CAP Updates: Plasmanta (Complete)

Status
Not open for further replies.

snake

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

Plasmanta
Abilites: Storm Drain / Vital Spirit / Telepathy
Stats: 60 / 57 / 119 / 131 / 98 / 100​

Plasmanta is an interesting CAPmon. In terms of competitive viability among CAPmons, it's fallen in the middle of the pack. A unique STAB combination backed by 131 Base Special Attack and 100 Base Speed turns it into a unique wallbreaker. It's 60 / 119 / 98 bulk is above average, a bit better than Marowak-A's bulk. It's held back a little by being reliant on Hidden Power due to subpar coverage moves, and while its STAB combination is excellent, Ground- and Steel-type run rampant in the metagame, meaning it struggles to spam either of its STAB moves without fear.

Name: Einherjar ~Acta Est Fabula~

Description: A Pokemon that dissuades your opponent from fainting it, or can even leave it's presence on the field felt even after it faints.

Justification: When a Pokemon faints, it's usually thought of as the battle having gotten down to a 5-6. However, we've yet to discover if a Pokemon can leave a lasting impression on the battle even after having fainted; be it through moves like Healing Wish and Destiny Bond, placing hazards that the opponent can't remove as their removal has been taken care of, or by leaving an opponent's key member weakened and/or taken out.

Questions To Be Answered:
  • How can a Pokemon leave a long-lasting effect on the rest of the battle with just it's moves?
  • How the hell is it different from simply ramming a sacrificial martyr into your opponent's team and hoping it punches holes in it?
  • Building on the previous question, is it possible to build this Pokemon as a defensive threat rather than a "Glass Cannon"?
  • Is it even possible for a Pokemon to leave a lasting effect on on the battle, even after it faints?
  • Could changing your opponent's way of thinking even be plausible? From, "I need to take CAP X out!", to, "Damn, if I take CAP X out, I'll be in trouble...!"

Explanation: Just going back to the basic rules of Pokemon, we all know we have to faint all 6 Pokemon on the opposing team. Once a member goes down, we think of it as a 5v6, and then subsequently a 4v6, etc. However, I was thinking if it was possible for a Pokemon to somehow "continue fighting", even after it faints, be it through a lasting effect on the field or by dissuading your opponent from fainting it. That, or having your opponent having the thought of fainting the mon being a taboo, causing them to choose their moves carefully instead of swinging their sweeper into motion all the time. Maybe the Pokemon can grab momentum extremely easily? I'm trying to wrap my head around my own concept myself, but you get the general idea. I hope.

I actually drew lots of inspiration from a specific type of Hyper Offense team in OU; the one known as "Flying Spam". However, that one is kind of one-dimensional and relies on repeatedly attacking to wear down your opponent's answers; my concept however tries to discover if it's even possible at all to take on that idea with a more defensive/balanced approach, or, on the flip side, to dissuade your opponent from recklessly swinging their battering rams into your team as it will leave repercussions if the mon faints.

As a CAP Project, Plasmanta is an odd product. Its concept was to make the opponent wary of KOing it for fear of some sort of payback. Concept Assessment basically turned this concept into another partner concept, and while partner concepts don't necessarily yield unviable products (see Voodoom's performance in Gen 4 and Volkraken's performance), they usually don't really work well with the mons they're intended to work with. The idea from Concept Assessment was to make Ground-types not want to kill Plasmanta because its intended partner, Gyarados, could set up Dragon Dance easily against them and then mega evolve. It's a cool idea, but it just doesn't really work in practice, and the concept is really lost on Plasmanta, frankly leaving Plasmanta as a good, special wallbreaker.

Notably during Plasmanta's CAP Process, Volt Switch was disallowed early on to focus on how Plasmanta was supposed to be sacked to get a free switch-in, not to pivot on its own. However, what our Gen 6 GL sparktrain and I can tell from the chat from the CAP Project room in PS! is that we should discuss the addition of Volt Switch on Plasmanta. Don't read this OP thinking, "man snake just wants Plasmanta to have Volt Switch and he's subtly pushing for it by bashing its process!" This isn't the case: I will remain neutral regarding Volt Switch Plasmanta. However, to address all parties of CAP, I will allow discussion solely on Volt Switch to start this thread off.

We all know that allow access to Volt Switch will increase Plasmanta's viability, so any posts that discuss only the viability increase without talking about whether or not it's appropriate on Plasmanta within the CAP Metagame may be subject to deletion. For example, don't post an importable of a Volt Switch Plasmanta and only tell us how it'd be amazing if Plasmanta could pivot. Tell us why Plasmanta should or should not be able to pivot in and out, whether we should consider the CAP Process's decision, etc. Here are a few questions to help you get started if you feel lost.

1. What effect on Plasmanta does the addition of Volt Switch provide? Will it be balanced, or will it be too potent of a change?

2. Should we respect the CAP Process's decision to disallow Volt Switch? Why or why not?

Please note that Plasmanta does not require any attention to its abilities. I will not tolerate discussion on any new abilities.
 
1. What effect on Plasmanta does the addition of Volt Switch provide? Will it be balanced, or will it be too potent of a change?
I think that it will be rather balanced. The current role Plasmanta has in the metagame (special wallbreaker) is hard to keep around for long amounts of time against walls that are super-effective to Plasmanta. It becomes even worse when you realize it has a base 60 HP and no reliable recovery. Volt Switch allows Plasmanta get out of bad situations when HP Ground or Earth Power (where Stratagem is concerned) is everywhere in CAP. I believe it would help Plasmanta stick around for longer if it can pivot out of a bad situation.

2. Should we respect the CAP Process's decision to disallow Volt Switch? Why or why not?
Honestly, I think we should ignore it. This is mostly because of the fact that the concept that caused the disallowing of Volt Switch deteriorated over time, and there is nothing about a wallbreaker having pivoting potential that screams broken to me.
 
Last edited:
1. What effect on Plasmanta does the addition of Volt Switch provide? Will it be balanced, or will it be too potent of a change?

Chip damage and Sashbreaker. It's speed tier is enough to get it to be annoying

2. Should we respect the CAP Process's decision to disallow Volt Switch? Why or why not?

The pokemon works as is. I don't see why you'd need to add in Volt Switch if it's working fine without it. Does the pokemon do its job? Does the pokemon fit its concept? The answer is yes. I don't think think the question is "What effect does it have", nor do I think that the question is "should we respect the decision"; I think that the decision SHOULD be respected, simply because that was the intended goal of the CAPmon, it's performing adequately (because of/in spite of, it's regardless) and that the question is "Why does Plasmanta require Volt Switch?" Like you said, we know it simply becomes more viable due to its inclusion, but is it necessary to include it to make it viable? In my opinion, I think it's perfectly viable already and ergo, Volt Switch isn't necessary to be included.
 
1. What effect on Plasmanta does the addition of Volt Switch provide? Will it be balanced, or will it be too potent of a change?

Volt switch would make scarf Plasmanta stronger, but it would have to get rid of a coverage/thunderbolt so it is relatively balanced. The volt switch would only do major changes to the scarf set. I believe it'd help it out inside the cap meta-game and gets the good chip damage on pyroak.

2. Should we respect the CAP Process's decision to disallow Volt Switch? Why or why not?

I'm neutral on this one. Volt switch wouldn't do much to its original concept but it ever really needed to be it's original concept anyway. It's already a powerful mon and adding volt switch to it would obviously make it more viable, but I'm not sure if we really need that. I'll edit this post if I made a decision
 
1. What effect on Plasmanta does the addition of Volt Switch provide? Will it be balanced, or will it be too potent of a change?
Plasmanta will stay perfectly balanced with Volt Switch in my opinion, as it can still be prevented by some Ground like AV Colossoil, Gastrodon and Excadrill (if he doesn't pack HP Fire), Alolan Marowak stays a big nuisance too. However, I wonder if the addition of Volt Switch and another coverage Move (several person including me thought that Plasmanta needs one) will remain Plasmanta healthy. Otherwise, Volt Switch should help Plasmanta against Special Wall/Tank like Mollux, AV Magearna and AV Alolan-Muk, I don't see anything wrong with that.

2. Should we respect the CAP Process's decision to disallow Volt Switch? Why or why not?
I'm not sure about it, but I have thougt about a somewhat odd scenario (in which Plasmanta can fulfill its original concept): You have a Plasmanta and your opponent an AV Colossoil, who have seen that you packs a Gyarados behind which should use Colossoil as a Set-Up bait if Plasmanta is killed or if you chose to switch. The Colossoil doesn't have U-Turn and therefore the opponent switches into Something like Mega-Crucibelle which has enough SpDef to take hit from Plasmanta and which can kill Gyara before this one does DD. You have guessed that if you had single occasion to place Gyara, you would win, and that your opponent would know about that too. Therefore, you have clicked on Volt Switch in case your opponent would switch, which he did.

Plasmanta isn't dead and you didn't used your Gyara, but at least your opponent didn't want to kill your Plasmanta and you have gained momentum, you can still do this again. Of course, since Plasmanta didn't really fulfill its concept, this example might not be the Truth in practice, but in case like that I don't think that Volt switch is a distraction for his concept.
 
1. What effect on Plasmanta does the addition of Volt Switch provide? Will it be balanced, or will it be too potent of a change?
i think is balanced beacuse plasmanta dont have a god speed and volt switch give him a nice movelitty, the scarf set would be more good and can make a little of damage
2. Should we respect the CAP Process's decision to disallow Volt Switch? Why or why not?
Yes, beacuese plasmanta is healty to the metagame cause is a really strong check for all the tapus and some of top tiers pokes of OU
 

LucarioOfLegends

Master Procraster
is a CAP Contributor
1. What effect on Plasmanta does the addition of Volt Switch provide? Will it be balanced, or will it be too potent of a change?
Volt Switch as an addition seems fairly balanced. There are some obvious benefits that could be considered broken in some cases, with Plasmanta's speed tier a contributing factor to this. The ability to switch out of an unfavorable situation would be incredible for it, especially against stuff like Aurumoth and Lele. Of course, this comes with two major downsides: a moveslot, which Plasmanta desperately needs and would cause some 4mss, and a further weakness to Ground types. So, in my eyes, its balanced.
2. Should we respect the CAP Process's decision to disallow Volt Switch? Why or why not?
Honestly, we should ignore the original concept. Plasmanta is so far off from its concept, its practically in a new county. It certainly does not fulfill its concept or seems to relate to it in anyway, so we should not make competitive decisions based on it. Instead, we should focus on its current metagame role as a uniquely-typed special wallbreaker. Furthermore, Volt Switch is not in anyway overpowered, as it doesn't address most of its flaws. So no, we shouldn't respect the process' decision to disallow Volt Switch.
 
1. What effect on Plasmanta does the addition of Volt Switch provide? Will it be balanced, or will it be too potent of a change?
I think it could possibly take on a specs role, since it would be able to pivot around more. However, I also feel like volt switch might not necessarily be an optimal change for any of plasmanta's sets. You would want to run tbolt, volt switch, sludge wave, filler, and I feel in this metagame that it would not exactly be a good change. Of course you don't have to run the other stab, but I feel as if that takes away from some of plasmanta's potency. The electric/poison stab combination is very unique, and while being walled out by both stabs having immunities, it really is able to pack a punch with its neutral hits.
2. Should we respect the CAP Process's decision to disallow Volt Switch? Why or why not?
I think we should respect the original decision to disallow volt switch. Plasmanta is a gen 6 project, which as the previous gen makes it really recent. Its not like a decision with voodoom, which was a gen 4 pokemon, not to give it nasty plot to further push the agenda of the partnership. As several years have passed since voodoom's inception, we can see that no nasty plot severely hurt the voodoo doll, so we added nasty plot. With plasmanta, its a recent project, and preforms really well considering what it has to work with, so I see no real reason not to go with the original decision to disallow volt switch.
 

Drapionswing

Eating it up, YUMMY!
is a CAP Contributor Alumnus
1. What effect on Plasmanta does the addition of Volt Switch provide? Will it be balanced, or will it be too potent of a change?

Volt Switch wouldn't be broken on Plasmanta as it only provides Plasmanta with the ability to gain momentum on steels as they try to switch in on a sludge wave, or in Ferrothorns case a thunderbolt. I don't see this change making a significant change for plasmanta, as this won't improve it's matchup versus ground types much and that's where it struggles especially.

2. Should we respect the CAP Process's decision to disallow Volt Switch? Why or why not?

No, the decision to disallow volt switch was made due to focus on Plasmanta's concept however, Plasmanta's concept was a complete fail and won't be achievable in this update so there's no reason for us to not add Volt Switch.
 
1. What effect on Plasmanta does the addition of Volt Switch provide? Will it be balanced, or will it be too potent of a change?
Like prior commenters stated, it would mostly help Scarfmanta (and possibly also Baloonmanta) to run around with a bit more freedom. It would be balanced, sure, because Plasmanta has no access to reliable recovery while still being normally susceptible to entry hazards and being stopped from pivoting and in some cases (Dugtrio, Pursuit Colossoil) even trapped.
Specsmanta, a dedicated wallbreaker, would possibly make use of it as well, to get some chip damage in and wait for another strike, if the wallbreaking as is becomes less desirable.
Anyway, this is balanced in a lot of ways, partly because as a wallbreaker, it's not helpful to be Dugtrio's dream switchin - and with Volt Switch, this would be even more, given it would take another moveslot for a move Ground switchin welcomes to see and getting 4mss in the process (might possibly become used as a Duggybait with Water Pulse, HP Ice or some other coverage).

2. Should we respect the CAP Process's decision to disallow Volt Switch? Why or why not?
I think we should. Not necessarily from the fear of brokenness rather as from the part of Update principles, where we should stay conservative and adhere to the concept as well as established identity (well, unless the established identity is "Punching bag" or "Meta-breaker"). From my point of view, Plasmanta, with all of its traits, is competitively defined by its lack of Volt Switch. It's also known for being a powerful hitter with low amount of coverage and nice support options in Taunt, Encore, Clear Smog and Haze for the non-Choiced sets, but for me, the only thing that defines it more than the lack of Volt Switch is its susceptibility to Ground-types.
 
On phone, so copying the questions isn't possible. They are still labeled though.
1. Volt Switch would allow for Plasmanta to become a better pivot than it has the ability to right now, and probably lead to a new set to run on top of what it has now. I do not believe this will unbalance Plasmanta, although some of its checks may be less reliable with it and that may be an issue. Unless it changes that fact for a lot of Pokemon that would check it, I would even say that a pivot set with Volt Switch shouldn't lead to any painful "guess the set" problems with Plasmanta: The main counters are definitely unaffected and you would be dropping a coverage or support move for Volt Switch, which seems like an even payoff.


2. That said, Volt Switch seems anti-concept, which is the main reason it was avoided the first time. If we are to keep with the concept, then saying no to Volt Switch does seem like it would help keep that identity intact. Although one could probably argue that the move could be seen as a way to help keep the decision of when to sac Plasmanta in your hands. The merits of that sticking with the concept seem dubious to me though.
 

Ignus

Copying deli meat to hard drive
Let's clear the air about the concept for Plasmanta: During the process, almost everyone disliked the interpretation we took with it going forward.

Originally, many of the people who voted for the concept expected the project to explore on-death abilities and moves, like explosion or healing wish - but instead, due to the wording of the concept, we ended up taking it in the direction of 'dissuading' death. Sound backwards? It was backwards.

Plasmanta originally was the cause of the PRC threads where we seriously re-evaluated the way we handle concepts. These PRC chunks led to the CAP concept workshop (which failed because it didn't really mesh with the way CAP works) and changes to our Concept thread wording - That is to say, Plasmanta's concept is probably the concept most universally evaluated as a 'mistake', whatever that means in the world of making fake Pokemon.

Because of that, I'd argue that abandoning the concept isn't that big of a deal. Others might disagree, and if that's the case, that's what this thread is for! We should talk about it!
 

jas61292

used substitute
is a Community Contributoris a Top CAP Contributoris a Forum Moderator Alumnusis a Battle Simulator Moderator Alumnus
1. What effect on Plasmanta does the addition of Volt Switch provide? Will it be balanced, or will it be too potent of a change?
2. Should we respect the CAP Process's decision to disallow Volt Switch? Why or why not?

Rather than look at these two things independently, I'm going to address them both together. It is my opinion that Volt Switch would certainly have a decent effect on Plasmanta, but nothing to major. Much of what it can do now is limited by its coverage, and running Volt Switch either means forgoing a more powerful, spammable electric STAB, or losing out on that important coverage. It would certainly help a choiced set, which in general would prefer the pivoting ability, but other sets might consider it too big of a trade off. But regardless, it would not be that big of a change overall.

With that said, we absolutely should not be giving Plasmanta Volt Switch. Not because it would be too good, but because it goes against the original decision, without any real good reason. Yes, it makes Plasmanta better objectively, since more good options is always better than fewer. But, it doesn't do anything to directly address the few real shortcomings it has. We voted for Plasmanta to have minor updates, and so we can certainly give it some small competitive boosts, beyond anything it gains from a consistency standpoint. However, such competitive boosts should be focused on the specific areas where it currently needs a bit of a boost. Volt Switch would bean addition that is not focused on the competitive aspects we should be focusing on. All that Plasmanta does need, in my opinion, is a tiny bit of help with its coverage.

And if there is not a real good reason for giving this move, it should not be given, both because our update principles want us to be conservative where we can. And, frankly, it would be bad from a consistency point of view. I know I have seen a few people talk about how almost all electric types get it, so unless we still have a good reason not to give it, we should. But I think that is looking at things from the wrong point of view. The fact is, gen 6 Plasmanta does not get Volt Switch, and never will get Volt Switch. And Pokemon that don't get a easily accessible TM move almost never gain access to it in a later generation. Consistency does not side with this move, and while I would have no issues with it if it were competitively needed, I really think it is not. And if you disagree with my consistency, fellow non-Water type fish Stunfisk would like a word with you.
 

G-Luke

Sugar, Spice and One For All
is a Community Contributoris a CAP Contributoris a Forum Moderator Alumnus
I'll share my points on the questions in a later post, but I'd like to argue why I think jas's view is wrong.

The addition of Volt Switch was barred on Plasmanta for one simple reason - it goes against its concept. That arguement is one I can side with. But fast foward a generation, and here we are now - Plasmanta, a mon that not only fails at its concept, but is the lastest at a CAPmon that proves the notion that partner concepts simply do not work.

Now if we stand by that decision to bar Volt Switch, we'd be supporting a failed cause. If it didn't go against its concept, Plasmanta without a doubt would be utilizing Volt Switch in Choiced sets as of now.

True, Gen 6 Plasmanta doesn't get Volt Switch. That won't be changed. But why should that stop us from retifying what was tbh a mistake in the past - GF has done it. Think Aerodactyl. It didn't have access to Rock Slide originally when it came out, but that was rectified in later generations. And Stunfisk not getting Volt Switch is a bafflement I truly will never understand, but using a fluke to justify an argument doesn't make it a very strong one.
 

nv

The Lost Age
is a Community Contributor Alumnusis a Contributor Alumnusis a Smogon Media Contributor Alumnusis a Battle Simulator Staff Alumnus
1. What effect on Plasmanta does the addition of Volt Switch provide? Will it be balanced, or will it be too potent of a change?
Honestly, I don't feel that the addition of Volt Switch will do much to Plasmanta's viability, except for making one of its sets (Choice Scarf) better than it already is by providing it with a pivoting move. I also agree with that it isn't going to "overshadow" its other Electric moves (Thunderbolt in particular) except for maybe on its choiced sets, which means I don't see any reason why we can't add it. Trying to follow its concept, as G-Luke said, has obviously failed due to how partner concepts haven't worked before and still don't considering Plasmanta is the most recent iteration of this idea. I do believe it would be a balanced addition to Plasmanta's movepool that only helps its better set(s) to thrive more than it already is in the current metagame.

2. Should we respect the CAP Process's decision to disallow Volt Switch? Why or why not?
I don't believe we should follow the CAP Process's decision since Plasmanta has evolved passed its original concept. While I feel like saying that is reiterating what other people have said, it shows imo just how true this is. Plasmanta has developed into its own self-sustaining Pokemon as a special wallbreaker and for that reason, we should capitalize on tweaking the role that Plasmanta currently plays in the metagame rather than trying to revive a dead concept by disallowing a move that was only disallowed since it took away from the original concept.
 
On mobile so here it goes.

1.I don't really think adding Volt Switch to Plasmanta will change much outside of making its already more common set, Scarf, more potent and better at pivoting. And it's not making Thunderbolt useless either, they both have there own applications. I might be echoing nv and G-Luke a bit here, but really, they already make better points that I could.

2. I definitely belive that we should not follow the original decission. Like how so many others have already said, Plasmanta has deviated so much from its original concept (which really does fall in the "good on paper, bad in execution" territory) that it's a whole new mon. Even back when I first stumbled over it, I was more "Hm so this is supposed to be a fast Scarf abuser with a unique typing and decent set of resistances, right ?". So yeah, I'm pro for Volt Switch being added.
 

Deck Knight

Blast Off At The Speed Of Light! That's Right!
is a Forum Moderator Alumnusis a Top CAP Contributor Alumnusis a Top Smogon Media Contributor Alumnus
I wasn't the GL for this update, but it does generally concern me we started discussing a specific move right outside the gate.

That said, Volt Switch would be used on every single Plasmanta set. Scarf and Specs love it, but Life Orb will happily trade marginal power or a slot for the ability to do Scizor U-turn levels of "chip damage." 70 BP item-boosted STAB 131 Base SpA is not "chip damage," It's legitimately threatening in its own right, especially with the switch-out effect. It would definitely assist Plasmanta in breaking down special walls (by allowing a switch to something more immediately threatening to them while doing significant damage), so as far as being true to metagame role, Volt Switch undoubtedly is.

To honestly assess it, to me keeping this a minor update requires choosing one of coverage for Ground types (anything stronger than Hidden Power or Water Pulse which it already gets, anyway. Grass Knot seems like the max envelope because it helps with Hippo and Ttar, but not Lando-T or Excadrill) or allowing the move Volt Switch. Having both would completely change the way Plas plays.

Plasmanta's concept was barely decipherable and the genesis for an overhaul of concepts generally. Disallowing Volt Switch was incidental to an interpretation of the concept held at the time, but not central to punishing opponents for KOing it, especially since so many discussed threats were immune to the move to begin with.

Tl;dr
Allowing Volt Switch is consistent with Plasmanta's established metagame role but inconsistent with decisions made in its process.

Allowing stronger coverage makes Plasmanta a better generalized special attacker, but doesn't really help it pressure walls enough so it's not that consistent with its metagame role even if it's more respectful to its original process.

Adding both changes Plas' role to an unrecognizable "excellent special-attacking pivot with unique typing."

Personally I like the Volt Switch route more, but others may disagree.
 
Last edited:

reachzero

the pastor of disaster
is a Senior Staff Member Alumnusis a Top CAP Contributor Alumnusis a Tiering Contributor Alumnusis a Battle Simulator Moderator Alumnus
1. What effect on Plasmanta does the addition of Volt Switch provide? Will it be balanced, or will it be too potent of a change?

Plasmanta has several very strong assets going for it, and several very strong liabilities that hamper its viability. Volt Switch would help with some of these liabilities, but far from all.

In my experience, Plasmanta has a lot to recommend it; Electric is an amazing STAB when paired with Tapu Koko for Electric Terrain support. Poison is a good STAB for hitting Pyroak, Tapu Bulu and Tangrowth, something Tapu Koko appreciates. Electric/Poison is a surprisingly good defensive typing, and will be even better once Tomohawk loses Earth Power. Base 100 speed is mediocre for a non-Scarf user, but very good for a Scarf user. Tapu Koko + Scarf Plasmanta is an exceedingly dangerous combination if the rest of the team is arranged well.

That being said, Plasmanta has some really serious flaws that turn it at times into a huge momentum sink.

Plasmanta has no recovery, low base HP, and takes a ton of residual damage from the stuff it likes to switch into. It can't be used as your primary Water resist because it takes so much damage from the rest of Volkraken's attacks. Using Life Orb is really tough when you're switching mostly into Hurricane or Nature's Madness. Calling Plasmanta a wallbreaker is a major stretch when it can't really break Ferrothorn or Chansey or accomplish anything at all against stall before being killed by Dugtrio.

But the biggest problem for Plasmanta, the one that keeps it at B-rank (where it honestly belongs) is how badly it deals with Ground types and how powerful and omnipresent those Grounds are in CAP.

Plasmanta's concept assessment had a lot of problems, that is well known. It would be easy to argue that the worst of these was the decision to be hard-walled by Ground types, as Ground types are some of the most threatening Pokemon in CAP as well as the hardest to circumvent. Moreover, whether this was foreseeable in Gen 6 or not is unclear to me, but Gyarados is not as threatening to Ground types as people seemed to think, and at any rate a few of these Ground types (Landorus-Therian, Zygarde), will set up on Plasmanta rather than killing it outright.

Enter Volt Switch. Volt Switch does solve some problems for Plasmanta, such as the issue of losing one-on-one to Ferrothorn (for the non-Scarf set). On the other hand, it makes Plasmanta's issues with Ground types much, much worse. The result is that it helps the all-out attacker set far, far more than the Scarf set. For instance, a typical all-out attacker set might look like this with Volt Switch:

Plasmanta @ Magnet
Ability: Storm Drain
EVs: 252 SpA / 4 SpD / 252 Spe
Timid Nature
IVs: 0 Atk
- Thunderbolt
- Sludge Bomb
- Hidden Power [Ice]
- Volt Switch


While this set still does nothing against stall, the ability to Volt Switch on Ferrothorn does a lot for Plasmanta, and the fact that the all-out attacker can afford HP Ice helps a lot against Landorus-T and Zygarde (though not against Alola-Wak, a massive threat to Plasmanta). Even with Volt Switch, every Plasmanta set still has clear, hard counters on every style of team, so while it would help, it couldn't possibly be called "broken".

Scarf Plasmanta, on the other hand, probably shouldn't ever run Volt Switch. The best reason to use Scarf Plasmanta (and Scarf is very clearly its best set) is because it 2HKOs so many things with Thunderbolt, especially in Electric Terrain, while reliably revenging every Greninja set and killing Cawmodore fairly reliably (HP Fire KOs Caw a little more than half the time after a Belly Drum, and every time if Caw has taken Stealth Rock damage). In other words, Scarf Plamanta has three moves already required (Thunderbolt, HP Fire and Sludge Bomb/Wave) to be effective at all, and badly needs its fourth attack to cover as many Ground types as possible. This is the only move that Volt Switch could realistically replace, yet doing so would make Plasmanta significantly less effective. The case could perhaps be made for using a set identifical to the all-out attacker set, but giving up on Cawmodore seems to me like a spectacularly bad idea considering how weak to Caw a team of Plasmanta + Koko would then become, especially considering the unlikelihood of using Cyclohm at that point.

In other words, Volt Switch would help Plasmanta's viability some, but not nearly so much as you might think, and not even close to how much coverage against Grounds would help.

2. Should we respect the CAP Process's decision to disallow Volt Switch? Why or why not?

Plasmanta's concept assessment, which led to the decision to disallow Volt Switch, was an unmitigated disaster. It took a very attainable concept ("what are the advantages of fainting, and how can we exploit them?") and sent the project down a completely tangential path. In particular, it took an unreasonably specific path in making Gyarados a focus of the project, to the point of hijacking the whole process, in my opinion. Evidence for this is that everything about Plasmanta is entirely counterintuitive for a newcomer looking at it for the first time: it is obvious that Syclant is a glass cannon, that Colossoil stops the secondary, and that Fidgit is all about utility. It's even pretty easy to see how Malaconda is better in Sun. When you look at Plasmanta, however, nothing is obvious. It is supposed to demonstrate the benefits of fainting, but it lacks Explosion, Final Gambit, Memento and Healing Wish, it has no place on Trick Room or Rain or Tailwind teams except as an attacker, which means something else needs to die to support it! It is supposed to "continue to have an impact" after fainting, but has no hazards or screens. Almost anything can die to "support" Gyarados, and in practice the two are rarely even seen together.

The point of this is not merely to bash the concept assessment, since goodness only knows enough people have already done that. The point is that Plasmanta's team suffers if Plasmanta faints. Whether you believe Einherjar was an attainable concept or not (I think it was), Plasmanta has already irredeemably failed it. The entire reason for originally disallowing Volt Switch has been proven faulty, and bringing up the concept as an argument at this point is laughable. In fact, saying that Volt Switch on Plasmanta is anti-concept raises the very good question of what pro-concept would even look like now, considering how poorly the concept was assessed.

I doubt that Volt Switch would make an enormous competitive impact for Plasmanta the way that it would for Krilowatt or the way that adding, say, Surf would for Plasmanta, but to continue to deny it on the grounds of its concept ignores the fact that virtually every other aspect of Plasmanta's design is already anti-concept.
 
Last edited:

Bughouse

Like ships in the night, you're passing me by
is a Site Content Manageris a Forum Moderator Alumnusis a CAP Contributor Alumnusis a Tiering Contributor Alumnusis a Contributor Alumnus
I fully agree with jas. Volt Switch is unnecessary and insufficient anyway to make Plasmanta good on its own.

I'd prefer to make as few changes as necessary so since this one is not really in the right direction and it contravenes specific decisions made last time (regardless of how garbage the concept was), I'd rather look into other changes instead.
 

Bughouse

Like ships in the night, you're passing me by
is a Site Content Manageris a Forum Moderator Alumnusis a CAP Contributor Alumnusis a Tiering Contributor Alumnusis a Contributor Alumnus
Double posting because I can...

So what other direction would I like it to go?

Plasmanta suffers because electric and poison have immunities. When Plasmanta was made, this was known and intentional. Lure in those types, let Gyarados then set up on them.

But SM/playing in the CAP meta have introduced two Pokemon to Plasmanta's world that were never supposed to beat it ignoring the type chart: Cawmodore and Marowak-A.

I think one of the best simple ways to improve Plasmanta would be with Mold Breaker, making it a fantastic Cawmodore check. I am aware Plasmanta already has 3 abilities but realistically no one is ever running anything but Storm Drain (for good reason).

The other option is giving Plasmanta a passable coverage option that lets it beat a select check or two, without totally ruining the whole counters list. Pain Split for example would remove Chansey and nothing else.
 
I've noticed Vital Spirit doesn't do much for Plasmanta if Electric Terrain is up and running becasue the field prevents grounded Pokémon from falling asleep, and Ohmagod's STAB is boosted by the same terrain. Mold Breaker would be nice to see on the anti-censorship stingray, as it allows Plasmanta to check Cawmodore based on the type chart, so it could easily replace Vital Spirit. At least it resists Cawmodore's STABs and Drain Punch, but Belly Drum enables Cawmodore to muscle through with raw power, even if it doesn't have Knock Off.
 
Mold Breaker would be a useful ability on Plasmanta over Vital Spirit since it allows him to deal with Cawmodore and A-Marowak. However, if I'm allowed to already talk about moves we would give to Manta, I've seen a lot of people who want to give Surf to Plasmanta, which prevents A-Marowak to wall you and would make you choose HP Fire over HP Ice, in order to kill some Steel, including Cawmodore. Therefore, as Bughouse said, we should make a choice between either an ability or a coverage option which helps against some Manta's usual counters.

Some of you might hate me for being stuck on the concept, but do you think that Innards Out could fit on Plasmanta?
Among Plasmanta's threats, the most obvious ones are Ground type, who can OHKO him with ease, and the majority of them aren't able to heal themselves outside of Rest or without Wish support (Colossoil, Lando-T, Zygarde, Garchomp...), which means that they don't want to lose too much HP if they are supposed to be useful later on the match. Outside of Ground type, Innards Out can save you against some Set-Up sweeper, powerful Wallbreakers and more. Plasmanta is also faster than Pyukumuku and can use Taunt against his opponent if this one decides to use non offensive move in front of Manta. Nonetheless, I think Innards Out Plasmanta would need something which allows him to leave his presence on the field like Toxic Spikes or Tailwind.

Even though Manta doesn't have many HP (which means you a straight OHKO on Manta won't kill the opponent all the time) and depsite the fact that the incoming Surf already helps Manta greatly aginst most Ground except Gastrodon, who isn't bothered that much by Innards Out as he can heal off, I think that Innards Out wouldn't be completely overshadowed by Storm Drain. Of course it doesn't help the core Plasmanta + Gyarados, but we said earlier that we don't care about that anymore right?

Concerning Volt Switch, I fully agree with what Reachzero said above.
 
About Innards Out I really like the idea of it still slightly being with it's concept without completely changing it. Plus
the imagery of it's innards looks scary. With innards out, it can still slightly do the concept it was made for, but supports more than gyarados. Allows a cleaner to wipe out the pokemon quickly.
 

snake

is a Community Leaderis a Top CAP Contributoris a Contributor to Smogon
CAP Co-Leader
Please limit discussion to Volt Switch for the time being. I'll give a chance for discussion for everything else very soon, so please wait until then.
 

snake

is a Community Leaderis a Top CAP Contributoris a Contributor to Smogon
CAP Co-Leader
As of now, this thread seems a little split on whether or not Plasmanta should or should not have Volt Switch. However, I don't want to poll Volt Switch just yet. While there hasn't been an overwhelming response to disallow Volt Switch, there is enough dissent that I don't want to guarantee it's inclusion on Plasmanta. I wanted to kick off discussion on Volt Switch because I wanted everyone to get it off their chest. So, now I'd like to have a formal moves discussion. This will allow us to be able to think about Volt Switch in context with Plasmanta's update, not just Plasmanta itself.

Additionally, Mold Breaker has been brought up for discussion. This ability does address some of Plasmanta's problems with a couple of its checks and counters, but I'd rather finish moves first. sparktrain and I decided it'd be already to be unconventional and focus on moves before abilities.

Before we get to actual moveset submissions, here are a couple of questions to be answered:

1. What kind of moves does Plasmanta need to uphold its metagame role? Don't name specific moves (for example, say Plasmanta needs a recovery move, not Recover or Giga Drain).
2. Given Plasmanta's subpar coverage moves, does it need new coverage? Why or why not? Don't name specific moves or certain types of moves (for example, do not say that Plasmanta needs Earthquake or Ground-type coverage).
3. Is Volt Switch a move that Plasmanta absolutely needs? Why or why not?
3. Would adding Volt Switch to Plasmanta be adding for the sake of adding? Why or why not?


Moveset submissions will happen in due time, but not now. I will retain the right to delete any posts that do not follow the rules above or have a formal moveset submission. The purpose of these questions is to give more direction for a smoother moveset submissions phase.

Please be smart with your answers. This is not the place to give Plasmanta reliable recovery, boosting moves, and 5 coverage moves. Plasmanta only needs smaller tweaks, so keep this in mind.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

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

Top