Approved Core Collapse (aka C-C-C-Core Breaker!)

[Birkal]

This concept by Elite Lord Sigma was approved for discussion. Is this concept worth pursuing? If so, what questions could we ask? How could we improve this? Everyone is free to discuss the following submission as if this was a concept discussion.

---

Name: Core Collapse (aka C-C-C-Core Breaker!*)

General Description: A Pokemon that can effectively break the common OU core of Landorus-T and Rotom-W.

Justification: Both Rotom-W and Landorus-T share the distinction of being an alternate forme introduced in the "third" versions of their respective generations. Thus, perhaps it is fate that these two form one of the most common cores in OU, if not the most common. As of this post, Landorus-T and Rotom-W occupy the first and third spots on the 1825 OU usage stats and are among each other's most common teammates. Even with the advent of Mega Evolution, there remains virtually nothing that can break through this core on its own that has not been banned to Ubers, leading most battlers to have to land repeated strong hits to wear it down. Thus, a Pokemon capable of reliably breaking this core on its own would have a unique niche in the OU metagame.

Questions to be Answered:

• What factors make the core of Rotom-W and Landorus-T effective in the OU metagame? In particular, what makes this core more effective than other cores in the OU metagame? (Most experienced battlers should have a response to these questions already, but it still needs to be addressed for this concept to work.)
• What approach (bulky, quick, etc.) is best suited for breaking through the core without making the CAP too powerful like the Pokemon that came before it (e.g. Greninja)? What viable function(s) outside of breaking such an ubiquitous core can a Pokemon have without being too powerful?
• What cores would become more viable and/or widely used as a result of the CAP threatening the Rotom-W/Lando-T core? Are any of these cores ones that are currently overlooked in the OU metagame?
• To what extent do particular playstyles require constructing a core? Conversely, to what extent do particular playstyles revolve around breaking opposing cores?
• On what team archetypes is the Rotom-W and Landorus-T core commonly found? What effect would reducing the viability of the core have on these archetypes?

Explanation: After the complex concepts of the previous two CAP projects, I looked back on earlier CAP projects for inspiration. The one that most struck a chord with me was Syclant, whose concept was "True Garchomp Counter." I think it would be beneficial for the CAP Project as a whole to consider more direct concepts, leading me to come up with this concept.

There are several factors underlying the effectiveness of the Landorus-T/Rotom-W core, such as defensive synergy, high bulk, and access to VoltTurn. I firmly believe that most or all of these factors would need to be addressed in order for this concept to be successful. For instance, simply making a Pokemon that can counter VoltTurn would not be sufficient to fulfill this concept, but such an approach would need to be one part of the overall process.

Furthermore, the last two CAP projects at the time of writing (Volkraken and Plasmanta) both focused on making a Pokemon fit into a core in one way or another. Both of them failed to fulfill their concepts, so I have come to believe that the concept of cores can be better examined by taking an approach opposite to that of previous CAP projects.

Another possible avenue to take with this concept would explore how much certain playstyles revolve around building a core. For example, certain playstyles (e.g. balanced) usually involve constructing a core in which each member can cover the weaknesses of another member of the core, allowing a skilled player to pivot and play around threats to the team. Other playstyles (e.g. hyper offense) do not concern themselves with such a core, but can often have certain members that are intended to be the linchpin of the team. As such, it would be interesting to see how disrupting what is arguably the most common core in OU would affect particular team archetypes.

The idea of various team archetypes being rendered impotent has also come up frequently in recent suspect tests (e.g. Greninja), so I think examining the balance of team archetypes in the OU metagame would be an interesting secondary objective of this concept.


*Credit to Acast for the alternate title for this concept.

 

[jas61292]

So I really like this concept. Its a bit of a throwback to some older concepts, focusing on one specific job and doing it well, but at the same time, brings up questions that can apply to more generally to cores. I think the ideas behind this concept are very solid, but with that said, I do think it could use a bit of improvement in the questions section (you all know how big I am on questions).

What factors make the core of Rotom-W and Landorus-T effective in the OU metagame? In particular, what makes this core more effective than other cores in the OU metagame?

This first question is very solid. It is a discussion starter that is not an inherent part of the CAP process but absolutely needs to be discussed in order to pursue this concept. Nothing else really to say here.

Unfortunately, I do think the others are a bit weaker.

What approach (bulky, quick, etc.) is best suited for breaking through the core without making the CAP too powerful like the Pokemon that came before it (e.g. Greninja)? What viable function(s) outside of breaking such an ubiquitous core can a Pokemon have without being too powerful?

The second question is a type of question I have seen a lot on concepts in the past, and I have always considered that type fairly weak. Basically, it is, in broad terms, asking what the project result is going to do, which really doesn't need to be asked. That is what the entire project is for. However, the wording here skirts around an interesting issues that I think could easily be made into good questions. Specifically, the issue of the roles outside of taking on the core. While it is fairly unnecessary to ask what essentially amounts to "how will we make it complete the concept," looking at what a Pokemon who can break this core could do to the rest of the metagame, depending on its role and trying to decide which is therefore most advantageous is an interesting question. However, this only really amounts to anything if we have a clear goal outside of the core breaking. Do we want a strong Pokemon that breaks this core as just part of its function, or do we want a Pokemon super dedicated to core breaking but that, outside of that is rather unremarkable. This is not necessarily something that needs to be decided on for this concept to work well, but it probably does if this question is really to amount to much. If we have a goal like that in mind, then questions of how various roles effect how it plays outside core breaking become very important. But, if we do not, then this entire question might be better off dropped.

• What cores would become more viable and/or widely used as a result of the CAP threatening the Rotom-W/Lando-T core? Are any of these cores ones that are currently overlooked in the OU metagame?
• To what extent do particular playstyles require constructing a core? Conversely, to what extent do particular playstyles revolve around breaking opposing cores?

These next two questions have similar issues in that it is not readily apparent how they are relevant to the concept itself. While they are certainly interesting things to discuss, the results of breaking the core, and general questions about how teams are built around cores do not directly have any bearing on how to beat the Lando-Rotom core. In the case of the former question, a way I can think to adapt these would be to look at how such changes would have an effect back on the CAP itself. One way to ask about this would be: "Which other cores would benefit most as a result of the CAP threatening the Rotom-W/Lando-T core, and how should the CAP aim to interact with these cores? Will the CAP need to pose a threat to any of these cores in order to make sure it achieves its main goal or should we want to lose to these other cores in order to further encourage a departure from the Rotom-W/Lando-T core?"

The second of these two questions is a bit harder to adapt, but I think something can still be done with it, especially the latter half. Constructing cores is not really what this concept is about, since this concept is interested in core breaking. But looking at the playstyles that utilize this core breaking will definitely be necessary. With that said, I'm not really sure there is such thing as a team style that specifically focuses on core breaking. Any good team needs to be able to break cores. So, rather than looking at that, we should be looking at what kind of teams most need to break this specific core. A question such as "Which playstyles would most benefit by being able to break the Rotom-W/Lando-T core?" is something simple but very important to address. Simply beating the core one on one is nice, but by allowing a playstyle that it was good against to take down the core easily, we go much further towards reducing the viability of the core. While that is not necessarily core breaking in a traditional sense, making a CAP function where it is most needed, rather than just where it would be easiest to make it work, would do more to help it fit in well in the metagame.

On what team archetypes is the Rotom-W and Landorus-T core commonly found? What effect would reducing the viability of the core have on these archetypes?

Finally, while this is an interesting question, it really needs to be molded a but to make it a good discussion starter. Identifying the team archetypes is something we will obviously have to do, but that alone does not necessarily help us when building the CAP. What does help is identifying common teammates and making sure we are not easily stopped by them. As for the second part of the question, this is more of a "what happened" kind of question, which is really not helpful at all for guiding the discussions. How I might word a question like this would be something like: "On what team archetypes is the Rotom-W and Landorus-T core commonly found, and what Pokemon are they commonly found teamed with? How well will the CAP need to be able to handle these common teammates to actually pose a threat to the Rotom-W/Lando-T core?" This is important because if a the CAP can easily be handled by a common teammate, it may fail to have the desired impact, but at the same time, if it handles the best teammates too well, it may have unintended side effects. For example, if some common teammates for the core were also very good on the team archetypes that the Lando/Rotom core struggled against, and the CAP handles them all very well, it may very well be possible that it could end up actually supporting the Lando/Rotom core as much as it hurts them, and thus fail to have the desired result. Addressing these issues is very important for a concept like this.


Anyways, that's all I have to say for now. I really like this concept idea, and I definitely think it could work well. I'd just like to see these questions turned into a bit more of discussion starters than they currently are.

 

[ginganinja]

Yea so I don't know about this concept. Anyone who played BW2 already knows of this concept (Rotom-W + Landorus-I + Tar + Keldeo was one of the most common teams in the meta before we banned Landorus) and teams already adapted in the past to handle the above core. You could prolly ask any single good ladder player that played in BW2 how they handled the most common core ever and I bet they could name prolly 5 pokemon that handled that two pokemon core. Heck, I know Latias and Celebi just off the top of my head were exceptionally common in terms of handling the Lando / Rotom core in BW2, and I bet players have long since come up with far more specialised answers, or failing that, have discovered effective lures to break the core. Since pokemon in the standard OU metagame already exist to handle this core (at least in part), I highly doubt we will learn anything we didn't already know.

 

[trc]

fwiw landorust/rotomw cores are almost always paired with a ferrothorn so i guess this seems ok in theory but in reality you kinda have to accomodate for that implied third partner...

and a lot have a pursuit tar as well.

plenty of pokemon beat this core as well like latis keld ferro landoi ches mvenu mgard most special mons

it could be interesting maybe to find a sweeper that has no trouble with rotomw yet isn't revenged by scarf landt? and also breaks through ferro too which would be cool for the concept imo, more solid.

also rotomw can sometimes be slowbro/megabro

 

[KhosroTheGreat]

252 SpA Choice Specs Keldeo Scald vs. 252 HP / 0 SpD Rotom-W: 92-108 (30.2 - 35.5%) -- guaranteed 4HKO after Leftovers recovery
252 SpA Choice Specs Keldeo Secret Sword vs. 252 HP / 212+ Def Rotom-W: 147-174 (48.3 - 57.2%) -- 41% chance to 2HKO after Leftovers recovery

-1 252+ Atk Chesnaught Seed Bomb vs. 252 HP / 252+ Def Landorus-T: 66-78 (17.2 - 20.4%) -- possible 7HKO after Leftovers recovery

Keldeo and Chesnaught don't really break this core.

 

[trc]

cm keld, the more common keld does win, specs 2hkoes after sr and rotomw just gets scald burned early game, and landorust can't touch chesnaught while it sets up leech seeds and spikes or subs and belly drums so ya the core has problems with them, lol.

 

[jas61292]

Upon re-reading this, I would agree with what has been suggested that it is not really true that "nothing that can break through this core on its own that has not been banned to Ubers." With that said, I still really like the concept, I just think that bit needs to be reworked. What makes this concept interesting is not that it is trying to do something so radical and different, but that it is looking at something common and important. It is true that Pokemon exist that can break the core, yet the core is still ridiculously common. Looking at that aspect of what makes cores work (and how to stop them) would be interesting, in my opinion. What I would suggest is that this probably should be reworked a bit to be more about discouraging the core, rather than simply beating it 1v1.

 

[Burt Racecar]

Sorry for the short post here, I like the concept, but I would be extremely wary that we don't accidentally end up creating a third partner for the core we're meant to be discouraging/breaking.

 

[Bughouse]

Essentially any time you use a Pokemon that can consistently beat a very commonly used team framework, you don't end up with a decentralized meta. Instead you just have a new centralizing core, built around that one mon that could consistently break other common cores.

This has happened before with Arghonaut and would likely happen again. That doesn't mean the concept is strictly bad; it just means it's not particularly exciting.

 

[Alfalfa]

There are a number of Pokemon that can break the Rotom-W + Landorus-T core, such as Kyurem-B, Life Orb + Freeze Dry Mamoswine, any strong Special Attacker, but either they do not actually discourage the core, or they are just not that common in OU anyways.

Realistically speaking, to discourage the core from occurring, we would need a Pokemon that can take advantage of the core. My idea is something that can actually take advantage of both Rotom-W and Landorus-T; something with Competitive, Contrary, or Defiant can easily take advantage of Landorus-T's Intimidate, the biggest issue is to avoid getting revenge killed by its Choice Scarf set. To break Rotom-W, this Pokemon needs to be able to deal with Will-O-Wisp, as switching into Rotom-W is not the most exciting thing to do solely because of Will-O-Wisp (unless you are Celebi, who can switch into Rotom-W anyways). I think experimenting with the ability Competitive would be the easiest route there, as making a good Pokemon that can take full advantage of Intimidate would definitely shake up any Landorus-T core. Contrary, when done wrong, can cause a Pokemon to be broken due to how easy it is to take advantage of anything, and Defiant has already been touched, and a Defiant user is not going to like Will-O-Wisp from Rotom-W and handle Landorus-T at the same time.

 

[Fulgrate]

I think if there is to be diversity in the meta. There needs to be more pokemon with not only good BST's and efficient stat spreads like the core that is mentioned, but also access to moves like volt switch and u-turn, to be able to keep up with that core. Or if not those kind of moves, then coverage moves that allow them to handle that core, and typing combinations that will at the very least allow them to survive neutral hits if their stat spread is balanced or defensive.

 

[Alfalfa]

I think if there is to be diversity in the meta. There needs to be more pokemon with not only good BST's and efficient stat spreads like the core that is mentioned, but also access to moves like volt switch and u-turn, to be able to keep up with that core. Or if not those kind of moves, then coverage moves that allow them to handle that core, and typing combinations that will at the very least allow them to survive neutral hits if their stat spread is balanced or defensive.

By giving your proposed Pokemon Volt Switch and U-turn, you are only going to cause the creation of more cores. The idea is to break the core, and the easiest way to break a core is to be able to take advantage of it, not attempt to keep up with the core.

 

[BigWigs]

Hey here, first post, been lurking for a while....

Of the approved ideas, this is my preferred concept. Why? Because, while CAPs like Voodoom and Volkraken were designed to work WITH certain cores, this one flips the idea on its head and is designed to BREAK a certain core. A complete reversal and something we haven't explored much. "Corebreaker" isn't a common phrase.

To go along with it, a concept that was looked at for multiple projects can be taken in a different approach, perhaps letting us learn what we did wrong and how we can do it right.

I apologize if my reply is bad and offers little to the topic, I was just interested in this topic for quite a bit. That said, I'll probably stay in the shadows for this CAP as well, with occasional posts thrown in, to learn for the next one.

 

[mphallor]

As has been mentioned already, there are plenty of Pokemon that can "break" this core. What makes this core unique from others though (as well as why this core is so popular) is that it is so easy to get the core members in (Intimidate, immunities, natural bulk) yet at the same time hard to get your core breaker in safely. Landorus has Knock Off and powerful STAB Earthquakes, Rotom-W has Will-O-Wisp to cripple physical core breakers as well as whittle away at special ones, and both mons have access to pivot attacks that can allow them to deal damage and switch out to some third team member that can threaten your switch in. This is really what puts the core over the top and makes it so good at generating momentum. Being able to get a core member in with relative ease allows the user to take momentum for himself, while the aforementioned difficulties of switching your core breaker in allow the core user to maintain momentum, usually until something dies and the core's victim can finally make a free switch.
For these reasons, I think the theme of this concept (or at least a couple questions) shouldn't be about making a Pokemon that can break the core (which plenty of mons can do 1v1), but rather trying to make a Pokemon that can neutralize the momentum gained by it. This poses a much greater challenge since instead of just making a check to the core, we need to make something that can easily switch in on it (aka a counter) and somehow manage to neutralize the threat of VoltTurning out into one of our CAP's checks (which will undoubtedly exist unless we make this thing Uber).

 

[Elite Lord Sigma]

Since just over a week has passed since this concept was approved for discussion, I think now is probably a good time for me to respond to feedback, as I likely won't have much time over the next two weeks to give an adequate response.

As numerous people have already pointed out, several Pokemon can actually defeat the core straight up. Specifically mentioned were Keldeo, Latias/Latios, Ferrothorn, Landorus, Chesnaught, Mega Venusaur, Mega Gardevoir, and Kyurem-Black. However, most of these Pokemon can do little to negate the momentum that the core provides, either because they are too slow to outspeed one or both members of the core before they pivot out (Ferrothorn, Chesnaught, Mega Venusaur, Mega Gardevoir against Scarf Landorus-T), don't enjoy taking damage from a super-effective U-Turn or Volt Switch (Latias, Latios, Keldeo to a lesser extent), risk being crippled by a Will-O-Wisp burn (Chesnaught, Kyurem-Black, Ferrothorn to a lesser extent), or don't enjoy losing their item from Knock Off (Latias, Latios, and Scarf/Specs Keldeo in particular, Landorus with Life Orb, Ferrothorn with Leftovers, Scarf/Band Kyurem-B, Chesnaught with Leftovers to a lesser extent).

That overview should suggest a major reason for the enduring popularity of the Landorus-T/Rotom-W core, an important reason that is mentioned in a post by mphallor. Namely, the amount of momentum that the core provides makes the core so popular, as it is perhaps the best core in OU at generating momentum. There are several reasons why the core is so effective at generating momentum, which include access to U-Turn and Volt Switch to pivot out of unfavorable match-ups, good defensive typings and abilities that allow easy switch-ins, and movepools with both powerful attacking moves (STAB Earthquake, STAB Hydro Pump) and utility moves (Will-O-Wisp, Trick, Knock Off, etc) with which to threaten the tier. I believe that is precisely because the core has so many avenues of gaining momentum that even Pokemon that can break the core have failed to damper its ubiquitous nature. As such, I have come to agree with mphallor that this concept should focus more on neutralizing the momentum generated by this core and less o merely breaking the core. While the risk of creating a broken CAP is somewhat higher by following this approach, I think the possible benefits and increased potential for learning more about the metagame vastly outweigh this risk.

Continuing on, I am not a fan of the idea that this concept should try to keep up with the core. If you're only keeping up with the core, you are not really threatening the core, nor are you preventing it from gaining momentum. It's similar to the old Lawrence Lessig quote: "If you're explaining, you're losing."

Some mention was also made of other common teammates (e.g. Ferrothorn). While I understand that the Landorus-T/Rotom-W core lends itself to have certain teammates accompanying it, I believe it would be a distraction to focus too much on these teammates. As doing so would shift the focus of this concept from breaking the core and stopping the momentum it gains from countering certain team archetypes, it would be too much of a departure from the stated goals of this concept.

I don't have time to touch on every point made in this thread so far right now, so I'll leave it at that for now. If I have time later on, I'll write a follow-up to this post.

 

[Alfalfa]

If we really want to break the core, then our CAPmon may need to not able to block Volt Switch with a Ground Typing, but U-turn with a Bug Immunity as well, or be able to take advantage of U-turn with the ability Rattled. This makes the opponent think twice before actually clicking U-turn, as it will likely put you at a disadvantage. While we try to avoid making up abilities and moves if we can, if we decide that we want to go through with make and make a Bug Immunity ability, is it really the end of the world?

 

[nyttyn]

As we've already gone repeatedly over, this core isn't impossible to beat by a single mon, and many mons already exist in OU who can do that. So instead, based on the suggestions raised, I recommend we push this concept even further, and make it turn the Rotom-W - Landorus-T core into a liability, with a pokemon that's capable of not only taking them on, but flat out forcing them out and snatching momentum simply for showing up, much like Mega Voir vs Mega Metagross, or Mega Metagross vs Mega Scizor.

 

[KhosroTheGreat]

I think we are all thinking in the same direction here.

I think Alfalfa's suggestion of Rattled is interesting, and also works with nyttyn's proposal, as it shuts down the VoltTurning shenanigans of the core. Volt Switch through the CAP's Ground typing and U-Turn through the CAP getting a free speed boost. Note that Rattled also gets a boost from Lando-T's Knock Off. With the right stat spread, the CAP could be a mini D-Dance sweeper (good power, needs the +1 speed to sweep, doesn't get the +1 attack DD sweepers do).

Having said that, however, we still have the problem that faces all Ground-types that look to block Rotom-W except Gastrodon (and Quagsire), which is that any Ground-type switched in will be facing a super effective STAB Hydro Pump, which is never nice. We can't switch it round to having a Lightiningrod/Volt Absorb mon that blocks U-Turn, because there is no type that is immune to Bug. In addition, Knock Off is going to mean you lose your item, while WoW means that the CAP is going to be losing durability and get its attack crippled if the CAP is physically offensive. The Pokemon will also have to be able to deal with STAB EQ from Lando-T, as well as coverage moves like Stone Edge, Superpower and even Explosion at times. Pokemon like Keldeo, Latias/Latios, Ferrothorn, Landorus, Chesnaught, Mega Venusaur, Mega Gardevoir, and Kyurem-Black have been mentioned as Pokemon that break this core. But, apparent from the 3 grass types, they do this through their specially offensive prowess, rather than stealing momentum from the core.

It's very difficult to steal momentum from a core which VoltTurns, burns you, knocks off your item, hits you with Powerful STAB moves and good coverage. To make a CAP that makes this core into a liability as nyttyn proposes, we need something that can neuter VoltTurn (Rattled was an interesting suggestion) while dealing with the Water/Electric problem, take burns (and paralysis due to Discharge) and not mind it, doesn't mind getting its item Knocked Off, as well as being able to take STAB EQ, Stone Edge, Superpower, STAB Hydro Pump and STAB Thunderbolt/Discharge.

 

[mphallor]

KhosroTheGreat brings up several good points about the challenges associated with this concept, and it honestly seems as if we can't create a counter to two Pokemon with such good synergy. That said, we don't necessarily NEED to counter this core in order to turn it into a liability.

As has already been established, there are plenty of ways to check this core. Designing a Pokemon that beats Landorus-T and Rotom-W once it gets inside can easily be handled through typing, stats and movepool. This should by no means be the big hold up for the project. The bigger challenge is therefore finding a way to capitalize on them, which (to a large extent) can only be handled through ability.

Now just rattling off the top of my head, the abilities that can capitalize on Lando-T in some way or another are: Rattled, Defiant, Competitive, Contrary, Justified (Knock Off), and Unburden (also Knock Off).

The abilities that can capitalize on Rotom are: Storm Drain, Water Absorb, Lightning Rod, Motor Drive, Flare Boost, Guts, Quick Feet, Flash Fire and Volt Absorb.

Now while there doesnt really seem to be any 1 ability that can beat both mons (unless I'm missing a really clever way to do it) there are a couple effects that the two lists have in common. What this opens the door to is designing a Pokemon that is one key boost from sweeping (powerful wallbreaker with middling speed, blazing fast mon with mediocre SPa, etc.) and then giving it not one, but TWO abilities that can patch up that flaw (Rattled and Motor Drive for the first example, Competitive and Lightningrod in the second). Obviously this Pokemon can't have both abilities at once, but since your opponent won't know which one you're using until it activates (none of those abilities are announced on entry) they have to play AS IF the CAP has both, since one bad play could hurt them so badly. This effectively means that when the core was used, it would either
1 give the CAP a boost that lets it wreck havoc (a liability) or
2 be played by someone that never uses some key aspect of the core (the pivoting, the attack reduction, etc.). While CAP may not directly benefit from this, it would either make it easier to switch in freely and check the core, or allow more Pokemon to beat this core since they no longer fear one or two of the moves on Rotom and Lando. Therefore, even if the core user is careful to avoid giving CAP a boost, CAP could still prevent those two team slots from gaining momentum the way they're supposed to, thus making them a liability.

The only logistical problem with this approach is it requires two or three equally good abilities (instead of the usual one primary ability and one secondary that is outclassed) as well as creating a pole jumping issue where one ability cannot be discussed without discussing the complementary options. That said, for the sake of an interesting concept I wouldn't be surprised if a minor tweak to the rules was made.

 

[KhosroTheGreat]

While this is a good idea, apart from the poll-jumping issues, it only really works until you the opponent works out which one you carry, and then it kinda ceases to be as good at stealing momentum away, because they know 1 of the Pokemon doesn't mind pivoting on it.

I also missed SR, Trick and HP Ice as other options Lando-T and Rotom-W run.

At the moment, the most effective CAP in my mind would have a Ground + Water-resist typing (Water/Ground resists SR, Stone Edge and is immune to Volt Switch and Discharge/Thunderbolt and only has 1 weakness - HP Grass Rotom-W might come up on a potential playtest but there you are) which allows it to block Volt Switch while being neutral to STAB Hydro Pump, Ability Rattled, which steals momentum from Lando-T's U-turn and Knock Off, that doesn't mind losing its item (Red Card/Weakness Policy/Sash/idk, maybe?), has good bulk, reliable recovery, good offenses but sub standard speed. Something like Kyurem-B except maybe not as powerful. Obviously, we gotta make sure it can only set up speed through Rattled, but it's still looking pretty OP.

 

[Alfalfa]

While this is a good idea, apart from the poll-jumping issues, it only really works until you the opponent works out which one you carry, and then it kinda ceases to be as good at stealing momentum away, because they know 1 of the Pokemon doesn't mind pivoting on it.

I also missed SR, Trick and HP Ice as other options Lando-T and Rotom-W run.

At the moment, the most effective CAP in my mind would have a Ground + Water-resist typing (Water/Ground resists SR, Stone Edge and is immune to Volt Switch and Discharge/Thunderbolt and only has 1 weakness - HP Grass Rotom-W might come up on a potential playtest but there you are) which allows it to block Volt Switch while being neutral to STAB Hydro Pump, Ability Rattled, which steals momentum from Lando-T's U-turn and Knock Off, that doesn't mind losing its item (Red Card/Weakness Policy/Sash/idk, maybe?), has good bulk, reliable recovery, good offenses but sub standard speed. Something like Kyurem-B except maybe not as powerful. Obviously, we gotta make sure it can only set up speed through Rattled, but it's still looking pretty OP.

This Pokemon does not have to have mixed offenses like Kyurem-B does; being limited to only special attacking may hurt its versatility, but we can still use Kyurem-B's speed and bulk, as these CAP needs enough to out speed Choice Scarf Landorus-T at +1. It needs to have Grass coverage though if it wants to be able to fully take advantage of Rotom-W, otherwise it really cannot do much to the Pokemon it is supposed to be taking advantage of.

 

[mphallor]

While this is a good idea, apart from the poll-jumping issues, it only really works until you the opponent works out which one you carry, and then it kinda ceases to be as good at stealing momentum away, because they know 1 of the Pokemon doesn't mind pivoting on it.

The key to what I was suggesting is that since none of those abilities are revealed until they actually activate, your opponent won't know which ability your CAP has unless they make one of the "liability plays" and get away with it, or make one of the "liability plays" and get punished. Moreover if we build the CAP correctly, we should be able to make sure it normally isn't broken, but giving it a single boost turns it into a terror (thinking Chandelure or Darmanitan style stats if we go the speed-abilities route, Noivern style if we go with abilities that boost SPa).

I also disagree with the notion that we have to build this CAP to shrug off everything the core does, since there's probably one or two (if any) ways to do this. Instead, the CAP really just needs to turn certain elements of the core into a liability so that CAP's teammates can have a chance to shine. If your opponent doesn't want to click Volt Switch because it might give CAP a game winning sweep, then you now have the option to bring in Keldeo, who doesn't really mind any of Rotom's other moves. The same thing happens with whatever aspect of the core we target. By introducing danger to clicking otherwise spammable moves, CAP can either switch in on the core OR allow its teammates to do the same. With this kind of approach, I think there would be a lot of diverse ways to achieve the concept without making the CAP broken.

Sorry that this doesn't really have anything to do with changing the concept's wording. I pretty much agree with nyttyn that the goal should be to make the core a liability, and I just wanted to show that while daunting, I do think that goal is realistically achievable.

 

[nyttyn]

As there have been no objections, I'd like to propose the following altered concept (additions subtractions):

Name: Core Collapse (aka C-C-C-Core Breaker!*)

General Description: A Pokemon that can not only effectively break the common OU core of Landorus-T and Rotom-W, but turn it into a liability.

Justification: Both Rotom-W and Landorus-T share the distinction of being an alternate forme introduced in the "third" versions of their respective generations. Thus, perhaps it is fate that these two form one of the most common cores in OU, if not the most common. As of this post, Landorus-T and Rotom-W occupy the first and third spots on the 1825 OU usage stats and are among each other's most common teammates. Even with the advent of Mega Evolution, there remains virtually nothing that can break through this core on its own are only a handful of singular pokemon that can break this core that has have not been banned to Ubers, leading most battlers to have to land repeated strong hits to wear it down. Thus, a Pokemon capable of reliably breaking this core on its own and rendering it a liability would have a unique niche in the OU metagame.
Questions to be Answered:

• What factors make the core of Rotom-W and Landorus-T effective in the OU metagame? In particular, what makes this core more effective than other cores in the OU metagame? (Most experienced battlers should have a response to these questions already, but it still needs to be addressed for this concept to work.)
• What approach (bulky, quick, etc.) is best suited for breaking through the core without making the CAP too powerful like the Pokemon that came before it (e.g. Greninja)? What viable function(s) outside of breaking such an ubiquitous core can a Pokemon have without being too powerful?
• What cores would become more viable and/or widely used as a result of the CAP threatening and turning the the Rotom-W/Lando-T core into a liability? Are any of these cores ones that are currently overlooked in the OU metagame? Would the popularity of the most popular core in the game be drastically impacted simply due to the existence of a matchup which turns it into a liability?
• To what extent do particular playstyles require constructing a core? Conversely, to what extent do particular playstyles revolve around breaking opposing cores?
• On what team archetypes is the Rotom-W and Landorus-T core commonly found? What effect would reducing the viability of the core have on these archetypes?

Explanation: After the complex concepts of the previous two CAP projects, I looked back on earlier CAP projects for inspiration. The one that most struck a chord with me was Syclant, whose concept was "True Garchomp Counter." I think it would be beneficial for the CAP Project as a whole to consider more direct concepts, leading me to come up with this concept.

There are several factors underlying the effectiveness of the Landorus-T/Rotom-W core, such as defensive synergy, high bulk, and access to VoltTurn. I firmly believe that most or all of these factors would need to be addressed in order for this concept to be successful. For instance, simply making a Pokemon that can counter VoltTurn would not be sufficient to fulfill this concept, but such an approach would need to be one part of the overall process.

Furthermore, the last two CAP projects at the time of writing (Volkraken and Plasmanta) both focused on making a Pokemon fit into a core in one way or another. Both of them failed to fulfill their concepts, so I have come to believe that the concept of cores can be better examined by taking an approach opposite to that of previous CAP projects.

Another possible avenue to take with this concept would explore how much certain playstyles revolve around building a core. For example, certain playstyles (e.g. balanced) usually involve constructing a core in which each member can cover the weaknesses of another member of the core, allowing a skilled player to pivot and play around threats to the team. Other playstyles (e.g. hyper offense) do not concern themselves with such a core, but can often have certain members that are intended to be the linchpin of the team. As such, it would be interesting to see how disrupting what is arguably the most common core in OU would affect particular team archetypes.

The idea of various team archetypes being rendered impotent has also come up frequently in recent suspect tests (e.g. Greninja), so I think examining the balance of team archetypes in the OU metagame would be an interesting secondary objective of this concept.

 

[Elite Lord Sigma]

As there have been no objections, I'd like to propose the following altered concept (additions subtractions):

Name: Core Collapse (aka C-C-C-Core Breaker!*)

General Description: A Pokemon that can not only effectively break the common OU core of Landorus-T and Rotom-W, but turn it into a liability.

Justification: Both Rotom-W and Landorus-T share the distinction of being an alternate forme introduced in the "third" versions of their respective generations. Thus, perhaps it is fate that these two form one of the most common cores in OU, if not the most common. As of this post, Landorus-T and Rotom-W occupy the first and third spots on the 1825 OU usage stats and are among each other's most common teammates. Even with the advent of Mega Evolution, there remains virtually nothing that can break through this core on its own are only a handful of singular pokemon that can break this core that has have not been banned to Ubers, leading most battlers to have to land repeated strong hits to wear it down. Thus, a Pokemon capable of reliably breaking this core on its own and rendering it a liability would have a unique niche in the OU metagame.
Questions to be Answered:

• What factors make the core of Rotom-W and Landorus-T effective in the OU metagame? In particular, what makes this core more effective than other cores in the OU metagame? (Most experienced battlers should have a response to these questions already, but it still needs to be addressed for this concept to work.)
• What approach (bulky, quick, etc.) is best suited for breaking through the core without making the CAP too powerful like the Pokemon that came before it (e.g. Greninja)? What viable function(s) outside of breaking such an ubiquitous core can a Pokemon have without being too powerful?
• What cores would become more viable and/or widely used as a result of the CAP threatening and turning the the Rotom-W/Lando-T core into a liability? Are any of these cores ones that are currently overlooked in the OU metagame? Would the popularity of the most popular core in the game be drastically impacted simply due to the existence of a matchup which turns it into a liability?
• To what extent do particular playstyles require constructing a core? Conversely, to what extent do particular playstyles revolve around breaking opposing cores?
• On what team archetypes is the Rotom-W and Landorus-T core commonly found? What effect would reducing the viability of the core have on these archetypes?

Explanation: After the complex concepts of the previous two CAP projects, I looked back on earlier CAP projects for inspiration. The one that most struck a chord with me was Syclant, whose concept was "True Garchomp Counter." I think it would be beneficial for the CAP Project as a whole to consider more direct concepts, leading me to come up with this concept.

There are several factors underlying the effectiveness of the Landorus-T/Rotom-W core, such as defensive synergy, high bulk, and access to VoltTurn. I firmly believe that most or all of these factors would need to be addressed in order for this concept to be successful. For instance, simply making a Pokemon that can counter VoltTurn would not be sufficient to fulfill this concept, but such an approach would need to be one part of the overall process.

Furthermore, the last two CAP projects at the time of writing (Volkraken and Plasmanta) both focused on making a Pokemon fit into a core in one way or another. Both of them failed to fulfill their concepts, so I have come to believe that the concept of cores can be better examined by taking an approach opposite to that of previous CAP projects.

Another possible avenue to take with this concept would explore how much certain playstyles revolve around building a core. For example, certain playstyles (e.g. balanced) usually involve constructing a core in which each member can cover the weaknesses of another member of the core, allowing a skilled player to pivot and play around threats to the team. Other playstyles (e.g. hyper offense) do not concern themselves with such a core, but can often have certain members that are intended to be the linchpin of the team. As such, it would be interesting to see how disrupting what is arguably the most common core in OU would affect particular team archetypes.

The idea of various team archetypes being rendered impotent has also come up frequently in recent suspect tests (e.g. Greninja), so I think examining the balance of team archetypes in the OU metagame would be an interesting secondary objective of this concept.

I approve of these changes. No objections here.

 

[boxofkangaroos]

As there have been no objections, I'd like to propose the following altered concept (additions subtractions):

Name: Core Collapse (aka C-C-C-Core Breaker!*)

General Description: A Pokemon that can not only effectively break the common OU core of Landorus-T and Rotom-W, but turn it into a liability.

Justification: Both Rotom-W and Landorus-T share the distinction of being an alternate forme introduced in the "third" versions of their respective generations. Thus, perhaps it is fate that these two form one of the most common cores in OU, if not the most common. As of this post, Landorus-T and Rotom-W occupy the first and third spots on the 1825 OU usage stats and are among each other's most common teammates. Even with the advent of Mega Evolution, there remains virtually nothing that can break through this core on its own are only a handful of singular pokemon that can break this core that has have not been banned to Ubers, leading most battlers to have to land repeated strong hits to wear it down. Thus, a Pokemon capable of reliably breaking this core on its own and rendering it a liability would have a unique niche in the OU metagame.
Questions to be Answered:

• What factors make the core of Rotom-W and Landorus-T effective in the OU metagame? In particular, what makes this core more effective than other cores in the OU metagame? (Most experienced battlers should have a response to these questions already, but it still needs to be addressed for this concept to work.)
• What approach (bulky, quick, etc.) is best suited for breaking through the core without making the CAP too powerful like the Pokemon that came before it (e.g. Greninja)? What viable function(s) outside of breaking such an ubiquitous core can a Pokemon have without being too powerful?
• What cores would become more viable and/or widely used as a result of the CAP threatening and turning the the Rotom-W/Lando-T core into a liability? Are any of these cores ones that are currently overlooked in the OU metagame? Would the popularity of the most popular core in the game be drastically impacted simply due to the existence of a matchup which turns it into a liability?
• To what extent do particular playstyles require constructing a core? Conversely, to what extent do particular playstyles revolve around breaking opposing cores?
• On what team archetypes is the Rotom-W and Landorus-T core commonly found? What effect would reducing the viability of the core have on these archetypes?

Explanation: After the complex concepts of the previous two CAP projects, I looked back on earlier CAP projects for inspiration. The one that most struck a chord with me was Syclant, whose concept was "True Garchomp Counter." I think it would be beneficial for the CAP Project as a whole to consider more direct concepts, leading me to come up with this concept.

There are several factors underlying the effectiveness of the Landorus-T/Rotom-W core, such as defensive synergy, high bulk, and access to VoltTurn. I firmly believe that most or all of these factors would need to be addressed in order for this concept to be successful. For instance, simply making a Pokemon that can counter VoltTurn would not be sufficient to fulfill this concept, but such an approach would need to be one part of the overall process.

Furthermore, the last two CAP projects at the time of writing (Volkraken and Plasmanta) both focused on making a Pokemon fit into a core in one way or another. Both of them failed to fulfill their concepts, so I have come to believe that the concept of cores can be better examined by taking an approach opposite to that of previous CAP projects.

Another possible avenue to take with this concept would explore how much certain playstyles revolve around building a core. For example, certain playstyles (e.g. balanced) usually involve constructing a core in which each member can cover the weaknesses of another member of the core, allowing a skilled player to pivot and play around threats to the team. Other playstyles (e.g. hyper offense) do not concern themselves with such a core, but can often have certain members that are intended to be the linchpin of the team. As such, it would be interesting to see how disrupting what is arguably the most common core in OU would affect particular team archetypes.

The idea of various team archetypes being rendered impotent has also come up frequently in recent suspect tests (e.g. Greninja), so I think examining the balance of team archetypes in the OU metagame would be an interesting secondary objective of this concept.

I like these edits. This concept seems very feasible at this point. Good job to both nyttyn and Elite Lord Sigma.