LC Pseudo-Analysis Introduction / Reservation Thread


is a Programmeris a Community Contributoris a Tiering Contributoris a Top Contributoris a Site Content Manager Alumnusis a Forum Moderator Alumnus
Welcome to the LC C&C Pseudo-Analyses project! In this project, we will write on-site condensed analyses for Pokemon that would otherwise not be eligible for an analysis. If you are new to the subforum, you should start by reading about the typical C&C process here.

Because LC is not a usage-based metagame, we have many Pokemon technically designated LC that are not in the least viable. These Pokemon see no use in the tournaments scene, but are somewhat frequently used by new players on the ladder. The goal of this project is to write analyses that emphasize why a Pokemon does not have competitive merit. Each "pseudo-analysis" will contain...
1. The reasons the Pokemon is not worth using
2. Some suggestions of alternatives that outclass the Pokemon
3. A sample moveset so that even if a player chooses to use the Pokemon anyway, they will hopefully use the best possible set.

It is important to understand that the goal of a pseudo-analysis is not to explain what the Pokemon does; it is to explain why the Pokemon is not worth using, so try to keep it brief.

The Pseudo-Analysis Process
(This is very similar to the regular analysis process, but contains fewer checks)​

1. Post here with the Pokemon you would like to reserve. Wait until your reservation is approved before posting. If you are wondering what Pokemon can be reserved, see the FAQ below.

2. If your reservation is approved, post a skeleton of the analysis within 72 hours of the approval post. If your reservation is approved, you may post a thread for the analysis in this subforum. The thread status should be WIP.
Your skeleton should look like the following:
**A few sentences here should immediately establish WHY the Pokemon is not viable (poor stats/no movepool/awful typing/fully outclassed/a combination of these). If applicable, give at least a few Pokemon that outclass it and explain why.**

**This should be the best possible moveset for the Pokemon, even if the set is still not good.**
move 1:
move 2:
move 3:
move 4:

**This should be 2-3 sentences:
- One sentence should be enough to briefly outline what this set attempts to do.
- If the Pokemon isn't fully outclassed, such as in the case of Krabby, you can describe why; fully outclassed Pokemon, such as Pidgey, do not require another sentence here.
- The last sentence should describe why the set isn't worth using; reiterate which Pokemon outclass it.

- Written by: [[<username1>, <userid1>]]
- Quality checked by: [[<username1>, <userid1>], [<username2>, <userid2>], [<username3>, <userid3>]]
- Grammar checked by: [[<username1>, <userid1>], [<username2>, <username2>]]

3. When your pseudo-analysis is ready, change the thread status to "Quality Control". UNLIKE REGULAR ANALYSES, YOUR PSEUDO-ANALYSIS SHOULD BE FULLY WRITTEN UP BEFORE BEING MOVED TO QC. You will receive TWO (not three) total QC checks on a pseudo-analysis.
Make sure to mention the number of QC checks you have implemented so far in your thread title.

Implement the QC checks carefully and fully, as they are needed to ensure the quality of the analysis. If you do not properly implement a large portion of a QC check without reason, you may be deemed too difficult to work with and barred from writing LC analyses in the future. However, feel free to ask if you are unsure of any of the suggestions that the QC team gives, as it is important that you are clear on why you are making the suggested changes.

4. Finally, change your thread status to GP. You will receive one total check from the Grammar-Prose team unless you are told you need further checks due to poor English. Make sure to implement this check completely.

5. Once you have implemented your GP check, you are done! Make sure to update your thread title and we will upload the thread ASAP.

FAQ (Please read, contains important information)

Q: What should these analyses look like?
A: Analyses should follow the skeleton above. The final product should look like this:
Q: Which Pokemon are available to be reserved?
A: Almost anything. The Pokemon must not currently have a full analysis or pseudo-analysis, and must not be on the list below. There is no official list of what is up for reservation, so it is up to you to make sure your reservation is not currently a WIP or uploaded.

Q: What are the rules on reserving Pokemon?
A: Anyone can reserve a Pokemon, provided they follow the above rules. If you have never written an LC analysis or pseudo-analysis before, you may reserve 1 pseudo-analysis at a time. If you have written an analysis before, you may reserve 2 pseudo-analyses at a time. If you have a badge, are a current or former QC member, or have special permission from Corporal Levi or myself, you may have up to 3 WIP pseudo-analyses.

Q: Can I earn a badge for writing pseudo-analyses?
A: Yes! Pseudo-analysis work counts towards the Pre-Contributor or the Contributor badge. While we don't like hard numerical quotas for badge work, 3 pseudo-analyses are roughly equivalent to 1 analysis for those trying to meet badging requirements.

Q: Can I earn a badge for QC/GP checking/translating pseudo-analyses?
A: QC checks also follow the 3 pseudo-analyses = 1 analysis rule in terms of badge eligibility. The GP and translation section leaders make the decisions about badging contributors in those fields, but checking does theoretically count for badge eligibility.

Q: I have more questions. What do I do?
A: Ask! Please! This thread is perfectly fine as a place to ask pseudo-analysis relevant questions, as is our SQSA thread. The best way to get an answer is probably by shooting Corporal Levi or I a message on here or on Discord.

Happy contributing!
Last edited:


Turtwig and Tepig

Tepig approved. I want to talk to levi before giving turt away, but you are first in line to get it. -9
Last edited by a moderator:


is a Programmeris a Community Contributoris a Tiering Contributoris a Top Contributoris a Site Content Manager Alumnusis a Forum Moderator Alumnus
Until we better standardize exactly what we want a pseudo-analysis to look like, we would like to request that people not QC amcheck pseudo-analyses for the time being.

If you are interested in helping with analyses from a QC standpoint, please consider amchecking official analyses. Thanks!

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