• Snag some vintage SPL team logo merch over at our Teespring store before January 12th!

CAP 25 - Part 2 - Concept Submissions

Status
Not open for further replies.
So, first to address the new concepts that have popped up since I last posted.

Weather Wars Part 2: Electric Boogaloo: Our last CAP was literally this, so there is zero chance of this being slated.

Move Spammer Slammers: This one has some promise, but also a lot of question marks. Some moves are easily punishable, notably Knock Off (which you mentioned), but many other common moves are very difficult to punish: how would one punish Ice Beam, or Hidden Power, or Stealth Rock? Moreover, most of the concept would have to kick in in the Ability Stage, which would raise a lot of questions for us in terms of the rest of the process. It's a good idea in theory, but I have a really hard time seeing how we would execute it.

A Touchy Subject: This is a well-worded and well-constructed concept with a lot going for it: it addresses a topic we haven't examined in depth before, it has a practical impact on the metagame, and it is easy to imagine our three starters each having a different relationship to contact moves, perhaps even compounding the rock-paper-scissors nature of starters. I like it.

Mix and Match: I'm not especially bullish on the concept of cores in general, and this looks to me like a less focused version of LoL's type spam concept. I just have a hard time seeing what doing this would teach us.


I also thought I would weigh in on the issue of role compression and creativity: in my experience, having a role compression Pokemon (like Rapid Spin/Stealth Rock Excadrill) allows you to include more interesting Pokemon on a team because it allows you to compress stuff you need to have to make room for the stuff you want to have. Having Ferrothorn + Tomohawk on every team gets repetitive, but the need to have both Rocks and Spin means you often can't fit your Greninja or Stratagem. Using a utility Pokemon saves you a slot to use on things that just do damage, which is the stuff that make teams fun. I don't really see hawk113's point about Kerfluffle, simply because neither Taunt nor Wish give Kerfluffle extra role compression--it still fundamentally beats and loses to the same Pokemon, and doesn't really save you any extra team slots.

Finally, and most importantly, this thread will close in 48 hours. At that time, I will slate the eight concepts that I feel are more suitable for this project! Good luck!


 
reachzero said:
Reading through the submissions so far, I'd like to divide them into a few different categories.
Crystal Ball: We actually already know quite a bit about some uses of Z status, based especially on Necturna, but the fact that this is usually considered a marginally viable strategy in CAP actually makes it a bit more appealing--it is possible to do this right? How could a Z Status user realistically account for Tomohawk? I think this would work better in a single Pokemon project than in this one, but it remains a good concept.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the feedback! I added a paragraph at the end of the discussion that gave a bit more justification for this concept spanning 3 Pokémon, in that it could also take advantage of a moves inherent effects rather than just its Z-boosts. (I also give it a slightly better name...)
 
  • Name Reflection of the Past
  • Description - CAP votes on three previous winning concepts to reuse for the trio.
  • Justification - This concept itself is actually just the idea of re-using previous concepts, since this is a celebratory reflection concept. It's designed to reflect upon how we accomplished goals in the past, and to try and see how we would do them in the future. Since all the previous concepts are justified, this one is also justified by extension.
  • Questions To Be Answered
    • How would a CAP designed to accomplish a goal now compare to our past attempt to design a goal-accomplishing CAP?
    • Why did CAPs from previous concepts end up following the route they did? Will this CAP by extension follow a similar route?
    • What makes Pokemon with the same intentions function differently, if anything?
    • Would two Pokemon with similar goals directly compete? Would they have synergy together?
    • Which iteration of CAP using the same concept turned out "better?" Is it possible for us to better answer the concept than previously?
  • Explanation - It's a celebration, of the 25th CAP created here. It seems only fitting that we take the time to think about our process in the past, and examine previous concepts again. Kind of nostalgic, if you will. It lets us explore quite a few different questions, depending on the concepts chosen to repeat from voting. What can I say? Revision and review has piqued my curiosity.
 
Name: Terrain of Terror
Description: Pokemon with moves or abilities that take advantage of terrains.
Justification: This concept would fall into the Archetype category as it explores different ways to utilize terrains seeing as they come with a variety of effects that others could gain benefits from them. While most of them are fantastic at doing that job, they aren't specifically designed for taking advantage of terrain. And those that do directly take advantage of them with their abilities aren't relevant in one way or another.

Questions to be answered:
- What's the differences and similarities between weather and terrain?
- Should they be able to take advantage of multiple terrains? Or just focus on one specific terrain?
- Should we focus on abilities that will be active on a specific terrain?
- Which role should these Pokemon be assigned to each?

Explanation: While terrains have existed since Gen 6, they have surged in popularity with the introduction of the Tapu. Players have since come up with ways to take advantage of terrain, one of famous example has to be Hawlucha. With Unburden and Terrain Seed, not only does it make Hawlucha one of the fastest in the metagame, but the Terrain Seed's activation also gives it extra bulk. Given that the Celebration CAP will be involving starter trio and the last CAP focused on weather, I feel like this could be a decent opportunity to center around terrain.
 
Last edited:
reachzero said:
So, first to address the new concepts that have popped up since I last posted.

Weather Wars Part 2: Electric Boogaloo: Our last CAP was literally this, so there is zero chance of this being slated.

Move Spammer Slammers: This one has some promise, but also a lot of question marks. Some moves are easily punishable, notably Knock Off (which you mentioned), but many other common moves are very difficult to punish: how would one punish Ice Beam, or Hidden Power, or Stealth Rock? Moreover, most of the concept would have to kick in in the Ability Stage, which would raise a lot of questions for us in terms of the rest of the process. It's a good idea in theory, but I have a really hard time seeing how we would execute it.

A Touchy Subject: This is a well-worded and well-constructed concept with a lot going for it: it addresses a topic we haven't examined in depth before, it has a practical impact on the metagame, and it is easy to imagine our three starters each having a different relationship to contact moves, perhaps even compounding the rock-paper-scissors nature of starters. I like it.

Mix and Match: I'm not especially bullish on the concept of cores in general, and this looks to me like a less focused version of LoL's type spam concept. I just have a hard time seeing what doing this would teach us.


I also thought I would weigh in on the issue of role compression and creativity: in my experience, having a role compression Pokemon (like Rapid Spin/Stealth Rock Excadrill) allows you to include more interesting Pokemon on a team because it allows you to compress stuff you need to have to make room for the stuff you want to have. Having Ferrothorn + Tomohawk on every team gets repetitive, but the need to have both Rocks and Spin means you often can't fit your Greninja or Stratagem. Using a utility Pokemon saves you a slot to use on things that just do damage, which is the stuff that make teams fun. I don't really see hawk113's point about Kerfluffle, simply because neither Taunt nor Wish give Kerfluffle extra role compression--it still fundamentally beats and loses to the same Pokemon, and doesn't really save you any extra team slots.

Finally, and most importantly, this thread will close in 48 hours. At that time, I will slate the eight concepts that I feel are more suitable for this project! Good luck!
Click to expand...
Fair enough, and thanks for changing my mind! I guess once again I was thinking a bit too narrowly about role compression.

I'll try my best to give feedback and focus on stuff you mentioned that has a chance of being slated or on the newest stuff that struck me.

Environment Control: I feel like this is a bit too unfocused, trying to tie weather, terrain, and hazards into one big bucket. Unfortunately, we now have concepts covering Weather, Hazards, and Terrain specifically. To salvage this in an attempt to get slated, you might change it to "Team Set-up"; ultimately that's what glues Hazards, Weather, and Terrain together right? The idea of a set-up move that sometimes the user can abuse, but also its teammates? You get to also fold in the "Rooms" from the Matrix suggestion as well as Screens and Tailwind, too. It may seem silly to suggest making a too-broad concept even broader, and last night before HeatEdgeSword posted I'd have said to just focus on terrain which I think is the most fruitful and interesting thing here, but to differentiate yourself now that's my thought.

Status Update: I agree with reach, in that I might focus on one kind of status over the other (and am more partial to volatile status since the competitive merits of Paralysis, Poison, Burn, and Sleep are very well known). This faces an uphill climb imo, both because status can be haxy (Paralysis) and because several other concepts would also allow us to explore the best parts of this.

Reflection of the Past: I like this idea, but am wary of a comment on another concept; we may simply obsolete an old CAPmon, which would be #feelsbadman. I also worry that this requires several additional steps to get us to a point where we can start discussing. This overall feels a bit too vague, and it may gain some strength from clearer examples.

Terrain of Terror: I was going to tell Hardrocknerd to do his like yours, so obviously I enjoy the concept. Given that we just did a weather CAP, you may want to address or add questions about how this is the same, and how it is different, as well as weather or not we want our Pokemon to all play in the same terrain or we want to intentionally support three different terrains.
 
Name - Sleep Set-Up Counter

Description - A Pokémon that can counter a play like the infamous "Spore/Set-Up Smeargle" strategy

Justification - This would fall into the Actualization category. It inspires the complete counter of the most common set-up play in the entire metagame. It could also potentially be a wall-breaker then turn into a massive sweeper. However, some abilities other Pokémon have could counter it completely, like Shell Smash Cloysters.

Questions To Be Answered

What moves/abilities best punish the opponents choice to set up?
If we go for pokemon that steals stat boosts, how would it best abuse the stat boosts?

Explanation - Abilities such as Comatose and Vital Spirit could prevent sleep, and moves like Heart Swap can steal the boosts a set up Pokémon can use. It would be a balanced physical-and-sp. attacker that also relies on necessary defense boosts, somewhat making it a glass cannon at first. Utilized correctly, this could be a decent sweeper, but on the flip side, there will be many strategies that can destroy this type of counter, as it requires hard reads and timing.
 
Richie_Rumbles1999 said:
Name - Sleep Set-Up Counter

Description - A Pokémon that can counter a play like the infamous "Spore/Set-Up Smeargle" strategy

Justification - This would fall into the Actualization category. It inspires the complete counter of the most common set-up play in the entire metagame. It could also potentially be a wall-breaker then turn into a massive sweeper. However, some abilities other Pokémon have could counter it completely, like Shell Smash Cloysters.

Questions To Be Answered

What moves/abilities best punish the opponents choice to set up?
If we go for pokemon that steals stat boosts, how would it best abuse the stat boosts?

Explanation - Abilities such as Comatose and Vital Spirit could prevent sleep, and moves like Heart Swap can steal the boosts a set up Pokémon can use. It would be a balanced physical-and-sp. attacker that also relies on necessary defense boosts, somewhat making it a glass cannon at first. Utilized correctly, this could be a decent sweeper, but on the flip side, there will be many strategies that can destroy this type of counter, as it requires hard reads and timing.
Click to expand...

This is an interesting concept, although tbh I've watched a ton of replays in the last month and this doesn't seem to be a hugely prevalent, centralizing, or oppressive strategy in the meta. I would also say this feels awful specific, and you may want to broaden it up a bit since we're working with three Pokemon here and designing three Pokemon that counter Sleep and/or Boosting feels like it would be challenging.
 
Name - Playstyle Party
Description - Create three Pokemon that all directly interact with a different playstyle
Justification - Target
The Pokemon created by this concept would directly target playstyles and either endeavour to increase their viability or decrease it. This is important as it directly relates to metagame diversity which is often referred to as being 'healthy' for the metagame. While I don't think the CAP metagame is currently unhealthy, I do think that there could be a bit more diversity and flexibility when it comes to teambuilding.

Questions To Be Answered
- What makes a playstyle good and what makes a playstyle bad?
- Which playstyles are underperforming currently?
- What defines a playstyle?
- Are there any playstyles that are currently too strong?
- How greatly is a given Pokemon's viability affected by the strengthening/weakening of a playstyle?
- What attributes does a Pokemon need in order to fit on a given playstyle?

Explanation - To me, picking apart what makes a playstyle tick is incredibly intriguing and also not something that has been explored too greatly in the 24 previous projects. This concept has fluidity in that there are plenty of playstyles in competitive Pokemon (past and present, viable or not) and we can decide how we want tackle the project by either balancing it out by creating a Pokemon strong against a certain playstyle or create a Pokemon that specifically supports a certain playstyle. However, this concept is also focussed as once we decide what path we want to take, we are bound by what the chosen playstyle allows and disallows us to do. An ideal end product to me looks like an incredibly diverse meta that reintroduces old tactics as well as previously unviable Pokemon to really shake up the meta and create something very dynamic. Fitting for a celebration!
 
Last edited:
Name: I Can't Let You Do That
Description: A trio of Pokémon that focus on uncommonly used disabling moves and/or means of constraining switches.
Justification: This concept is somewhere between Archetype and Actualization: disabling techniques are clearly utility moves, but this project would serve to elevate the usage of those techniques which receive little to no representation.

Questions to be Answered:

- Where is the unexplored potential of these uncommonly-used techniques?
- How do these strategies synergize most effectively with typing, ability, and movepool?
- How will players cope with having their valid options limited? Will these responses overwhelm these techniques?
- How can these strategies avoid being overshadowed by the Pokémon's other options?
- What effect does turn order have on the viability of these strategies?
- How will these strategies fare against themselves? Will one variety reliably beat another, or will other factors affect the outcome of these matchups?

Explanation:

There is a wide swath of moves and abilities which explicitly reduce the number of options available to both the opponent and the player themselves, but most of them do not receive extensive usage. The most common such strategy in the metagame is Taunt, whose effect in disabling utility moves gives it clear and obvious utility, but this rarely forms the core of a Pokémon's strategy. Tricking a Choice item is perhaps the next most common move-disabling strategy, but it fulfills that role exactly once in a match, after which the user employs other strategies.

This concept would explore the usage of other mechanics which prevent the use of certain moves or limit the number of viable switches. It is not uncommon for a Pokémon to have only one move which can adequately respond to a specific threat, so if that move is disabled, it will compel a switch which could be easily punished. Although Pajantom was just two projects ago, it is not inconceivable that trapping moves may then play a role in the strategy of at least one of CAP 25's creations.

While several moves explicitly disable certain moves and switches, there are also subtler means of constraining turn choice freedom by (for example) playing upon resistances and immunities. With all of these tactics and the limitations of the framework taken into account, there seems to be enough worth exploring here to allow these Pokémon to be competitive in a unique fashion.
 
Hello everyone! It’s time to announce or slate for the Concept Submission Poll! One of these entries will be the concept for CAP 25. Here they are, in no particular order:



Cause and Effect by Wulfanator72


Death to the King! by Granny Pie


Once More, with Feeling! by Mr Holiday


Role Compression Madness by mxmts


The Bigger They Are by Quanyails


Typed Together by LucarioOfLegends


First Come, First Served by Pipotchi

Astounding Ability Actualization by Deck Knight


May the best concept win!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top