Colonel M
I COULD BE BORED!
Personally, I would rather take the action as soon as possible rather than wait for the next generation. On top of just being something that can be forgotten in less than a week, it's best to get a head start on getting everyone on the same page and doing it effective immediately.
How I propose our options is as follows:
- Cut out unnecessary fluff and redundancy. Mentioning something as a perk like how Landorus-T can use its defensive typing and Intimidate is fine, but we don't need to regurgitate Intimidate for every other instance. This also includes instances where a 252 spread and a few other things such as items are mentioned. It's fine to mention some small examples such as how Scarf Keldeo out speeds +1 Volcarona (just an example don't lecture me on what's in meta or I'll just ignore you).
- Cut down on useless Other Options and be allowed to either leave the section blank or to simply state "there are no other viable alternatives worth considering for this Pokemon."
- Allow QC to tackle fluff to help with GP.
- Allow GP to kick back an analysis if there is too much fluff or redundancy. I feel that while we should hold the writer and QC team responsible, GP should also feel free to tell a writer to cut down on unnecessary content.
It feels like the majority agree on these things. I understand the minority and definitely want to express that we should help guide users to exploring a Pokemon and its viability and usage, but we should not take this as a measure of hand holding either. This also includes bringing back damage calculations, a suggestion made earlier, as that is also plagued with a myriad of issues that I can list from way back when we did them in Generation 4. If a player really wants to explore a better way to play Pokemon (ie a newbie who has 0 clue on competitive battling) , we have much better resources such as articles that can help go into further detail with these things.
I want to stress something that bugmaniacbob even seemed to fail to understand - sometimes the best information is short and to the point. People should not see these suggestions personally first off. Secondly, people should understand that we want to provide information, but we want to treat the reader to be at least a little more intelligent than we make them out to be. Yes there are newer players, but if they wanted to learn the best way is to go into action and do it. There are other sources of content these days that help average people learn as well and I think overloading an analysis is not the approach to it. Let's treat our viewers more like humans and less like robots fresh out of the factory.
Finally - If you want my personal take - I agree with lyd on Usage Tips and Set Details being the most merge able of the bunch here. I think Moves on its own seems bland but it makes some sense especially with different move options. EV sections often have some information in Usage Tips as is.
How I propose our options is as follows:
- Cut out unnecessary fluff and redundancy. Mentioning something as a perk like how Landorus-T can use its defensive typing and Intimidate is fine, but we don't need to regurgitate Intimidate for every other instance. This also includes instances where a 252 spread and a few other things such as items are mentioned. It's fine to mention some small examples such as how Scarf Keldeo out speeds +1 Volcarona (just an example don't lecture me on what's in meta or I'll just ignore you).
- Cut down on useless Other Options and be allowed to either leave the section blank or to simply state "there are no other viable alternatives worth considering for this Pokemon."
- Allow QC to tackle fluff to help with GP.
- Allow GP to kick back an analysis if there is too much fluff or redundancy. I feel that while we should hold the writer and QC team responsible, GP should also feel free to tell a writer to cut down on unnecessary content.
It feels like the majority agree on these things. I understand the minority and definitely want to express that we should help guide users to exploring a Pokemon and its viability and usage, but we should not take this as a measure of hand holding either. This also includes bringing back damage calculations, a suggestion made earlier, as that is also plagued with a myriad of issues that I can list from way back when we did them in Generation 4. If a player really wants to explore a better way to play Pokemon (ie a newbie who has 0 clue on competitive battling) , we have much better resources such as articles that can help go into further detail with these things.
I want to stress something that bugmaniacbob even seemed to fail to understand - sometimes the best information is short and to the point. People should not see these suggestions personally first off. Secondly, people should understand that we want to provide information, but we want to treat the reader to be at least a little more intelligent than we make them out to be. Yes there are newer players, but if they wanted to learn the best way is to go into action and do it. There are other sources of content these days that help average people learn as well and I think overloading an analysis is not the approach to it. Let's treat our viewers more like humans and less like robots fresh out of the factory.
Finally - If you want my personal take - I agree with lyd on Usage Tips and Set Details being the most merge able of the bunch here. I think Moves on its own seems bland but it makes some sense especially with different move options. EV sections often have some information in Usage Tips as is.
Last edited: