CAP 33 - Part 2 - Typing Discussion

Status
Not open for further replies.

Quanyails

is a Top Artistis a Forum Moderatoris a Community Leader Alumnusis a Community Contributor Alumnus
Moderator
CAP 33 So Far

-----

It's time to discuss one of the most important decisions for CAP 33--its type! Please follow Zetalz's posts carefully and DO NOT immediately propose type combinations until he says so.

Below is the final post from the Concept Assessment thread:

Alright, we've now gotten to a point where I think we've really dug into the meat and potatoes of this concept, so I don't really see much of a reason to keep us here any longer than we need to, especially with how much hype there is around typing atm.

Regarding the process order, I am going to be keeping it the same and host threat discussion after we have our primary Ability voted on. As stated by several people (including myself), there's not really a reason to deviate from standard protocol. So, the order would be looking something like this for the uninitiated:

Typing => Ability => Threat Discussion => Defining Moves => Stats => Movesets

Overall, it does seem that there is a fair amount of control we have to make this concept hit close to the target goal, but still be successful. I believe most of the challenge that comes from this concept will come from the actual stat limits to balance the chemistry of our desired offense, bulk, and, most prominently, the Speed tier itself. This seems to be mirrored fairly well by the fact that most sentiment around what would make this concept too much is giving it too much bulk, longevity, and speed for what it is capable of accomplishing. Obviously, I will not dive into the nuances of that as this isn't really the time for it, but it's important that we respect the strength of the interactions that Speed will enable CAP 33 as we continue the process, and be conscientious of the chemistry all of our stats will have with one another.

With this established, there's not really much more that needs to be said. I believe our path forward is pretty clear and I know our TLT is going to do a great job at getting things mobile. I'm now going to pass the baton to Zetalz!
 

Zetalz

Expect nothing, deliver less
is a Pre-Contributor
Howdy everyone, I'm Zetalz, and I'll be your Typing Leader for this here project. We've established the general direction we want to be taking CAP 33, a very fast wall that utilizes it's speed to disrupt the opponent, though we've got a fairly open board to play on regarding how we accomplish this goal. There's a lot we have yet to define at this stage, so for the moment typing submissions are not open. For now I'd like to ask some questions that should help give us a bit an idea what road we want to go down.

1. Our role as a wall has already been defined for us. Traditional walls typically value their defensive profile above all, but given our interaction with our Speed stat, more options are made open to us. Should we prioritize having a more broad set of neutral defensive interactions, or a more narrowed selection of key resistances? If we choose to narrow our defensive options, what sort of critical interactions should we try to work toward or avoid? (ie; hazard vulnerability or item reliance).

2. Following up on this, our speed stat allows 33 a degree of flexibility on how it chooses to interact with the opponent, be it through utility, or by being offensively threatening in a 1v1 scenario. Are less-defensively potent typings that place more emphasis on limited offensive interaction desirable? If so, where should we be aiming to draw the line between our offensive and defensive profile?

3. Speed invariably affects how potent are line-up of resists and weaknesses end up feeling, however our Speed stat is not yet set in stone. Should we seek typings that can fulfill our defensive needs more or less regardless of how high our Speed ends up being? If not, what sort of typings are more or less potent the higher or lower on the Speed spectrum we find ourselves?


We'll be moving on to the next set of questions around 24-48 hours after this post goes up, subject to change if schedules are not permitting or if illness kicks me in the butt again lol. Really looking forward to what everyone has to say!
 
Last edited:
Should we prioritize having a more broad set of neutral defensive interactions, or a more narrowed selection of key resistances? If we choose to narrow our defensive options, what sort of critical interactions should we try to work toward or avoid?

I think that all these are important considerations (having useful resists, not having too many debilitating weaknesses, having relevant status immunity, etc) and I think that to overfocus on one risks harming the others. I will say that basically all these problems (too many weaknesses, too status weak, etc) are fixable with the right abilities, so we shouldn't worry too much about any one problem.

less-defensively potent typings that place more emphasis on limited offensive interaction desirable? If so, where should we be aiming to draw the line between our offensive and defensive profile?

Defensive profile is by far the most important feature of our typing, and useful STABs is far secondary. We should try not to run like, bug normal or any type without useful coverage, but any of the common defensive typings (grass, steel, poison, fairy, water, flying) are solid STAB

Should we seek typings that can fulfill our defensive needs more or less regardless of how high our Speed ends up being? If not, what sort of typings are more or less potent the higher or lower on the Speed spectrum we find ourselves

The main thing speed affects is our matchups. For example, a slow fairy flying type will get murdered by Bax, but a fast one will be able to throw out a moonblast and threaten the KO if the bax is weakened. But really, I don't think this is a huge factor in typing.
 
1. Our role as a wall has already been defined for us. Traditional walls typically value their defensive profile above all, but given our interaction with our Speed stat, more options are made open to us. Should we prioritize having a more broad set of neutral defensive interactions, or a more narrowed selection of key resistances? If we choose to narrow our defensive options, what sort of critical interactions should we try to work toward or avoid? (ie; hazard vulnerability or item reliance).
A more broad set of neutral defensive interactions increases splashability and consistency as opposed to a narrowed selection (although it does depend on what the narrowed selection is). Should we choose to narrow our defensive options, we should make sure we have a positive matchup vs. key offensive types of common meta threats such as Ground, Fighting, and Dark so that CAP33 can make use of its resistances in as many teams as possible

2. Following up on this, our speed stat allows 33 a degree of flexibility on how it chooses to interact with the opponent, be it through utility, or by being offensively threatening in a 1v1 scenario. Are less-defensively potent typings that place more emphasis on limited offensive interaction desirable? If so, where should we be aiming to draw the line between our offensive and defensive profile?


I doubt a traditionally offensive role will work if we're both a wall AND fast. No, this isn't Bang Average anymore, but I doubt we'd have the stats to be strong AND fast AND fat (and a mon like that doesnt sound fun to fight against anyway). I think pressure through utility is the better option.

3. Speed invariably affects how potent are line-up of resists and weaknesses end up feeling, however our Speed stat is not yet set in stone. Should we seek typings that can fulfill our defensive needs more or less regardless of how high our Speed ends up being? If not, what sort of typings are more or less potent the higher or lower on the Speed spectrum we find ourselves?
seeking typings that can fulfill our defensive needs more or less regardless of our Speed is definitely the safer option.
 
Should we prioritize having a more broad set of neutral defensive interactions, or a more narrowed selection of key resistances? If we choose to narrow our defensive options, what sort of critical interactions should we try to work toward or avoid? (ie; hazard vulnerability or item reliance)
I think the broader the better. Even if it means some types will get through (and probably hurt a lot), it's better to have strong defensive coverage for a number of scenarios. Put a decent speed stat on that and it will be difficult to directly counter

Are less-defensively potent typings that place more emphasis on limited offensive interaction desirable? If so, where should we be aiming to draw the line between our offensive and defensive profile?
I would still say yes, though not as strongly as my first answer. Without suggesting types outright, the meta is definitely going to need to be considered, which, while limiting by nature, will also bolster competitive viability. This can, and arguably should take type bonuses into account, rather than simply tanking whatever we fancy (since we have the speed to back that up!)

Should we seek typings that can fulfill our defensive needs more or less regardless of how high our Speed ends up being? If not, what sort of typings are more or less potent the higher or lower on the Speed spectrum we find ourselves?
It's definitely a factor and not one to be ignored. As fast as the wall gets, the sweeper is going to try to be faster. Any means of interrupting or avoiding that initial setup is going to be invaluable
 

Lasen

smiling through it all
is a Site Content Manageris an official Team Rateris a Top Social Media Contributoris a Forum Moderatoris a Community Contributoris a CAP Contributoris a Tiering Contributoris a Top Contributor
Howdy everyone, I'm Zetalz,
Howdy!

1. Our role as a wall has already been defined for us. Traditional walls typically value their defensive profile above all, but given our interaction with our Speed stat, more options are made open to us. Should we prioritize having a more broad set of neutral defensive interactions, or a more narrowed selection of key resistances? If we choose to narrow our defensive options, what sort of critical interactions should we try to work toward or avoid? (ie; hazard vulnerability or item reliance).
The way I see it, trying to limit our typing by being narrow is not the way to go at all. We can very easily end up with something that aims to only check 1-2 threats that are presently available and thus shoot ourselves in the foot when each DLC or generational change makes our niche obsolete or (re-)introduces a Pokemon that simply does our job better. I'd much rather see something akin to Arghonaut which has a clearly defined defensive niche (how good it is atm non-withstanding) rather than "Pokemon that switches into exactly the current S and A+ ranks of CAP".

2. Following up on this, our speed stat allows 33 a degree of flexibility on how it chooses to interact with the opponent, be it through utility, or by being offensively threatening in a 1v1 scenario. Are less-defensively potent typings that place more emphasis on limited offensive interaction desirable?
I think this ties into what I just brought up that a generally solid defensive typing should probably be preferred.
Where should we be aiming to draw the line between our offensive and defensive profile?
This is quite interesting because I don't hate the idea of being a defensive beefaroni that actually has an OFFENSIVE ability; the Refrigerate wall with Extreme Speed but NO other Normal-type moves which actually merely 2HKOes the Dragon-types? Sign me up!

3. Speed invariably affects how potent are line-up of resists and weaknesses end up feeling, however our Speed stat is not yet set in stone. Should we seek typings that can fulfill our defensive needs more or less regardless of how high our Speed ends up being? If not, what sort of typings are more or less potent the higher or lower on the Speed spectrum we find ourselves?
Considering how CAP's stages are staggered, even if we do end up with an offensively potent typing like Dragon/Fire (don't ask me how that's defensive) we can actually make it manageable through the stats stage. I am not saying we should be giving 33 a typing that is mostly offensive but I am confident we can navigate this correctly. Slight preference for a more defensively oriented typing.
I don't think any "sort of type" is preferred based on how fast or slow we truly are; if we want to be sticklers for definitions, offensively potent typings such as Fairy, Water, and Dragon all benefit the most from being fast because you can revenge kill with your STAB moves while having solid amounts of resistances and an immunity in the case of Fairy whereas Grass can always become a Leech Seed bot that runs Protect to remain healthy.
 
Our role as a wall has already been defined for us. Traditional walls typically value their defensive profile above all, but given our interaction with our Speed stat, more options are made open to us. Should we prioritize having a more broad set of neutral defensive interactions, or a more narrowed selection of key resistances? If we choose to narrow our defensive options, what sort of critical interactions should we try to work toward or avoid? (ie; hazard vulnerability or item reliance).
First of all, hazard vulnerability and item reliance are essentially the same thing (If you value your Boots that makes you vulnerable to hazards), so if we have one we have the other (There are exceptions like Krilowatt, who has one but not the other, but that's not due to its typing). But I think this is okay so long as we make up for it in other areas. Granted, it's still not great, and our typing would have to try extra hard to resist the meta if our typing has these flaws.

As for neutral vs narrowed, I don't think there is an issue with either. A more broad set of neutral interactions might be a tad better due to potentially having more sticking power, but we could go with a narrowed set of resistances as well.

Speed invariably affects how potent are line-up of resists and weaknesses end up feeling, however our Speed stat is not yet set in stone. Should we seek typings that can fulfill our defensive needs more or less regardless of how high our Speed ends up being? If not, what sort of typings are more or less potent the higher or lower on the Speed spectrum we find ourselves?
How speed affects a typing becoming more potent involves the specfic matchups, meaning which Pokemon you outspeed. For example, if Examplemon is 125 Speed and is Fire type, if we choose a typing that resists Fire, our matchup is enhanced if we hit above 125 Speed. Just an example, I am not arguing for specific types or speed stats here.

We should still try to seek types that are good defensively regardless of our Speed stat though.
 
Should we prioritize having a more broad set of neutral defensive interactions, or a more narrowed selection of key resistances? If we choose to narrow our defensive options, what sort of critical interactions should we try to work toward or avoid?
Keeping a broad set of resistances is the way to go imo, both because trying to resist one or two Pokémon specifically can easily make this mon weaker to meta changes, especially with the upcoming DLC's and also seems fairly difficult to do with any of the current offensive threats without including a type that has a decent amount of resistances as it is.

Are less-defensively potent typings that place more emphasis on limited offensive interaction desirable? If so, where should we be aiming to draw the line between our offensive and defensive profile?
Absolutely not. Even if the typing we chose has poor offensive interactions, we can still rely on potential utility moves to help us do our job as a wall, and that's excluding the chance that the defensive typing we choose also has powerful offensive applications. If we choose a weaker defensive type in exchange for offense, we lose connection with our main role in exchange for offense that we'll most likely lack the power to use.

Should we seek typings that can fulfill our defensive needs more or less regardless of how high our Speed ends up being? If not, what sort of typings are more or less potent the higher or lower on the Speed spectrum we find ourselves?
This is somewhat confusing, since for the most part, a higher speed is going to make almost any typing more potent. Being able to move first helps you in your good matchups and your bad matchups, and is only really a hindrance when a pokemon is trying to move last, such as when a move requires it or if they're a slow pivot.

In terms of what types take advantage of speed the best, I think the key types to look for are any that have a mix of defensive and offensive prowess, and can either use high power STABs or STAB moves that can cripple the opponent (mainly offensively). Any type with moves that have a chance to burn or Draining moves come to mind, as they give us momentum while limiting the opponents damage towards us.
 
Should we prioritize having a more broad set of neutral defensive interactions, or a more narrowed selection of key resistances? If we choose to narrow our defensive options, what sort of critical interactions should we try to work toward or avoid?

Imo, we should lean towards the former - but I also think this concept could work even with many significant weaknesses. Looking at the examples of "fast walls" that have been brought up (mega-latias, lugia, talonflame, scream tail), a few things stand out to me;

-None of these pokemon require the many resistances of the likes of Toxapex or Ferrothorn to function. Lugia, for example, is able to go first and click reflect if it needs to take half damage from an attacker.
-Two (Scream Tail and Talonflame) have very few weaknesses and a shit-ton of neutralities.
-Two (Lugia and M-Latias) have 5+ weaknesses, some (such as dark and ice) very significant, but make up for it with stupendous bulk and excellent defensive abilities.
-All of them have a relevant immunity - either ground or dragon, in these cases. I'm not actually sure if this is important, but it's interesting to note?

With all of this in mind, I think we have a couple of options. If we want to spend our power budget on typing, something with few weaknesses and many neutralities would be a good pick. But if we want to save some power for our ability and stat stages, going with a typing that has a few niche defensive applications but looks defensively less than stellar on the face of it would put us on the path to building a pokemon closer to our two examples from Ubers.
It could also be wise to pick up a useful immunity here, but type obviously won't be our last chance!

Are less-defensively potent typings that place more emphasis on limited offensive interaction desirable? If so, where should we be aiming to draw the line between our offensive and defensive profile?

I think this ties into the two paths laid out in answer 1. A fast wall wants at least some offensive ability, and if we're spending a large chunk of our power budget on our typing, we need to get more bang for our buck with at least one good STAB; think about how talonflame and scream tail utilize Brave Bird and Dazzling Gleam, respectively. Lugia and Latias, meanwhile, function just fine with coverage as their main damage output (usually ice beam).

Should we seek typings that can fulfill our defensive needs more or less regardless of how high our Speed ends up being? If not, what sort of typings are more or less potent the higher or lower on the Speed spectrum we find ourselves?

I think we ought to pick something that can do its job at multiple speed tiers, not just to make the stats stage more interesting; a more general-use defensive typing future-proofs us at least a little bit, ensuring that when the tier shifts around 33 it may not immediately be left high and dry with a targeted typing outmoded.
 
Last edited:

Da Pizza Man

Pizza Time
is a Pre-Contributor
Are less-defensively potent typings that place more emphasis on limited offensive interaction desirable? If so, where should we be aiming to draw the line between our offensive and defensive profile?
I do think we could get away with less-potent, but still overall potent, defensive typing here. Something that completely sacrifices any sort of defensive utility in exchange for having offensive prowess is obviously going to be a no-go. However, I do think that we can partially sacrifice some of our defensive prowess in exchange for a better offensive typing to help better force out certain threats. We've seen how valuable the ability to apply offensive pressure for defensive mons is many times in the past (Think of stuff like SpDef Talonflame in ORAS, Mega Latias in ORAS/SM, and pretty much any incarnation of Lando-T), and I think trying to tap into this would be fairly beneficial for the process overall.

Should we seek typings that can fulfill our defensive needs more or less regardless of how high our Speed ends up being? If not, what sort of typings are more or less potent the higher or lower on the Speed spectrum we find ourselves?
Our typing here should be defensively strong regardless of high our Speed ends up being, yes. Regardless of what our speed stat is, much of a wall's ability to perform it's job relies heavily on how capable it is on switching in on various different offensive threats, much of which comes down to other aspects of the mon. Having high Speed on a wall helps support the defensive framework that is accomplished through aspects such as typing and defensive stats, and can't really be used a replacement for the framework itself. That being said, to answer the second part of the question, I would consider typings with a fairly strong offensive presence (Fairy, Water, and Dragon in particular come to mind) to be more potent the higher our speed ends up being.
 

Samirsin

✧Rey de los Snom✧
is a Top Social Media Contributoris a Contributor to Smogon
:snom:
Should we prioritize having a more broad set of neutral defensive interactions, or a more narrowed selection of key resistances? If we choose to narrow our defensive options, what sort of critical interactions should we try to work toward or avoid?
Choosing between a broad set of neutral defensive interactions and a narrowed selection of key resistances depends on CAP 33's intended role and matchups. A broader defensive profile offers versatility by handling a wider range of threats, making the wall adaptable to various scenarios. On the other hand, a narrower focus on key resistances sharpens the wall's identity by excelling against specific strategies. Personally I think that the Speed should allow it to be defensive through the stat, not the typing completely, so a narrower selection of resistances would be better.

Are less-defensively potent typings that place more emphasis on limited offensive interaction desirable? If so, where should we be aiming to draw the line between our offensive and defensive profile?
Opting for less-defensively potent typings that emphasize limited offensive interaction is a valid consideration. This approach complements CAP 33's Speed-focused concept, allowing it to exert pressure on opponents while still countering specific threats. Defining the line between offensive and defensive profiles involves striking a balance. A careful balance would ensure that the wall remains effective at its core defensive role while also contributing offensively in specific scenarios, without overshadowing its primary purpose. Anti-setup (offensively) gang.

Should we seek typings that can fulfill our defensive needs more or less regardless of how high our Speed ends up being? If not, what sort of typings are more or less potent the higher or lower on the Speed spectrum we find ourselves?
The relationship between Speed and typing is crucial. Seeking typings that fulfill defensive needs regardless of Speed ensures that CAP 33 maintains its defensive role consistently. However, if CAP 33's Speed ends up being higher, its ability to switch in and out rapidly might diminish the importance of typing. Conversely, if Speed ends up lower, typing becomes more significant to mitigate weaknesses against faster opponents. Typings with resistances to common offensive types could remain potent at both high and low Speed tiers, helping CAP 33 stay relevant across different scenarios. We could take Scizor's :scizor: and Swampert's :Swampert: typing, a lot of resistances but a x4 weakness, as an example, almost an omni-wall, but not completely, these typings would help on the low-end Speed tier, as it is not able to outspeed the faster Pokémon in the tier, so the typing allows it to survive those matchups. If the speed is higher, a less defensive typing would be good, as the Speed ensures the survivability, not the typing. (Not saying it should have an offensive typing, but it shouldn't have a one-weakness only typing, for example).

Also, let's consider things like immunity to Stealth Rock or Toxic Spikes later on.
 
Last edited:
Should we prioritize having a more broad set of neutral defensive interactions, or a more narrowed selection of key resistances? If we choose to narrow our defensive options, what sort of critical interactions should we try to work toward or avoid?
Usually you can distinguish two types of wall.
The Blissey Build: This type of walls typing mostly gives it neutral Matchups to work with. To be effective it needs far above average bulk, which allows it to become a blanket physical/special wall. Few exploitable weaknesses and big bulk are the key. This approach is valid but likely will require just more stats. It also seems like it’s the approach that is harder to control wrt viability.
The Gliscor Build: This type of wall has a large number of valuable resists, that allow it to check Pokémon, without necessitating huge bulk (often less passive wall fall into this category). These typings often have exploitable (4x)weaknesses, that have to be mitigated by partners in a defensive core.
You can combine both to shape typings that have almost no weaknesses and some good resists but mostly face neutral matchups. One of the standouts here is Bug/Steel, which has some key resists and only one weakness, but mostly deals with neutral matchups.
Are less-defensively potent typings that place more emphasis on limited offensive interaction desirable? If so, where should we be aiming to draw the line between our offensive and defensive profile?
The primary focus should definitely be defensive. Numerous walls exist, that never or rarely use a STAB move. Offensive presence is nice to have and if a defensive typing can offer a solid spammable STAB, that’s cool but as a wall you might get by with only Utility or some form of coverage geared towards (a) key matchup(s).
Should we seek typings that can fulfill our defensive needs more or less regardless of how high our Speed ends up being? If not, what sort of typings are more or less potent the higher or lower on the Speed spectrum we find ourselves?
I don’t think that speed actually changes how strong a defensive typing is immediately. The only way speed interacts with a defensive typing directly is fast type changes a la Protean or Roost.
That said, typings with a broader range of valuable resists would likely allow for much less bulk. While this doesn’t directly impact our speed, it allows for more flexibility in stats overall.
That said speed can interact with how offensive a typing ends up being. Some spammable attacks become so much more potent the faster you are. Dragapult gets by with a largely neutral base 80 STAB move because it’s powerful enough to threaten other fast mons. This example can show, how some typings might restrict how offensively potent we can allow cap 33 to be.
 
Should we prioritize having a more broad set of neutral defensive interactions, or a more narrowed selection of key resistances? If we choose to narrow our defensive options, what sort of critical interactions should we try to work toward or avoid?
Okay, so those who know me know that my main tier is UU, and in UU, we have a surprising amount of fast walls. Let's analyze these walls and the amount of resistances, weaknesses, immunities, and neutralities they have.

Scream Tail (Psychic/Fairy): 12 neutralities, 3 weaknesses, 1 immunity, 2 resistances (one of which being a 4x resistance)
Talonflame (Fire/Flying): 8 neutralities, 3 weaknesses (one of which being a 4x weakness), 1 immunity, 6 resistances (two of which being 4x resistances)
Cyclizar (Dragon/Normal): 9 neutralities, 4 weaknesses, 1 immunity, 4 resistances

Obviously, these three mons have many other traits, such as ability, movepool, and of course, stats, that allow them to function well. But these three also show us that having a good Speed stat allows us to make walls with typings not normally considered defensive. Scream Tail's Psychic typing and Cyclizar's Normal typing aren't usually seen as the peak of defensive, but when paired with their other types and given the good stats, ability, and movepool that these two mons have, they manage to work as defensive Pokemon. These typings themselves aren't even the pinnacles of defensive prowess - they're certainly no Grass/Steel, that's for sure. But they are well rounded and balanced types that allow the Pokemon using them to reliably sponge up even neutral hits. And that's what I think we should be prioritizing for this CAP - a balanced type with a large number of neutralities and resistances to the most important threats, with just enough weaknesses to keep the mon from walling everything. All of these mons do also happen to have one immunity, but IMO, that doesn't mean it should be a necessity for this CAP - an extra resistance might be better in some cases. What's most important is that we have as few weaknesses as possible, so we can soak up as many hits as possible.

It's getting late here, so this is the only question I'll tackle for now.
 
having a good Speed stat allows us to make walls with typings not normally considered defensive.
It's worth noting that in CAP we generally try to shoot for an OU power level. While fire flying is a five star excellent defensive typing and talonflame just doesn't do it as well as Moltres (OU's resident firebird), I think that if cyclizar or scream tail had better more useful typing they might find more use in OU. This isn't to say that your point is invalid, but that I think it would be a mistake to be afraid of a strong typing.
 

snake

is a Community Leaderis a Top CAP Contributoris a Contributor to Smogon
CAP Co-Leader
Should we prioritize having a more broad set of neutral defensive interactions, or a more narrowed selection of key resistances? If we choose to narrow our defensive options, what sort of critical interactions should we try to work toward or avoid?
I'm not sure if there's an explicitly correct answer here. A broader defensive profile likely leads to a build more like Scream Tail, which has amazing bulk but very poor offensive pressure. A narrower defensive profile, on the other hand, likely leads to a build more like Talonflame or (non-Calm Mind) Mega Latias, where they are afforded a relatively higher offensive presence at the cost of having some really rough weaknesses.

For this process, though, I think a build with a narrower defensive profile lets us get away with stronger moves overall - not just moves with higher base power but also stronger overall utility moves. That is, sacrificing a little defensive potential in this stage could very well pay off later. Personally, I think this route is much more interesting overall.

Are less-defensively potent typings that place more emphasis on limited offensive interaction desirable? If so, where should we be aiming to draw the line between our offensive and defensive profile?
See the above. Walls need some way of pressuring the Pokemon they're walling, or else they're not effective. Offensive pressure is one way to accomplish that, and that should not be neglected just because we're making a wall. As a reminder, Talonflame's uninvested STAB Brave Bird off of 81 Attack (which is no longer priority-boosted consistently) and Mega Latias's uninvested, non-STAB Ice Beam, Thunderbolt, and Hidden Power Ground are decently strong, but nothing on the lines of wallbreaking. I understand the concerns of making a fast attacker rather than a wall, but damage output can be fine-tuned in stats to where this is unlikely to happen.

Should we seek typings that can fulfill our defensive needs more or less regardless of how high our Speed ends up being? If not, what sort of typings are more or less potent the higher or lower on the Speed spectrum we find ourselves?
Based on stage order, I think the resulting speed stat is a result of the type chosen, rather than the other way around. Typings with a narrower defensive profile likely need their Speed stats more fine-tuned to address the appropriate threats. Typings with a broader defensive profile likely can get away with a wider range of Speed stats. I think there are more important factors to consider rather than the specific Speed benchmark we need to hit. If the typing doesn't properly address faster metagame threats, it's probably not a great typing for this project.
 
1. Our role as a wall has already been defined for us. Traditional walls typically value their defensive profile above all, but given our interaction with our Speed stat, more options are made open to us. Should we prioritize having a more broad set of neutral defensive interactions, or a more narrowed selection of key resistances? If we choose to narrow our defensive options, what sort of critical interactions should we try to work toward or avoid? (ie; hazard vulnerability or item reliance).
I believe going for a typing with many good neutral interactions and a few choice resists is the way to go here. Looking through the current viability rankings, I don't think we should care too much about our matchups against Pokémon that might be faster than us at the end of the day and rather focus on dealing with mons we want to outspeed and beat. Obviously we don't know what our speed stat will end up being, but going for a typing with good neutral game and letting our natural bulk handle things we want to beat seems like a pretty safe option here compared to trying to resist specific Pokémon.

2. Following up on this, our speed stat allows 33 a degree of flexibility on how it chooses to interact with the opponent, be it through utility, or by being offensively threatening in a 1v1 scenario. Are less-defensively potent typings that place more emphasis on limited offensive interaction desirable? If so, where should we be aiming to draw the line between our offensive and defensive profile?
Given that we are a wall, I don't think our primary focus should be on how offensive our STABs are. We should take care not to be completely passive, but most defensively sound typings such as Fairy, Water and sort of Poison have quite spammable STAB regardless and we can patch this up with coverage moves later on if need be (Latios-Mega does this very well, though it does also have an insane SpAtk stat anyway). This also leaves room to play with some cool utility move options later on in the process.

3. Speed invariably affects how potent are line-up of resists and weaknesses end up feeling, however our Speed stat is not yet set in stone. Should we seek typings that can fulfill our defensive needs more or less regardless of how high our Speed ends up being? If not, what sort of typings are more or less potent the higher or lower on the Speed spectrum we find ourselves?
Looking at the current Viability Rankings, the offensive profile of the very fastest Pokémon seen in the tier right now varies greatly. Between mons like Cinderace, Dragapult, Iron Valiant, Meowscarada and Stratagem, most attacking types are seen as STABs or coverage and so I think we should disregard this speedster mon build for this question.

Other than the very fastest mons, some typings have Pokémon almost exclusively around a certain base speed, with exceptions of course. Almost all of the ranked Electric- (:krilowatt:,:caribolt:,:zapdos:), Fairy- (:iron valiant:,:scream tail:,:enamorus:,:jumbao:) and Dragon types (:walking wake:,:miasmaw:,:garchomp:,:hydreigon:) right now are slightly above or just under 100 base speed, while Steel types (:equilibra:,:corviknight:,:kingambit:,:heatran:) tend to be a bit slower overall. In terms of middle-of-the-pack speed tiers, you'll see a few Ground- (:landorus-therian:,:great tusk:) and Water types (:arghonaut:,:rotom-wash:, :samurott-hisui:), though you'll see mons of these types in the slower speed tiers as well (:equilibra:,:ting-lu:,:ursaluna:,:dondozo:,:toxapex:). Contrary to this, some typings are all over the place, such as Poison (:sneasler:,:iron moth:,:glimmora:,:venomicon:,:toxapex:, :slowking-galar:) and Fighting (:zamazenta:,:sneasler:, :iron valiant:,:great tusk:,:arghonaut:,:iron hands:).

Based on these observations, I'd say Fairy-, Poison- and Steel type walls would generally speaking match up fairly well with a higher speed stat, while Water- and Grass type walls might not necessarily care too much about what speed tier they're in. Obviously this might change with the incoming DLC though, which is also part of the reason I'm an advocate of typing with a good neutral matchup rather than resists.
 
Last edited:

shnowshner

You've Gotta Try
is a Pre-Contributor
Should we prioritize having a more broad set of neutral defensive interactions, or a more narrowed selection of key resistances? If we choose to narrow our defensive options, what sort of critical interactions should we try to work toward or avoid?
I'm not sold on one over the other. A generalized defensive presence feels like it'd end up as a workable but not very convincing wall. I'm reminded of like Gastrodon, the stats are good for being a wall, you have recovery and utility moves, and your Water/Ground typing is hard to exploit while having useful properties like an Electric Immunity and either a Water immunity or security versus Trick and Knock Off depending on if you run Storm Drain or Sticky Hold. In spite of that, you aren't resisting enough of the big offensive types to really work, nor is anything you offer terribly unique or worth overcoming the disadvantages for.

At the same time a narrower approach is going to be more dependent on metagame factors to find success than a broader one. If we identify Sun teams as something that needs a better defensive answer, this CAP may not be able to survive in a metagame where Sun is suddenly absent.

I feel like we need to be, specifically strong versus a broad set of Pokemon? This sounds contradictory but what I mean is, a physical wall that is resilient to passive damage, or a Special wall that excels versus any Special booster. We need to approach this with "what exactly are we trying to wall" in mind and going in with a generally good defensive suite might just flop if it's not providing the team with anything it specifically needs, or if our specific defensive capabilities are simply too narrow to help when the opponent doesn't have anything this CAP is useful against. In the former two cases, we're looking to be strong on one side of the defensive spectrum, but targeting a specific subset of Pokemon in that spectrum we are equipped to handle. It doesn't mean we only handle those Pokemon, but that we offer an surefire answer to them that teams will want, and come packaged with any other winning matchups by default. You'll often add Arghonaut to a team because Unaware is massive versus setup users, and in doing so you've also given your team a Dark, Water and Fire resist that's just useful in general.

I'm not sure how much this really answers the questions you have: it's hard to talk about how we operate when we only know how we're supposed to with zero other contextual material to work with, and the above was mostly just braindumping that uncertainty on my end. Overall I feel a general approach should be cautious to not be "too general" and fail to actually address anything people use in CAP. Narrower approaches conversely need to be capable of doing more than just one or two specific duties that may only function if the opponent loads the right team, else they end up dead weight.

Are less-defensively potent typings that place more emphasis on limited offensive interaction desirable? If so, where should we be aiming to draw the line between our offensive and defensive profile?
I find that we should avoid trying to be "cute" about the concept with the notion of offensive capabilities being a useful defensive property. Threatening specific Pokemon is a nice trait, but not necessary nor even desirable for many walls to function. Our focus on our chosen typing shouldn't be a result of having STAB into common threats, but keeping us safe from common attacks and coverage combos. I don't feel we need our typing to be the cornerstone of our offensive capabilities, as many walls often forgo STAB in favor of moves which better play into its strengths or versus the mons it wants to check or try to check it. Corviknight, Ferrothorn, Toxapex, Dondozo, Mega Latias, and Dragonite have run defensive sets without any STAB moves at some point, or even regularly, though many of them have the stats, typing, and moves to do so. Their attacking moves of choice are usually those that match up better into the metagame, against the Pokemon they are often pitted against, or simply synergize better with their strategy (Body Press is notable here since it gets stronger off of Defense investment instead of Attack).

Point being, I think offensive angles should be opportunistic in nature rather than a driving force of our strategy being a wall. If we're fully capable of serving as a wall, we should have the moveslots available, and the turns generated from our longevity to give us enough room to start dealing damage. Being faster than the average wall only makes this easier. I'm not saying you can't sell your typing as have useful offensive applications, but that the defensive potential of the typing should be the primary focus and not be compromised on.

TL:DR Let's keep our typing solidly defensive in nature and worry about threatening the opponent offensively when we have a better foundation to work from.

Should we seek typings that can fulfill our defensive needs more or less regardless of how high our Speed ends up being? If not, what sort of typings are more or less potent the higher or lower on the Speed spectrum we find ourselves?
I don't really have a preference for either of the two options. A typing that doesn't need to be fast to work defensively lets us explore what happens when said typing ends up being fast anyway, while a typing that works better the faster we are does more to demonstrate how Speed can be a huge part of what allows a defensive Pokemon to achieve viability even if the typing may seem more vulnerable at a glance.

If we wanted to focus more on the Speed-dependent types, any typing that has serious merit both in offense and defense is going to prefer having higher Speed. Another option would be typings where their commonly run moves can inflict status, or any typing that relies on or simply enjoys status. Being faster lets us spread that status before the opponent acts instead of after, and that's useful for all the non-Poison statuses because it means they can be in effect immediately. Even Poison and Toxic could be helpful if we find ourselves in a losing position where getting one last status off is the best way forward, something other Walls may not be able to accomplish.
 

Cyril tbh

formerly LordDoesOtherStuff
Should we prioritize having a more broad set of neutral defensive interactions, or a more narrowed selection of key resistances? If we choose to narrow our defensive options, what sort of critical interactions should we try to work toward or avoid?


The way I see it, immovable should mean being able to handle a broader spectrum of mons, so I deffo lean to a more broad set of neutral interactions. That way it sits on way more rather than just sitting on a specific set of mons. I think being able to sit on most Mons would make it a lot more effective at doing what its supposed to be doing.

I think going the talonflame route of not too many resistances would be great.The problem is just that Im not sure this mon needs to invest a lot of its "budget" (stealing a term from another post) on its typing specifically. I think it would work just as well with a decent type rather than a great one. I think this mon is really gonna shine in movepool and stats, Im just not sure how much the typing will impact the viability.

Are less-defensively potent typings that place more emphasis on limited offensive interaction desirable? If so, where should we be aiming to draw the line between our offensive and defensive profile?

I think hitting the line of good but not great on its defensive type would be the sweet spot, while the offensive type doesnt have to be dire, but maybe not something like fairy ground. It still shouldnt be a type that suits an offensive juggernaught.


Should we seek typings that can fulfill our defensive needs more or less regardless of how high our Speed ends up being? If not, what sort of typings are more or less potent the higher or lower on the Speed spectrum we find ourselves?

I think the lower the speed, the less weaknesses. The way I see it, itll have between 110-135 ish speed? Thats just a rough estimate for the simplicity of me explaining my thoughts.

If we go closer to 110, I see something like bug/steel or ghost/dark are good examples. Both only have one weakness, being that of fire and fairy respectively. If its on the slower side itll be tanking more and more hits, meaning itll probably need a better defensive profile.

If we inch closer to the 135 speed tier, meaning it can speedtie stuff like chien pao, I feel it should be easier to hit its weaker point. See, once again, talonflame. Its on the faster end of things, but its typing clearly has its flaws, having several weaknesses, including an important 4x weakness to rocks. The rocks keep it in check, especially in gen 6 where it can run rampant without em. Now granted, it does run offensive in gen 6, but the principle is still there. If its that fast it shouldnt be able to switch in pretty much unpunished. At least thats how I see it.




PS: Take this with a grain of salt since I'm still very new to this shit haha, this process will be sick <:)
 
Should we prioritize having a more broad set of neutral defensive interactions, or a more narrowed selection of key resistances? If we choose to narrow our defensive options, what sort of critical interactions should we try to work toward or avoid?
Both routes are honestly really viable options and neither should be precluded here. It should be noted that typings with broadly neutral matchups will require a bit more bulk than typings with a lot of key resistances. That shouldn't really be regarded as a weakness though, only a different build.

Are less-defensively potent typings that place more emphasis on limited offensive interaction desirable? If so, where should we be aiming to draw the line between our offensive and defensive profile?
I think a stellar defensive typing with little to no ability to pressure opposing pokemon offensively is perhaps worse here than a merely quite good defensive typing with a fair amount of inherent pressure from its STABs. On a fast pokemon, being able to heavily damage or knock out key threats before they can hit you can actually prevent you from taking damage in some cases, and moreover it can prevent you from being setup fodder. This is not to say that we should choose a genuinely poor or even mediocre defensive typing, just that passiveness has killed many a wall and typing is arguably the cleanest way to address that. Having at least one potent STAB is really, really impactful and should not be underestimated even on a defensive mon.

Should we seek typings that can fulfill our defensive needs more or less regardless of how high our Speed ends up being? If not, what sort of typings are more or less potent the higher or lower on the Speed spectrum we find ourselves?
I kinda think the speed doesn't change much. A good defensive typing is a good defensive typing. Speed changes the calculus a lot more on the offensive end than the defensive end.
 
Are less-defensively potent typings that place more emphasis on limited offensive interaction desirable? If so, where should we be aiming to draw the line between our offensive and defensive profile?

I agree with what others have said that the emphasis should be on defensive typings rather than ones with major offensive synergy. Realistically our budget will be too heavily spent on speed and defenses to have enough room for offenses to make it worth planning too much around that (unless we end up specializing in either special or physical).

I do think though that we would benefit from having a typing that gives us a spammable STAB. Since we will lack power and may find ourselves running just one attack for some sets, having a single reliable move with no immunities will help us avoid being taken advantage of. Think Scream Tail running Moonblast as its only attack. It never has much power due its attacking stats, but it has PP, is reliable, and can chip anything, which is significant. Not fun when an opponent with 15% HP left can come in and set up because it’s immune. Lugia is forced to run Ice Beam in Ubers as its only attack because its STABs have low PP or immunities. That works okay in Ubers because there is such a bias toward dragon type box legends, but in CAP I think having to run a non-STAB move would make us too vulnerable.
 

Zetalz

Expect nothing, deliver less
is a Pre-Contributor
Sorry for the delay everyone, thunderstorms and tornadoes ran wild through my state the other night and left me without power or internet access for a bit, of which I'm still not fully recovered from. Regardless, I'm mostly back, and ready to move things along! I'm very happy with the responses you all have given, so let's do a quick summary.

1. There was pretty clear consensus that we should strive for a more broad defensive profile for 33 over something more targeted, as this makes it less volatile to changing metagame conditions, as well as raising it's level of consistency. Any typings that seek a more narrow approach will inherently have more catching up to do and will need to have a strong direction to justify their less generally applicable defensive profile.

2. Opinions were more mixed here, but for the most part people agree that there is room for 33 to have some form of offensive presence, namely in the form of a decent STAB, but is not a mandatory consideration. Any typings that lean into offense any more than that will require heavy consideration from future stages which may damage 33's purpose as a wall.

3. This one was perhaps not worded greatly as I saw some users struggling with the question, for which I do apologize, but overall I think most everyone got the gist. In general it's pretty agreed upon that 33's Speed doesn't concern it's defensive profile very much at all, but is an important consideration for typings that have more offensive potential baked into them. Overall questions of Speed tier relating to typing aren't terribly relevant, and should mostly be left to future stages at this time.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
**IMPORTANT: PLEASE READ CAREFULLY**

With all that out of the way, instead of asking more questions we're going to be doing things a little differently moving forward. The Mod Team and TLT have decided to change the way Typing Discussion is structured with regards to Typing Submissions. In many past typing stages we've experienced a large amount of typings being submitted by users more or less just to throw their name in the hat, to have submitted something and thus have a chance at "winning" typing. That even if a typing they wanted to see was already posted, they still may post a similar typing that they don't actually support as much just to put themselves in contention and increase typing variety.

This sort of culture encourages rather selfish posting behavior, and lessens the quality of discussions and analysis that could be had on other typing submissions. In past projects we've encouraged people to leave analysis posts of other presented typings, but these largely ended up backloaded to the very end of the thread when things were close to wrapping, and not every user partook in them. We'd like to push these sorts of critical thinking type posts more to the forefront of typing discussions, and move away from submission based posting. Ideally we'd want to see fewer overall typings being presented with more quality discussion put into them.

To this end, we'll be retiring the usual "Typing Submission" based formatting we've used up to this point. If you'd like to offer strong support for a typing, you can include support for it in your post in something along the lines of this format. (Not a hard format, feel free to phrase things however you like).


I strongly support (X typing) for (X, Y, or Z reasons)
(ideally you should have at least 1 good paragraph of in-depth justifications/thoughts/analysis, more so if you're presenting something new to the thread.)


The idea here is that, regardless of whether or not you're presenting something new or just giving feedback on what you like, the TLT will have a much easier time evaluating community consensus. Ideally we want users to choose only a few typings that they strongly support. You're not hard-capped on how many you'd like to strongly support, but you must provide thorough input and comparisons for all of them. Again, we don't want typings to be thrown out all over the place with little thought or support behind them. We want to see well constructed justifications, as well as in-depth comparisons to other similar presented typings (if any). It might sound obvious to experienced users, but I'd really like to stress that throwing out typings on a whim just for the sake of diversity or competitive inclusion is not going to be acceptable going forward.

Even more importantly than presenting a typing however, we very, VERY heavily encourage people to give feedback as a part of their posts, whether they're presenting something new or not. Again, I'd really like to stress, feedback in posts is MONUMENTALLY more valuable to the TLT and the project itself than just submission-based posting. Even if you feel like someone else has already stated any thoughts you had to say, don't be afraid to repeat those sentiments! One-liners should be avoided, but never feel like you never have anything else to add, even agreeing with someone else's viewpoints helps us immensely! If at any point your opinions shift you are of course welcome to either edit your post or to post again as we continue onward, don't be afraid of posting more than once!

One last important disclaimer before we move on to typing discussions proper, CAP Mods will be editing any posts that use "Typing Submission" formatting within them as has been done in the past. This is our first run using this new format of Typing Discussion, and we'd like things to remain focused on discussion-driven posting.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

With all that out of the way, Typing Discussion 2.0 is now open for business! (title wip). We'll be running for about 1 week, give or take as my IRL conditions change or thread activity begins to die down.
 
I'd like to throw my support behind Poison/Fairy. This typing is overall pretty good with its resistances, but I feel like it does well in the neutral game too. Fairy by itself is regarded as a pretty good defensive type, with a good Mono STAB to play with, and Poison adds a few additional useful resists and a neutrality to other Poison moves, while also providing an immunity to being poisoned itself. The type combo's immunity to Dragon and resistances to Fairy and Fighting (quad!) match up fairly well into things that are fast but not extremely so (think under 120 base speed), but is also at least neutral to those Pokémon that might end up still being faster than us, such as Dragapult, Greninja and Booster Iron Valiant. A Dark resist is pretty useful whenever we can afford to get knocked off, and the resistances to Grass and Bug (quad!) are kind of extra imo but may come in handy at some point.

Offensively, between the type combo's common STABs we might be annoying a lot of mons moreso for the utility than the coverage. That said, we'd likely be able to pressure out many Fairy, Fighting, Dark and Dragon types seen in the meta right now, but we'd be lacking against other Poison types as well as Steel types, but nothing coverage can't fix if we wanted to. Being resistant to Hemogoblin's Extreme Speed and Kingambit's Sucker Punch can make a difference later on in matches, enabling us to severely damage the former and possibly KO the latter if it's weakened enough.

In terms of weaknesses, Ground is a bit of a pain but I think with enough bulk we can take on at least non-STAB Earthquakes, and Steel isn't seen that often offensively, but these types are both pretty easy to switch into for most given teams. Other than Hoopa-U, I don't think there's that many things that carry Psychic coverage (Iron Valiant perhaps, but again enough bulk may win us the matchup regardless) so we wouldn't necessarily have to worry about that as much.

TL;DR: Fairly neutral typing with some good resists still, might struggle into Grounds and Steels but seems manageable to me.
 
Last edited:
Water/Flying

This type is very good into Great Tusk, and is a Flying type not weak to Ice Spinner. It's also good against Arghonaut, Cinderace, Equilibra, Volcanion, Heatran, and Ting-Lu, while being decent against Hemogoblin and Iron Moth. That's a good chunk of mons! It does not have too many weaknesses either. While Electric is an issue, Rock types switching in could fear our Water STAB (which is only Garganacl and Stratagem anyway). That being said, the Stealth Rock issue/reliance on Heavy-Duty Boots (especially if we're a wall) is an issue, but I think the value of the Ground and Fire resists make it worth it. Water/Flying is also immune to Spikes.

Dark/Fairy

The biggest draw of this typing is being good into Dragapult, but it is also good into Malaconda and Roaring Moon. Not to mention it is neutral to a lot of other things in general. And even though we're making a wall, I think the offensive STABs here are cool. The big draw here is STAB Knock Off, which is a great tool to have on any Pokemon, offensive or defensive. Dark and Fairy also check a lot of their respective switchins. It's a Fairy type that Glowking and Gholdengo can't switch into and a Dark type that Great Tusk and Arghonaut can't switch into. We aren't uncheckable though, we have Hemogoblin and Enamorus that would be able to take on our STAB combination.

Hope I did this right.
 
Last edited:
I strongly support Electric/Fighting for a number of key resistances that I believe will benefit a fast wall.

Quick Defensive Info:
  • 4x Resistances - None
  • 2x Resistances - Electric, Bug, Rock, Dark, Steel
  • Neutral - Normal, Fire, Water, Grass, Ice, Fighting, Poison, Flying, Ghost, Dragon
  • 2x Weaknesses - Ground, Psychic, Fairy
  • 4x Weaknesses - None
Electric/Fighting has a relatively neutral profile, but the resistances are really what stand out to me as appealing. With resistances to Volt Switch, U-Turn, and Knock Off, this typing has good match-ups into most of the safe, spammable moves an opponent might choose. With a Stealth Rock resistance as well, I think the main benefit of this typing is having a high chance of successfully switching in on a large array of threats. The defensive profile has excellent match-ups into strong picks like Kingambit, Zamazenta and Samurott-Hisui. Paralysis immunity is the cherry on top to keep our fast wall moving quickly.

Offensively, the typing has some good coverage which help it in a number of neutral match-ups or disadvantageous match-ups. Fighting helps cover the Ground weakness against threats like Equilibra or Ursaluna, and Electric gives coverage for Venomicon and other Flying types that want to match-up well against Fighting. This type isn't great at complete coverage as it can be easily shut down by a number of top threats, like Dragapult, Great Tusk, and Landorus-Therian. Both offensive types having an immunity match-up is a hindrance that helps us keep this type from moving towards tank territory.

The most glaring weakness of this option is the Ground and Fairy weaknesses, which will certainly need to be considered throughout the process as the highest barrier for a wall. However I don't think these are insurmountable, Toxapex is an example of a wall that boasts a Ground weakness as well.

Looking forward to the newly revised process here, will definitely follow up with supporting posts.
 
I'd like to offer support to Bug/Steel, mainly due to what I perceive as a broad and consistent defensive profile with 8 resists, 1 immunity, and only one weakness. A few interactions that stick out to me include being a Steel that doesn't necessarily crumble in front of Tusk's STABs, alongside not being outright weak to the STABs of other relevant threats like Valiant, Gambit, Venomicon, and Bax. The Poison immunity is one of the bigger draws here, as limiting the opponent's options to wear us down slowly is another point of consistency that could take some pressure off later stages. Moreover, the fact that it only has a singular weakness to Fire means that the list of mons that immediately threaten us with big damage is relatively narrow; from what I see, the main users of Fire STAB/coverage in the current meta are Goblin, Drag, Cinderace, Moth and Wake, with some other less common threats like Heatran and Volcanion also existing. While I admit the STABs are not great, Bug and Steel still do possess both hard hitters and good utility should we choose to pursue either of those options, and if there is concern about having a too-strong offensive presence veering us off-concept, having relatively undertuned STABs may prove useful.

Hope this is an acceptable post, I don't usually participate in the forum discussions.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

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

Top