CAP 33 - Part 1 - Concept Submissions

[spoo]

CAP 33 So Far

-----

The Concept will be a guiding force throughout the ensuing project, to ensure the the final result is a cohesive competitive Pokemon. Any discussions, suggestions, or submissions in later topics, that do not support the spirit of the Concept, will be moderated by the Topic Leader. Concepts must be presented as high-level descriptions of a general idea. They cannot be detailed Pokemon designs. Since we have polls to determine each aspect of the Pokemon, we cannot allow any specific features of the Pokemon to be determined by the details of the Concept. We intentionally have many rules regarding Concept Submissions. If you are not prepared to read and understand all the rules, then don't bother making a submission. These rules are made to help narrow the field of concepts down to those that have been carefully designed. This is not meant to be easy for everyone -- a good, legal Concept requires a lot of thought and careful wording. The following rules must be followed when submitting a Concept:

• Concepts must work with the mechanics laid out in Pokemon Scarlet/Violet. A concept that requires a custom ability, move, or other element that cannot be found on a Pokemon from Scarlet or Violet is not allowed. A concept must be feasible with the gameplay mechanics that are currently available. A concept MAY reference Pokemon unique to the CAP metagame, but the concept must be able to be fulfilled by a creation with access to only GameFreak created abilities, moves, etc. In short, "no customs." We are using GameFreak's toolbox.
• One submission per person. You may edit your Concept, but you may not change the fundamental premise after it has been posted. If editing your concept, please edit the original post instead of posting a new revision. Do not bump your Concept after you have posted it. If people do not comment on it, so be it.
• Do not duplicate or closely-resemble Concepts already posted by others. It is your responsibility to read through all previous submissions in this thread to ensure you are complying with this rule. Ignorance or laziness is not an excuse.
• Specific Pokemon types or type combos cannot be included or excluded in a Concept. Nor can other characteristics of the Concept specifically result in in the inclusion or exclusion of Types. For example, the following phrases would be illegal:
  "This is a Dragon pokemon with..." "The pokemon should be immune to Ghost attacks..." "The pokemon should have at least 7 resistances..." "The pokemon should get STAB on Thunderbolt.."
• Specific Abilities are not allowed. This applies to existing abilities and new abilities. Do not attempt to circumvent this rule by mentioning specific battle effects that can only be achieved by the implementation of an ability. For example, the following phrases would be illegal:
  "This pokemon should have a defensive ability like Intimidate or Marvel Scale..." "This pokemon has an ability that steals the opponent's held item..." "When this pokemon is switched in, all weather conditions are nullified..."
• Movepools or lists of moves are not allowed. A specific move can be mentioned if it is the basis for the entire concept. For example, the Concept "Rapid Spinner" would obviously mention the move Rapid Spin.
• Specific stat bias, base stats, or base stat ratings are not allowed. It is acceptable to use descriptive phrases like "fast", "bulky", "strong attacker", etc -- since there are a variety of ways a pokemon can fit those descriptions without specifically requiring certain stats. But, do not use overly-specific descriptions that would narrowly constrain the pokemon's base stat spread.
• Indications of Physical/Special bias are discouraged, but acceptable if it is essential to the Concept.
• Do not refer to any part of the pokemon's artistic design. For example, the following phrases would be illegal:
  "This is a bright blue pokemon..." "The pokemon looks like a..." "The pokemon uses its long tail to..."
• All submitted concepts for a standard CAP process will be used to create one fully-evolved Pokemon with zero alternate forms. This restriction can be partially or fully lifted by a winning framework that corresponds to the current project. Steps involving the CAP’s pre-evolutions are inherently flavor-based in nature and will have no bearing on concept fulfillment.
• A Concept Submission must be submitted in the proper format. The format is described below. If the proper format is not used, the moderators will not evaluate the submission, regardless of content.

Concept Submission Format Use this format for all concept submissions: Here is the format with tags. Just copy/paste this into your post, and fill it out:

• Name - Don't get too clever with the name. If the essence of the concept is not intuitively obvious in the name, then you are hurting your chances of people understanding it. If the essence of your concept cannot be expressed in a few words, then you need to seriously re-evaluate your concept.
• Description - This is the official description of the concept, and must follow ALL the content rules listed above. Do not make this a long description. Long descriptions are invariably too specific or too convoluted. Keep it short. Any more than a sentence or two is TOO MUCH. Do NOT include your Explanation of the concept in the Description. See "Explanation" below.
• Justification- Your concept must answer the following questions to be eligible:
  • What new territory will your Concept Pokemon explore, why do you believe it’s interesting, and how would it interact with the metagame?
  • How does your concept motivate in-depth discussion at each stage of the process, and why do you believe the CAP Project community should discuss these topics?
• In filling out your concept submission, copy the questions above and add your answer after it.
• Questions To Be Answered - The purpose of the CAP project is to learn new things about the metagame, and each concept submission is a proposed "experiment". Each tool has its own specific set of questions, but good concepts often can explain other facets of competitive Pokemon. Use this section to pose those additional questions. Note that this is different from Justification where you are answering tool-related questions, in this section you are proposing questions.
• Explanation - This can contain just about anything. This is where you can explain your concept without restraint. You may make suggestions, even specific suggestions, regarding the possible implementation of the Concept. This explanation should help facilitate discussion of the Concept -- but the Explanation is NOT part of the Concept and will be omitted from the polls and any future use of the Concept. Since your explanation is non-binding, regarding future polls and threads, it will not be evaluated for purposes of determining if your concept is legal or illegal. Although it is tempting, refrain from making too long of an explanation; it will deter readers from fully considering your concept.

It is the submitter's responsibility to figure out how to make a legal submission within the rules listed above. Do not complain about the difficulty of making a submission in this thread. There are many, many legal concepts that can be presented within the rules. Here are few examples of good and bad Concepts from previous projects:

Good Concepts from Past Projects
"Pure Utility Pokemon"
"Anti-Ghost Rapid Spinner"
"Ultimate Weather Abuser"
"Status Counter"
"Momentum"

Bad Concepts from Past Projects
"Ice-Resisting Dragon"
"Super Luck User"
"STAB Explosion Glass Cannon"
"Auto-Stealth Rock Remover"
"A Pokemon with Special Intimidate"
"Pyrokinetic Pokemon (Fire/Psychic)"
"Special Guts"
"Typing Means Nothing"

Note that all good concepts do not specifically dictate anything in later polls. Please try to remember that we are simply pointing the project in a general direction, we are not trying to decide anything right now. We have several weeks of polls ahead of us where EVERYTHING about this Pokemon will be dissected, discussed, voted, and decided. The concept is a very basic guide for the creation process. It is hard to provide solid concept descriptions without basically designing the entire Pokemon right off the bat. Submissions should be written and chosen very carefully to avoid these problems.

 

[ausma]

Hello everybody! I'm honored to be CAP 33's TL, and I'm also honored to be able to work with our winning TLT members. Our TLT is full of wonderful community members who I know will help really make this project enjoyable and productive throughout.

Before I get into specifics regarding this CAP specifically, this is your obligatory reminder that if you want to submit a concept, that familiarizing yourself with the Gen 9 CAP metagame is highly recommended. Ever since Hemogoblin's launch, Gen 9 CAP has been featured for its first CAPPL and there are a truly incredible amount of replays and usage stats you can look at if you're looking for a general idea of how the metagame plays out. Furthermore, there are great resources like the Sample Team and Viability Ranking threads if you're looking to just jump in.

As the TL, I won't pretend that I don't have my own personal philosophy when it comes to what makes a good CAP concept. To help guide your submissions, I would like to share them!

First, I believe a good CAP concept has clearly outlined and engaging parameters for its suggested design space. This may seem obvious, but I think when it comes to concepts, it can be really easy to get stuck in your own head and know exactly what you're aiming for the concept to accomplish, but not really explain the design space well enough and why it is worthwhile for us to dedicate a CAP process exploring. This is really where the questions section excels and I would heavily suggest spending a good amount of your time outlining your questions so we can understand what those parameters are and what that design space would actually look like. I've seen concepts that look interesting at a glance, but end up being really hard to establish reason to explore simply because the concept winds up limiting itself. I believe this also makes a concept timeless, as it means your concept is not bound by a metagame and is instead defined by its ability to enable exploration of the game on a deeper level.

Second, I believe a good concept also balances feasibility, inspiration, and ambition. This may sound like a lot, but in actuality I think a concept that achieves this comes, fittingly, from your own passion for mechanical and nuanced interactions that the game of Pokemon helps enable. For instance, there may be a specific Pokemon/move/ability that operates in a way you deeply bond with, and from there, you can unpack nuances of why/how it is able to fill that role, and then build a concept around that style of execution. It's far easier to flesh out a concept that you personally believe in and have an experienced understanding of compared to one you aren't subscribed to and aren't even sure of how it would play out. This really shows in how you aim to justify and explain the concept; I would advise you to really dig into the core of what you love about the game mechanically and/or are ambitious to explore the possibilities of.

I've learned recently from my experience in the CAP community that having an open mind is vital to truly having a successful, thorough, and holistic process. It's for that reason I am completely open to any and all concepts that are justified and outlined well. If you need any help in achieving that, I am willing to help workshop concepts as well as provide feedback. Of course, don't be afraid to post in the CAP Discord if you want a more open forum, too.

With that said, I am opening the field for submissions! Let's make this process one worth remembering.

 

[Explosion Badger]

Final Submission

Name: Schrödinger's CAP

Description: The Pokémon’s abilities change the effect of a move/what moves can be used, thus changing the Pokémon's role and what team comps it succeeds on.

Justification: Role Diversity is a topic that CAP has very rarley, if ever, dipped its toes into. while many CAPs take on multiple roles at once, and most are given movepools that would imply they have multiple sets and roles, very few, if any, use more than one set whenever they're used. Often, we give CAP's massive movepools, filled with everything from setup and powerful offensive moves, to recovery and utility moves, in the hopes that they'll help the pokemon find a role or roles that it fits well into, and then usually remove most of what we've given when it's found that the Pokémon uses only a few of the moves given to it. This concept aims to look at the movepools to analyze how they play into creating role diversity on a mon.

This concept doesn't just aim to look at movepools, however. It also aims to look at how abilities affect role diversity, and more specifically, how the synergy between abilities and moves affect role diversity in a mon. There are very few Pokémon who have multiple viable abilities, and often, these abilities don't change the Pokémon’s playstyle save for what they can and cannot deal with(e.g. Bulletproof vs Levitate on Equilibra). Pokémon with multiple abilities that interact with their moveset are extremely rare, and as such, this concept aims to explore how abilities can change the way a move is used and/or change what moves are interacted with and how.

Questions to be asked:

• What are some examples of Pokémon with role diversity both during and prior to gen 9? How have these Pokémon’s movepools affected their versatility? How have their abilities affected it? Their stats? How do all three synergize with one another?
• Should our two abilities interact with the same moves, or should they each interact with different ones? Should we use ability combos that allow for a mix of both?
• How might a shared move interact between its two abilities? Do they both give a similar effect, or do they provide different advantages?
• Depending on the roles and abilities chosen, how important is it for the opponent to be able to "open the box" (to know what role is being run)? How can we make sure this info is known?
• How do we define different roles? Can both of the roles be offensive/both be defensive while having enough differences to prevent these roles from overlapping significantly with one another?
• What are some examples of Pokémon with multiple viable abilities? How do these examples align or contrast with the goal of this concept?
• How can abilities change the way that certain moves are used? How might an ability and move combination allow for unique types of support and offensive potential?
• How do we prevent one ability in a pair from completely overshadowing the other?
• How do multiple roles in a concept affect certain stages of the process?
• How have CAP concepts that focused on having multiple roles turned out in the past? How do they compare with this concept?
• What can we learn from the difference in popularity between this Pokemon's roles?
• Is it possible to buff one role without buffing the other? What about nerfing one but not the other?

Explanation:
Move-Ability interactions are some of the most interesting, diverse and unique aspects in Pokemon, my favorite parts of Pokemon to think about. The way that moves and abilities can not only work in tandem with one another, but create unique and fun playstyles that few other Pokemon can replicate. A move like Close Combat can become dangerously difficult to stop with Scrappy, or gain new utility with Poison Touch, or become a unique setup tool with Contrary. A move with lackluster power but useful effects can suddenly become offensively threatening with Technician or Tough Claws. Blizzard can gain perfect accuracy with either No Guard or Snow Warning, but at the same time, both of those options have different moves options that they enhance as well. there's so much creativity possible when discussing the potential synergy between a Pokemon's moves and abilities, and this only becomes even more interesting when more than one ability is thrown into the ring. Seeing how a Pokemon can be designed to play in more the one way, how its two abilities creat opportunity cost for one another, and how they each interact with the metagame around them is an idea that genuinely excites me to think about. We've seen Pokemon like Reuniclus, who use Magic Guard and Regenerator to change how they maintain their longevity throughout a battle, and Pokemon like Greninja who can use Protean to enhance its wide movepool or Battle Bond to go for late-game sweeps, but we have yet to see a Pokemon that can completely change how it plays and uses its moves in battle, and this is what this concept aims to achieve.

 

[Amamama]

Final Submission

Name: The Pawn

Description:
This Pokémon will take inspiration from the chess-pawns gameplay to create a team-support focused Pokémon. To achieve this, we will take the following cues from the Pawns three most distinguishable aspects as an unselfish piece whose core identity is to be put into service for its teammates.

1) It is a piece, that opens the game to create advantageous positions for its team.

2) It is a piece, that - despite being able to only achieve slow incremental progress - is crucial for positioning the team for success through its defensive utility and ability to pressure the opponent offensively.

3) In a majority of games it is a piece, that ultimately is expendable compared to other team members and might be sacked for the sake of the team or even traded to make room for a previously “lost” (meaning unfavorably positioned or low health) teammate.


Justification:
The Pawns gameplay exemplifies two very important aspects of Game Strategy also found in Competitive Pokémon.

1) Positioning:
The role of the Pawn is largely about Positioning the team (or a teammate) for success throughout the game, both offensively and defensively

2) Sacrifing or Sacking
Since it is a comparably weak piece the Pawn is often sacked in favor of a teammate in some cases it even trades itself for a stronger piece, that had been “lost” to the opponent before.

Exploring these two elements of playing Pokémon, how to create or shield advantageous positions and how giving up one of your pieces can be beneficial to furthering the success of the team, is what interests me about applying the Pawns gameplay to a Pokémon.


Questions to be answered:

1. Are there existing examples of Pawn-like strategies in Pokémon? What can we learn from them?
2. What does opening the game mean in Pokémon? What common strategies exist, that can create (long term) advantageous positions?
3. What methods can be employed to make progress, that don’t rely on sheer power?
4. How can one secure their progress and favorable positions and how can one protect from the opponent making progress?
5. What team archetypes does the pawn thrive on? What team archetypes depend on a Pawn-like piece?Conversely, are there team compositions, that don’t or can’t use Pawn-like pieces?
6. How important is the ability to sack a Pokémon of your team, without jeopardizing the entire gameplan?
7. Can sacking a Pokémon at the right time even be beneficial for the Team?
8. How does the ability to be sacrificed for the success of the team impact a Pokémons gameplan?
9. How can the ability to trade a less valuable Pokémon on a team for a more important Pokémon impact the endgame?
10. How do all of the Pawns abilities help to set up the Wincon for the endgame

Explanation: The Pawn is one of the most widely known and simplest key pieces of any strategy game - so much so, that the term “Pawn” is being used for a category of characters in a multiplicity of different games and stories.
A single Pawn in chess is both the simplest Piece in terms of Power and Movement and maybe even the most complex in terms of Strategy and Gameplan.

But what would a Pawn look like in Pokémon? This is the central question of this concept.

In Chess the Pawns gameplan consists of three distinct stages:

1) Opening the Game:
The Pawn(s) open the game and create an (advantageous) position from where its teammates can be successful.

This is exemplified in Pokémon by early-game Leads and Counterleads.
Those can be Hazard or Screen Setters like Glimmora, Grimmsnarl, Samurott-Hisui or Landorus-T, Counterleads, which answer those mons and can keep the field clear of those hazards like Great Tusk, Hatterene, Cinderace or fast Taunt users and (mostly fast) Pivots that can outspeed and kill or bring in a defensive or offensive answer to the opponents lead, like Dragapult, Zeraora or Meowscarada.

2) Controlling Positions
In this stage the Pawns main task is to control the playing field by occupying important offensive and defensive positions.
Most characterizing for this stage are the Pawns limited ability to make progress due to its “weak” move pattern and its “strength in numbers”, that help it block the opponents progress and shield its team - often at the cost of sacrificing itself for the sake of a teammate.
There’s a wide array of tools in Pokémon, that enable a Mon to control the flow of the game and let it check opponents defensively while pressuring them offensively. In this case though, it would be crucial to look at those tools that don’t necessitate a lot of overall power to be successful.
After all this should still be a Mon that you’d chose to sacrifice over another in a pinch.

3) Promotion
Pawns that reach this stage can unleash their true power by promoting to a stronger piece (most often the Queen). This “trade” (in case the piece was lost before) or “promotion” allows the pawn to create a major momentum swing and usher in the endgame, where “itself” or the piece it is sacrificed for can create a situation, that leads to victory or prevents defeat.

I chose to omit two key aspects of the pawn, which are its strength in numbers and ability to promote, as it would introduce another level of complexity in an already complex concept.
To still incorporate the third stage of the Pawns gameplan in a more limited way, I chose to focus on the Pawns value as a sacrificial piece, wether it is as a sack or through a way to trade itself to create an advantage for a teammate.

 

[Swiffix]

Name - Reconnaissance

Description - This Pokémon's main role will be to assess and report. In other words, it excels at scouting opposing sets to determine the best counter your team has for them, thus generating momentum through information and subsequent positioning.

Justification -
What new territory will your Concept Pokémon explore, why do you believe it’s interesting, and how would it interact with the metagame?
In the current Tera metagame, relying solely on Team Previews as a way to scout is inadequate. Uncertainty about an opposing Pokémon's Tera type can lead to devastating consequences for both walls and breakers, significantly impacting a battle's outcome. Furthermore, the current metagame harbors several Pokemon whose sets aren't initially clear even from Team Preview (Iron Valiant) or who have the means of carrying a specific coverage move for certain cases (Baxcalibur, Cinderace, Sneasler), or even Pokémon whose designated role within the team isn't immediately apparent from Team Preview, providing yet another context where Reconnaissance steps in to provide invaluable assistance.

How does your concept motivate in-depth discussion at each stage of the process, and why do you believe the CAP Project community should discuss these topics?
Reconnaissance introduces a compelling dynamic by excelling at pressuring opponents to reveal details about their sets. This concept allows for diverse and creative suggestions to achieve this goal, offering a lot of ground for discussions within the CAP Project community.

I realize that the Scout concept was previously explored with Kitsunoh. That said, I believe that the concept still offers enough room for creativity and could result in a new take on the scout role distinct from Kitsunoh's. There's new dimensions to the Scout role that emerged since Kitsunoh's creation, one of which being Tera-scouting, and that Reconnaissance could address more effectively. It would also be an interesting experience for the community to revisit an old concept and adapt it to a new metagame.


Questions To Be Answered -

1. How can Reconnaissance effectively compel opponents to reveal critical information about their sets, particularly the team's Tera slot and intended type?
2. What measures will be employed to prevent Reconnaissance from becoming too passive or easily exploited as a setup fodder?
3. How will Reconnaissance facilitate momentum gain for the team once it fulfills its role of gathering intel?
4. Which playstyle would benefit the most from the presence of Reconnaissance on the team?

Explanation - A Scout Pokémon tailored to counter the main battle mechanisms of the current generation would introduce a refreshing and balanced element to the metagame without deviating from its core essence. Reconnaissance's value extends beyond the Tera-metagame of SV, making it effective against versatile threats in general.

 

[Pipotchi]

Final Submission

Name: Wind-up Soldier

Description: This Pokémon becomes uniquely boosted by the actions of its' teammates.

Justification: This Pokémon will explore a specific form of team support or gameplan, which'll directly interact with this mon's abilities or moves. Many moves and abilities can be boosted in ways that dont involve the mon clicking its own boosting move, such as Swords Dance. This includes the presence of field conditions, status on the opponent, speed and hp values of the opponent, and many more. This project is going to explore a Pokémon that allows its teammates to set it up to be stronger in one or multiple of these methods. This is going to explore the payoff of mons that don't just achieve max strength through self-sufficient strategies, as well as examining how supportive moves can be abused to the maximum. We've seen plenty of team support and long-gameplan options this gen to choose from, and Im excited to also tread new ground for modern CAP with something that requires some team support!

Questions to be asked:

• What are all the forms of team support and field conditions currently found in the CAP metagame? What abilities, typings and moves interact directly with these moves?
  
  
• What team support and field conditions are regularly seen even without direct abuse (an example would be chilly reception without slush rush abuse, or future sight without shuffling tactics). Conversely, what team support options are only viable as setup for direct abusers? Is there a third grouping of team support options that seem viable if they only had the correct abusers?
  
  
• What are examples of mons that directly use multiple forms of support at once to bolster their moveset? Is this a reliable strategy for them, and what about the abuser and the support makes it so/not so?
  
  
• Which support is easiest to negate by the opponent- and conversely, what support has the most sticking power? Are there specific Pokémon for different support types (weather, terrain, status) that cause a roadblock?
  
  
• How does the permanence of the team support affect this mon's desired playstyle? For instance, working with the short window of a weather condition vs the "permanent" effects of status conditions on opposing Pokémon.
  
  
• How much payoff does a team-reliant Pokémon need in order to justify its team placement? Just how team-reliant can a Pokémon be while still securing teamslots?

Explanation: Getting mons to perform at their peak can often be a team-wide effort, and can be a game-long strategy. An example is Dragapult becoming enabled by teammates spreading status conditions, allowing a specs Hex to threaten mons that were ready for specs Shadow Ball. This concept is all about exploring interesting forms of enabling our pokemon outside of the most common- which is the KOing/chipping of checks and counters and removing hazards. Mons like Ash-Greninja from Gen7, Arctozolt from Gen8, and Armarouge from Gen9 all become enabled in very interesting ways when it comes to moves and/or abilities, and the goal for this concept is to analyse other routes and find out what's viable and what's just too gimmicky to take seriously.

Some team support that might be fitting includes:
-weather, terrains, tspikes, and lesser field conditions like tailwind/TR
-status spread for moves and abilities that hurt statused pokemon like Hex
-status spread for other strategies like flinch and outspeeding moves like Bolt Beak
-Future Sight for unblockable two-pronged attacks or shuffling strategies
-wish/hwish support with when-at-max-hp abilities and hp-costing moves like sturdy,multiscale, and steel beam

While this Pokemon's teammates will get involved as controlling game-state is a teamwide effort, we will also have to work intelligently to create a Pokemon that is not reliant on gimmicky or limited strategies- for instance, an Electric Terrain Pokémon that is relying on support from an unviable Pincurchin. Compare this to the Dragapult and Ash-Gren concepts above.
I hope everyone is on the same page that this is not what we would usually call a "partner concept". We can find success here by making a solid standalone Pokémon that utilises USEFUL game-states instead of ones that are awkward and not worth slotting onto teams, as well as not pairing it up with any single Pokémon, but rather a group of potential useful teammates that offer that support.

 

[Yu_IOTJ]

Final Submission

Name: Debuff Specialist

Description: This Pokemon excels at debuffing the enemy team through whatever means available.

Justification: In a high powered metagame such as this one it's easy to get bowled over without options for counterplay. This Pokemon would be an option to assist in providing means to dynamically counter or neutralize a threat through various debuffs like status and stat drops. By administering the right status or stat drops, or by using the threat of a debuff to force switches, this Pokémon will help disrupt and make progress through the enemy team.

Questions to be Answered:

• Should the mon be self sufficient in its debuffs and use them to the Pokemon's own advantage, or should it be more reliant on its teammates?
• How can we best abuse the opponent wanting to switch out of our status afflictions?
• How can we differentiate ourselves with our status further from support mons that have come before, i.e.: Astrolotl, Grimmsnarl, Tomohawk, and what status and stat drops could we explore more effectively?
• What abilities can be used to further facilitate debuffing the opponent?
• Is offensive support or defensive support more useful when deciding the stats and movepool?
• Should we utilize the debuffs to benefit more offensive or defensive builds?
• Do we want debuffing moves such as Acid Spray, or other moves of the same ilk that lower defenses, to be considered for pressuring with more immediately threatening damage?

Explanation: This one's a sort of mirror-world version of Astrolotl's concept, whereas Astro was meant to be an offensive cleric to directly assist its teammates, this concept seeks to focus on status and stat drops inflicted onto the opponent as indirect team support. Ideally, a mon with this concept would help slow the pace of games down and get players to think more methodically.

 

[Ayecrusher King]

Final Submission

Name: Create-A-Parasite

Description: This Pokemon gets stronger by taking advantage of the opponent and their actions, such as by taking damage, stealing benefits, and/or exploiting certain playstyles, disrupting them in the process.

Justification:
Parasite: an organism that benefits by deriving nutrients at the host's expense/a person who habitually exploits others and gives nothing beneficial in return. Or, in Pokemon terms, when the CAP is on the field, it drains whatever components of the (current?) opposing Pokemon's set to (possibly) benefit itself, disrupting them in the process.
Most Pokemon in the metagame excel due to either being able to boost their own stats and/or lowering the opponents, as well as recovering its own HP if need-be. However, there is also the avenue of using the opponent to get stronger; among the options include taking the opponent's stats boosts/Ability/item/moves, or boosting your moves/stats if the opponent attacks you, options which are rather niche because of its unreliability. This concept aims to explore how we can design a Pokemon that will get an immediate advantage no matter what the opponent does, and to create opportunities where the opponent must overthink to minimise the benefits they're giving you.

Questions to Be Answered:

• What Pokemon or playstyles in the CAP metagame make it difficult for us to take advantage? Additionally, what Pokemon in the CAP metagame would prefer to keep what they have?
• What Moves and Abilities encourage enemy interaction to put them at a disadvantage? Additionally, what moves, items and/or Abilities protect the opponent from being leeched upon?
• How effective - offensively and/or defensively - should this Pokemon be when it initially enters battle? In addition, how long should CAP 33 persist on the field to become a 'problem'?
• What can we do when CAP 33 isn’t and/or incapable of leeching off its opponent?
• Is there a risk of CAP 33 not being able to find enough opportunities to leech off from its opponents to build up enough power? Additionally, how do we ensure that CAP 33 can continue finding opportunities to leech off from its opponents as the metagame evolves?

Explanation:
Here's a breakdown of the move that inspired this idea, Spectral Thief: while having decent base power, takes advantage of the opponent's positive stat boosts, depriving them to boost its own, before striking back stronger. Now, how do we turn such a concept from move to mon?
Granted, examples of a similar concept are already popular or underused: you have the item Weakness Policy, which sharply boosts stats if hit by a super-effective move, or Mirror Herb, which boosts your own stats if the opponent boosts their own (although admittedly not useful if the stat boosted is worthless to the mon); you have the ability Wandering Spirit, which takes the opponent's Ability and deprives them of a possible component of their set that you can take advantage of, Defiant/Competitive, which raises your Attack/Sp. Attack by two stages if an opponent lowers your stats, like through Sticky Web or Defog, or Stamina, which boosts your Defense by one stage every time the opponent attacks you; you have the move Foul Play, which uses the opponent's Attack to calculate damage (though useless against physically weak foes), Rage Fist, which gains +50 power every time you live a hit, Strength Sap, which restores the user's HP by the same amount as the target's effective Attack stat and debuffing them at the same time, Power/Guard/Speed Swap, the most direct option.
Thanks to the CAP podcast for feedback, questions to be changed...

 

[Brown4Sides]

Final Submission

Name: Version 3.3

Description: A Pokemon that attempts to recreate the playstyle and niche of a lower tier Pokemon from this generation.

Justification: Is there a Pokemon you like that you think is really cool competitively but are saddened to find it is actually unviable? Let's fix that by making a better version of it! This concept aims to explore strategies and niches seen by lower tier Pokemon, analyze why they don't work in the CAP metagame, and adjust it so that it is viable in the metagame.

Questions To Be Answered:

• What causes the strategies of various lower tier Pokemon to be unviable in the metagame?
• How do we replicate a lower tier Pokemon while preserving its identity?
• Are certain lower tier Pokemon limited by the quality of the set itself rather than their innate traits, and therefore poor targets for this concept?
• How close does CAP 33 have to be to the Pokemon it is replicating in terms of traits?

Explanation: Essentially a reverse Mini Uber. Have you ever thought about what a lower tier Pokemon would look like if it was viable? There are lots of interesting Pokemon found in the lower tiers that have really cool playstyles that can't be found in the high powered metagame of OU/CAP. The goal here is to make those playstyles/niches viable in CAP. I also narrowed this concept down to what it was originally, as it was pointed out that it was too broad before.

This is also important: We would decide the Pokemon we are replicating very early on to ensure the concept has direction.

Thanks to Vile and Bass, Zetalz and ausma for the feedback, as well as Voltage's PodCAP.

 

[IronTemplar]

Final Submission

Name: The Weatherman

Description: This CAP utilizes its ability(ies) and type(s) to influence or take advantage of on field weather effects

Justification: Weather has been a staple of gameplay since its debut, and several tournament winning teams have utilized it in one way or another. A huge portion of Scarlet & Violet was heavily dominated by either sun teams to set up a Past Paradox (namely Great Tusk), or rain teams to set up Palafin. Meanwhile, other, less supported varieties were still important for the disruption they made available in slowing down the opponent's initial game plan (think Slowking with Chilly Reception). Adapting a CAP to fit the current staples has been a trend since the very first trial, and I personally think this is an excellent strategy going forward

Questions to be answered:

• What weather would the CAP focus on?
• What are the most relevant weathers in competitive, historically and in recent play?
• How has it been used?
• Can it do MORE than that? Are there avenues that haven't truly been explored?
• What true limitations exist for each?
• What type(s) would benefit the most from it?
• What advantages are generated from the weather chosen?
• What current threats could this strategy respond to?
• What current threats could this strategy suffer from?
• Should up and coming Pokémon (not even present in OU at the time) be considered as possible contenders?
• How effective can 1 turn of disruption really be?
• Should the CAP provide the weather on its own? And if so...
• Should it have an ability to do so?

Explanation: The utility of weather focused teams is too strong to ignore, especially in the modern day. The resources available for such strategies to truly blossom is incredible and should not be squandered. Even going beyond straightforward methodology such as the boosts provided is only 1 facet present. In the right hands, it can be unpredictable and change the flow of the game, making it more interesting and challenging as a result

 

[Samirsin]

Final Submission

Name: Strategy's Bane
fka: Skoupaphobia: Sweep Police

Description: This Pokémon specializes in shutting down various strategies or only one, providing disruption and counterplay in a variety of battle scenarios. This Pokémon's abilities and/or moveset are strategically designed to hinder key components of some strategies, promoting adaptability and strategic depth in the metagame.

Justification: Building on the idea of strategy disruption, this concept delves into a broader approach, encompassing the shut-down of various strategies. The concept acknowledges the importance of countering not only sweeping strategies but also stall, setup moves, priority, hazards, and other core tactics. By creating a Pokémon that counters some of these strategies, the metagame becomes more engaging and multifaceted. This concept invites discussions about the diversity of strategies and how a versatile shut-down Pokémon can contribute to a more balanced metagame.

Questions to be answered:

1. What abilities and/or moves can be incorporated to address different strategy components?
2. How does the introduction of a versatile shut-down Pokémon impact team-building dynamics, and how can it be utilized effectively in various team compositions?
3. How can a Pokémon be designed to address different strategies while maintaining a unique identity and not becoming a "jack-of-all-trades" Pokémon?
4. Are there any existing abilities or moves that could serve as a basis for the Pokémon's toolkit, and how could they be adapted to fit its role?
5. Could the Pokémon be designed to counter strategies across different speed tiers, both fast and slow? How would its role change depending on the opponents it faces?
6. How might the Pokémon interact with entry hazard-focused teams, priority, stall teams, and other strategy-specific compositions? Would it be effective against all, or are there limits to its versatility?
7. What strategies might emerge to overcome its disruption abilities?
8. How does the introduction of a versatile shut-down Pokémon open up new opportunities for creative team compositions and unexpected strategies? How might players leverage its capabilities to create unique team synergies?

Explanation:
This concept envisions a Pokémon that possesses a diverse array of abilities and moves aimed at shutting down various strategies. Its abilities could include effects that nullify entry hazards, weaken the potency of setup moves, or disrupt opponent's recovery and healing tactics, the sky's the limit. The moveset could encompass moves that inflict status conditions, block priority moves, or bypass defensive abilities. Not all at the same time, only 1 or 2, even more if we feel like it.

A Pokémon able to stop Calm Mind Cresselia? Iron Defense Garganacl? What about Sucker Punch Kingambit? Trick Room? Weather teams? There are many options to cover. A discussion should be made about what problems in the metagame can we solve with CAP 33.

Maintaining balance remains crucial. Team composition discussions will be dynamic as players explore how this Pokémon can fit into different team archetypes. Its presence will encourage players to consider how it complements and interacts with other team members, leading to discussions about its role as a disruptor and enabler.

By broadening the scope of strategy disruption, this concept fosters conversations about the versatility of team strategies, the impact of counterplay on battles, and the multifaceted nature of competitive Pokémon. It invites the CAP Project community to critically analyze various strategies and their interactions, ultimately contributing to a metagame that thrives on creativity, adaptability, and strategy.

 

[Palosaks]

Final Submission

Name: The Spore You Know

Description: This CAP is built around using the move Spore without being overbearing.

Justification: Sleep as a whole is a mechanic that has gone underutilized in the CAP project, the only sleep move that existing CAPs have is Yawn and all of them only have it for flavor. Now, I believe this is warranted as sleep is a very strong stats condition as should be obvious of any status condition that can just shut down the opponent, but that doesn’t mean trying to make a Cap around this is a bad idea, by building a CAP around sleep we can properly explore this status condition to see what works, what doesn't and to see how sleep can be balanced besides the change of missing.

Questions to be Answered:

• Should this CAP use sleep as a team support, for itself, or both?
• How effective should this CAP be at doing things other than using Spore?
• What can we apply to this CAP from past Sleep move users and abusers?
• What can this CAP do once an enemy has been Spored?
• Fast Spore and Slow Spore both have merit albeit in different ways, how do they affect this CAP’s ability to fulfill it’s role?
• With Tera any Pokemon can be immune to Spore, alongside those that are already immune such as garganacl or gholdengo, how should this CAP interact with this?
• Sleep is a very strong mechanic and Spore having 100% accuracy makes it a move that can get out of hand quickly, what can we do to prevent Spore from being overbearing?

Explanation: As previously said sleep is underutilized in CAP and I believe sleep is an interesting mechanic that should be explored, while Spore might seem good on any pokemon it’s clear that not all Sporers are equal given two are in RU right now, this gives us a chance to take a deeper look at why this is and see what truly makes a good user of sleep. As for why this is a Spore concept rather than something generally focused on sleep this is because Spore is constant, as such we can learn more from it as we can constantly get sleep rather than missing it, thus muddling the info on what makes a good sleep abuser.

 

[quziel]

Title: Very Fast Immovable Object

Description: This is a wall that has a high speed stat

Justification: When designing a wall, we typically prioritize defensive typing, defensive stats, and ability choice the most, with offensive prowess and speed being secondary considerations at best. This concept aims to explore how the general considerations for designing a wall change when said wall actually has the speed stat to change how it interacts with the offensive threats it's expected to take on.

Questions:

• How and why does the Speed stat matter for a wall.
• When and why does outrunning an offensive threat matter?
• Is speed only useful for letting a wall force a KO on a threat before said threat can KO it? What formes of utility / recovery are strongly speed dependent?
• Are there any options that are open to a wall specifically because of a high speed stat that may not be open to slower walls, even accounting for ability choice?
• What makes fast walls decide to not just invest in their offenses?
• Does being a "Fast Wall" imply some level of offensive presence? Is offensive presence necessary to truly reap the rewards of going very fast?

Explanation:

Scream Tail, Defensive Talonflame, and Mega Latias are a few examples of a very rare archetype in Pokemon, the well, very fast wall. Typically the only things that matter for a wall are its defensive typing, defensive stats, healing, and then utility moves, with speed being a secondary concern at best. Gliscor loves having 95 base speed, but only so that it can invest a small amount to outrun Heatran, letting it check a mon that it otherwise wouldn't.

Looking at Mega Latias in particular, while it is an absolute bundle of stats, the speed stat in particular is a major element of its defensive prowess. If it was just 5 points slower it stops being able to reliably check Kartana, which, lets be honest, is a huge part of why you're running it in SM.

 

[hexatron]

Name: Mage Killer

Description: A tank that utilizes incredible special bulk to generate offensive momentum.

Justification: This is an archetype concept designed to fit the “Mage Killer” build in RPGs; which is a physical attacker that excels in thwarting magic users through a combination of incredible magical resistance and an anti-magic offensive kit. “Offense through Defense” is a relatively unexplored concept and has the potential to shake things up a lot, especially given the heavily offensive lean of the current CAP meta.

Questions:

• How much offensive utility does pumping one defensive stat provide? Being virtually indestructible to one side of the offensive spectrum will give this mon plenty of opportunities to capitalize on. How much offensive utility does this alone provide? This is the key question this mon is focused on solving.
• How much should we mitigate offensive options? We want to prevent this mon from being just another bulky attacker. How do we limit its power to being able to dispatch certain key threats, without being a threat on its own? Should we give it any set-up options, or would that compromise the vision of being a dedicated Mage Killer?
• How much should we mitigate support options? Would options designed to neuter certain threats like T-Wave, Haze, Toxic be fair game? Or should we focus entirely on attacking options to keep the concept as pure as possible? Similarly, should we give this mon any recovery options?
• What is a fair defensive trade-off for being virtually immune to one side of the defensive spectrum? Should we give it the lowest possible defense stat? A typing that is very vulnerable to common physical attacks? A stealth rock weakness? Some combination of these traits? Must it necessarily have terrible physical durability to be balanced, or is that not even important?
• What are the attributes of the typical special threat, and what attributes would be perfect to countering it? Would Ice Scales be required to meet our goal, or would something like Regenerator, Purifying Salt, or an immunity ability be better suited for it? Rock Type with Sand Stream? Maybe go with an offensive ability to better combat threats? There are many possibilities!

Explanation: Blissey played the role of “Special Brick Wall” in past gens, but due to power creep & just how passive it is, it can be taken out with proper set up. It could lose Calm Mind wars if the opponent had 101 subs, it could lose to repeated boosting etc. The Mage Killer is similarly unmovable on the special side, but it can confidently switch into and go 1-on-1 with any of these threats and always come out on top, due to a specially tailored offensive kit.

The Mage Killer would have middling to decent strength, not enough to be a threat on its own, but just enough to bonk threats. It wouldn’t be fast per-se, but it would be just fast enough to outspeed key threats if it invests. This will be a pokemon that has a great deal of marginal utility. But its ability to capitalize on that marginal utility would be quite strong.

Most importantly, it would distinguish itself from other tanks by having minimal team support options – this mon isn’t here to set up hazards, screens, defog/spin, pass wishes, act as a cleric etc. This mon is meant to switch into and eliminate threats.

 

[Cyril tbh]

• Name - Create-A-Pivot
• Description - This pokemon is neither a potent sweeper nor a perfect wall. It's neither offensive by nature or defensive nature. All it does is get in, make room for a different pokemon to enter the field.
  
  
• Justification:
  
  What new territory will your Concept Pokemon explore, why do you believe it’s interesting, and how would it interact with the metagame?
• How does your concept motivate in-depth discussion at each stage of the process, and why do you believe the CAP Project community should discuss these topics?
• 
  The way I see it, we dont have a dedicated pivot in the tier. While a lot of mons get pivoting moves, I dont think any of them excel at positioning specifically. Look at Venomicon. It has U-turn, but its clearly meant to be a wall that can sit and spongehits thanks to stamina. Look at Syclant. Clearly a great offensive sweeper that loves having U-Turn in its arsenal, but it's always gonna use U-turn as a way to get out rather than get something in. Both of these are good ways to pivot, but having a dedicated pivot could shake the metagame up completely. The closest thing to what Im looking for is something like Chilly Reception Glowking. But even that isnt the perefect fit as glowking isnt a dedicated pivot like this would be. This concept is a way to see what would happen if frailer, more offensive mons had a much easier time getting in, while not being able to do much itself.
• Questions To Be Answered:
  
  Could this Pokemon allow frailer yet stronger threats to overwhelm the opponent easier?
  how could this Pokemon set itself apart from other pivots in the metagame?
  Will this mon only find a use on Hyper Offense teams or will it also be used on other sorts of teams, like balance or BO?
  
  
• Explanation - The way I see it, I dont want this to be overwhelmingly bulky or strong, a bulk of something like 100/80/80, but with a good defensive typing, like normal/ghost. It would also have attacking stats at around 75. This mon would get a bunch of pivoting moves, U-turn, volt switch, Parting shot, whatever. Abilities should help with pivoting, either keeping it alive or something like intimidate. I really want to see a dedicated pivot in the tier as I think it could be a fun new way to run offensive teams. The amount of times I've seen a mon I wanted to use, but havea really hard switching in is more than I can count, and this mon would help a lot in that regard.
  
  
  WIP

 

[Fenghuang]

Final Submission

Concept: Mixed Attacker

Description: Create a mixed offensive powerhouse which is much better mixed than it is unmixed

Justification: I really love mixed attackers, and the recent success of Iron Valliant made me realize how starved for mixed attackers we are. Almost every single mon, even ones that sometimes run mixed sets, are much better focusing on one attacking stat or the other. The advantages of specializing are clear: you can put more attacking EVs into one stat or the other, and boosting moves almost universally boost one attack stat or the other (exceptions are shell smash, growth, and work-up). On the other hand, mixing lets you pick up coverage that otherwise wouldn't be available, and can help muscle past physical or special walls which are less bulky on the other side.

Questions to be answered:

• How do we make a mon offensively threatening while still strongly encouraging it to go mixed?
• Many mixed attackers of the past (Garchomp, Kommo-o) have been pseudolegendaries with high BSTs. Is this necessary, or can mixed attackers with lower BSTs exist?
• How can we discourage unmixed sets, given their natural advantages?
• Nature choice is always a bit awkward for fast mixed attackers. You want speed, attack, and special attack, but lowering a defensive stat is usually suboptimal. This can be somewhat mitigated by making a slow bulky mixed attacker (allowing it to run minus speed natures). Alternatively, we can lean into this somewhat awkward nature selection to encourage tradeoffs in building.

Explanation: If you look at mixed attackers of the past, many of them are running mixed attacks for coverage (see: Victini running Glaciate or gen8 physical Dragapult running flamethrower for Ferrothorn) and a few run pivot moves (like volt switch zeraora or uturn tapu koko). Chain Chomp is, in my opinion, the most interesting mixed set, and we would have a lot to learn from it. There are many moves like Draco Meteor which have very high base attack in return for dropping special attack, something which is obviously less of a problem for mixed attackers, and chomp really enjoys fire coverage of which it only has special attacks. Some other tools we have: giving a dual-type mon only physical STAB for one type and only special STAB for the other, giving a mostly physical/special attacker some really juicy opposite-stat coverage moves, e.g. trailblaze or knock or just really powerful moves like burn-up, or some really good type coverage like how gen3 skarm runs HP ground to beat its arch enemy mag. The design space for a mixed attacker is just as much about what we don't give them as what we do, and it would take some nuance and thinking to avoid making a mon that's just better off going unmixed. I really enjoy crafting and using mixed attacking sets, and I think making a mon which heavily incentivizes them and makes mixing better than unmixed sets would be a fun CAP challenge.

 

[Gekokeso]

WIP

Name - The Terraformer

Description - This Pokémon is able to successfully set and/or utilize terrain to either improve its own performance, support its team or do both at the same time.

Justification- I believe this is an actualization concept. This concept would choose to explore every aspect of terrain that generates value to its teammates, such as the boost to certain moves, the move debuffs it provides (eg. Earthquake halved damage and dragon type move debuff), and the other effects they provide (status inmunity, priority inmunity, healing). Besides exploring they capabilities to their maximum, this concept would also look to explore how terrain setters are able to support their team in the same vein as weather setters like Pelliper or Torkoal support their teams, as well as the general characteristics of terrain abusers.

Questions To Be Answered -

• How much does being a weather setter improve the general viability of a Pokémon?
• Which kinds of Pokémon tend to be the best at using Terrain for themselves? Which kinds of Pokémon tend to be best at setting up terrain for their team. Which can do both things the best?
• What are the offensive merits of being in a Terrain? Are there any more advantages rather than just a boost to certain moves?
• What about defensive merits? To which extent can inherently defensive mons take advantage of a terrain?
• Which Pokémon tend to be the best at being facilitated by Terrain? What qualities make them the best at said role?
• If we were to pursue this concept, which terrain should we focus on? Are we able to focus on more than one terrain for this concept? Are we capable of balancing a Pokémon that can help facilitate more than 1 terrain?

Explanation: Terrains and their setters have been a very key part of various metagames since gen 7 with the introduction of the Tapus and their further introduction in later gens. In gen 9 there has been a severe lack of terrain setters, to the point that Misty Terrain doesn't even get a terrain setter as of right now. I think we could be able to take the opportunity of the Tapus not being in the meta yet to fully explore both the offensive and defensive capabilities of each terrain.

 

[Sawyer.]

Name: Wounded Warrior

Description: This Pokemon is only a threat when it is on low HP.

Justification:

The idea of a Pokemon that needs to be on low HP in order to be effective is largely unexplored in competitive play, despite the diverse range of abilities, moves and items that Gamefreak has designed to facilitate this strategy.

If executed properly, this concept would give rise to unique gameplay and teambuilding dynamics. For example, the CAP could provide team support by being an ideal damage sponge, and by discouraging the opponent from using certain attacks (as Annihilape does, for example, through the threat of boosted Rage Fist). Opponents may also be encouraged to use specific counterplay to deal with a boosted Pokemon on low HP, such as increased use of priority attacks or Rocky Helmets.

This concept would give the community a clear direction to pursue as well as a broad design space to work in, prompting fresh and interesting discussions. It may also provide opportunities for the community to learn more about effective HP management in general.

Questions To Be Answered:

• What kind of team support would this CAP require? Conversely, what support would it provide to the rest of its team?
• What effect will a Pokemon that benefits from taking damage have on the wider metagame?
• What are the most reliable strategies to use in order to deliberately take damage?
• How could this CAP mitigate the inherent vulnerability of being on low HP in order to reliably fulfil its role?
• How favourable is the current metagame for Pokemon that rely on being at low HP? How do the conditions differ from previous metagames, in which concept examples like SubPetaya Empoleon have met with relative success?

Explanation:

Examples of existing Pokemon

• Annihilape powers up through Rage Fist as it sustains damage. However, its ability to reliably heal itself with Drain Punch / Rest means that it does not fully embody the Wounded Warrior concept.
• Moltres-Galar and Drampa can gain power via Berserk, but their access to strong stat-boosting moves, reliable recovery, and good initial damage output means that they do not rely on being at reduced HP.
• SubPetaya Empoleon, from DPP OU, is a great illustration of the concept, utilising a Petaya Berry and Torrent (along with Agility) to sweep at low HP. However, this particular strategy is highly gimmicky in contemporary metagames.

Examples of potential approaches

• Abilities or moves that buff the CAP when it takes damage (e.g. Berserk, Anger Shell, Weak Armor, Rage Fist, Stamina, Steam Engine). This is (imo) the most reliable way to approach the Wounded Warrior concept. However, the CAP should not be given access to HP recovery moves in this case in order to meet the requirement to be on reduced HP.
• Pinch berries like Custap or Salac (can potentially be activated multiple times through Harvest or Cud Chew)
• Pinch abilities (e.g. Overgrow)
• Pain Split
• Reversal / Flail. While extremely gimmicky in normal circumstances, these moves could nevertheless be used to support a Pokemon with otherwise overpowering attributes but a barren offensive movepool.

 

[sneakyjeans]

Name: Training Dummy

Description: This Pokemon is designed to teach new players the basics of competitive gameplay

Justification: Competitive Pokemon has a high barrier to entry. The source games are simple and accessible but entering the competitive scene is an entirely different level. The CAP metagame takes this substantially further by adding a number of critical threats that need to be considered. Mastery of both the fundamentals of a match to the specifics of each match-up are critical to learn on the path from beginner to expert. A Pokemon that is designed to interact with the basics in such a way to help a player improve match-over-match is a unique design challenge unseen in CAP before. This concept would be an exploration of a critical part of complex game design - teaching someone how to succeed.

Questions to be Answered:

• What skills differentiate a beginner, intermediate and expert competitive player?
• What are the fundamentals of competitive Pokemon? What are advanced techniques?
• Which mechanics interact the most with the key fundamentals?
• What match-ups are the most important to learn early on?
• How much of an impact can one Pokemon have on making the team building process easier to learn?
• Given Pokemon is a game that is constantly evolving, what are the constants that players can rely on when learning a new metagame?
• What are the unique complexities of the CAP metagame and how can CAP 33 help a new player become familiar with them?

Explanation: A Grass/Fire/Water trio is a perfect example of how Pokemon fulfills this concept for brand new players - they use your rival to teach type match-ups immediately as it is the most critical mechanic of the game. However arriving onto the competitive scene and trying to learn the meta is a whole other ball game as there isn't necessarily a starting point you can bring to the team builder that you know will help you get sorted out. I hope this concept appeals to players who remember what it was like discovering that these communities built around competitive Pokemon existed and made the climb through the ambiguity of the competitive scene. This is also a good opportunity to look at expert players and dissect what really makes them different from a novice - and how that mastery was developed.

 

[Tommaniacal]

Final Submission

Name: Game of Inches

Description: A Pokémon that explores the use of incremental damage and recovery effects in the CAP metagame.

Justification: This is an Actualization concept. Given the vast amounts of directly damaging attacks and reliable recovery, this concept intends to explore some of the lesser seen methods of damage and healing. Another route worth considering are the ways to dissuade or block these effects.

Questions to be answered:

• How important are incremental, residual, and any other forms of indirect damage in the current meta?
• Which effects, whether they are moves, abilities, or anything else, should be considered incremental?
• Which damaging moves would be useful for their secondary effects?
• How can incremental effects be dissuaded or blocked?
• In what ways can incremental effects be worthwhile over traditional forms of damage and recovery?
• How should incremental damage be used alongside direct damage? Should one be prioritized over the other?
• How can incremental effects be used to alter the number of turns opposing Pokémon can stay in? Does it affect the turns the user stays in?

Explanation: This Pokémon would serve a different playstyle than Pokemon that only deal direct damage or Pokemon with perfectly reliable recovery. As an example, Leech Seed perfectly encompasses these effects, providing both passive damage to the target and incremental healing to the user. Other effects worth looking at include (but are not limited to) Sand, Ingrain, Leftovers, Rough Skin, Poison Point, Infestation, and Salt Cure.

As for blocking incremental damage and recovery effects, the first ability that comes to mind is Magic Guard, which would be very strong both offensively and defensively. Others to look at include Poison Heal to block Toxic damage, Overcoat to block Sand, Water Veil to block Burn, Taunt to prevent incremental status moves, and the like.

This CAP would not need to be completely passive, as a potential path to explore is how direct damage and indirect damage differ and synergize with one another. Abilities like Rough Skin and Poison Touch can provide chip damage to otherwise pure attackers, and moves like Poison Jab or Scald can debuff the opponent.

The closest Pokémon that has filled this role in the past is Ferrothorn, with its main recovery being Leech Seed and leftovers, and its ability to rack up damage with Iron Barbs. As for CAP Pokémon, the closest to fill this role is Snaelstrom, with its main source of Recovery being through Poison Heal, and its ability to status through Toxic.

 

[kenn]

Final Submission

Name: Position is Key

Description: This CAP excels during one particular stage of the game, at the cost of being weaker than average during other stages of the game

Justification: Designing a CAP that explores how to excel in one particular game state seems hard to do since most game states are very fluid; however, it would be neat to see how each team archetype (stall, balance, and offense) could justify a CAP that isn't as great in one state of the game yet is the absolute best in another state. Rarely are gamestates ever used as a means to provide evidence for making progress for the team's goal whatever that may be. I think it would be neat to see how a Pokemon could make said progress based on what gamestate it is in rather than it being generally good.

Questions To Be Answered:
•How do playstyles and movepools differ between game states? Does a Pokemon that excels earlier need to set up? Does a Pokemon that excels later need to lay entry hazards?
•How does a Pokemon's role differ within each game state depending on team composition?
•What game state is the best to gain an advantage over your opponent? Does a Pokemon that excels earlier in the game give more of an advantage over something that excels later in the game? Why?
•What purpose does a Pokemon hold in the other positions that it doesn't excel in? What level of flexibility is found in the current metagame?
•How do teams utilize a Pokemon that excels in a particular game state?
•How do Pokemon that specialize in particular game states actually accomplish their jobs even when faced with potential counterplay?

Explanation:
So the idea behind this is to find what game state is the most advantageous in terms of gathering momentum or maybe even getting that leg up over your opponent. Successful examples of Pokemon that excel in the early stages would be Screens setters such as Regieleki and Dragapult, which provides a buffer to their offensive teammates to setup and sweep, dedicated leads like DPP Infernape and Ambipom, or even Focus Sash Azelf in later gens.

Just excelling in an earlier game state isn't necessarily the only route either. Pokemon that excel in the middle of the game can range from wallbreakers that requiring getting checks worn down to the point of taking them out on their own such as Specs Blacephalon or Crawdaunt to mons that like the opposing team being worn down to the point the check can't switch in any more like Nidoking. I think something like this could be intriguing to explore as a powerful wallbreaker that needs opportunities to be forced in, euch as Choice Specs Lele and Choice Specs Kyurem of SS fame, but is potent enough to take down what it needs to when it does is a lot of fun to imagine imo.

Furthermore, Pokemon like Kingambit or Sneasler have abilities, Supreme Overlord and Unburden respectively, that are better off in the latter part of a game as the former boosts power based on fallen allies and the other can let Sneasler clean up without fear of being outsped. Others that have exemplified this in the past such as Zeraora in SS are also wonderful examples as Zeraora was usually near impossible to beat out once the opposing check such as Landorus-T was too weak to switch in. A fun idea that was brought up during discussion in CAPcord was a Pokemon that pivots in and out early game, yet has a hard time doing so, racking up boosts on Rage Fist and then being able to finish off the opposing team with said boosts towards the end of a game. Another idea could be a Supreme Overlord Pokemon that is only good after some of the teammates have fainted, forcing it to be used later on in any given game.

 

[naturalstupidity]

WIP

Name: Timeless

Description: This Pokemon should be able to succeed regardless of metagame-specific factors.

Justification: Pokemon history is full of Pokemon that have thrived in certain metagames only to fall off a cliff as tides turn against them. There is a much smaller club of Pokemon who succeed and thrive seemingly in spite of the metagame they are in; for instance, it is hard to imagine a generation where Ferrothorn or Heatran will not be viable. CAP generally designs to target the current meta, but past projects like Arghonaut and Krillowatt have succeeded across generations. Why is that? What differentiates them from the Pokemon that dominated a given generation, but faded into irrelevance? With the massive upheavals of base Gen 9, Home, and the upcoming DLCs, now is an ideal opportunity to explore what makes a reliable staple.

Questions to be answered:

• What similarities and differences exist between historical metagame staples?
• What factors in a metagame can bring otherwise dominant Pokemon down?
• Besides simple power creep, how have generations of competitive play differed?
• What key roles have remained consistently viable throughout competitive Pokemon history?
• How can we "future-proof" a Pokemon against power creep without overtuning it?
• Without the benefit of hindsight, how can we know whether our CAP will fulfill its concept and remain viable?

Explanation: Scarlet and Violet flipped competitive Pokemon history on its head. By Dexiting previous staples like Ferrothorn and Clefable, removing key moves from Pokemon like Weavile and Blissey, and introducing massive power creep, historical players that once thrived are now gone or unviable. With that being the case, what makes a Pokemon resilient to such dramatic changes? One might say it's just a matter of creating a generically good Pokemon, but mons like Tyranitar that have been consistently phenomenal have fallen off, but seemingly unconventional picks like Gastrodon and Amoonguss manage to carve out niches no matter what generation they find themselves in. Nor is it a matter of pure versatility, as something like Weavile dominated with 1-2 unique sets until unceremoniously losing its best STABs this generation. It might seem like all the Pokemon who fell off lost key moves in the generational shifts, but something like Swampert or Tomohawk petered out without losing anything. It's not immediately clear what factors make something good across generations. As such, instead of designing a Pokemon purely for the conditions we find ourselves in now, it will be an educational and valuable experience to determine how to make sure our creations stand the test of time.

 

[Voltage]

Final Submission

wow a repost! (riposte?)

Name: Parry and Riposte

Description: This Pokemon is able to "parry" and/or "riposte" (counter-attack) an opponent's actions with a well-timed action from the user. This parry and riposte may be done passively from the Pokemon's inherent features like its ability, or more actively accomplished through the use of specific moves, or both.

Justification: With the trending toward a more offensively oriented metagame compared to the previous generation, it is important to consider in what ways can players mitigate said offensive threats. In that regard, this is primarily an Actualization concept that aims to explore the ways in which a Pokemon can improve the user's positioning in a battle through carefully timed and executed play.

Questions To Be Answered:

• How are Pokemon able to "parry" and "riposte" foes with the present gameplay mechanics?
• Furthermore, what actions can a player make that would be considered to fall under the umbrella of "parrying" and "riposting"?
• Does parrying and counter-attacking have to be inherently offensive, or can there be defensive parries as well?
• To what extent does the idea / threat of a pokemon's potential to parry and riposte impact each player's gameplay throughout a match?
• Under what circumstances would we expect this Pokemon to be able to attempt a "parry", i.e. when in a match is it most advantageous to try to and parry your opponent??
• To what extent should misplaying a parry punish the user?
• What would a punishment for incorrectly attempting or executing a "parry" look like?
• Should a "parrying" Pokemon be able to parry and riposte itself?
• How does Terastalization provide opportunities for "parrying" in a match?
• To what extent should the user be left "open" to Pokemon it previously checked or countered specifically after "parrying" with Terastalization?

Explanation: First and foremost, some definitions:

parry
verb
par·ry ˈper-ē
ˈpa-rē

: to ward off a weapon or blow

riposte
noun
ri·poste ri-ˈpōst

: a fencer's quick return thrust following a parry


I'm always a sucker for trying to map common fighting game mechanics to Pokemon through CAP. Astrolotl, CAP 27, was an example of attempting to take the Dungeons and Dragons Trickster Cleric and make it into a Pokemon. And so now I've returned with a similar kind of idea: parrying and riposting.

In fighting games, one of the most skillful actions a player can make is accurately reading the actions of their opponent and properly blocking said action and following with an immediate counter blow. In Super Smash Brothers Melee, for example, Marth's Down+B action is a parry that, when timed properly allows the Marth user to block the attack from the opponent and redirect the damage back onto the attacker. In order to properly use the move, the Marth user must be acutely aware of their opponent's plans of attack in order to make this move work effectively, otherwise they are left open to attack should they mistime their "Down+B". In Smash Ultimate, King K. Rool' "Gut Check" exaggerates this to an amusing degree: timing the narrow window in the proper direction leads to what is essentially a KO, but missing it or facing the wrong direction makes the K. Rool user vulnerable to attacks for almost a whole two seconds.

We can see some examples of this in Pokemon as well. The move "Sucker Punch" is a direct example of such an idea, where the Sucker Punch user has to be entirely correct with their read of their opponent's plan of attack to effectively use the move. Predict your opponent to be using an attacking move and you move first and likely get the KO, misread and you essentially lose an entire turn. We've seen examples where games will often come down to one player outplaying (or not outplaying) an opponent with a Kingambit (and Bisharp in generations before it) using Sucker Punch to win games or vice versa. Sucker Punch isn't the only example of this kind of gameplay as well; other more passive examples of "parrying" come from appropriate switch-ins and lures which can could catch opponents off-guard.

Switching in a Pokemon with the ability Guts to potentially absorb a burn and obtain an immediate surge in power, or switching in a Pokemon with the ability "Defiant" on an expected switch-in of a Pokemon with "Intimidate" are examples of this kind of "parrying". Make the right read and you've got yourself a much stronger opportunity to win matches, make the wrong read and you've left yourself open to the whims of your opponent. The ability Magic Bounce (AND REBOUND) is an example of this concept (almost the exact opposite of Sucker Punch too): properly predicting a status move being used, the user can switch in a Pokemon with Magic Bounce and immediately punish the status move user. Obstagoon as a Pokemon is somewhat the codifier of this idea since it has Obstruct a move that immediately creates openings if a Pokemon should make contact with it by lowering the attacker's defense 2 stages (thanks quziel). This can also be extended to more, admittedly gimmicky, concepts like Focus Sash / Endure + Reversal strategies, wherein you allow a Pokemon to be hit by an attack bringing them to HP, only to use an attack that does more damage the lower the user's HP is. one might recall dex's "Hen 5", Galarian Zapdos Set from last gen which was as follows:

Hen 5 (Zapdos-Galar) @ Salac Berry
Ability: Defiant
EVs: 252 Atk / 4 SpD / 252 Spe
Jolly Nature
- Endure
- Acrobatics
- Reversal
- Bulk Up

With a corresponding replay to demonstrate the potential (Turn 11 onward): https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/gen8cap-1531459800

One major consideration I hope we really consider in great depth is what punishment looks like on both players' ends. If the user of CAP33 attempts to parry their opponent, only to be read and thwarted, what does the gameplay penalty look like? From the Sucker Punch example, it means that the opponent gets a free turn to use the status move of their choice which could have significant repercussions in following turns. With the Magic Bounce example, if you were to switch in a Pokemon with magic bounce on a predicted status move, only to be attacked with a damage-inducing attack, CAP33 has lost a perhaps non-negligible amount of health which might prevent it from switching in again later. But it should also follow that the player FACING CAP33 should be punished for creating obvious play. If it is clear that an opposing CAP33 has a clear parrying opportunity, and you let it happen, to what extent is your predictable play punishable, and what might that look like? Does it mean that if, for example you choose a move that you'd be choice locked into with a type that CAP33 is immune to, and you go for it anyways, to what extent is that your own fault for all the problems you might be immediately facing shortly thereafter, and what might those punishments look like? Knowing what the punishment for failing to parry is just as intrinsic to the concept as it is to understand what successfully parrying looks like.

I'm resubbing this concept for CAP 33 as I feel it was one worth exploring, especially after Hemogoblin's process. For starters, without getting too into the weeds of the process, one of the biggest talking points surrounding Hemogoblin's process of the lack of clear vision of what its eventual role would be in the metagame. I think this concept grounds us in a way that we can direct ourselves towards a clear "in-battle" / usage goal in mind: "a Pokemon that rewards its user's skill and punishes an opponent for predictable play". A role for this Pokemon, while not concretely provided, is present, and should not be as nebulous as the previous process. This Pokemon we make will likely not be a "versatile" Pokemon as it will likely skew more defensive (though again, open to the interpretation of the process), and in my eyes this is a good thing.

Additionally, now that the Terastalization mechanic is a bit more fleshed out, I think there can be a pretty interesting exploration into its uses from a design perspective. In my previous pitch I included a note about not commenting on Terastalization as I did not (and still do not) want it to be the primary focus of the process. However, despite the development of the metagame and the pretty clear understanding that Tera is not going anywhere, I still don't think that Terastalization should be the primary focus of this concept, but could, in theory provide a meaningful discussion as to how Tera impacts the flow of a match and how a one-time use of a type change can "parry" an opponent's moves. For example, a Tera-Fairy Baxcalibur has significant utility being able to Tera into a type immune to Dragon, allowing the Baxcalibur to now significantly threaten its checks like Dragapult, Iron Valiant and other Baxcalibur. However, by Terastalizing into the Fairy type, its ability to check other threats like Galarian Slowking and Iron Moth goes out the window, having been "left open" after attempting to "parry". The fact is that Tera WILL come up in the process in some capacity, and I'd like to initially address it here and now as PART of the pitch, rather than an idea that might hijack the process going forward. Given that now that there's less variance in the uses of Terastalization, I am confident in our ability to spend some time looking into the current mechanic of the ninth generation of Pokemon while not making it the central focus of the process.

thanks for reading, I welcome your feedback

 

[sun_dew]

Final Submission

Name: One-Trick Pony

Description: This Pokémon has one stat that is significantly higher than the rest of its spread.

Justification: A Pokémon that relies on one exceptional stat is interesting to explore due to the implications it has on the remainder of its stats as well as on the role that it seeks to fill. Nearly every key role on a team relies on a combination of good stats; For instance, walls want high defense, high special defense, and sometimes high health as well. Restricting these combinations down to a single exceptional stat leads to a much more interesting design process, as it forces us to more carefully consider the interactions between our chosen stat and the other various factors that make up a Pokémon.

Questions To Be Answered:

• What tools allow us to use defensive stats offensively, or vice versa?
• Are some stats easier to completely rely on than others? Why or why not?
• What are the main advantages to having balanced, even stats? Do these outweigh the benefits of a single, extremely high stat? If so, by how much?
• What classifies as "low" and "high" in regard to each stat? How does this impact our specialized stat? How does this impact the rest of our spread?
• In what ways can we utilize stat boosts to make up for sub-par stats?
• How do attacking moves that do not use the user's attacking stat (i.e. Body Press or Foul Play) impact this concept?

Explanation: This concept is primarily inspired by Orthworm (a Pokémon I personally found very fun to use), but also by Hemogoblin's process. More specifically, Hemo having perfectly "average" and generally even stats made me curious as to what direction absurdly uneven stats would lead a process.

Some examples of Pokémon with a single exceptional stat include:

• Chansey/Blissey / (Health)
• Rampardos (Attack)
• Orthworm (Defense)
• Xurkitree (Special Attack)
• Regice (Special Defense)
• Electrode/Hisuian Electrode / (Speed)

A lot of these Pokémon are notably... not very good, and there are very few good examples for Attack and Special Defense in particular. The relatively unexplored nature of this concept is one of the main reasons I wanted to submit this concept, since there are so few official mons that execute it, and even less that are successful in their tiers, let alone in OU. Finding a way to make uneven stats not only work, but thrive, is compelling, and could lead to the creation of a very unique CAP.

 

[Wulfanator]

Final Submission

Name: No Shuckles Given

Description: This Pokemon would be built with minimal to no focus on its offensive capabilities.

Justification: CAP often prioritizes offense above all other defining features. This is so prevalent that we tend to build with one of two distinct stat chassis: fast, semi-frail offensive mon or fatter balance mon. Both chassis rely on swinging hard in conjunction with their other defining characteristics. This concept aims to abandon this safety net and explore what it means to build a mon that cannot meaningfully rely on raw offensive potential.

Questions To Be Answered:

• What other ways can a Pokemon make progress in a match that do not rely on its own offensive potential? How does typing, ability, stats, moves, and item selection synergize with each other to make non-offensive progress?
• This type of build historically tries to make progress by enabling more offensive teammates throughout the game. How could this type of mon make progress for itself and, potentially, create non-offensive win conditions?
• What mons already occupy this less-offensive archetype? What roles are these mons able to fill for teams, and how can we use this to inform our design choices?
• Even less-offensive Pokemon want the ability to click an immediate, damage-dealing move: Clefable w/ Moonblast, Ferrothorn w/ Power Whip/Gyro Ball/Body Press, or Chansey w/ Seismic Toss. Would this CAP also want an option to immediately force damage despite wanting to put minimal focus on offensive capabilities?

Explanation: This concept stemmed from a desire to break away from the cookie cutter design choices we regularly gravitate towards. For some background, I have spent some time away from CAP since HOME dropped. In its place, I have found myself loading into random battles. While climbing the latter, I have noticed very peculiar sets that have piqued my interest. Mons like Tropius and Salazzle have very unique playstyles in the tier that aren’t very offensive in nature. Both are general nuisances with Sub+Protect paired with some form of HP draining condition. In the case of Salazzle, its speed paired with corrosion lets it force toxic on nearly all Pokemon and build toxic turns by outspeeding them. Tropius uses similar tactics but leverages its bulk over speed. Harvest+Sitrus Berry+Leech Seed helps it heal off large chunks of damage. Protect lets it fish for the Harvest proc and additional Leech Seed turns. Substitute helps it activate the Sitrus Berry+Harvest cycle while also shielding it from status and damage. Scream Tail is another mon that has very little offensive strength, but its bulk and speed make it pain to remove from battle. These are three mons that can be obnoxious to face since it is easy to fall into a position where you cannot reliably break them. Perhaps this can be attributed to the randomized, no-preview format, but I think there is something to learn from these types of builds that we would otherwise never touch.