zarator
^_^
Approved by Darkie
The concept should add a niche to the metagame, either specializing an already existent one, or creating a new role altogether.
Almost all concepts our CAPs (at least, our CAPs from Fidgit up to Colossoil) are based upon follow this interpretation. For example, Fidgit's concept is "Pure Utility Pokémon". Obviously there are already pokémon, in the standard OU environment, which are able to cover a utility role effectively, like Vaporeon, Forretress, and Jirachi, to name a few. However, there was no dedicated utility Pokémon available, and this is why we decided to create one. On the contrary, Colossoil's concept is "Stop the secondary". There aren't Pokémon, in standard OU, able to actually claim this role. Although a debatable assumption (and clearly not the point of my OP), we could say Colossoil created a new niche in the metagame.
However, we can see that not all the interesting concept fits this interpretation, and this became apparent recently. I'm quite positive most of you remember the runner-up concept for CAP9. If not, then read below:
What is my point? If we go with a strict interpretation of the CAP Mission Statement, in my opinion the above concept should be unacceptable. But this would also mean that a lot of existing OU Pokémon, should they have been CAP concepts, would have been deemed "uninteresting", while they probably aren't (if not for the fact that they are OU, but I digress). You may agree or disagree with me upon the fact whether or not this type of concept is acceptable, or how to read the CAP Mission Statement, but I hope all of you will at least recognize that a problem of interpretation exist. I think this may be the right place to better define our mission statement, and above all, decide what kind of concept future CAPs should be about.
Thank you.
I'm sure most of the readers remember perfectly the CAP Mission Statement. Let's read it again:If you are not an experienced member of the CAP community, it is strongly recommended that you do not post in this thread.
This thread is intended to contain intelligent discussion and commentary by experienced members of the CAP project regarding CAP policy, process, and rules. As such, the content of this thread will be moderated more strictly than other threads on the forum. The posting rules for Policy Review threads are contained here.
Let's analyze it, shall we? This sentence says that we explore the metagame. And we do it by "designing, creating, and playtesting new Pokémon concepts". So, what should these concepts be about? The first interpretation of this expression, i.e. the most obvious and immediate one, probably is:"The Create-A-Pokémon project is a community dedicated to exploring and understanding the competitive Pokémon metagame by designing, creating, and playtesting new Pokémon concepts."
The concept should add a niche to the metagame, either specializing an already existent one, or creating a new role altogether.
Almost all concepts our CAPs (at least, our CAPs from Fidgit up to Colossoil) are based upon follow this interpretation. For example, Fidgit's concept is "Pure Utility Pokémon". Obviously there are already pokémon, in the standard OU environment, which are able to cover a utility role effectively, like Vaporeon, Forretress, and Jirachi, to name a few. However, there was no dedicated utility Pokémon available, and this is why we decided to create one. On the contrary, Colossoil's concept is "Stop the secondary". There aren't Pokémon, in standard OU, able to actually claim this role. Although a debatable assumption (and clearly not the point of my OP), we could say Colossoil created a new niche in the metagame.
However, we can see that not all the interesting concept fits this interpretation, and this became apparent recently. I'm quite positive most of you remember the runner-up concept for CAP9. If not, then read below:
First of all, I'd like to say that I don't want to call out billymills (I actually voted for him at the time, lol), I chose him only because it is the most recent example for what I'm going to say. Now, can we say this concept adds something to the metagame? In my opinion, no. And not because there are already Two-sided attackers in OU, but because being a two-sided attacker (at least, in the meaning intended by Billymills) does not add anything to the metagame by itself. Gliscor, for example, does not add anything to the metagame simply because it can be both a physical attacker and a physical tank. It is his unique type combination, combined with an excellent and interesting movepool, which makes Gliscor a relevant addition to the metagame. If he had been just an unspectacular and not-so-unique physical attacker AND physical tank, it would not have been much of a contribution. While, even if he would not have been able to be a good physical attacker (if, for example, it lacked Swords Dance) it would still retain a niche as a peculiar physical wall thanks to the aforementioned features (namely, typing and movepool).Originally Posted by Fat billymills
Name: Two-sided attack
Description: Can play two incredibly different roles extremely well, but no middle ground. If this pokemon attempts to compromise its strengths, it will suck. Ideally, it will absolutely destroy one type of pokemon using one of its strengths, but will be completely countered if it chose the other specialty. Important: It has no true 100% counter.
Justification: Depending on how this works out, I could see this being a good stall breaker (50/50 shot at breaking one of your opponent's major walls, if this turns out to be a sweeper), or a strong wall of either defense. The important thing is that it makes prediction even more important, and should reduce any luck factor when facing this pokemon.
Questions to be answered:
- Is there anyway to prevent a pokemon from being moderate, and always extremely powerful in a direction using basic methods (i.e.: Would type change or change in formes be necessary)?
- Does such a pokemon actually encourage prediction, or is countering it completely based on luck?
- Is it possible to create a pokemon without true counters, even if it is not overpowering?
What is my point? If we go with a strict interpretation of the CAP Mission Statement, in my opinion the above concept should be unacceptable. But this would also mean that a lot of existing OU Pokémon, should they have been CAP concepts, would have been deemed "uninteresting", while they probably aren't (if not for the fact that they are OU, but I digress). You may agree or disagree with me upon the fact whether or not this type of concept is acceptable, or how to read the CAP Mission Statement, but I hope all of you will at least recognize that a problem of interpretation exist. I think this may be the right place to better define our mission statement, and above all, decide what kind of concept future CAPs should be about.
Thank you.