moves that you absolutely need. With a limit of 25 very good moves, that leaves 10 or more moves there for full customization, and thats not even counting the differences in opinion on what are those 6 to 7 moves we need.

If there are still 10 spaces for VGMs, who's to say that someone doesn't put in all of the controversial items anyway? We're not going to make a competitive impact in how Cawmodore functions unless we drop the VGM limit to 20 or lower. I see three options here:

1)Leave the movepool limits as they would normally be, since the reduction in size to even 55/25 doesn't restrict the important competitive elements of how Belly Drum Cawmodore will function.
2)Reduce the movepool limits to some intermediate step, whether that is 55/25 or 70/32 doesn't actually make a huge difference. This at least forces submitters to consider the flavor and elegance of a movepool, rather than being able to throw everything in if they wanted to. Again, 55/25 and 85/40 will have nearly identical competitive results, maybe one important move off of one another, if that.
3)Drop the movepool limits even further to 55/20 to incentivize tough choices on the controversial moves.

As to the potential effectiveness of option 3, here's a sample idea of what 20 VGMs might get put in a movepool:

Hide

the 10 required ones I listed above + 3 incredibly likely inclusions
Iron Head
Drill Peck
Air Slash

You're now at 13, leaving only 7 to spare. Among remaining options, these are probably the most important left to consider one way or the other:

Roost
Acrobatics
Drain Punch/Brick Break (wouldn't include both, most likely)
Bullet Punch
Mach Punch
Other priority options (Aqua Jet is better than the rest, but I included it here as one thing)
Baton Pass

So yes, you have space to include all of the most important and likely inclusions at 20, though this means you give up on lots of flavor like Hurricane or Rain Dance, and any range of coverage options, which no submitter ever wants to do. This problem doesn't exist with the extra 5 at 25 VGMs.

Basically, if you're gonna try to restrict Cawmodore because Belly Drum doesn't need much variety, actually go for the jugular. Otherwise, you're only killing flavor in a crusade about competitiveness.

 

[Rising_Dusk]

I agree with SRK's opinions on the matter.

As a side note, I find the notion that "We have disallowed most every move that could be a potential pitfall to the project"/"We've disallowed every move that is a potential threat to the concept" to be ridiculous and irrelevant. There were controversial moves that many people thought would indeed be a threat to the project that ended up being included. Simply being voted in and supported by you guys does not mean they could not be mistakes. I'm not saying they necessarily will be, but to claim we should have lax limits because of this is to dismiss the opinions of many off hand, and ignore history where in past projects, moves that were voted in and seen as even necessary by many ended up being disastrous. Allowed does not equal non-harmful, for if this were the case, a stage such as this would be totally irrelevant.

The only ridiculous and irrelevant thing to do is to enforce your opinion on someone else as though it's fact. In my opinion, there is no move combination that we have available to us that can distract or damage the concept, and that is why I feel the way I do. Call it ridiculous and irrelevant only so far as you can accept that your own opinion may be ridiculous and irrelevant to others as well.

 

[Pata Hikari]

One thing about Cawmodore is that we wanted a Belly Drum Sweeper to be it's best set.

But do we want it to be it's only set? With 25/60 movepool it will pretty much guaranteed to be the only set. While that's one way to handle it, I think that there could be at least one or two more things it could be allowed to do.

 

[jas61292]

I agree with SRK's opinions on the matter.

The only ridiculous and irrelevant thing to do is to enforce your opinion on someone else as though it's fact. In my opinion, there is no move combination that we have available to us that can distract or damage the concept, and that is why I feel the way I do. Call it ridiculous and irrelevant only so far as you can accept that your own opinion may be ridiculous and irrelevant to others as well.

I think you are misinterpreting my point. I am not trying to say that there are harmful moves here and we should shrink down the limits to choke them out. Nothing I said there in that paragraph was even a reason for lowering the limits at all. Rather that paragraph was attacking the use of such claims as a pro-higher limit argument.

Yes, you are entitled to you opinion that no moves here are harmful. But your opinion on that matter is indeed irrelevant. So is my opinion. That is because it is an irrelevant issue altogether. Harmfulness at this stage is nothing but subjective opinions. However, as we have seen in the past, simply being allowed doesn't not always mean something is not harmful. And, beyond that, even if a move is not harmful alone, that does not mean it does not have the potential to be harmful with certain other options. Again, I'm not saying anything specific here is indeed harmful, and but if we dismiss that possibility, than this entire stage serves no purpose, because the entire point of this stage is to limit how many non-harmful options you can put together without them becoming harmful.

So no, I am not saying there are harmful moves and we should limit it because of that, but implying the opposite is a faulty argument and has no real bearing on where we should set the limit.

 

[DarkSlay]

I'm a bit confused as to the immediate disapproval of a 60/25 movepool. First off, let's bring up the point about a "standard CAP movepool". Malaconda's movepool limit was 65/30, somewhat small but designed to give it some coverage options to carry out its overall concept (which was interpreted to be conducted in a number of different ways). Necturna had a 55/30 movepool limit that was originally discussed to be 55/25. A Pokemon that was given one move that ultimately offset its lack of coverage options due to the size of its movepool and what was/was not allowed...this is sounding familiar. A 60/25 movepool is not as unprecedented as it's being described as in this thread. It's actually quite close to some of the other Generation 5 projects, actually.

Next, let's talk about "25 is too much, but too little at the same time". This is a trap that CAP falls into time after time again: instead of focusing on the essentials of the project, we tend to believe that having lower limits "stifles the creativity of movepool submissions" and err on the side of liberal movepool sizes. This is not the case, and in fact I'd argue that it takes an even harder, if not different, art style to create a working, flavor-rich movepool from medium to lower limits. Cawmodore, as we know, does not have a lot of coverage options. It does not have a long list of VGM options, but it has an ample amount of allowed Non-VGM options. While I understand that VGM =/= competitive rationale only, the movepool limit stage and movepool submissions in general follow the lines of the concept and nothing else, which is competitive in nature entirely. Flavor is always something that is welcome and highly exciting to make, but in the end what matters is the concept. Cawmodore's concept falls perfectly in line with a somewhat limited movepool, and going by what is allowed and what is not allowed, I'm having a hard time seeing why something like 25 does not give us both the chance to add important VGM's to our movepools while also giving us a small amount of breathing room to add a few VGM's in for flavor reasons.

Finally, to address the "Cawmodore is pretty safe due to our AM and NAM discussions, so a larger movepool would be safe". I echo what most of jas has said already in this thread, in that nothing is guaranteed at this point, and past history has shown that the decision to add moves simply for the sake of adding moves has proven derogatory towards both the CAP project as a whole and the concept in general. Especially with a CAP project as specific as this, I'm not really for having a broad movepool for the sake of providing flavor cushions. 60 moves total is plenty, bigger than Necturna at least who arguably should be even less limited than Cawmodore.

This is also going to serve as the 24 hour warning for the thread. With all that said, I am treating all posts and ideas very seriously and giving them a good deal of thought, so do not think that this is a concrete answer to the movepool limits. Please continue to discuss whatever you're thinking within the next 24 hours.

 

[Qwilphish]

I support DarkSlay's limits of 60/25. 25 VGMs is definitely plenty to work with especially with a CAP as narrowed as this one (even when including certain non-competitive VGMs that may be included due to flavor). It is important to make sure that we don't mess up on this stage for the reasons that were outlined in the OP and I think that having a more restrictive movepool is the safest way of going about this. It would be detrimental should a random move be included in the Final Movepool that would not have been added beyond the fact that "I was allowed to add it." Obviously, we've discussed many of the controversial moves already, but we want variety in our submissions, and by making the Movepool submitters pick and choose which controversial moves that they want to add to their movepools instead of all of them just adding all of the controversial moves in because they can.

60 is also a good limit to have for the total moves. Flavor moves are of course necessary for a good movepool, and this gives us much legroom to work with. This is especially true considering that Steel/Flying has few "required" flavor moves when talking about moves that are specific to their types (e.g. Steel Wing, Fly, etc.). It also helps that some of the VGMs that are going to be used are included within the "type" of moves that I talked about above! If we were to go above 60, I could foresee random moves being submitted in that won't necessarily be needed and once again, would make the movepools more linear and less diverse than if we were to make the submitters pick and choose which flavor moves to choose (although this will unlikely be necessary).

All in all, 25/60 is a perfectly good size for limits as it limits the amount of VGMs that can be applied, as well as giving us leeway in the flavor department.

 

[nyttyn]

Just gonna second 60/25

As someone who's been making movepools pretty often, I can understand the "NEEDS MOAR" moves mindset, but our steel bird does not need a huge movepool. We want it to be one-dimensional, even @ 60/25 there's room for variety anyway. We don't need an enormous movepool, and Cawmodore doesn't need every move ever that even remotely makes sense, because then people are just going to stuff in filler and fringe-logic moves. To be honest, even 60 moves total is pushing it, because not even Keldeo, a legendary, has 60 moves total in its movepool.

Please don't point out examples of pokemon from prior generations, they have large movepools because they get new moves every generation.

 

[Pata Hikari]

Personally I think that 30/65 is actually the best choice for Cawdmodore. It's still a fairly narrow. With only 20 moves available after the required ones. Sure, it's just a five move difference, but I feel that allows you just the right amount of flexibility vs the needed restrictions based off the concept.

 

[Bughouse]

I'm struggling with the logic of 25 VGMs, since as I pointed out, it doesn't actually stop anyone from including every relevant move. I have a working movepool right now with 22 VGMs (yes, even with 5+ flavor VGMs in there) and it doesn't contain 3 of the biggest potential issues. I could easily fit them all in if I wanted to. If the goal is to actually restrict the ability to offer a Cawmodore moveset with everything but the kitchen sink, the VGM count should at least be lowered to 22/23.

If the point of 25 VGMs isn't to restrict the possible combinations of Roost/Drain Punch/Acrobatics/Baton Pass/Mach Punch/etc etc, then that's fine I suppose, though I don't understand why we should set the limit there. It just seems so arbitrary to me.



(on a side note, is Drill Peck considered to outclass Aerial Ace? I know Aerial Ace has true perfect accuracy, but is that considered enough to matter, when Drill Peck has 100% anyway? If this is the case, that's even one more free VGM in Cawmodore's movepool to make 25 a breeze.)

 

[alexwolf]

65 / 30 seems the best choice. Let's not forget that we want viable sets other than Belly Drum to exist for the CAP, just not to be better than the BD set. Versatility is something almost every Pokemon needs, even a Pokemon with such a specific role as this.

 

[Rising_Dusk]

I'm a bit confused as to the immediate disapproval of a 60/25 movepool. First off, let's bring up the point about a "standard CAP movepool". Malaconda's movepool limit was 65/30, somewhat small but designed to give it some coverage options to carry out its overall concept (which was interpreted to be conducted in a number of different ways). Necturna had a 55/30 movepool limit that was originally discussed to be 55/25. A Pokemon that was given one move that ultimately offset its lack of coverage options due to the size of its movepool and what was/was not allowed...this is sounding familiar. A 60/25 movepool is not as unprecedented as it's being described as in this thread. It's actually quite close to some of the other Generation 5 projects, actually.

The similarity or divergence from other G5 CAP projects should have no bearing on this project, which stands on its own.

Finally, to address the "Cawmodore is pretty safe due to our AM and NAM discussions, so a larger movepool would be safe". I echo what most of jas has said already in this thread, in that nothing is guaranteed at this point, and past history has shown that the decision to add moves simply for the sake of adding moves has proven derogatory towards both the CAP project as a whole and the concept in general. Especially with a CAP project as specific as this, I'm not really for having a broad movepool for the sake of providing flavor cushions. 60 moves total is plenty, bigger than Necturna at least who arguably should be even less limited than Cawmodore.

I lead Necturna's project, so I think I have a pretty good field position to understand the significance of what's going on here and why Necturna is about the worst example possible to compare this Pokemon to. Necturna had 25 VGMs as my initial feel because, by definition, Sketch only counted as 1 VGM, but functioned as practically infinite versatility. CAP6 is the polar opposite in that it has zero versatility because we are hooked on the idea that BD must be not only its best set, but it's only set. With zero competitive versatility and zero set variation, CAP6 will be predictable and a singularly and superbly easy to counter Pokemon. We want CAP6 to either have some coverage variation or have some varying approach to the BD set or it will simply lack the requisite versatility to actually succeed at the sweep we are so intent on securing. 25 VGMs is very, very low, and even if only 10 VGMs are required, there are many more that will get included no matter what because they are standards for the typing. Those include moves like Drill Peck, Steel Wing, Iron Head, Flash Cannon, Air Slash, and so forth. If we make the argument that those moves should be omitted, then we are already at the point where we're throwing out the notion of level-up movepools and things in general. This is a much more philosophical debate than is necessary here, but the point is that there are two camps: one who thinks that we're always pushing bigger movepools because of "flavor", and one who thinks we're always pushing smaller movepools because "we're scared of big movepools". 25 VGMs is either not enough for this CAP or too many for this CAP. What you need to decide, as the movepool leader, is whether or not you want people to actually pick between things like Roost and Acrobatics and Bullet Punch or whether you want to enable movepools with all of those options, but also with enough flavor to still be movepools.

I personally believe that a XX/30 would be appropriate here. 60 is plenty moves for the total, but I think we should have more than 25 VGMs available for the reasons stated above.

 

[Jewvia]

I am leaning towards 30/XX for the movepool limits. Sure, you can get the bare minimum of what we need with 20 VGM, but 5 extra choices will give us next to no diversity in the submissions, in addition to giving us next to no breathing room for flavour. It is understandable that concept is far superior to flavour when designing these CAPs, but if we stamp flavour out of the equation entirely, it is more of a husk used to fill the concept than a Pokemon.

 

[SoulMuse]

Gonna go ahead and support 30/60. Way I see it, if you don't want to use those extra five VGMs, you don't have to but I haven't seen a good argument as to why we shouldn't have them. This opens up for options for diverse movepools as has been talked about. It gives everyone an opportunity to be unique, without really impacting the competitiveness of the CAP.

 

[DarkSlay]

This thread is now closed.

After reading the arguments presented in this thread, it became clear that the community was fairly divided on the amount of moves needed to benefit Cawmodore. The original proposed limits of 60/25 were, to some, too limited. To others, they represented the concept perfectly. So naturally, this decision for me was not an easy one. I have made my own points very clear in this thread as to how to keep to the integrity of the concept, and I hope that regardless of the limits that I have selected, submitters will stay true to the idea that Belly Drum will be, first and foremost, the prime role for Cawmodore, and that over-saturation of moves generally detracts from the successful nature of such concepts like CAP6's that we have explored.

I believe it is a fair compromise to allow a maximum 30 Very Good Moves and a movepool maximum of 60 total moves. The community, as a whole, has reacted in such a way that I cannot simply ignore the call for extra VGM slots to account for flavor VGM selections. Just be wary of submissions that throw the kitchen sink into the mix: when I slate my movepools, I will be taking a very close, hard look at the competitive impact before flavor aspects (as it is in the nature of my position to do). I will shell out some more information regarding what I'm looking for at the start of the movepool submission thread, but keep this in mind as you are (no doubt) completing your movepools.

 

[capefeather]

I was hoping to have more to base my decision here on than community consensus, but many factors have made things harder for me to account for the previous movepool discussions or the similarities between existing movepools of similar Pokemon. The horrid moveslot issues that Cawmodore will very likely face make the limits relatively irrelevant on the competitive front, and both Steel- and Flying-types are so varied in their movepools (among other things) that there isn't much I can reasonably determine on the flavour front. I've only recently gotten a move searching script I made long ago working to the capacity they did before, and I still can't seem to restrict my searches to the Flying egg group... At any rate, given what I do have, I don't have any objections to the 60/30 limits. Like I said, I'm not sure the limits matter that much for this particular project, especially since the competitive front is mainly going to deal with whether Acrobatics and HP-recovering moves are on a given movepool submission, anyway.

So here, two Captain Falcons for the price of one: