CAP 3 CAP 3 - Part 3 (New Evolution/New Pokemon Discussion)

[Dane]

I see the pollen hasn't been kind to you this year Dane.

;D

Pretty much the first month or so that flowers start blooming again always makes my sinuses go wonky. Plus flowers attract bees, which are Satan incarnate.


On topic, I'm a little surprised the votes are this close. I definately see the next CAP being an evolved Pokemon.

 

[Mystica]

New evolution. There are too many weak grass and fire types that need some attention imo.

 

[beej]

Honestly I don't understand why people hold the order of the types with such importance. There's absolutely no mechanical difference, and there are exceptions to the rule of the first type dominating. Cradily is a Rock/Grass pokemon, but it looks like it could pass off as pure Grass. In regard to moves, it isn't more of a Rock-type than Grass-type. It also focuses on SD, a larger quality of Grass-types than Rock-types.

It may be a Fire/Grass, but we shouldn't limit its potential just because Fire comes first. People talk about limiting creativity by making it evolve, but isn't saying it should be a new species for this reason exactly that?

 

[Gothic Togekiss]

^ Maybe it has to do with how the type was voted on and how changing it around just to fit a pokemon we all want it to fit would overruled the vast number of voters but that's my opinion.

 

[Dane]

It may be a Fire/Grass, but we shouldn't limit its potential just because Fire comes first. People talk about limiting creativity by making it evolve, but isn't saying it should be a new species for this reason exactly that?

Exactly what? I don't see how having free reign on every aspect of it's creation can be considered limiting to creativity, especially when you compare it to having a pre-existing mold that stats, art, ability, and movepool need to reflect.

 

[beej]

Exactly what? I don't see how having free reign on every aspect of it's creation can be considered limiting to creativity, especially when you compare it to having a pre-existing mold that stats, art, ability, and movepool need to reflect.

You misunderstood me. I meant that making it a primarily Fire-based fastish pokemon because of Fire/Grass would be limiting the potential.

 

[Elevator Music]

Meh, I'm kinda late to this, but I have to say new species.

I would love to do a new evolution, I do think it's a great idea. But I'm not too fond of the options we have right now.

 

[samtheman]

Evolution.

We made two new species, let's try this out. If it turns out to be "too limiting," we won't do it again next time.
Imo, even if it's not Sunflora or Cherrim that gets evolved/an alternate evolution, I could see something like Ninetales or Torkoal being part grass.

 

[Dane]

You misunderstood me. I meant that making it a primarily Fire-based fastish pokemon because of Fire/Grass would be limiting the potential.

Well, it should focus on fire as the main (note: not only) influence of the Pokemon. I agree it shouldn't automatically be declared fast, and we actually debated in the last topic about what it's speed (among other things) should be. Between 60 and 105ish was brought up a lot.

 

[Chaoscrippler]

Evolution.

We made two new species, let's try this out. If it turns out to be "too limiting," we won't do it again next time.
Imo, even if it's not Sunflora or Cherrim that gets evolved/an alternate evolution, I could see something like Ninetales or Torkoal being part grass.

I'd say that a Fire/Psychic would be more fitting for a Ninetales evo than Fire/Grass.

 

[JimBob]

You misunderstood me. I meant that making it a primarily Fire-based fastish pokemon because of Fire/Grass would be limiting the potential.

what are you talking about, most of the people have been talking about this pokemon as a primarily grass type, and no one is talking about the fire type stuff except regarding the defensive typing, and you come in splurting stuff about how "hey guys don't forget that just because this is a fire type doesn't mean we have to forget the grass type too! ;D"

also I 100% agree with what aki said in response to helios. I was getting ready to do the same thing

 

[doublestatus]

i vote for:
new evolution
its very easy to do a burned plant, but we can do a macargo evolution saying that the fire on his shell became cold and plants colonised it, but the rest of his body kept hot, also

 

[Azacin]

hmm.. I chnage my vote to New Evolution, since we hant done that Before. Arcanine Evolution sound good?

 

[Cooper]

if you guys really are thinking like "the process of creating the Pokemon is the goal, the pokemon that come out are just byproducts", then I don't understand why you would want to create a new Pokemon. All you could do is increase the base stats and give it a new move or two, and you're done. That's why I'm gonna vote new pokemon because that way we'll actually have things to discuss besides the sprite.

This is strange for me, because I don't commonly say this to be people, but you are wrong. Think of all the pokemon people have posted that look nothing life their pre-evos, or the ones with split-evolutions that look vastly different. The fact that you are ignorant to this shows your close-mindedness, and the fact that a similar belief in held by many of your fellow forum-goers show that you are not alone. People need to get out of this mentality that new evolutions must be identical to their predecessors, because sooner or later we're going to need to make a new evolution, and I'd rather it be sooner so we can get the process down.

Not only that, Doug has specified that this program is supposed to balance the metagame, which a new pokemon doesn't necessarily do. Look at Syclant, the self-proclaimed Garchomp counter. Not only did it fall flat on it's face, but even those of us who actually know what the CaP server is don't use it much. Perhaps a Sunflroa evo and mini-Sunny Dayer is Cherrum is exactly what standard needs.

EDIT: I'm not saying Syclant is a Chomp counter, because it's not. Saying it is was how people harped on the project when I first started it.

 

[Venom]

Evolution of an existing Pokemon.

 

[User 12783]

What Cooper says is true, an example is Politoed!

 

[Dane]

This is strange for me, because I don't commonly say this to be people, but you are wrong. Think of all the pokemon people have posted that look nothing life their pre-evos, or the ones with split-evolutions that look vastly different. The fact that you are ignorant to this shows your close-mindedness, and the fact that a similar belief in held by many of your fellow forum-goers show that you are not alone. People need to get out of this mentality that new evolutions must be identical to their predecessors, because sooner or later we're going to need to make a new evolution, and I'd rather it be sooner so we can get the process down.

Not only that, Doug has specified that this program is supposed to balance the metagame, which a new pokemon doesn't necessarily do. Look at Syclant, the self-proclaimed Garchomp counter. Not only did it fall flat on it's face, but even those of us who actually know what the CaP server is don't use it much. Perhaps a Sunflroa evo and mini-Sunny Dayer is Cherrum is exactly what standard needs.

EDIT: I'm not saying Syclant is a Chomp counter, because it's not. Saying it is was how people harped on the project when I first started it.

But what you're describing isn't even really evolving an old Pokemon anymore. It's basically creating a new Pokemon with subtle influences, if any, from an old Pokemon.

If all you're doing is creating a new Pokemon, not giving it egg moves, and just claiming it to be an evolved version of an old Pokemon, what's the point? The only way to give it a worthwhile claim as an evolved Pokemon is to make it based off of the old Pokemon, which also creates a creative void to a certain degree.

 

[Admiral_Stalfos19]

People need to get out of this mentality that new evolutions must be identical to their predecessors.

Then again they can't be immensly different either, like the new-altogether ones. Kinda sucks that everyone wants to go for new evo cause I've already drawn up my Fire/Grass guy. I can't post the image yet 'cause it's not in the right poll, nor can I give you too much info as I need to post the image in order to do so effectively, but I can tell you that it's a Bronchosauras-like creature...

 

[espeonescape]

^ you did spell politoed right ^_^, and I also agree with everything Cooper said, we should try an evolution and see how it goes... it may useful to the game.

 

[Luck]

This should be the first poll,not the type.So that a potential evo of an old poke does not get pigeonholed in type it should not be.This putting this as the first poll will end all arguments.

This is strange for me, because I don't commonly say this to be people, but you are wrong. Think of all the pokemon people have posted that look nothing life their pre-evos, or the ones with split-evolutions that look vastly different. The fact that you are ignorant to this shows your close-mindedness, and the fact that a similar belief in held by many of your fellow forum-goers show that you are not alone. People need to get out of this mentality that new evolutions must be identical to their predecessors, because sooner or later we're going to need to make a new evolution, and I'd rather it be sooner so we can get the process down.

Not only that, Doug has specified that this program is supposed to balance the metagame, which a new pokemon doesn't necessarily do. Look at Syclant, the self-proclaimed Garchomp counter. Not only did it fall flat on it's face, but even those of us who actually know what the CaP server is don't use it much. Perhaps a Sunflroa evo and mini-Sunny Dayer is Cherrum is exactly what standard needs.

EDIT: I'm not saying Syclant is a Chomp counter, because it's not. Saying it is was how people harped on the project when I first started it.

Nintendo doing it is ok ,they are the "excepted force" they actually make the pokemon, but if we do it a large portion community will not accept it because we expect a certain look from the pokemon and it against will bring huge backlash when it does not meet expectations.A new evo of created pokemon is something that will have to be a very careful thought out process more so than what we normally do.

If we where trying to pull a "remoraid" with say banette make banette a vampire or something what would happen?

 

[Gmax]

New evolution.

I'd like to see a useful version of Sunflora.

 

[Admiral_Stalfos19]

If we where trying to pull a "remoraid" with say banette make banette a vampire or something what would happen?

We could just make it as close to banette as possible so few people notice

 

[Cooper]

If all you're doing is creating a new Pokemon, not giving it egg moves, and just claiming it to be an evolved version of an old Pokemon, what's the point? The only way to give it a worthwhile claim as an evolved Pokemon is to make it based off of the old Pokemon, which also creates a creative void to a certain degree.

Creating an evolution serves two purposes:

1. Gives purpose to an existing pokemon that isn't used much, even if that purpose is to serve as a catalyst.
2. Creates an excuse to use better-than-average stats.

Not only that, but we have a base to work with. Note that a base is different than a set of guidelines. Every basic pokemon given to us by GF has the potential to be anything (namely the starters). Who would've known that Mudkip would become a Water/Ground, or that Torchic anything but a Fire/Flying? Having something like Sunkern/Sunflora to work with gives us an idea of what the pokemon should be, and what it needs work in. Having Grass/Fire or Fire/Grass (they're practically interchangeable at this point) to work with gives us a template by reminding us that this will fit a certain niche needed by both (i.e. Sunny Day, reliable Subseeding, a staller, etc.). Now, you could say this applies to a new pokemon as well, but that runs the risk of being called broken by those who don't want to see a theoretical 600 BST pokemon pop into existence.

 

[Aldaron]

I agree with Cooper's sentiments that a Sunflora / Carnivine / Cherrim evolution would be more like Prinplup -> Empoleon than Rhydon -> Rhyperior or Dusclops -> Dusknoir.

In the latter case, yes, I agree, the creative process would be hindered a bit. Rhyperior is literally just Rhydon+. However, with Prinplup, this Pokemon would not even be NU (whereas Rhydon was UU or even arguably BL in ADV) in the metagame. It is essentially an "incomplete" Pokemon, for whatever reason, be it stats, move pool or whatever.

Sunflora, Cherrim and Carnivine all fall in this category, I would think. Obviously, the UU metagame has not been fleshed out at all, so I can't claim that none would be used too often, but, from what I have played / experienced of the UU metagame, none of those are too common. I feel like all three are essentially unused. Looking at Shoddy statistics, they are 238, 239 and 259 respectively, all falling underneath Squirtle and Bulbasaur in terms of usage, lol.

By adding a type and thinking with the mindset to improve, we could definitely use a huge range of possibilities for evolving any of those three. Cherrim has potential as a supporter as it is, and I have already talked about how Fire / Grass is great typing for supporting. However, it is also a great typing for special offense, meaning we could use its original "guideline" to "build" into something more.

That said, I still support a new Pokemon, lol. I just wanted to clarify that evolving decidedly never used Pokemon does not really limit us, as they are basically "incomplete" Pokemon anyway in the competitive perspective.

 

[Dane]

Creating an evolution serves two purposes:

1. Gives purpose to an existing pokemon that isn't used much, even if that purpose is to serve as a catalyst.
2. Creates an excuse to use better-than-average stats.

The same could be said for creating a new Pokemon though, so it really isn't that different outside of it being completely new, rather than just a new version of something old.

Not only that, but we have a base to work with. Note that a base is different than a set of guidelines. Every basic pokemon given to us by GF has the potential to be anything (namely the starters). Who would've known that Mudkip would become a Water/Ground, or that Torchic anything but a Fire/Flying? Having something like Sunkern/Sunflora to work with gives us an idea of what the pokemon should be, and what it needs work in. Having Grass/Fire or Fire/Grass (they're practically interchangeable at this point) to work with gives us a template by reminding us that this will fit a certain niche needed by both (i.e. Sunny Day, reliable Subseeding, a staller, etc.). Now, you could say this applies to a new pokemon as well, but that runs the risk of being called broken by those who don't want to see a theoretical 600 BST pokemon pop into existence.

How is a base different than a set of guidelines? It's still something you follow, and use to inform your later decisions.

Mudkip, if given a secondary typing, would obviously be ground. Why? Because it's the mudfish Pokemon. Torchic is just a chicken, chickens don't fly. Granted fighting is a little out of left field, but still.

If people don't want to see a theoretical 600 BST Pokemon be made, then they won't vote for a spread like that. If they do, then it being an evolution won't stop it, and there will just end up being a new evolution with 600 BST. And you can't say that 600 BST on a new evolution isn't an option, or it proves that new evolutions limit creativity.

And since you mentioned the "template for filling a niche", doesn't that mean it's forcing the movepool to be a certain way? If Sunflora can already SubSeed, Sunny Day, and Stall... then how do we improve the movepool without either just adding useless filler or ridiculously powerful alternatives to what it already has?

While I don't think making a new evolution is bad, I do feel that making it just so that we can say we made a new evolution is bad. Perhaps it would be better on later CAPs to do evo/new as the first poll, just to alleviate any problems that might come up like this, where the options for an evolution are limited.