CAP 32 - Part 1 - Concept Submissions

Not open for further replies.


I am the Scientist now
is a Site Content Manageris a Forum Moderatoris a Community Contributoris a Smogon Discord Contributoris a Top CAP Contributoris a Contributor to Smogonis a member of the Battle Simulator Staff
CAP 32 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..."
  • 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"
"True Garchomp Counter"
"Ultimate Weather Abuser"
"Status Counter"

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.


is a Site Content Manageris a Social Media Contributoris a Community Leaderis a Community Contributoris a CAP Contributoris a Contributor to Smogon
CAP Co-Leader
Hi everyone, I hope you're as excited as I am to be here!

I've got a few things to say before submissions start rolling in, so let me run through the standard TL spiel first: if you plan on submitting a concept, I highly recommend familiarizing yourself with the CAP metagame. Because Gen 9 is so new, this is a little harder than usual -- still, try to glean what you can from the CAP viability rankings, and for something more substantial, watch recent replays from the ongoing CAP Champions League tournament. If you've been keeping up with SPL, that's incredibly helpful too -- CAP and OU have a lot in common! On a separate note, don't hesitate to tag me (cg#1000) in our discord server, or reach out to me via forum/discord PM asking for advice on your concept (though I might not always respond immediately). I'll also do my best to say something about everyone's concept right here within this thread, so don't worry about whether or not you'll get feedback.

With that out of the way, I'd like to give some unsolicited advice for writing a good concept and what I'll be looking for when compiling the slate:
Ask any previous TL what the most important part of a concept is, and without a doubt they'll say the "questions to be answered" section. This is the heart and soul of any good submission and provides a window into just how deep the possibilities run with your concept. Broadly applicable questions such as "how will we prevent making CAP32 overpowered?" or "should CAP32 be fast or slow?" should be avoided; this is your chance to get specific about what makes your concept uniquely interesting and worth pursuing. Here are a few past concept winners that are prime examples of how to develop a rich and compelling list of questions: Wulfanator's Forbidden Fruit, quziel's Defective Ability, and Voltage's Offensive Team Support. Note how these questions start off more surface-level, and progressively get more complex and thought-provoking.

This next one is more subjective, and far from mandatory, but I find that it can help to include examples of existing Pokemon that demonstrate your concept. Try to think about if there's anything out there that encapsulates your vision already -- e.g., if your concept is about utilizing passive damage, some obvious parallels to draw would be Ferrothorn and Garganacl. If you can't think of an existing example, you can always make one up too! Providing apt examples can help turn your concept's abstract ideas into clear and accessible points of reference, letting everyone get on the same page as you about exactly what you're envisioning.

I think it's also worth being upfront about the kinds of things I'll be looking for in creating a slate. It's no secret that every TL has their individual preferences, and this applies to me too; so, one thing that will be informing a lot of my judgment as this stage (and process as a whole!) unfolds is whether or not a concept stands the test of time. We can't see the future, but we can still take away some important lessons from CAP's past: concepts that hyper-fixate on one dominant Pokemon or strategy, that aim to decentralize or "fix" the metagame, that are explicit in their goal to fill a perceived "gap" in the metagame, and so on, typically don't age well. These concepts are highly specific to the metagame state that they were made in, and could easily find themselves facing an identity crisis next generation, or hell, even next DLC.

The above section is a nice preface for this next point. For CAP32, I strongly recommending against submitting a Terastallization-based concept. I've run this past the TLT already, and they agree with me that CAP32 is too early to be exploring Tera in its entirety. Not only will Tera probably cease to exist in the next generation, but it's possible that we see tiering action taken on the mechanic even within Gen 9 -- this lingering issue makes me reluctant to pursue any concept centered around it. Moreover, we still have no idea how Tera will interact with the CAP process yet. Terastallization will undoubtedly play an integral role in stages like Typing, Threats, and Movepool, so we'd like to see Tera's effect on the process before choosing a concept that puts it at the forefront. Lastly, we're still continuing to learn about how to best use the mechanic and what its limits are, which would make it a more compelling choice down the line when we're more familiar with it. If you have an idea for a Tera-based concept that you just can't give up, speak to me privately and I promise that I'll consider it; for now though, I can almost guarantee that no Tera concepts will be slated.

It's about time I wrap this post up, so I'll leave you with one last thing: a compilation of every single Concept Poll 1, intended to provide some inspiration for concept ideas and strong examples that you can look to when writing your own submission (credit to Birkal for originally putting this list together for CAP28)
Gen 4 Slated Concepts
Fidgit -
Stratagem -
Arghonaut -
Kitsunoh -
Cyclohm -
Colossoil -
Krilowatt -
Voodoom -

Gen 5 Slated Concepts
Tomohawk -
Necturna -
Mollux -
Aurumoth -
Malaconda -
Cawmodore -

Gen 6 Slated Concepts
Volkraken -
Plasmanta -
Naviathan -
Crucibelle -
Kerfluffle -

Gen 7 Slated Concepts
Pajantom -
Jumbao -
Starters -
Equilibra -

Gen 8 Slated Concepts
Astrolotl -
Miasmaw -
Chromera -
Venomicon -
Saharaja -


I am the Scientist now
is a Site Content Manageris a Forum Moderatoris a Community Contributoris a Smogon Discord Contributoris a Top CAP Contributoris a Contributor to Smogonis a member of the Battle Simulator Staff
Name: Old Muscular Dog, New Muscular Trick

Description: This Pokemon aims to recreate a specific playstyle or set reminiscent of an old-gens OU threat, be it from RBY, or SM.

Justification: There are several very unique sets that were old-gens mainstays, and simply haven't translated into modern gens, thanks to being outclassed, being removed from the metagame, or mechanics changes. This concept aims to recapture the magic of one (or more) of these old gens sets / playstyles in a new CAP.

Questions To Be Answered:
  • What old gens sets / playstyles are possible to replicate, i.e. not fully outclassed / outdated?
  • How should we deal with old gens sets / playstyles that have been pushed out due to mechanical changes? Can we replicate some of them using move-ability interactions?
  • How do mechanical additions affect the viability of old gens sets / playstyles, eg how do phazers interact with HDB?
  • Are there some old gens sets / playstyles that will be easier to draw inspiration from than others?
  • Should we focus on one old gen set / playstyle, or multiple when designing this CAP?
  • How will these old gens sets / playstyles interact with a modern meta?
  • Are there specific old gens to draw on that will be easier than others (eg RBY or SS?)
  • The continued Dexit means that a lot of recent gen (ORAS-SS) sets / playstyles are now unusable in current gen, are they acceptable targets for this concept?
Old generations, from RBY to SS, were full of a ton of very interesting sets that engage with moves, abilities, and items that are not commonly seen in SV OU. From Heatran being probably the best partial trapper ever seen, utilizing its unique Magma Storm to trap and then kill even resists (while dealing with its limited HP), the many Focus Punchers in old gens, which aren't seen now because most Focus Punch users have Close Combat now, and sets that simply can't work in modern gen due to mechanical changes, eg Amnesia Slowbro. This concept aims to explore some of these forgotten synergies, mechanics, moves, and abilities that simply aren't present in current gen. I think this concept sorta has two modes depending on which sets we're trying to explore.

For very old gens sets / playstyles / mechanics we have to ask, why have these sets fallen out of favor, is it due to the moves / sets being outclassed by stronger options, have the only mons with the moves / sets just been overtaken by powercreep, and if there are substantial mechanical changes to key elements, can we still use those elements. If we can't, is there any way we can replicate those strategies using newly introduced elements? e.g. using Simple + CM to act like RBY Amnesia, or using Super-Luck to act like RBY fast mon's crit rates. How could we even begin to think about mons from BW perma-weather sets.

For new-gens sets, its a lot easier imo, because the only reason we don't have a bulky magic guard setup mon (picking on Reun/Clef) in the meta is because the only mons that can do that are snapped atm. With these mons one of the questions I'd have is, how do these sets interact with some of the gen 7/8/9 introduced elements. The only thing here is like, if we chose a mega to draw inspiration from, how would we treat the mega transformation, eg its why M-Bro has a multi-mode playstyle, is that even possible?

A final major question I'd have here is should we draw fully from one mon, or is it worth looking at multiple mons / playstyles / archetypes as inspiration. Is it better to draw from a specific mon, or rather an archetype? Eg looking at CM Mguarders (Reun/Clef), is it better to focus fully on one of them, or to rather draw from the entire genre of Mguard abusers back to BW Knock Twave Reun. Shoot, is it better to look at multiple archetypes? should we look to both RBY Amnesia Slowbro and SS CM Clef?
Last edited:


is a Community Leaderis a Top CAP Contributoris a Contributor to Smogon
CAP Co-Leader
Final Submission


Description: This Pokemon utilizes Spore as effectively as possible.

Justification: Despite Sleep existing as a mechanic since CAP's inception in Generation 4, no CAP project has fully explored sleep as a mechanic, and no CAP Pokemon has used Sleep effectively. Furthermore, we generally have an aversion to sleep moves during the Defining Moves and Moveset stages, as they typically introduce elements undesirable to the current concept, and are typically written off as "deserving their own project." Hence, I propose we give sleep-inducing moves their project. Spore is chosen to reduce the variance induced by the sleep-inducing missing (such as with Sleep Powder or Hypnosis).

Questions To Be Answered:
  • How have previous sleep inducing moves been used effectively in the past?
  • What do previous users of sleep-inducing moves have in common? What are their differences?
  • Which is more advantageous: moving before or after the opponent with a sleep-inducing move?
  • What strategies can a powerful tool like Sleep enable? That is, what strategies become viable to run because of a Sleep move, and not simply better because of the Sleep move?
Explanation: The only sleep-inducing move that previous CAP Pokemon have is Yawn, which historically has not been run on its users (Arghonaut, Kitsunoh, Tomohawk, Kerfluffle, and Astrolotl) or on many Pokemon at all. Additionally, Necturna rarely ran Spore in favor of Sketching stat-boosting options such as Shell Smash and Geomancy. Beyond CAP, Sleep was largely absent in Generations 7 and 8 due to an abundance of Tapu Koko and Tapu Fini setting up Electric and Misty Terrain. Without them, Generation 9 brings a favorable environment for sleep-inducing moves. For example, Breloom and Amoonguss have returned to Gen 9 OU with their ability to use Spore much more freely than previously. However, other Spore users like Toedscruel and Brute Bonnet have settled into UU instead, and the most recent users of Sleep Powder in OU have been Mega Venusaur and Tangrowth, who only ran it on occasion.
Last edited:
Final Submission

Schrödinger's CAP

Description: The Pokémon’s abilities change the effect of parts of its moveset, thus changing the Pokémon's role in battle.

Justification: Designing a Pokémon with the ability to change its role on a team is difficult for many reasons, but one of the biggest difficulties CAP faces when creating a Pokémon like this is designing its movepool. Often, Pokémon that can fulfill different roles end up having heavily bloated, utility filled movepools, and with CAP's focus on producing a viable Pokémon, this effect is at its most extreme with certain processes. This concept, then, aims to explore a different path to achieving role diversity. Rather than giving Pokémon a bloated, utility-heavy movepool, this concept aims to explore the possible utility options found in the interactions between certain abilities and moves, and limiting the movepool size of the Pokémon while using different abilities to change the utility found in that movepool. Examples of this can include using abilities such as Prankster vs Mycelium Might to create a Pokémon that can switch between fast or slow pivoting, or Triage vs Berserk to change a Pokémon from being a passive wall to being a bulky setup sweeper with the same recovery tool.

Questions to be asked:

  • Depending on the roles and abilities chosen, how important is it for the opponent to be able to "open the box" (aka know what role is being run)?
  • What are some utility options that CAP hasn't explored before? How can information discovered during this process be applied to CAP processes in the future?
  • What are some examples of Pokémon with multiple viable abilities? How do these examples align or contrast with the goal of this concept?
  • How do the specified moves interact with each ability? how much should these interactions compare/contrast with one another?
  • How might two role-defining abilities affect a Pokémon's versatility?
  • How do we prevent one ability in a pair from completely overshadowing the other?
  • How might Terastalizing affect this concepts goal? Can Terastalizing change how a move other than Tera Blast is used in a battle?
  • How do multiple roles in a concept affect certain stages of the process? Similarly, how does the given movepool restrictions affect move-related stages of the process?
  • How have CAP concepts that focused on having multiple or changing roles turned out in the past? How do they compare with this concept? How has movepool bloat affected previous CAP projects?
  • How would this concept affect stage order? Specifically, how would both the ability and move stages be ordered?
The goal of this CAP is to explore the utility options present in interactions between different moves and abilities. As this is a somewhat confusing concept to, well, conceptualize, I wanted to use this explanation to give a few examples of abilities that overlap with one another in terms of moves they interact with:
Contact Moves: Poison Touch, Long Reach, Tough Claws, Iron Fist, Strong Jaw, Sharpness
Normal Type Moves: Scrappy, Pixelate, Aerilate, Refrigerate, Galvanize
Sound Moves: Liquid Voice, Punk Rock
Stat-Changing Moves: Contrary, Simple
Secondary Effect Moves: Serene Grace

There are already quite a few examples of moves in these categories alone that would work well with that specific category of abilities. However, there's also plenty of overlap between different categories of abilities, and along with that, plenty of different combinations that could be utilized for this process, such as Close Combat or Superpower being paired with either Scrappy to hit ghost types that they normally wouldn't hit, Poison Touch to gain the utility of poison while also threatening steels that are immune to it, or Contrary to turn their usual weakness of stat drops into a buff instead. Now, some of these abilities don't carry any inherent utility benefits, and instead boost the power of the moves they affect, which may make some question how they tie into the concept as a whole. However, there is a benefit to a power boost, as for some weaker, more utility focused moves, a power boost can help them use that utility more consistently, in contrast to other abilities that might be weaker but provide stronger utility or more uses packed into one move. Using Draining Kiss as an example, it could be used with Triage or Poison Touch to boost its utilities, but it could also be used with abilities such as Tough Claws or Technician to boost both its damage and the amount it can heal. This list nor any other interactions I've already mentioned even cover the full spectrum of abilities and moves available to us, so I truly believe there is a lot of creative and fascinating stuff to explore through this concept.
Last edited:
Final Submission

Extremist CAP

Description: This Pokemon possesses a combination of several traits, which generally are viewed as extreme, such as very high/low stats, a typing with a lot or very little weaknesses, an ability with extrem effects, a very shallow or ample movepool or main attacking moves with very high or low power.

Justification: CAPs Designspace usually gravitates towards well rounded builds with no real weaknesses and no extremely overpowered traits. There have been exceptions like Miasmaw in the past but voting patterns usually produce a happy middle of the road result.
Meanwhile, OU has a history of mons, that are extreme one way or the other.
Most of these also have several extrem traits in different areas, which balance each other out.
I want us to stretch the limits of what a CAP can look like and explore the uncharted territories of our Design Philosophy and the furthest realms of competitive Pokémon Design.

Questions To Be Answered:
  • What traits of a Pokémon can be considered extreme?
  • Can we find extremes for every stage. What is an extreme Typing, Movepool or Ability?
  • Is it possible to balance out several different extremes?
  • Is it possible or even necessary to balance extreme traits between different stages or should we focus on one area of the Pokémon being extreme while being more orthodox at other stages?
  • Where can these extremes be amplified to their maximum and what extremes have to be balanced out?
  • is it possible to balance out an extreme with a non opposing extreme? E.g. can we balance low move power with a good offensive typing instead of high attack?
  • Does balancing extremes always mean deoptimization/optimization?
  • Are extreme traits always tied to a niche/top or flop viability?
  • Why has our process mostly yielded smoothed out results
  • And is it possible to adjust the process to allow for more edges and nooks
  • How does building for the extreme influence the democratic process
  • Do we have to plan ahead where to go extreme and where to mellow out?
Between Toxapex :Toxapex:, Great Tusk :Great Tusk:, Kartana:Kartana:and Regieleki :Regieleki: there’s a lot of Pokémon, that have one or two exceptional Stats but are lacking in other parts.
There have historically also been Pokémon in OU, which take their entire stat range to extremes like Kyurem B:Kyurem-Black:or Salbleye:Sableye:.
You have Pokémon like Clefable:Clefable:or Mew:Mew:with a huge movepool, as well as mons like Regieleki, which survives on the bare minimum. Or Pokémon, that rely on more low powered moves like Garganacl:Garganacl:and Kartana:Kartana:vs those like Victini:Victini:, which use incredibly strong moves.
Pokémon like Tyranitar:Tyranitar: and Kartana work with typings, which have incredibly weaknesses (defensively or offensively) but are able to make the most of it with a combination of Great stats and Abilities.
I have a much harder time thinking of extreme abilities in higher tiers but something like Gorilla Tactics, which gives immense strength but also limits you or Simple, which lets you set up fast but also be debuffed as fast.

I think it’s very notable, that all of these Pokémon don’t only have one extreme trait. Regieleki isn’t only the fastest Pokémon, it also has a comically shallow movepool and STAB, that only hits two -albeit key - typings, while meeting an immunity and two resists. Kartana doesn’t only have the highest attacking stat in past OU gens, it also has STABs, which are generally considered bad and also have fairly low base powers on top.
Toxapex doesn’t only have incredible bulk, its survivability is further bolstered by its great defensive typing and access to both Regenerator and Recover. At the same time SV Toxapexs offensive presence is negligible.
Last edited:


is a Top Tiering Contributor Alumnus
UPL Champion
Name: Patchnote Specialist
Description: This Pokémon intends to make use of one or more aspects that have been either buffed or nerfed in between generations, whether it be Moves, Abilities, or Weather.

Justification: This concept has the goal of producing a Pokémon who makes the most of previously buffed or nerfed aspects of the game within a certain time period. This concept intends to test just how well these buffs and nerfs can be used within their current forms to see just how improved or neutered they have become.

Questions to be answered:
  • What are examples of successful Pokémon who survived mechanical changes to their play? What differentiates these Pokémon from others who have failed to keep up with these changes?
  • Are these nerfs or buffs truly effective in the goal of either reducing or boosting the effectiveness of their use?
  • Can these nerfs and buffs bring about alternate playstyles using these tactics that weren't considered before?
  • Is it possible to turn a nerf into a positive trait by looking at it from a different angle?
Description: Just for clarities sake, these buffs and nerfs would primarily focus on changes from Gen 7+. So things like King Shields nerf, hails buff into snow, proteans nerf, the recovery nerf, and so on. If banned options are on the table, things like Intrepid sword also make that cut. On a strictly personal note, Snow Warning is the one I'm most interested in meta wise. Not only does CAP not have any weather setters besides Sun, the buffs to the Weather can provide interesting applications.
Last edited:
Name: Weather Wall

Description: A Pokemon that leverages a weather effect to maximize their defensive options

Justification: Weather effects in Pokemon typically facilitate more offensive playstyles. Despite weather effects removing weaknesses and buffing defenses, between options like Sand Rush, Swift Swim, Chlorophyll or the potent Protosynthesis, weather strategies tend to focus on accelerating play with sweepers. This concept focuses on using defensive benefits of weather, between abilities, moves, typing, etc. to build a defensive threat that thrives with the weather effect on the field. This is a niche that is unexplored in CAP and has never really seen a strong showing in popular metas.

Questions To Be Answered:
  • All weather types have different defensive benefits - which one has the most potential? What should we use for this concept?
  • What has kept other more defensive weather options from succeeding?
  • What examples do we see from previous generations of defensive weather abusers?
  • What kind of playstyles would need a defensive weather option?
  • Does having a more balanced array of weather abusers open more effective team building options?
  • How does a Pokemon that is weather reliant need to work with weather setters?

Description: We've seen examples of defensive Pokemon that appreciate weather effects, Ferrothorn in rain as a good example. But given the strong presence of offensive sun Pokemon with Protosynthesis today and other weather sweepers in previous metas, defensive weather abuser is a role that has never really found a strong showing. Despite the tools being available, typically weather does not lend to strong defensive builds. I think this is a well rounded option, for us to explore in depth around a niche that has all the potential to succeed. I imagine we will have a lot of interesting discussion up front when it comes to narrowing the weather focus, and then have a consistent theme to build around for all stages.
Last edited:
Final Submission

King of Thieves

Description: This CAP utilizes stealing from the opponent to disrupt the opponent’s strategy

Justification: This is an Actualization concept. CAP has explored Support in an offensive manner Astrolotl’s process. However, this concept isn’t tied to “offensive” or “defensive”. What sets this concept apart from others is its focus on stealing from the opponent, which puts more of a disadvantage on the opponent, therefore, putting our Pokémon at an advantage. Stealing would be defined as: taking one or more of: items, abilities, stat boosts, or moves, from the opponent to put them at a disadvantage; therefore, putting this CAP at an advantage due to the possession of the thing that was once the foe's. The broadness of this concept will definitely lead to high-quality discussion as there are many paths this CAP could take.

Questions to Be Answered:
  • What moves and abilities can we use to steal from the opponent to put them at a disadvantage?
  • What is in the meta currently that utilizes the idea of stealing from the opponent?
  • How do we disrupt individual battles through stealing?
  • What Pokémon in the CAP meta would prefer to keep what they have, so that we could target that with our concept?
  • How should CAP32 use what they stole to their advantage?
  • How effective should CAP32 be when they aren’t stealing something?
  • What can we do when CAP32 isn’t stealing anything?
  • What Pokemon in the CAP metagame make it difficult for us to steal from them?
  • How should CAP32's teammates respond to CAP32 stealing something?
Explanation: Stealing from the opponent is very common the meta, with bulky scarfers running Trick to break down stall or slow Pokémon. An example of this is BW Latios, as it runs Trick sometimes to either stall break or gain the valuable Leftovers. Stealing items is the most literal and used application of the concept. Skill Swap, or other methods of stealing abilities, is another application. An example of this is ORAS Cofagrigus, as it uses its Mummy ability to wear down opposing Pokémon who rely on their abilities, and gives an additional advantage to its team. A rarely used application stealing would be stat boosts (Psych Up or Oppurtunist). This CAP concept would be to take one or more of these applications and try to effectively use it in the CAP metagame.
Last edited:


Banned deucer.
Name: Reliable Status Abuser

Description: This Pokémon is an especially excellent user/abuser of moves that inflict status onto and/or take advantage of current status on opposing Pokémon.

Justification: Rather than focus on pure offensive or pure defense, it is an interesting idea to explore the actualization of a Pokemon which does one, the other, or perhaps some medium of both through a specific, explorative lens. I would like to particularly investigate what something with the reliability of status moves can do, and how it can influence the CAP metagame.

Questions to be asked:
  • What makes a Pokémon a canonically "good" or "bad" user of status moves?
  • What sort of niches do Pokémon typically utilize with a moveset which features a central focus on inflicting and/or taking advantage of statused Pokémon?
  • What types of status moves are the most reliable if a Pokemon has a more focused design around them?
  • What types of moves work well with status moves (other status moves or not)? (Which ones do not?)
  • What elements make status abusing Pokemon weak/lackluster at their job, and are there new concepts to explore that could remedy this issue?
Explanation: With the movepool distributions of status moves (the most notable being Toxic) taking affect in gen 9, most Pokemon in the gen 9 CAP metagame that still use status moves only use them because there is often nothing better in their movepool. For those more fortunate with movepool freedom, the status move(s) is/are often not cohesive (Will-O-Wisp Skeledirge that already uses Unaware to deny more strength) nor reliable (Infestation + Toxic Toxapex is straightforward and easy to play around to make progress). My CAP concept aims to discover the possibility of something that wants to and clearly can use multiple status moves reliably.
Last edited:

Unorthodox Passivity

This Pokemon would use less usual or completely unique ways to deal most of its damage throught residual damage rather than actually dishing out hits itself. This could be done via a limiting attacking movepool ala blissey


Passive damage has been a key part of competitive Pokemon even before CAP's Existance since generation 3 thanks to TSS , yes. But with the vast removal of Toxic and the nerfing of the distribution of moves like Knock Off or Defog , Residual Damage is in a really unique position to both shine thanks to knock off's reduction and also be hard to make use off like in the past thanks to the presence of the new Covert Cloak for certain moves (Salt Cure) and Boots without the widespread knock Off. This pokemon would use ways to deal passive damage that could solve the issue of more defensive teams relying on passive damage without the ability to get somewhere against offense thanks to boots on basically everything.

Question To Answer

"What should be the ways to make this pokemon deal passive damage ?"
"How to make set ways not broken for defensive teams to exploit them and make themselves unbreakable ?"
"What would prevent offense from using this new pokemon and the traits it brings to its teammates?"
"Should inspiration be taken from older generation's hazard game and passive damage ways to make this pokemon deal its passive damage ?"
"Should it be forced to pair with teammates that can beat Magic Guard Pokemon or should it be able to deal with them in some capacity"


As more and more threats get added in over the course of the generations , Defensive teams often get casted to the side , Especially this generation thank to the healing nerf (PP nerf to be more specific) , and since CAP has been a metagame riffled with offensive threats and anti-offensive threats , Support CAP Pokemon (Crucibelle , Certain variants of Pyroak to take two examples) are often seen to the wayside or untouched in their potential to do Invaluable progress toward winning for your own offense threats. This Pokemon would be exclusivitely focused in doing so because it'd make Metagame Interaction of Stall / Bulkier teams VS Offense more interesting , as comparaison to the Offense on Offense Party that Gen 9 has felt as so far. "Unorthodox Passivity" would make matches against offense for defensive teams less of the same (I'm a stall player , I know from experience the matches , no matter how different the teams I face are , always feel similar-ish in its own way) than it is now.
[My apologies for forgetting this part , I didn't even see I didn't put it in]
Last edited:


I am fucking perfect
is a Site Content Manageris an official Team Rateris a Top Social Media Contributoris a Forum Moderatoris a Community Contributoris a Top Contributoris a Smogon Media Contributoris a CAP Contributor Alumnus

Stick Together!

Description: This Pokemon fulfills a "glue" role, working well alongside a multitude of cores while justifying its usage through a myriad of utility options and/or defensive qualities.

Justification: This is an Archetype concept because it aims to perform a role that is commonly found on many team structures in the current metagame. Every generation, there have been certain Pokemon that "glue" teams together. These glue mons typically offer incredible role compression. Tornadus-T in ORAS is a great example of this, providing teams with invaluable Knock Off and pivoting support while offering unique defensive qualities through its typing, stats, and ability. Zapdos in SS is an interesting instance of this as well, as its typing, ability, and movepool allowed it to fill a number of necessary roles for teams, causing it to have incredible usage even though its apparant "utility" may seem lacking at first glance. A current generation example would be Gholdengo, which gives teams access to Thunder Wave support, removal denial, and an incredibly helpful defensive presence that isn't passive. A lot rides on glue mons in teambuilding, so it would be interesting to see how we deal with the immense role compression that often accompanies these mons. Examples of glue mons in current SV CAP: Gholdengo, Arghonaut, Venomicon, Equilibra, Great Tusk, and Skeledirge

Questions To Be Answered:

Being a glue mon has more often been an indirect result of a process rather than a goal. How can we achieve making a glue mon directly?
What roles can a glue mon inhabit?
Are there certain roles and needs that simply cannot be condensed on one Pokemon?
How does typing play into role compression?
Is the ability to output offensive pressure a necessary component of a glue mon? If so, to what level?
How do we define utility?
How do metagame trends impact the usefulness of glue mons?
What Pokemon have such a need to be checked that they justify the usage of a glue mon when a less-than consistent check is used?
Creating a glue mon would necessitate working with existing teambuilding structures. How do we analyze and use that to our advantage?

Explanation: When CAP has created glue mons in the past, it has often been a byproduct on the process. Astrolotl is a prime example of this: there was no need for it to be as splashable as it became, but its combination of support traits resulted in an absolutely excellent "glue" choice. This concept would challenge us to look at the creation process through a different lens, taking a step back to look at the metagame as a whole and use that viewpoint for the entire process. The concept also presents a challenge in choosing what utility is given to a CAP. In the past, CAP has often slapped utility moves willy-nilly onto mons to both boost their viability and give them places in teambuilding. For this concept, the conversation surrounding utility will need to be a lot more deliberate than it has been in the past. It will also be interesting to see how CAP defines utility in a concept like this; utility is not something that is limited to just moves. Glue Pokemon need to be splashable to a certain degree, meaning what they provide will need to be consistent and usually useful.
Last edited:

: Berry Good

Description: A Pokemon that uses held Berries to maximum effect.

Justification: Despite being some of the first and most iconic held items, Berries are rarely seen as held items in competitive singles. Those that do hold Berries either do so because of a move that cuts their HP (such as Belly Drum or Shed Tail) or to lure in certain threats via type resist berries. Even though Game Freak has introduced multiple tools to encourage the use of Berries, such as Belch and Cheek Pouch, these tend to be confined to subpar Pokemon that would rather use the other tools at their disposal, such as a stronger ability. This Pokemon aims to abuse the effect of its held Berry as well as the bonuses brought on by moves and abilities that require a Berry to be used.

Explanation: Even though there are more tools than ever to utilize Berries, sets centering around the fruits haven't been super commonplace since Gen 3. The buff to Knock Off, an item-removing move, doesn't do them any favors either. However, there are a number of moves and abilities that could theoretically be powerful with the right Berry and the right mon; Stuff Cheeks and Harvest are the two standout examples to me in my mind. However, these both have limited distribution among Pokemon that are subpar (Swalot, Greedent, and Oinkologne are the only Stuff Cheeks users, while Tropius is one of the only two Harvest users) or have other tools they'd prefer to use (Arboliva, the other Harvest user, prefers Seed Sower 99% of the time).

Questions To Be Answered:
  • What advantages do Berries offer over other held items such as Leftovers?
  • Outside of type-resist Berry lures and Sitrus+HP-cutting moves, how have other Pokemon utilized Berries to their success?
  • What flaws hold back Pokemon that have tools that encourage the use of Berries?
  • How do we play around item-removing moves, namely Knock Off and Trick/Switcheroo?
  • How do we prevent Berry-based sets from being overshadowed by those that use different items?
Last edited:


Name: Bang Average

Description: This pokemon will attempt to circumvent average or below average stats to become viable.

Justification: Ou has always shown a massive preference towards mons with great statlines and high base stats, but there have always been exceptions to this rule. However in Cap we have always exclusively made mons with good to great stats, meaning we have left a lot of interesting design space untouched. There's a variety of ways we could go about a concept like this and I think this would be an illuminating and interesting project for us to engage with.

What actually counts as average stats?
This will likely be up for some debate, as this is somewhat relative. 85 speed is a perfectly good speed stat on fini, but if zera had 85 speed it'd probably be in ru. As for bst, the lowest bst of ou ranked mons at the conclusion of ss (sv is a bit young to draw conclusions from) is Pelipper at 440, with Clefable in 2nd with 483. Both of these are undeniably average but 3rd lowest is Ferrothorn at 489, whose statline could definitely be seen as above average. It'd be pretty hard to deny that Toxapex has a better statline than Alolatales, despite the 10 point bst difference being in the fox's favour. Particular attention will have to be paid to how the stats synergise, rather than a flat interest in BST

How much stat efficiency is permissable?
To return to the above example part of what gives Ferro and Pex above average stats is the efficiency with which their bst is divided, with speed and various attacking stats being dropped in favour of juicing up defenses. Conversely, to use a lower tier example, Cobalion has a bst 91 points higher than ferro, but that bst is inefficiently distributed giving Cob mediocre attacking stats and good bulk on only one side. Despite it's high bst, Coba has pretty average stats. Obviously some degree of efficiency will be necessary but to what extent. Breloom has a frankly awful statline with the exception of it's attack, finding use through it's unique combination of other strong attributes. Is one stat pushing 130 fundamentally antithetical to the concept or is it permissable if all other stats take hits? Where do we draw that line?

Do we actually do stats first?
This is obviously a very stat centric concept, but there's good reasons that stats are usually done so late in the process. It'd certainly be a shake up to the process but you could probably still achieve a similar result with a more standard process order.

How does this affect our power budget?
The Chromera process afforded a large power budget to other aspects of the process to account for it's bad ability. To what extent, if any, do we allow that here? Remember that the goal here is using stats that are average or below average, not explicitly bad. The sort of affordances allowed in chroms process are almost certainly over the line, and honestly we could potentially make a perfectly reasonable end product without dipping into anything explicitly overpowered.

What types suit average stats, if any?
For example, dragon might be more suitable for it's access to strong stabs like Draco and Outrage that mitigate ower attacking stats. Psychic on the other hand may suit less well due to its reliance on weaker stabs. Are there typings that can work around mediocre bulk by leveraging unique or valuable defensive profiles?

What can we learn from gen 9?
The early stages of SV has given us some interesting examples of successful mons with average stats. In particular, we've been given two excellent examples of what to avoid. Espathra and Houndstone both clearly have very average stats with both having a sub 500 bst and highest individual stats of 105 and 101 respectively. These two became the lowest bst mons to be banned to ubers since Mega Sableye in oras. Houndstone isn't particularly interesting, as it was purely broken by virtue of having one of the most cracked moves to ever exist. Espathra is more notable, as it initially fell to uu before rising through the ranks thanks to it's stored power shenanigans and ridiculous tera synergy. Espathra shows us that even with pretty shit stats, we have to be careful to not overtune in other stages, which is definitely a tendency that we have in cap projects.

Cap loves statballs. It's a natural consequence of the ability to choose stats that we're never gonna intentionally give a cap a statline that isn't fit for purpose. From dpp when most caps bst were only lower than legendaries, to the sheer ridiculousness of baos whole statline in sm, to the most recent project that required rajas speed to be nerfed, giving caps some great stats has been a consistent theme across generations in cap. It's one of the easiest ways to guarantee a viable end product and in projects that are focusing on exploring other elements, it'd be a bit of a downer to ruin the mon at the last stage by giving it glalie stats.

This leaves us with some pretty interesting unexplored design space. High statlines are an obvious staple of all ou metas, but there have always been interesting exceptions. The classic example here is Clefable, which has no stats above 100 but has achieved ou success in four generations. However to me, Clefable is a pretty uninteresting and frankly, unhelpful example. Clef is viable because of magic guard. It has a great movepool and really nice typing, but let's be real here, without Magic Guard Clef would be ranked RU, UU at best. To me the more interesting example is Breloom which also has ou success in 5 generations including sv, despite a statline that is severely lacking in almost every department. Just like Clef, it's got some great abilities and a dope movepool. However, Clef is a phenomenal ability facilitating other good attributes, while Loom is a series of great individual traits that when combined, make an utterly unique and consistently viable mon. Loom isn't the only example either. SVs current poster child for low bst in ou is Clodsire, which has the lowest bst of any ou mon in generations bar azu (which is obviously carried by huge power) with just 430 bst. Clodsire very much goes down the incredibly efficient distribution route, with hp and spdef making up more than half of it's total bst, in stark contrast to it's cousin Quag which has identical bst and very evenly distributed stats. Clod could very well fall to uu very soon but it's still had it's place in the spotlight.

There's a variety of other examples and ways this concept can go. Amoongus and Gastro only have good hp but that patches up their more lacklustre defences. Others like indeedee and masquerain fulfill highly specific niches that require only barebones stats to get by. There's a range of options here.

To me, this concept has the potential to give us a super tight and focused cap, instead of the sprawling masses that caps often turn into, where they have a hundred movepool options and stats that can be specced seven ways to Sunday. It also has the potential to give us something really unique and interesting if we try. In my opinion this concept hits the sweetspot of giving us interesting constraints to play with and learn from, without kneecapping us with the starting pistol. There's design space here and I think it's space worth exploring.
Last edited:
Final Submission

High BST Mon

Description: This Pokemon has a very high BST, comparable to most cover legendaries.

Justification: Outside of Ubers, mons with above 600 BST in their base form are almost nonexistent. Currently, only Kyurem, Kyurem-Black, Hoopa-Unbound, Regigigas, and Slaking are ranked below Ubers in any generation; Regigigas and Slaking are bottom-tier mons in every gen in which they are available (with the exception of Slaking in Gen 3), and only Kyurem-Black is OU by usage in any gen. Creating a high BST mon that is neither broken nor useless could be an interesting challenge.

Questions To Be Answered:
  • How should we define "high BST"? Should we stay in the 660-720 range where many legendaries reside, or can we venture into the unexplored 601-659 range?
  • What makes Kyurem, Kyurem-Black, and Hoopa-Unbound balanced despite their high BST?
  • Can a detrimental ability balance a high BST mon without making it useless?
  • Is there an avenue Game Freak has not yet explored for balancing high BST mons? If so, do we want to explore that avenue?
Explanation: Many Ubers are broken not just because of their high BST but also because of their excellent abilities, typing, or movepools. By deliberately giving this CAP subpar tools, we can certainly make a mon that's not broken. But as Slaking and Regigigas proved, it's possible to go too far and make a mon useless despite its high BST. This concept would allow us to explore a facet of Pokemon that past CAPs have not focused on, namely BST, by developing a balanced OU-level mon with Uber-level stats.
Last edited:


protect the wetlands
is a Contributor Alumnus
Name: Dead Men Walking

Description: This Pokemon removes an opposing Pokemon from the match without needing to KO them.

Justification: An Actualization concept. The most linear way to remove a threat from the opposing team is to either KO it directly, or damage it enough that a teammate can KO it. However, over the course of generations of the game, there have been other forms of control that effectively removed Pokemon from the game without KOing them by limiting their options, ability to act, or exhausting their resources. This ranges from the downright overpowered, such as freeze in RBY and sleep in BW, to the utterly absurd, such as Trick Assault Vest Golurk. The point of this concept is to explore the median, where there is a consistent strategy to remove a target's threat without needing to secure the KO.

Questions To Be Answered:
  • What is the most consistent way to remove a Pokemon from the game without KOing it?
  • What benefit is there to keeping an opponent's Pokemon around?
  • What forms of counterplay is available for the opponent?
  • How important is unpredictability to these strategies?
  • How will we define "removing" a threat?
  • What kinds of threats to Pokemon present, and how do different options address these threats?
Explanation: I gotta pee I will do this later

Switch Bait

Description: This Pokémon punishes the opponent for switching with maximum efficiency.

Justification: Switching is an integral part of competitive Pokémon, whether it be through hard-switching, double-switching, or making use of pivoting moves. The main goal with switching is to maintain offensive momentum or to bring in an answer to what your opponent has out on the field. Previously, we have had CAPs that were built with the idea of forcing switches and capitalizing on them, but no CAP exists specifically to directly punish the opponent for switching, rather than keeping the advantage for the team. The goal of this Pokémon is to directly punish the opponent for switching out of it, as opposed to simply setting up on a switch or pivoting out to keep momentum.

Questions To Be Answered:
  • What moves and/or abilities exist that specifically punish the opponent for switching out?
  • Is it more ideal to punish a hard-switch or the use of a pivoting move?
  • In the case of punishing pivoting moves, is it possible to punish the switch if the Pokémon pivoting out is slower or using a negative priority move?
  • What kinds of team structures would most enjoy having a Pokémon that punishes switches in this manner?
Explanation: TO DO
Final Submission

You Only Live Twice

Description: This Pokemon uses the move Revival Blessing and explores different possibilities regarding its effect.

Justification: Revival Blessing is undeniably a novel effect unlike anything else in the game, and being able to bring a Pokemon back from fainting presents unique and difficult challenges in design. Unlike many powerful, Pokemon-defining moves that provide immediate benefit, either by providing damage or weakening the opposing Pokemon, Revival Blessing's ability is as powerful as the benefit that an fainted ally is able to bring. Ultimately, this leads to interesting balancing questions at every stage, as this move's unusual and powerful nature will inform what limits we place on this Pokemon, and what potentially unwanted interactions we need to avoid.

Questions To Be Answered:
  • What Pokemon benefit the most from having a teammate with Revival Blessing, and how can we balance this Pokemon in relation to those styles?
  • How difficult should it be to use Revival Blessing successfully -- should someone who uses this Pokemon expect to get it off consistently, or should it be risky?
  • How powerful should the Revival Blessing user itself be?
  • How should the presence of Revival Blessing affect play, and what forms of counterplay should be available to counter it?
Explanation: Revival Blessing has the potential to create a process that feels very different from prior ones. Pokemon like Pawmot and Rabsca get it, which gives us the ability to look at how this move works in play on two very different Pokemon, and devise something that distinguishes itself from those two. It also provides us with a challenge -- how can we make something that's a viable alternative to other users without being *too* powerful? I think part of what makes this an interesting move to work with is that it shifts the paradigm of how we view counterplay to this Pokemon, and allows us to come up with creative solutions to how we deal with counterplay -- either by having the "counters" to this Pokemon focus on the specific team style it's expected to play with, having counters that prevent Revival Blessing from going off, or by making it risky to click. It also raises questions about what Pokemon may be too powerful in conjunction with this Pokemon, and how we can discourage or limit these through anti-synergy.
Last edited:

Setting the Stage

Description: Terrain Setter which uses terrain creatively and/or selflessly

Justification: Terrains appear to be here to stay, but while they have several features, are in practice primarily used for boosting the damage output of the setter itself. Despite the uniqueness of the terrain mechanic, CAP has not explored this territory before, so discussion of it would be novel, and the secondary effects of terrains (including the use of seeds and abilities that exploit the terrain) cover a wide enough range to provoke interesting discussion at each stage of the process.

Questions To Be Answered:
  • What terrains have the most untapped potential for creative use?
  • How strong can seeds be in a general context?
  • What are the upper and lower limits of strength needed to balance for each of the different ways for terrain to be set? (move, surge, other ability)
  • What determines whether existing Pokemon in the metagame are vulnerable to having their check and counter list changed by the presence of terrain?
  • Other than the obvious, what existing Pokemon most appreciate the existence of a specific terrain?
Explanation: There's been a good deal of interesting terrain-interaction mechanics, but because of the individual weakness of the abusers or setters, none of the terrain use abilities have seen use. Even in gen9 OU, despite many strong Future Paradoxes being able to exploit Electric Terrain, it remains unviable. The strongest historical exception is Tapu Lele's Psychic Terrain in previous generations being used to counter bulky teams with strong priority, but even then the power boost to Lele's Psychic attacks was a bigger deal, making Choice Specs Psyshock or Psychic a nuke. I think it should be possible to use any of the three methods to viably set terrain, but the easiest would certainly be a surge ability. I don't know if this is feasible, but I'd suggest the Ability Stage coming before all the other stages if this wins.
Last edited:
Name: Speed Demon

This Pokemon excels at moving first on any given turn, and uses this to great benefit.

This project will explore the unique realm of mons that move first, whether for offensive, defensive or utility-based reasoning, and how these benefits warp the strength of the rest of the mon's qualities as they are bolstered by going first in the turn order. We have seen a glimpse in OU/CAP of how ultrafast mons dont adhere to the regular requirements of regular mon's offensive stats and overall BST over the years, some fascinating examples including Talonflame and Tornadus-T, and we've seen how defensive mons with high prio moves have been able to improve their defensive profile drastically, such as Sableye. In this concept we will explore the true value of priority, the speed stat, and a range of speed-focused abilities and items.

Questions to be answered:
  • What are the viable qualities (abilities, moves, stats, items) to outspeed opponents on a given turn? Which offer this strength reliably?
  • How do the various qualities to outspeed opponents interact? Is there a hierarchy of speed, with a strongest tool at the top, or is there a cyclical relationship between outspeeding methods?
  • What mons are resistant to, and which are most affected by being outsped?
  • How does moving first affect the required offensive stats to revenge kill Pokemon?
  • How does moving first affect a Pokemon's ability to take more hits?
  • Does typing interact with turn order? If so, how does moving first enable/disallow certain typings to be successful?

Speed is arguably the most important stat in Pokemon. Controlling the turn order is often the difference between winning and losing, and many mons with the right tools will instantly go to Ubers if granted the ability to outspeed the tier. But in reality, the mons who have been given this unique trait have always been brutally balanced with no coverage, no utility and frail stats- for example Electrode, Regieleki, Ninjask, Accelgor and many others have one or all of these issues. That being said- something has to sit at the top of the speed tiers, and we've had some time playing with the likes of Dragapult and Iron Valiant to see the strengths of mons with natural speed and also the tools to be threatening. We can also see the immense value of powerful priority throughout SV which has tempered some of the speedy mons, with massive tera-boosted priority from stuff like Dragonite and Chien-Pao pre-ban. And last gen, we saw the value of Tapu-Lele's dominant shutdown of priority with a scarf set, forcing everyone to play at their priority tier and one-upping the bulky prio-based strategies of the previous generation. The whole interaction of who moves first is a constantly changing battle over the history of Pokemon, and it will be very interesting to see which route we deem strongest and most reliable as we try and find something that can find the balance between going first and being balanced.
Last edited:


is a Site Content Manageris a Top Social Media Contributoris a Community Leaderis a Community Contributoris a Smogon Discord Contributoris a CAP Contributoris a Top Tiering Contributoris a Top Contributoris a Top Smogon Media Contributoris a Battle Simulator Moderator
GP & NU Leader


Description: This Pokemon uses punching moves to fulfill its niche.

Justification: There are lots of punching moves in Pokemon! Priority attacks like Mach Punch and Sucker Punch, the recovery move in Drain Punch, and many great type coverage options in the elemental punches all find their ways onto a myriad of different Pokemon set archetypes. This concept allows us a very wide range of possibilities to aim for, ensuring for a fun process.

Questions to be answered:

  • How do we define "punching moves"? Is it limited to moves specifically called a punch? Should we expand it to include any move boosted by Iron Fist (and, as a result, Punching Glove)?
    • Specifically, Headlong Rush, Hammer Arm, Ice Hammer, the Urshifu signature moves, Double Iron Bash, Plasma Fists, and Rage Fist fall under this category.
  • Other than damage-boosting abilities, what other kinds of abilities could we see on a Pokemon with this concept? Are offensive abilities in general even necessary?


will do later
Last edited:

This Pokemon runs sets with single-use items.

Justification: If Oonga Boongus' design wasn't incredible enough, Gamefreak gave it and other Paradox forms a cool new ability. One that can get activated by a field condition or by a single-use item: Booster Energy. This got me thinking about other single-use items: the attack gems, the terrain seeds, berries, air balloon (kinda), power herb, etc. I also think it would be exciting to create some counterplay to Knock spam and Poltergeist with this design.

Questions To Be Answered:
  • What kind of kit is most effective in the current meta? Does it require an ability like unburden or Proto/Quark? Or a move like Acrobatics?
  • Items like the Cell Battery and Snowball get no competitive use, is there any point in using them?
  • Are there 2 turn attacks besides Meteor Beam that could get a chance to shine on a Power Herb set?
  • What do Eject Button, Eject Pack, Red Card sets add to a team?
  • Does a mon like this need to be offensive? Think Hawlucha and its various items (white herb, sash, terrain seeds)
  • Will a mon with this design feature end up feeling like a weaker Paradox mon? A Paradox Poser?
  • Remember running Lum Berry + Outrage/Thrash? Could a strategy like that be viable in this generation?
  • Could abilities like Pickpocket or Magician be part of a mon's kit? Mons like Weavile have run Pickpocket before, but unless it was Sash or ate a Knock Off, this ability was never even activated.
  • Do you sacrifice viability running a single use item? In the case of the Paradox Forms, unless you are Tera Flying Moon, it feels like Booster Energy has seen a big drop in usage over items like Boots, Choice, Lefties, or LO which have more lasting utility.
While it would be really fun to workshop a brand new Paradox form that could use Booster Energy as part of its main kit, I'm most interested in exploring the potential of the ejection items and berries. We've seen Unburden sweepers, and Sash/White Herb Shell Smashers, but what if there was a support/utility mon that could abuse a single use item. Red Card is a really interesting option in my opinion because of its ability to force out mons that set up.
Eject Pack would be cool to see too. Something like a Close Combat/Draco Meteor/Overheat spammer feels like a welcome addition to a meta full of strong Unaware mons, let alone the momentum you get out of using one of these moves as a mon like Argo switches out, only for you to prock your Eject Pack and then come in and be able to steal a different item with magician/pickpocket. I feel like this type of set up specifically would add a dynamic and fun element to our very offensive metagame.
I don't have as clear of a vision on how to implement this with items like Blunder Policy, Adrenaline Orb, Sash.
AND FLING! HOW COULD WE FORGET FLING! EVER SINCE WE LOST THE TR FOR OVERHEAT THE LADDER HAS NOT BEEN THE SAME. With Fling alone, the potential is limitless. So leave a like if you want to see CAP 32 chuck Overheat and OHKO Gholdengo on the switch.
Last edited:


Description: This pokémon would slowly get stronger throughout a match and scale from something minor to a major threat

In gen 9 Pokémon have introduced more interesting and unique concepts for Pokémon then they ever have in previous generations and one of these areas that they’ve explored with the new Pokémon are mons that slowly get better throughout a match and win cons that start slow and ramp up throughout a match to become a major problem. However Gen 9 has failed on this front by tipping the scales too far and gone to the extreme, leading to the likes of rage fist, last respects and Espathra becoming too centralising and too easy of a strategy to pull off. This project aims to explore a way to make a CAP that would keep this slow build up style of mon whilst making it so that the Pokémon would have sufficient counter play which should lead to interesting strategies and win cons.

Questions to be answered:
  • Would the focus be more on a Pokémon that slowly gets stronger as the match progresses or stronger as it is out on the field
  • How would we ensure that the mon stays viable without tipping it into unfair territory
  • How do we make it so this mon would be able to pull off the slow playstyle in a fast meta
  • How do you make sure that a mon like this would be able to break past certain killers for this play style? For example how would this mon get past unaware? Should this mon get past unaware?
  • Should a Pokémon like this be a one trick pony? Or should it be able to function on it’s own such that it can be used throughout the match
  • What would be the best counter measures for a mon like this so that it has sufficient counter play

I think the idea of a Pokémon that slowly ramps up has been a relatively unexplored idea in general and has hardly seen any competitive use in the past as most of the time a lot of set up is an immediate set up into sweep. Gen 9 introduced Kingambit which I think is the most unique Pokémon that they’ve introduced in a competitive sense as it fundamentally changes how a match is played and the strategy in the match as it’s something you always have to respect and understand that it is getting stronger. Other examples of this are things like metronome making the same move stronger, the simple ability being unexplored (shout out to my boy numel in LC) and things like BS cosmic power mew. I think Pokémon like these cause for interesting games and really fundamentally change the way you play a game as on one hand if you’re using it you’re trying to find room to get this train going and on the other hand you’re having to constantly find how not to give this thing space to win which just adds another layer of strategy.
Last edited:

Da Pizza Man

Pizza Time
is a Pre-Contributor

Risky Business 2: Electric Spoogaloo

Description: This Pokémon is very risky to play, but very rewarding if played correctly.

Justification: Most Pokemon that are viable in OU/CAP are often have little to no risk attached to putting them on a team, and as such, Pokemon who often have high risk attached to them often don't see play, barring extreme exceptions such as Cawmodore. This Concept aims to (re)explore the idea of what makes a Pokemon risky to use, as long as what does it take for a Pokemon that is traditionally seen as being risky to use to see success in the metagame.

Questions To Be Answered:
  • What makes certain Pokemon more risky to use than others?
  • What different team structures, if any, are better suited for riskier Pokemon?
  • How important is risk management in regards to being able to use certain Pokemon successfully?
  • In what ways are existing Pokemon able to mitigate and/or manage any risks that are attached to them successfully?
Explanation: This is essentially just a resubmission of Aurumoth's concept. Aurumoth's process is rather infamous for just how off the mark it was in regards to fulfilling the idea of risk, as any and all risk that it brought to the game was put on the opponent instead of the user, which was largely due to the result of not having a clear way of handling Risk vs Reward in the first place . While it's very clear that Aurumoth was a failure, I think that enough time has passed that it would be worth taking another shot at this concept, as there is still a lot of unexplored territory that would be worth examining.

One concern that I have seen is that it's very likely that this concept would result in the creation of another Cawmodore, and while I do understand where this concern come from, I overall feel that they aren't super warranted. While it is true that one-and-done set-up sweepers tend to be what people usually think of when it comes to risky Pokemon in the metagame, they are far from the only examples of such. One of my favorite such examples of a Pokemon that could be considered risky would be Regieleki last generation, as it was a completely liability early on due to it's inability to make any sort of significant progress while Ground-types where around, but with smart predictions could actually use this in its favor to generate free switch-ins into Flying-type partners, with the most notable one being Galarian Zapdos. Another good example, also from last generation, would be Choice Band Weavile, whom was incredibly easy to wear down thanks to weakness to all forms of hazards and its over-reliance on a three-hit contact move that could very easily be abused by the likes of Ferrothorn and Rocky Helmet Corviknight, while also being completely hard countered by one of the best Pokemon in the entire metagame (Arghonaut), but still saw quite a bit of success despite the risks attached to using it, as the reward for being able to successfully manage these risks is one of the strongest and fastest wallbreakers in the entire metagame.

Feedback is much appreciated, especially in regards to the questions.
Last edited:
Not open for further replies.

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