CAP 34 - Part 1 - Concept Submissions

Not open for further replies.


Clefable's wish came true!
is a Forum Moderatoris a Top CAP Contributor

Stat Thief

Description: This Pokémon copies the stat spread of an existing Pokémon exactly as it appears in the builder.

Justification: Stats has historically had lower contributor turnout compared to other stages simply because participation demands a greater familiarity with the project. What happens when you remove a steep barrier of entry, like the BSR Calculator, from the project? This target concept aims to make the stat stage more accessible to all contributors while also imposing a unique limiting factor of having to use an existing stat chassis.

  • How important is it for contributors to be able to cherry-pick their benchmarks using the BSR calculator? Can the same level of customization be achieved with a finite number of options?
  • The BSR limit paired with the individual limits are designed to prevent contributors from creating absurdly overtuned stat spreads. How do you achieve a reasonable/restrained submission process without these arbitrary values?
  • If stats were to be selected first, how does the ambiguous direction of the concept impact our ability to have a meaningful conversation surrounding stats and roles? Does starting with a stat chassis make it easier to build out the Pokémon?
  • If stats were to be selected last, how limited does the stats discussion become as a result of our previous decisions? Does the submission process devolve into trying to brute force a stat spread or is there still ample room for customization? Would the stage follow the existing trend of closely related stat spreads being considered/submitted or would there be greater variety?
  • How important should distinguishing our creation from the original Pokémon be?
Last edited:
Final Submission

- Death Star

Description - This pokemon has one critically low defense stat, while being reliant on the other to fulfill its role.


I’m always fascinated by Pokemon with traits that are inherently contradictory in some way. Roles like tank, defensive pivot, and bulky setup sweeper require tanking hits, and in most cases the pokemon that fill these roles are at least moderately bulky on both sides of the spectrum. There are some exceptions, such as Assault Vest Hoopa-Unbound which functions as a tank despite a huge vulnerability to physical moves, and Kartana which would often tank physical hits switching in or to set up a Swords Dance but had horrid special bulk. Something like Great Tusk has a large imbalance in its defensive stats while tanking hits quite frequently to perform its role, so it’s a decent example to look to. Pokemon with well-defined strengths and weaknesses like this tend to be some of the most interesting to use, and make for really rich processes as well.

Questions To Be Answered -
  • When in the process must we choose which defense stat has the gaping hole in it? Can this wait until stats or is it important to decide it earlier than that, maybe even in concept assessment?
  • What team archetypes are more or less suited to covering our vulnerabilities? For instance, is VoltTurn required to get us in against the pokemon we’re more suited to facing?
  • While having our dominant defensive stat be massive is a good way to counterbalance our weakness, can we succeed with a more subtle approach?
  • What roles rely on frequently tanking hits, and which of these are suitable for a pokemon with such a massive vulnerability?
  • How passive are we allowed to be while maintaining viability? Is a role like wall on the table? How would we succeed in such a role where pokemon like Avalugg and Pecharunt did not?
  • Conversely, how offensive are we allowed to be without subverting the concept by avoiding hits almost entirely? What is the sweet spot?
  • How can we avoid being too vulnerable to scouting, pivoting and double switching, when an entire side of the attacking spectrum can effectively take us down?
  • When choosing a typing, do we need to focus more on our dominant defense stat (leaning into our strengths) or our weak defense stat (mitigating our weaknesses)?
  • A lot of pokemon rely on weak, uninvested utility attacking moves like Knock Off and U-turn. Can we avoid being too vulnerable to such moves when trying to check pokemon like Dragapult or Clefable? Is a typing that resists or at least is not weak to such moves required?
Explanation -

I think any of the roles I discussed could work for this concept. I initially developed the concept as “this is a pokemon with at least 120 points between its defensive stats”, but it was pointed out to me that it’s futile trying to define an exact limit for that sort of thing, and anyway, it’s very dependent on the pokemon’s other traits. One of my questions concerns whether we even need to pump the other defense stat or not, which I think is worth considering.

The part in the description about being “reliant on the other defensive stat to fulfill its role” is there because if we’re too offensive, it becomes easy to ignore that defense stat entirely. So having a role where we’re forced to tank hits is vital for this concept to be interesting at all. That said, I definitely thought about powerful attackers like Kartana and Nihilego when developing this concept, and that is definitely a valid route we could take.

Thanks Pipotchi for the name and some edits!
Last edited:

Back to the Future

Description: This Pokemon leverages the ability Quark Drive to serve a variety of different roles.

Justification: To preface, I'm writing this half-asleep and plan to elaborate on it later - just want to get a preliminary idea out there before I forget. I've always found Quark Drive interesting because wanting to make use of it pretty much mandates the use of Pincurchin. What would incentivize a Future Paradox mon to run manual terrain? While it seems that the majority of the community prefers not having a CAP be "what if we gave x mon x setup move," in this context ETerrain acts as an unorthodox setup move - almost a +1 to a certain stat depending on how you EV it, a boost to your electric moves, and now a block on basically just Rest (although that is a pretty good thing to block against mons like Dondozo.)

Questions to be Answered: To be added

Explanation: I've had this idea in my head since I saw the Paradox Naviathan in the Flash CAP thread. Feels like the legs that the idea might have had were mostly scuttled by the sleep moves ban, but I'd be happy to discuss this or get any preliminary feedback before I add more.

: Big Game Hunter

Description: This Pokémon is designed to break hyper-offense.

Justification: The meta right now is extremely strong with tons of big, heavy hard-hitting Pokémon. This Pokémon will be designed as a blanket check, but not counter, for many of these threats. Its offensive kit will be built around KOing common hyper-offense Pokémon, without being so strong to be a runaway threat on its own and start wallbreaking and sweeping. It will reward skillful maneuvers to safely bring into the field and risky gambits.

  • What is the defensive utility of offense?
  • Is it possible to mitigate offenses to be strong enough to KO offensive defensively-uninvested mons without being strong enough to stand a major threat to defensive mons on its own?
  • How do you build a mon that is able to broadly check many threats, without outright countering them?
  • Are there any common weakpoints that many hyper-offense Pokémon share?

Explanation: To use an easy to understand explanation of what I mean, Weavile is able to check Garchomp by coming in on a slow u-turn or after a KO. HOWEVER, it cannot counter Chomp; it will die to any of its moves if it gets hit first. This mon is essentially this but it can do it to most of the leading threats in the meta. The core principle is "Defense through Offense."
Last edited:
  • Name - Hero's Journey
  • Description - Similar to the literary "hero's journey" archetype, the CAP starts out slow but powers up as time(turns) go on or as it interacts with more foes(other pokemon).
  • Justification- What we explore:
    • Since gen 4, we have only had one concept that has to do with staying in for a certain amount of time, and that's Slow Start- a negative ability that most people really dislike, as it rendered regigigas borderline unusable for over a decade. What if we had a CAP that could flip that concept on its head, the longer it stays in the stronger it gets? To put it short, we're looking for a pokemon that gets better the longer that it's in, and I believe that this idea allows for an incredibly interesting archetype in the metagame- would it be used like Gliscor, spamming protect and substitute to get further, like Latias or Clefable constantly constantly boosting its defenses in an attempt to sweep, or would it find a role more as a late game sweeper like Kingambit or the long-banned Last Respects Houndstone? There are a lot of ways to interpret the "positive stay-in" mechanic, and while an ability does naturally get incentivised here, there is a lot that can be done- this pokemon could be defensive, offensive, utility, it is entirely up to the way the community would take it- just built around that concept of the Hero's Journey, the positive stay-in. Even down to the moves, once it's been conversed about more- is it a dragon slayer, killing all the tier's dragon types with it's powerful ice and fairy moves, is it a tanky hero building itself up like Zamazenta, or is it something more creative? Is it the mage gaining higher priority to its utility moves as it stays in more? SO many archetypes that can spring forward from this single idea! It could be as simple as a stored power sweeper or as complicated as the mage, I just love where this archetype could go in discussion and bringing novelty to CAP.
  • Questions To Be Answered-
    • What if we make it a sweeper?
    • What if we make it more defensive or utility?
    • What are some other archetypes that could be built off the "Hero's Journey" positive stay-in concept?
    • What are some movesets that could build this idea up outside of an ability?
    • What kind of movesets would you give to a Hero that gets stronger throughout its journey?
    • Can we please give it Sacred Sword?
I put a little bit too much into the Justification but I'm pretty passionate about this idea- the portion could definitely be streamlined a bit and the rest be put into an explanation section, but I think the raw thought process here is worth seeing! Hope you enjoyed the read!
Last edited:
Final Submission

Name: King for a Day (formerly known as Mini-Uber)

Description: This Pokemon replicates or is inspired by a strategy, play pattern or niche used by an Uber Pokemon of our choosing.

Justification: Many of the Pokemon that reside in Ubers- be it this gen or in past gens- have playstyles and niches that are totally foreign to most other Pokemon and tiers. This concept seeks to explore both the design space of those roles and niches, as well as how balance and strength work in Pokemon, to create something that draws from the unique elements of the chosen Uber without being worthy of the tier itself.

Questions To Be Answered:
  • What makes an Uber Pokemon interesting beyond just the power level?
  • What roles or niches, or playstyles are unique to or common among Uber Pokemon?
  • On average Ubers have better stats, abilities, and movepools than OU Pokémon - out of those 3, which are safe to take away without removing a Pokemon's identity? What of these traits define what Ubers?
  • Will a Pokemon still be useful even when taken out of its native context (i.e. without the specific metagame threats it checks)?
  • Is there room to explore certain Ubers' unique defensive and utility potential in addition to their offenses?
  • How do the roles of past Ubers- those not currently available in SV, mainly the Kalos legendary trio, Genesect, and the Ultra Beasts - translate to the modern generation?
  • How can Pokemon already deemed too strong for OU be replicated in a more balanced fashion?
  • SV has quite a few Pokemon banned to Ubers who are NOT Legendary Pokemon. Would the roles of these Pokemon be easier or harder to translate back to OU in a balanced fashion?
  • Due to the nature of Ubers as a non-usage based tier, there are many Pokemon that are good in both Ubers and lower tiers. Quagsire is a very good example in any generation that isn't Gen 1, but others include Skeledirge and Ting-Lu in SV Ubers and SV OU, Weavile in SS Ubers/OU, and Celesteela in SM Ubers/OU. What makes these Pokemon match up well against both higher and lower tiered threats, and how can we apply this to CAP 34?

Explanation: This concept has been submitted a couple of times already (thanks to SHSP, the previous submitter of this concept, for giving me permission to submit this for CAP 34!), but considering how infamous SV OU is for its liberal bans, I think this is the perfect time to look at this concept in further depth. The wide variety of non-Legendary Pokemon banned to Ubers this generation gives us a wide variety of Pokemon to base this CAP around. Annihilape, Palafin, Sneasler, Espathra, Baxcalibur, and Ursaluna-Bloodmoon are just a few of the examples of interesting Ubers Pokemon that could be used to create solid OU expies of. And that's not even getting into all of the new interesting Legendaries in Ubers - Ogerpon-Hearthflame, Terapagos, the Origin forms of Dialga and Palkia, the Raidons... and this isn't even getting into all of the older Ubers we could use for inspiration! In short, this concept would be a fun way to explore how to reverse the power creep that seems to be so common in Gen 9 while allowing us to explore some unseen niches in the metagame as a result.
Last edited:


is a Pre-Contributor

perhaps a

Name: Parry and Riposte

This Pokemon is able to "parry" and/or "riposte" (counter-attack) an opponent's actions with a well-timed action from the user. This parry and riposte may be done passively from the Pokemon's inherent features like its ability, or more actively accomplished through the use of specific moves, or both.

As observed with the continued additions of progressively offensive power-creeping threats entering the metagame, it is STILL important to consider in what ways can players mitigate said offensive threats old and new alike. In that regard, this is primarily an Actualization concept that aims to explore the ways in which a Pokemon can improve the user's positioning in a battle through carefully timed and executed play.

Questions To Be Answered:
  • How are Pokemon able to "parry" and "riposte" foes with the present gameplay mechanics (including but not limited moves abilities, and typings, for example)?
  • Furthermore, what actions can a player make that would be considered to fall under the umbrella of "parrying" and "riposting"?
  • Does parrying and counter-attacking have to be inherently offensive, or can there be defensive parries as well?
  • To what extent does the idea / threat of a Pokemon's potential to parry and riposte impact each player's gameplay throughout a match?
  • Under what circumstances would we expect this Pokemon to be able to attempt a "parry", i.e. when in a match is it most advantageous to try to and parry your opponent?
  • When in a turn should a parry take effect? When should the riposte take effect?
  • To what extent should misplaying a parry punish the user?
  • What would a punishment for incorrectly attempting or executing a "parry" look like?
  • Should a "parrying" Pokemon be able to parry and riposte itself?
  • How does Terastalization provide opportunities for "parrying" in a match?
  • To what extent should the user be left "open" to Pokemon it previously checked or countered specifically after "parrying" with Terastalization?
Explanation: First and foremost, some definitions:


par·ry ˈper-ē

: to ward off a weapon or blow


ri·poste ri-ˈpōst

: a fencer's quick return thrust following a parry

In fighting games, one of the most skillful actions a player can make is accurately reading the actions of their opponent and properly blocking said action and following with an immediate counter blow. In Super Smash Brothers Melee, for example, Marth's Down+B action is a parry that, when timed properly allows the Marth user to block the attack from the opponent and redirect the damage back onto the attacker. In order to properly use the move, the Marth user must be acutely aware of their opponent's plans of attack in order to make this move work effectively, otherwise they are left open to attack should they mistime their "Down+B". In Smash Ultimate, King K. Rool' "Gut Check" exaggerates this to an amusing degree: timing the narrow window in the proper direction leads to what is essentially a KO, but missing it or facing the wrong direction makes the K. Rool user vulnerable to attacks for almost a whole two seconds.

We can see some examples of this in Pokemon as well. The move "Sucker Punch" is a direct example of such an idea, where the Sucker Punch user has to be entirely correct with their read of their opponent's plan of attack to effectively use the move. Predict your opponent to be using an attacking move and you move first and likely get the KO, misread and you essentially lose an entire turn. We've seen examples where games will often come down to one player outplaying (or not outplaying) an opponent with a Kingambit (and Bisharp in generations before it) using Sucker Punch to win games or vice versa. Sucker Punch isn't the only example of this kind of gameplay as well; other more passive examples of "parrying" come from appropriate switch-ins and lures which can could catch opponents off-guard. We also have seen just how powerful a special version of this move is with Raging Bolt's Thunderclap. Raging Bolt makes its presence known on the field immediately through mind games between boosting with Calm Mind and forcing a first attack with Thunderclap, or dropping a Draco Meteor on foes who misplay. There's an incredibly high skill ceiling here that is demonstrated through these two moves and their characteristic owners in the SV CAP metagame.

Another returning example of a move that takes this concept into an actualization is the move Beak Blast. New to THIS Concept pitch compared to previous pitches, Beak blast presents an interesting way of "parrying and riposting" an opponent almost perfectly. "If the user is hit by a contact move this turn before it can execute this move, the attacker is burned." This means that a carefully played CAP34 with Beak Blast could force a matchup in their favor by inflicting a burn should it be hit by a contact move on the same turn. This thus leads to an increased skill ceiling for matches as players on both sides must play around the mirage threat of a burn, which might otherwise be the difference between a win and a loss. Similarly, Gouging Fire's Burning Bulwark or Toxapex's Baneful Bunker, while not terribly useful in Singles, demonstrate a similar mindgame. By eschewing one's opportunity to attack or actively damage the opponent on a well-predicted turn, one is able to passively punish their opponent through the application of a status condition (whether this status condition is actually useful for the overall match is another story, but this is just another example).

Switching in a Pokemon with the ability Guts to potentially absorb a burn and obtain an immediate surge in power, or switching in a Pokemon with the ability "Defiant" on an expected switch-in of a Pokemon with "Intimidate" are examples of this kind of "parrying". Make the right read and you've got yourself a much stronger opportunity to win matches, make the wrong read and you've left yourself open to the whims of your opponent. The ability Magic Bounce (AND REBOUND) is an example of this concept (almost the exact opposite of Sucker Punch too): properly predicting a status move being used, the user can switch in a Pokemon with Magic Bounce and immediately punish the status move user. Obstagoon as a Pokemon is somewhat the codifier of this idea since it has Obstruct a move that immediately creates openings if a Pokemon should make contact with it by lowering the attacker's defense 2 stages (thanks quziel). This can also be extended to more, admittedly gimmicky, concepts like Focus Sash / Endure + Reversal strategies, wherein you allow a Pokemon to be hit by an attack bringing them to HP, only to use an attack that does more damage the lower the user's HP is (rest in peace hen 5). A few of these strategies presented here are characteristic of Gen 8, yes, but I believe there are still plenty of ways we can parry and riposte here now in a mature Generation 9 metagame.

One major consideration I hope we really consider in great depth is what punishment looks like on both players' ends. If the user of CAP34 attempts to parry their opponent, only to be read and thwarted, what does the gameplay penalty look like? From the Sucker Punch example, it means that the opponent gets a free turn to use the status move of their choice which could have significant repercussions in following turns. With the Magic Bounce example, if you were to switch in a Pokemon with magic bounce on a predicted status move, only to be attacked with a damage-inducing attack, CAP34 has lost a perhaps non-negligible amount of health which might prevent it from switching in again later. But it should also follow that the player FACING CAP34 should be punished for creating obvious play. If it is clear that an opposing CAP34 has a clear parrying opportunity, and you let it happen, to what extent is your predictable play punishable, and what might that look like? Does it mean that if, for example you choose a move that you'd be choice locked into with a type that CAP34 is immune to, and you go for it anyways, to what extent is that your own fault for all the problems you might be immediately facing shortly thereafter, and what might those punishments look like? Knowing what the punishment for failing to parry is just as intrinsic to the concept as it is to understand what successfully parrying looks like.

I'm once again resubbing this concept for CAP 34 as I feel it was one still worth exploring, especially now in a more or less "completed" version of Pokemon Scarlet and Violet. We likely have all the moves we would expect to see in the remainder of this set of games, including some of the moves that were previously "removed" from the game, or redistributed in some capacity. I still believe the ultimate goal of this process would be to make a Pokemon that rewards skill play and timing in a game, a skill that has always been and is becoming been more indicative of high level play. Given just how fast the metagame has gotten as of late, whether it be from the rising supremacy of Rain, an increase in priority attackers, or just generally fast Pokemon, the ability for a player to outplay their opponent, and thus bypassing the concept of speed as a whole, through careful preparation is something absolutely intrinsic to Gen 9's metagames, and a concept well-worth exploring in my opinion. I want to make it clear that this concept does not necessarily need to skew towards offense or defense right out of the gate. Rather, this concept will hopefully explore what it means to "see an opening" in a match, how to capitalize on these moments, and how to prevent these moments through careful play.

And as always, I'd be remiss if I didn't comment on Terastalization here. As we've seen now with over a year of games with the mechanic, the dominant way to use Tera is to obtain some kind of defensive utility to swing a match in one's favor. If you want to have your Archaludon to maintain its offensive presence in a match while in front of a Raging Bolt, for example, simply Tera Fairy and live the hit you'd otherwise faint to. That isn't to say Tera can be used in offensive cases as well, (see Stellar + Contrary), but Terastalization presents a novel way to achieve this concept (albeit likely in just one of MANY ways in a perfect outcome in my opinion). If selected as our concept for CAP34, I'd encourage those involved with the concept assessment to consider Tera as an option for this Pokemon to be successful, but to be one of many other options in the interest of project completeness.

thanks for reading, I welcome your feedback :blobthumbsup:
Last edited:


I am fucking perfect
is a Site Content Manageris an official Team Rateris a Top Social Media Contributoris a Forum Moderatoris a Community Contributoris a Top Contributoris a Smogon Media Contributoris a CAP Contributor Alumnus
Round 2 here we go. Remember, you can reach out to me as well if you have more questions about your concept!

Name: The Stuff Of Legends
I would flatly define a box legendary as a Pokemon that does not evolve from anything and has either a 670 or 680 BST. I think most people would agree with that. I think you need to cut to the actual competitive side of the concept. The interest here should be more on "let's make a Pokemon with really, really big stats" rather than "let's make a box legend" because the former actually can pose some good questions around how we balance for big BST, how much BST actually matters, etc. while the latter is just a flavor definition. We are looking to ask competitive questions, and I think there are some here to answer, you just gotta specify.

Name - Not Terably Common
I am a bit hesitant to do this, as while I think you can definitely make a Pokemon more likely to use a weird tera, it is ultimately at the whims of the metagame, and that could change very quickly. The pieces are there for this to be interesting, but I do fear the concept quickly taking a backseat.

Name: Stat Thief
While I like the idea, as CAP is maybe too reliant on making these perfect, min-maxed spreads, I do think it trivializes the stats process a little. Not too much that I wouldn't choose this concept, as there are plenty of Pokemon to choose from, but it is something to note, as the process of making stats is one of my favorite parts of CAP, and we don't get that here. Another matter is how it doesn't provide a whole lot of direction for any other part of the stage. The stats stage is currently informed by other stages, and while this concept may seek to mix that order, I'm not sure how it plays out there.

Name - Death Star
I think this concept is generally quite solid. I don't think examples are even limited to what you mentioned in your post, either, as I'd say stuff like even Goodra makes sense as a comparison. I'd like to see some other questions, for instance, "How does having such a big weakness impact typing?" or "At what point in the process does it become necessary to choose what side the weakness is on?" Things like that make sense to me as an expansion on what you already have.

Name: Back to the Future
Concepts that call out a specific ability are against the rules, unfortunately.

Name: Big Game Hunter
I've got the beast in my sights. This concept is a hot one. To me, it is very reminiscent of Miasmaw's concept, which also called for a specific counter to a metagame force. I think Miasmaw's concept was very, very interesting, despite whether or not it ended up achieving it. That being said, I think this is a lot more focused than Miasmaw's concept is, as it targets a specific archetype rather than a gameplay style. The issue I think you should address is whether or not this CAP is going to angle to beat what HO is today or focus on being positive into general HO traits (set-up, hazards, etc.). I'm interested in seeing how you expand this.

Name - Hero's Journey
I'm going to suggest you read through some other concepts and questions and update this, as right now it reads very flavor-heavy. Remember, CAP is a competitively based process, and we want to assume as little as possible about a CAP from its concept. There is something there with the idea of rewarding staying in, but it needs to be explained better.

Name: King for a Day
CAP often looks to other tiers for inspiration on how to solve certain problems. Looking to Ubers, which plays fairly uniquely due to what is in the tier, is definitely an interesting one. This has obviously been a concept that has been honed over quite a few processes, so I will only add this: it would be helpful as well to look into Pokemon that are good in both Ubers and OU (think Skeledirge in early SV, Weavile in SS, Celesteela in SM, etc.). That's an interesting and valid route to look down as well as what you already discuss.

Name: Parry and Riposte
ye olde parry and riposte. This is another concept that I know has been around the block a bit, so I'll keep the advice short. How are you for moving this concept into generation 9? Do the same principles apply in a much faster metagame? I think you've explained yourself fairly well, I just wanted to give you a little more to think about. And put hen 5 away, Zarel saw that it would never see the light of day again for good reason.
  • Name - Webslinger
  • Description - This CAP would be designed around using and making the most of Sticky Web.
  • Justification-
    • What new territory will your Concept Pokemon explore, why do you believe it’s interesting, and how would it interact with the metagame?
      • Sticky Web, as a move, is extremely niche and uncommon. Trapped on mons like Ribombee, Snaelstrom, and Araquanid, most Sticky Web setters are niche suicide leads or are altogether unviable. As such, Sticky Web has gone almost totally ignored in the CAP metagame, with the exception of some hyper offense teams that use it to outspeed and OHKO fast threats. My concept would allow us to explore this mechanic that goes relatively unused in the CAP metagame, and look at how many Pokemon interact with it.
    • How does your concept motivate in-depth discussion at each stage of the process, and why do you believe the CAP Project community should discuss these topics?
      • As I mentioned, Sticky Web is woefully underexplored in this metagame, and even in other metagames. I have only really seriously used Sticky Web in hyper offense Ubers teams, and due to its lack of exploration, I think that there are plenty of opportunities for robust discussion. While Sticky Web does preclude some sense of utility, it does not necessitate a pure utility role. This allows us to explore a variety of potential roles and explore what the nature of a utility Pokemon is. Additionally, with the introduction of Heavy-Duty Boots and Gholdengo, the whole metagame of entry hazards has transformed. These changes have made the discussion of hazards and their role in the metagame to become even more pertinent.
  • Questions To Be Answered
    • Can a Sticky Web setter be designed so as to benefit from their own webs?
    • How can Sticky Web be utilized by the current metagame?
    • What team archetypes can best capitalize on Sticky Web?
    • Which Pokemon in the current metagame would benefit most from Sticky Web?
    • How does the prevalence of Heavy-Duty Boots and Gholdengo affect Sticky Web's viability?
    • What Pokemon archetype is best suited to setting Sticky Web? What archetype is best suited to capitalizing on it?
  • Explanation - I, since XY, have loved to use Sticky Web. My love affair with this move began in Ubers hyper offense teams, using suicide leads like Slurpuff and Shuckle to ensnare fast mons and obliterate them with raw power. I always found Sticky Web so interesting because, as a hazard, it disrupts the opponent rather than doing chip damage. Additionally, many of my favorite mons are web setters, increasing my love for this move. I found it extremely interesting how effective it could be in Random Battles, allowing the close speed tiers to be easily swayed in your favor and giving a major advantage. I always felt that it was a shame it wasn't more prevalent in common teams. Part of this is due to it being trapped on Bug types (not counting Slurpuff), and even worse, Bugs that had better niches to fill. Snaelstrom, for me, could always run a better move than webs, like rocks, recover, swords dance, rapid spin, etc. Ribombee is a powerful quiver dance sweeper. Araquanid could fit it, but is already held back by a subpar movepool and abysmal speed. All this makes me especially interested in seeing Sticky Web thrive in a metagame on a Pokemon that capitalizes on it.
Last edited:


formerly JAGFL
is a Pre-Contributor
Final Submission

All Filler, No Killer

Description: This Pokémon lacks the consistent damage needed to secure kills.

Justification: Dealing damage is obviously very important in Pokémon, as securing kills is the main way to make progress in a match. However, some Pokémon are able to be valuable, relevant, and viable all without a way to deal significant damage. Alomomola, for instance, is a successful defensive pivot that can barely deal any damage, mostly gaining value through Scald burns and Wish. Similarly, Ting-Lu generates value despite limited kill potential in both OU and Ubers with its massive bulk, hazards, and access to whirlwind and ruination. Designing a CAP that does not create value through damage explores a design space we have not touched on all that much and allows us to experiment with some more niche options.

Questions To Be Answered:
  • What makes a Pokémon inclined to use moves that won't kill? What is the best way to incentivize this?
  • How are status moves important to Pokémon lacking in damage output?
  • What role lends itself best to a Pokémon without kill potential? Is there a way to subvert this and try something new?
  • In what ways can progress be made aside from dealing damage?
  • What does a Pokémon with no kill potential offer to its team? How can we ensure that the Pokémon has value?
  • How can we ensure that the Pokémon lacks consistent damage? Do we restrict stats? Do we restrict movepool?
Explanation: Originally, this concept was about creating a 'mon that wanted to run four status moves. However, that... didn't really work. The only real example of a Pokémon that did anything like that was Pyukumuku in ZU, and every other Pokémon that even came close were also stall mons who focused on spreading toxic. However, making a toxic stallmon doesn't really teach us much, and with help from pip, spoo, and frostbiyt on the CAP discord, the concept was altered to instead focusing on designing a 'mon that doesn't kill. I still want to keep the focus on unique status, as status moves are what inspired this concept in the first place, but allowing for some attacking moves as well opens up a lot more options for us later down the line.

Additionally, some interesting moves I believed were worth exploring as mentioned in the original post are Court Change, the Protect clones, Trick, and Power Swap. These aren't really as relevant to the concept as they were initially, but I felt like keeping some kind of mention to them in this post.
Last edited:
Name: Field Effect Fiend

Description: This Pokemon utilizes at least one field effect normally underutilized or entirely absent in Smogon singles gameplay.

Justification: There are several field effects in the Pokemon series that rarely, if ever, see play in Singles, and there are some that are so poor that they're never even seen in VGC or other Doubles formats. Due to the CAP restrictions on no custom elements, it would require unique takes on how to utilize those field effects, and make them actually useful.

This general design space was explored previously in Fidgit, an early CAP creation. Fidgit has remained a niche, but usable, pick. It's currently ranked C tier in the SV VR, which is the lowest tier, and has been used a couple times in modern gens during CAPCL, setting Trick Room, Tailwind, and Gravity. With that said, there is a lot of room in this area, enough to easily support another creation. One goal of this proposal would be to navigate how to develop this new concept without pushing Fidgit out of viability. Power creep is a hot-button topic right now, as anyone paying attention to any SV metagame will tell you, and pursuing this concept would be a great thought exercise in how to explore potentially shared design space without one pushing out the other.

In addition, this would have a positive impact on the metagame by opening up a new team style or sub-style based off of the effect(s) chosen. While it's unlikely that one addition would make, for example, Magic Room a viable archetype, perhaps some form of team could utilize Magic Room with this new concept. Underutilized effects, for the purpose of the concept, would exclude all four types of weather and at least Psychic and Electric Terrain. Grassy Terrain, Trick Room, and Misty Terrain are all arguable as to whether or not they are niche enough to focus on. This leaves options like Magic or Wonder Room, Tailwind, Gravity, etc., to potentially develop. In addition, I intentionally included "at least" [one field effect]; this is to not pigeon-hole the design into "[effect] abuser".

Questions to be Answered:
  • The big question: what field effect(s) should be explored?
    • Are the three borderlines I mentioned off-limits, or could they be incorporated into its design space?
  • Should this Pokemon be able to utilize two or more field effects? If so, how are they to be kept distinct from each other?
  • Is this Pokemon going to be an effect setter or effect utilizer? Some hybrid of the two?
    • If multiple field effects are chosen, could it set one and use another?
  • If this is a setter, how can we make this distinct from Fidgit while making clean-cut niches for both?
  • If this is a Pokemon who utilizes the field effect, how can we uniquely incorporate that into its design?
    • Should this be an offensive concept, boosting its offensive capabilities? Defensive? Support?
    • How do we do that? Should this come from movepool? Abilities? Inherent traits such as stats and typing?
  • How do we fit this concept into a team structure?
    • Does it support itself, such as self-Trick Room setters?
    • Does it rely on support, such as Choice-locked weather abusers?
    • Can it flex into either role depending on the matchup?
    • Does it require a full team around its concept, or can it be locked up in a semi-structure (think, say, Ttar/Exca semi-Sand teams)?

Explanation: I LOVE FIELD EFFECTS. I think they're genuinely very cool concepts that unfortunately were, for the most part, left in the dust. It's like that one meme of the kids in the pool, with the second frame being a skeleton underwater? The girl is weather (and Electric Terrain as of gen 9), the boy is the other Terrains and Trick Room (and Tailwind for any VGC players), and the rest are the skeleton. As a first-time CAP contributor, I wanted to post something I feel like I think is sick, and others would as well, and as we all know, the best Pokemon designs are the coolest concepts. That's why everyone loves Landorus. ...right? Everyone loves Landorus, right?

I imagine the two leading concepts will be Gravity and Tailwind as they feature very specific, identifiable effects that are easy to build a design around without incorporating custom elements. I wanted to leave this open-ended, though, in case there are any other insane Magic Room enjoyers who want to really try to make that work. While making a custom element to benefit this would make the creation of this concept easier, I think it could potentially come out more interesting without custom elements, so I am not fighting that rule with this submission.

As far as the "three borderlines" as I called them earlier, I personally think we say no Grassy Terrain, no Trick Room, yes Misty Terrain. Grassy Terrain, while not as structured as options like Rain, can absolutely form cores. Looking at CAPCL usage rates, Rilla-Lucha had 4 uses in SV Week 4, tied for the 5th-most used mon, and winning 3 of them. We don't need to strengthen that playstyle. Similarly, while Trick Room doesn't have the CAP tour success of Grassy Terrain, full Trick Room teams are a possibility, and something that, in the right hands, can be threatening. Misty Terrain, on the other hand, has practically no usage in Generation 9, seeing how its only setter, Weezing-Galar, prefers its other two abilities. Even when Tapu Fini was around, full Misty Terrain teams were rarely, if ever, used, with Fini really just setting terrain for itself. Thus, I think, in a Scarlet/Violet environment, is closer to Gravity or Tailwind in viability, both conceptually ("how well can I build a Misty Terrain-focused team") and in-battle ("okay, how good is that team I just built") than the other terrains.

Between all the ideas, I think Gravity is probably the most personally interesting, but I am very open to explore the other field effects were this to be chosen, which is why I submitted it this way and not as a "Gravity user" concept.

; Oops wrong stat

Description; This CAP would use its or its opponents stats in unconventional ways whether just swapping stuff around or dealing damage with its or its opponents defensive stats.

Justification; This is an interesting CAP concept because it builds a Pokémon with a very unique style of play. This would be effective within the metagame because most Pokémon don't have access to this type of utility/power that plays both defensively and offensively. Additionally very few of the Pokémon that can use their other stats for damage don't use these moves very well, with some notable exceptions.

Questions to be answered;
  • How can we make this viable without making a bulky sweeper?
  • Also how can it get KO's without making all of them trades?
  • Should this CAP play defensively or offensively?
  • What are the limits of this archetype are there any Pokémon that tread here?
Explanation; I used this idea because their are some Pokémon are intended and don't, i.e. Houndoom, and other Pokémon who do use moves like this i.e. Annihilape and Ting-Lu, don't use it as their main move generally a back up option. Personally i enjoy the idea of using the moves that most Pokémon can't use.
  • Name - Mr. Morale and The Big (progress) Steppers
  • Description - This CAP should be capable of making guaranteed progress that can be capitalized on by the CAP’s teammates or themselves.
  • Justification- One thing that any competitive player will tell you is that every turn is made for progress. There are many ways that progress can be made, from predicting that switch-in and killing their Pokémon, to some thing simple like just getting those stealth rock up or getting that weather to set up their teammates to make huge progress. However, guaranteed progress is when that Pokémon can force progress, progress that, along with its teammates, can be capitalized into breaking the opponent‘s team. In a game where creation and abuse of progress can decide a winner and a loser, a Pokémon that can perform this process Can be exceptionally helpful. There are multiple ways that this can be done, as there are examples of metagame viable Pokémon that can make guarenteed progress defensively(Slowking-Galar) and Offensively(Samurott-Hisui)., allowing for more creative freedom.
  • Questions To Be Answered -
  • Should this CAP make progress offensively or defensively?
  • How much progress should this CAP make? (Big amounts of progress, or small amounts of progress?)
  • Should this progress be made all at once, or be slowly made over the course of the game?
And for the most important 2 Questions that I want to focus on….
  • How should this CAP make said Progress (Damage, Hazards, Terrain Effects, Status, Etc.). ?
  • How can we make this sort of Pokemon without making it broken?

  • Explanation - WIP
Last edited:
Final Submission

- A Rising Star

Description - This Pokémon uses a strategy/toolset that was not viable in OU in previous generations.

Justification- As with all generations new powerful pokemon, new items/moves for those pokemon, and changes to mechanics have resulted in what's viable/unviable shifting. However, with this generation, a combination of terrastalising, powerful new items, and the significant changes to moves and movepools have resulted in some huge shakeups. This concept seeks to explore the *new* and *unprecedented*, rather than keying off of already well understood concepts in a pokemon. A CAP based around making use of tools that have only recently become viable will encourage really thinking about what makes this generation special compared to the rest of the series, and result in a CAP that performs distinctly from many others - leaving it a unique but non-toe-stepping presence.

Questions To Be Answered -
  • What strategies have existed in previous generations, but were relegated to gimmicks or considered too risky for general play?
  • Did these strategies fail because of the state of the metagame? a lack of viable users? genuinely being a bad concept?
  • Which new items and moves benefit previously unviable strategies?
  • Which changes to moves and distribution benefit previous unviable strategies? Is this by helping them, or hurting strategies that counter them?
  • In the current meta, are there any playstyles with counter-strategies that lack a prominent user?
Explanation - This concept is inspired by some of the big shakeups in existing pokemon, such as early-gen Blissey going from almost entirely OU to NU, or the brief rise of Trick Room in singles. I think that developing on this, to provide a pokemon that can do something that was previously considered unviable, would be a quality concept. In this case, rather than creating a CAP to make a totally unviable niche viable, we would be aiming to create a CAP that fits into a newly-viable role in order to avoid creating a gimmick-mon.
Last edited:


You can call me Jiggly
is a Forum Moderatoris a Community Contributoris a CAP Contributor
Final Submission

Name: That's a Skill Issue

Description: This concept builds a Pokémon which has a high skill ceiling.

Justification: From competitive games, we are very familiar with the idea of a "skill ceiling" - the idea that even God's gift to playing the game can only make a certain Pokémon go so far. You can't magically become more skilled and make your sweeper that one step faster, or make it do more damage - your name is not Michael Larson, you are not able to control the RNG through pure skill.

But... if there was no skill at all in Pokémon, then we wouldn't have good players and weaker players. It's fairly obvious that good players can get more use out of their Pokémon - they're probably hitting the game's skill ceilings. What we can explore through this concept is fundamentally "What is Skill in competitive Pokémon?", followed shortly by "How do you create a Pokémon where the best players get more use out of it?". What traits make a Pokémon easier or harder to use - and what sort of Pokémon can really shine in the hands of a skilled pilot? I think these are questions we've never really tackled before - but from concepts like Momentum, questions we've never tackled are the most fun!

Questions to be Answered:
  • What, objectively, is skill in Pokémon?
    • As a player/pilot, what factors make someone skilled? Is it metagame knowldge, the ability to read someone, or some other factor?
    • As a teambuilder, what makes someone skilled? Is it being able to create a team to a solid archetype, testing and refining the team, or being ready for a specific opponent?
  • What traits of a Pokémon make it easier or harder for an individual player to get usage out of?
  • What traits of a Pokémon allow a skilled player to get substatially *more* out of it than a less skilled player?
  • How do we avoid making a Pokémon which is "mindless", implicitly requiring very little skill to use?
  • What team archetypes have a massive skill ceiling? What team archetypes have a much lower ceiling? Should we aim to be most useful in one of these archetypes, or be more generic?

Explanation: The idea of looking at Skill Ceilings came to me when I was originally looking at the exact opposite - Skill Floors (a concept around a Pokémon which was very *easy* to use to help a team make progress, but probably wouldn't be in many Tournament teams as it wouldn't be as strong as other options). And whilst that's an interesting idea, I made the reasonable assumption that meta players would find the idea tedious - and really, who wants to use a Pokémon labelled as "for beginners"? (I mean, I would, but I'm a freak of nature anyway)

As such, pivot to this concept, which focusses on the far more interesting end of *high* skill ceilings. A Pokémon that beginners might want to avoid, but is capable of incredible rewards when piloted well. A bonus, perhaps, is that we can actually try to avoid making a Pokémon which is "mindless" - if a Pokémon requires making more difficult decisions when using it, it increases the level of interaction between two players. Even in my limited experience, whilst I was able to ladder well with a mindless "Sandstorm then switch to Stoutland and click Return" in an older generation Tier Shift, it was incredibly mindless to play - not fun for anyone involved. That's something we certainly want to avoid!

Obviously this concept is fairly open, and we will (as always) be walking that fine line of "Being powerful" against "Being overwhelming". But I have eternal faith in CAP! And, who knows, maybe frank discussions on skill - and how players can improve it - might help people into the meta itself! Probably not me though, the skill issues there run waaaay too deep
Last edited:


is a Forum Moderator
1v1 Circuit Champion
Name: Years Prior

Description: This pokemon will use priority in combination with Tera in order to provide a strong offensive profile.

What new territory will your Concept Pokemon explore, why do you believe it’s interesting, and how would it interact with the metagame?
This concept Pokemon would explore what exactly makes a priority user viable beyond the realm of moves being able to move first/faster in battle. It would provide a stopgap to a lot of frail Hyper Offense structures and be a consistent form of additional pressure that can reliably outsource damage to opposing teams.

How does your concept motivate in-depth discussion at each stage of the process, and why do you believe the CAP Project community should discuss these topics?
It opens a lot of questions in each aspect of design in my opinion. 1) what makes priority users viable and how are they viable without overstepping lines of unhealthiness? 2) If a Pokemon's main role is to abuse priority how would the statline/BST look when it is largely not going to need its Speed stat? 3) Would an ability or moveset be the ideal way to highlight priority, and what moveset would best be able to showcase this? 4) Lots of priority moves or abilities have a decent amount of creative liberty or ideas that inspire the users of either, relating to typing or in reference to ability, some characteristics of the pokemon. I believe these topics should receive a bigger light now more than ever since SV has had an abundance of viable priority users that have caused a lot of changes on their own to the overall phases of the metagame.
Questions to be Answered:

  • Would being an all-out-attacker be more effective than being a setup sweeper in this role?
  • Is priority mainly through abilities or moveset something that should be given a closer look?
  • At what point do we draw the line at the pokemon being unhealthy or overbearing due to the nature of priority moves?
  • How would balancing a BST look for a pokemon whose niche involves moving first without use of the Speed stat?
  • Is STAB priority before Terastalizing too strong?

Explanation: Those familiar with the climate of current SV can see just how fast paced and turbulent the metagame is, featuring a lot of HO wars or offense matching up into similar forms of offense. Currently there are a great amount of priority users thriving such as Dragonite, Rillaboom, Raging Bolt, Kingambit, Comfey, and to cite examples from the CAP format itself, Hemogoblin. While each of them use priority, they still have a great amount of difference in team structure and archetypes that they are used on. The introduction of Tera as well has brought a resurgence in some cases like Dragonite's where it primarily uses Tera Normal on setup sets to make the most out of its own priority. This also throws another layer into the mix of "would the mon in question need to even have STAB priority options to be viable". The defensive aspects of Tera are also just as notable for a lot of these mons, allowing certain examples like Tera fire kingambit to set up on wisp or Tera fairy Raging Bolt setting up on a Draco. Seeing how much this mechanic has influenced the use, diving into it holistically gives a greater understanding into how the gen facilitates offensive mons like these through the mechanic.
Last edited:


token smogon furry
is a Site Content Manageris a Top Social Media Contributoris a Top Artistis a Member of Senior Staffis a Community Contributoris a Tiering Contributoris a Contributor to Smogonis a Top Team Rater Alumnusis a Smogon Discord Contributor Alumnus
OU Forum Leader
Final Submission

Greedy Gadgets

Description: This Pokemon uses moves that have utility-centered effects to directly make itself more threatening.

Justification: The idea of this concept is to flip the script on the standard application of utility effects, which are generally used as options to support the team. Utility is fundamentally rooted in creating progress and/or enabling allies, but who's to say a Pokemon can't use its own utility as a dedicated tool to make itself more threatening? The idea of self-centered offensive utility is one not directly explored in CAP, in part due to its abstract and unconventional nature when used on offensive Pokemon. Because there are a lot of ways we can define and explore the boundaries of self-centered offensive utility, especially in the department of balancing defense and offense, there are a lot of really fascinating avenues we can take with this concept to really bring it to life and bring a unique offensive presence that uses unique combinations of tools to the SV CAP metagame. As such, this is an Actualization concept.

Questions To Be Answered:

- How can a dedicated user of utility moves best extract value from said moves for itself as opposed to its teammates when utility moves often have intrinsically supportive qualities?
- What effects might a self-centered utility user value the most? What makes them valuable to this Pokémon’s game plan?
- Can dedicated stat boosting options be considered pro-concept? Why or why not?
- How do we incentivize usage of utility moves to support our damage output over higher power damage-dealing options?
- How do we find the balance of defensive resilience to enable our usage of utility, but still maintain an overall focus on boosting its threat factor throughout the game?
- How much of a role would progress need to play for a selfish utility-oriented offensive Pokemon to become threatening? Conversely, what kind of attributes have threatening qualities without the need of progress? Are these attributes desirable for this concept? Why or why not?
- What lessons can we take from in-canon examples of selfish utility users/strategies? How can we make CAP 34 unique from them/use them uniquely?


Historically, utility in Pokemon is understood to have a very clear purpose: to provide support to the team. Whether it's spreading status to better enable setup or make steady progress against a durable wall, utility is fairly dedicated to supporting teammates for the most part. Because of its more team-centric nature, most utility users are built around using their utility options as efficiently and as consistently as possible. You will see them used most often on Pokemon packing defensive investment and, situationally, Speed. This basically takes a new spin by directing the focus and value of utility toward the utility user itself, incentivizing a more offensive angle and execution of options often geared toward supporting the team.

Since this is a bit of an abstract concept on paper, I wanted to give some quick brief examples of options that I feel would be pro-concept and show how this concept has a lot of unique avenues that aren't too limited or too similar to Astrolotl wrt offensive utility. Bear in mind these are just surface level examples and I guarantee there's a lot of room for discussion regarding specific combinations of moves/abilities that haven't even been mentioned here.

Rapid Spin: +1 Speed and hazard clearing, definitely can be used selfishly but it's a super lame option imo because Saharaja already does this. Maybe a different angle could be taken though.

Mortal Spin: The cooler Rapid Spin but harder to work with.

Hex/Venoshock: Very pro-concept, it literally becomes more powerful when you spread status.

Infernal Parade/Barb Barrage: Same deal as Hex but with more moveslot compression.

Stone Axe/Ceaseless Edge: Offensive moves that apply pressure and set hazards to enhance pressure further.

Knock Off: Removing items that can be annoying for CAP 34 to deal with is pretty convenient but this sort of forces physical

Assurance: This is pretty swell with hazards

Leech Seed: SubSeed.
Merciless: Provides critical hits when you spread status, enhancing damage output. Very strong ability that needs to be balanced carefully

Poison Touch: Making contact can spread status. Pro concept

Intimidate: Used to make sponging hits easier for team, but you can easily use it selfishly. you can definitely make an argument for this

Immunity Abilities: Normally I would be whatever on this but Tera makes this a lot more interesting an option

Weather Setting Abilities: Very fickle since this will fundamentally support the team no matter what, but making it something a la Drought Mega Charizard is possible, and Snow's new effect is something to consider too

In terms of actual existing examples in-canon, there are several. For example, the offensive hazard setter archetype falls under this. Ash Greninja famously uses Spikes to bolster its own offensive presence. Another example is SS OU Weavile's tendency to use Knock Off to remove Leftovers, Heavy-Duty Boots, and Rocky Helmet to make its boosted Triple Axel more threatening in the endgame.


protect the wetlands
is a Contributor Alumnus
Final Submission

Hail to the (Sea)King

Description: This Pokemon replicates the role of Seaking in BDSP OU, using a unique combination of typing, ability, and a usually useless move to counter significant metagame threats.

Justification: Since the early days of the franchise, when it was devilishly coded into a functioning game by exchanging one's soul in the eastern waters of Cinnabar Island, no single Pokemon has been is definingly forgettable as the King of Sea. Competitively, the iconic goldfish has failed to make a splash despite climbing up waterfalls. In the offshoot metagame of BDSP OU, Seaking's water résistance, access to Lightning Rod, and desperate recovery of AQUA RING allows it to cheese the shit out of Rotom-Wash. This CAP would channel the spirit of Seaking, RBY Tackle Porygon, GSC Growl Miltank, and all other "quirky" picks used to generate YouTube content, get saucy wins in prestigious team tournaments while the rest of your team loses you the week, and flood the ladder. We would create a Pokemon that puts a rubbish or suboptimal move to work.

Questions To Be Answered:

- What situations create opportunities to use a usually useless move?
- What traits make a usually useless move viable in the highest level of competitive play?
- How much utility is derived from typing and/or ability compared to movepool for these niche Pokemon?
- Viability of Seaking-style Pokemon is usually low or niche by design. Is there a way to increase viability beyond just raw stat power?
- What odd tech moves have been used effectively in tournaments or on the high ladder on high viability Pokemon in recent formats?
- What food should we feed Seaking to achieve optimal horn length?
- Is overall viability more important than focusing on securely answering specific threats? Could that carry over to achieve high viability?


This would be a concept most similar to something like Kerfluffle or Equilibra, but instead of picking a poorly distributed move it picks a historically or generally "bad" move. This could also extend to Pokemon that are generically good, but require a suboptimal move to fill out a moveset. This includes Pokemon like Double-Edge Dragapult, Fire Fang Garchomp, and perhaps the infamous Pre-Platinum GEN 4 PECK CHOICE BAND MAMOSWINE. These Pokemon make a usually useless/suboptimal move work since it fills out a need in their moveset.

With the above in mind, it also draws some similarities to Chromera or Mollux, where a Pokemon is taking a poor attribute and trying to twist it to its advantage. This concept has some shaky ground, as it is by necessity going through the metagame with a fine tooth comb. OU is in considerable flux, and likely CAP by extension, but there are some consistently good Pokemon that are going to be sticking around for at least a while (i.e. Kyurem) to target. This concept's success has different ways to be measured as well, which should be determined early. The "viability independent" success would be how well and reliably this Pokemon does answer a threat when they face off. The "viability dependent" success would be the impact that would have on the metagame as a whole; think of how CAPs like Arghonaut, Equilibra, and Hemogoblin have had immense impacts on the viability of specific sets or Pokemon in current or past metagames.
Last edited:


I am fucking perfect
is a Site Content Manageris an official Team Rateris a Top Social Media Contributoris a Forum Moderatoris a Community Contributoris a Top Contributoris a Smogon Media Contributoris a CAP Contributor Alumnus
This is a 36-hour warning for concept subs! I'd also like to open up Final Submissions as well. I would absolutely love if any of y'all in this thread would pick out some concepts you like and talk about why. It is always helpful to know what everyone likes here!
Here's some other feedback pieces:

Name - Webslinger
While gen 9 is not the worst gen to be doing a Webs concept, I do think that the space is a little small for what we could be doing. I'll tell you right now that a Pokemon that sets webs is rarely, if ever, going to be benefitting from them; that's how those structures are made, you want the best setter and then the best users. Webs is currently entirely limited to Ribombee for that reason. I do think the design space is really shallow, so I would need to see why that is not the case.

Name: All Filler, No Killer
This is a tricky concept to me because I think there has been one Pokemon ever (Pyukumuku) to do this, and it wasn't even very good. At that point as well, is that the type of Pokemon we really want to make? I am having trouble seeing that expansive of a design space because the prompt is quite restrictive. Interesting in theory but I need to see more ways for it to work beyond making just a very good Toxic user.

Name: Field Effect Fiend
There's a few points I want to contest you on to think more deeply about with this concept. First, Grassy Terrain is by far the most popular effect right now (except for rain), and Electric Terrain has only really seen use in lower tiers. Second, many field effects are not just one Pokemon away from seeing use, and I worry that this concept would devolve quickly down into "this mon has Electric Surge" because that's immediately where my brain went. There is room to go elsewhere, but since these playstyles require a lot of synergistic parts, going elsewhere may not really be viable. Talk about some existing support for some of the field effects and how we can build off those in our process. As an aside, I don't think doing anything with Magic Room or Wonder Room is going to amount to much of anything beyond funny gimmicks. I don't want to rain on your parade, but those shouldn't be in play.

Oops wrong stat
So we got Foul Play, Body Press, and... that's that. I think you could expand the scope of the concept to just flatly include more options because, as it stands right now, there isn't much to work with here.

Name - A Rising Star
I think this is a really cool concept. I too feel like every gen becomes defined by unique playstyles, and those are interesting to tee off of here. I think you could do with some other examples of stuff this gen we can look at (encore sweepers, stored power, priority spam, teching mixed coverage etc.). Other than that, lookin' good to me!

Name: That's a Skill Issue
It's a fascinating idea, that some Pokemon require more skill to use effectively than others. I would hazard to agree with you as well. However, I think your concept in its current state lacks direction. It wants to look at what goes into high-skill floor and ceiling Pokemon, but it doesn't give us an express goal for the process between the two. I think it makes the most sense if you flatly state "This will be a high-skill ceiling Pokemon" because I don't think anyone really wants to use a high-floor low-ceiling Pokemon and then we look into what Pokemon are high-skill ceiling. Now, this is a departure from what you currently have, so only do that if you think it is interesting, but that rework I think helps.

Name: Years Prior
Priority is good good in the current metagame, so I don't mind building around it, especially since there are now so, so many good priority moves. I do wonder what we stand to learn from it, however. Strong priority is good, always has been, and most likely always will be. I also think a good deal of what we could learn was answered with Hemogoblin; however, it is still a fine space to explore. I think you could also look into how priority interacts with Tera, since so many users Tera to their priority's type.

Name: Greedy Gadgets
The "offensive trickster" concept has actually been done before! (edit: see now that you already knew that, my b) Taking more queues from Astrolotl's early process may be helpful in fleshing out what you already have here. Obviously, there are some differences between your concept and Astrolotl's (namely in the delivery of utility), but the similarities are there. Strangely, I think opening up the concept to include abilities actually may hinder the overall design space, as there aren't really that many abilities that fall under the description you're going for here, while there are many moves that do. That would change it to mean "What moves provide utility while still having damaging effects?" or something like that, but you do already have quite a bit of a move focus in your questions, so I don't think it is too much to just make the swap if it agrees with you.

Name: Hail to the (Sea)King
I think there is merit to this concept beyond mentioning the bestest fish (it ran Ice Beam fyi you needed to freeze Latias and pressure Tang). It would be fun to look into Pokemon that are strong, but have such a dearth of options for something they need to do that they end up using a move that would not see use on any other Pokemon. I think you could expand some of your examples to include stuff like Double-Edge Dragapult, Wingbeat Dragonite, and even Rock Blast Tyranitar. Remember, sometimes metagames force something otherwise suboptimal (think special lando-t in earlier SV). I do find it interesting, just would like more discussion of historical examples.

Remember, 36-hour warning! And let me see which ones y'all think would be cool to do as well!
Last edited:
Final Submission

The Weak Come Back to Bite

Description: this Pokémon becomes stronger during later game stages through conditions that have to be set up before by teammates and/or itself.

I believe that that this archetype while done before has not been done in the best manner. As most of the pokemon who fall into this archetype either are strong outright or are often times are far too niche and are relegated to "set up sweepers" though sometimes it is a move/ability that help this pokemon (notable examples from this gen are Kingambit with Supreme overlord and Annihilape with rage fist though) they pokemon themselves are still incredibly powerful without their needed set up. With this concept I propose we take a new approach to this conundrum and focus on a CAP who can be used most effectively conditionals with having less benefits than the examples I gave above.

Questions to be asked:
• What limits this CAP's strength that it needs to set up either by itself or its teammates?
• What makes this CAP different from set-up sweepers that it would require help from its teammate or itself?
• What moves and abilities would benefit such a concept, while not leaning too much into the territory of set up sweepers?
• In what way does this CAP get stronger?
• How did other pokemon necessarily fail at this concept in the past?
• To how far is this CAP game deciding once it activates it condition?
• Under what situations can you expect this CAP to be in to activate its conditions?
• How does tera type affect the condition or reward from reaching said condition from the pokemon?
• How will this CAP be punished for failing to reach its condition?
• How will you be able to counter said conditions in a reasonable manner?

The baseline concept revolves around the idea of "weak thing gets strong under conditions" so I wanted to commit to it The best examples of what i mean at least in the current generation are: Kingambit with Supreme overlord, Annihilape with rage fist, Hex Pecharunt, some paradox pokemon (most notably slither wing and walking wake), Last Respects users (Houndstone and Basculegion) and from older gen 7 Battle-bond Greninja. But often times the pokemon either are inherently very good that their condition doesn't work as a set up but more so as a buff mainly Greninja, supreme overlord Kingambit and last respects. Or its incredibly niche set up that can spiral out of control (setting up stick webs on self for a contrary user to sweep it).

With this I believe that this CAP can invite new ways to come into this approach, rather than having a pokemon that is built around a mechanic, having a mechanic work as a buff how about someone who can benefits in certain conditions a lot but those conditions need to be earned. For example what about a very passive and defensive CAP who can abuse opportunist. Or perhaps something among the lines of a Hex pokemon that has Merciless or perhaps another idea I had was a CAP who uses soak + salt cure. Those thoughts actively leads to more situations and decision making of how to set up the opportunity and cash in it at later stages.

thank you all for reading, this is my first time writing a CAP concept and I appreciate any and all critiques/feedback!!!
Last edited:
The Best Defense

This Pokemon forces switches from a variety of opposing offensive threats by exerting its own offensive pressure. Specifically, Pokemon aims to serve a defensive function while avoiding many of the hallmark moves of a defensive pokemon(Hazards, Status, Knock, Recovery, Pivoting) in favor of an offensive movepool.

This concept challenges how we conventionally view defensive play by questioning if typical defensive movesets are necessary to fulfill defensive function. While this concept has been accomplished in the past, notably with tanks like AV Melmetal, this blend of offense and defense is largely missing from current SV. Note that while many current bulky offensive threats can serve defensive purpose like Hemogoblin and Kingambit, these pokemon stray away from the concept because their primary function is to serve as a late game wincon rather than to function defensively.

  • Is it possible to make a defensive pokemon without hazards/hazard control, status, knock, recovery, pivoting, etc.? If not, to what extent are these sorts of moves permissible in our moveset?
  • How should we treat moves that serve a dual purpose like Knock Off and Ceaseless Edge? Should they be avoided because they shift focus away from direct offense, or should they be sought after because they provide a means of progress in addition to our offensive pressure?
  • What effect do offensive options like setup moves and choice items have on this concept? What is the best way to strike a balance between sufficient offensive pressure and excessive wallbreaking/wincon potential?
  • While slow tanks like Melmetal are great picks for the concept, Pokemon that can mitigate damage by moving first like Hemogoblin and Tornadus-T also come close to fulfilling the concept in their own ways. What role does Speed and priority play in this concept?
Final Submission

Take Two
Description: This Pokemon aims to fulfill a concept that was assigned to a previous CAP that said previous CAP does not.

Justification: No CAP is truly a failure, but many of them turned out differently from what was expected. Be it through metagame shifts, age, or developments in our understanding of the CAP's combination of stats, moves, and ability, their role can end up vsstly differently from what was intended. No cap is truly a failure, though, because we learn something with every process. With 33 CAPs and a lot of experience under our belt, it may be worth looking at some "failed" concepts and try to fulfill them again, with the more streamlined process we have now.

  • What constitutes as a "failed" concept? Which CAPs can be considered "failed?"
  • How did "failed" CAPs end up diverging from their original concept? Was a post-process change, or did something go awry mid-process?
  • Some concepts are harder to achieve than others. Have some CAPs "failed" because their initial concept was too hard to fulfill? Should we still stay away from those concepts?
Krilowatt is probably the poster child for this concept. It was originally meant to be a 'Utility Counter" and was meant to be "customized to counter virtually any specific Pokemon, but is incapable of countering a large number of Pokemon at the same time." However, as time went on, Krilowatt ended up becoming an offensive pivot that was hard to switch into that couldn't really counter anything specifically, in essence almost becoming the opposite of what its concept wanted. Again, no CAP is a failure, but sometimes they end up different from their nascent concepts. What my concept aims to achieve is to take older concepts such as Utility Counter and give them a second process, hopefully being more accurate to the original concept than before.
Last edited:



Name: The Specialist

Description: This pokemon is designed to function on a specific archetype or teamstyle rather than being good across styles.

Justification: As has been frequently noted, CAP tends to really try to play the odds with viability by giving mons a wide range of tools and the ability to play multiple roles and aiming for broad and diverse usage. This is understandable but it leaves us covering the same ground a lot (how many mons do we need to give hazards to lads). This concept would instead pick a specific teamstyle and work to create a mon that would work for said team style, while trying to limit our desire to make yet another multi style meta monster.

  • Will I get this concept written up in time?
Coming soon to a post near you
Final Submission

- One Crit Wonder

Description - This Pokémon utilizes Critical Hits and takes advantage of all the benefits that the mechanic provides, with item, moveslot or ability sacrifice in order to generate consistent critical damage.

Justification- A Pokémon that specializes in Critical Hits are untapped potential. Its capability of ignoring Defensive stat stages are valuable to current threats such as Zamazenta-Hero, Archaludon and Venomicon-Prologue that can raise their Defensive stats somewhat freely, and there are Pokémon such as Scarlet & Violet Regulation A Hydreigon that have utilized consistent Critical Hits in order to be able to spam the move Draco Meteor. In addition, it always helps to curb the use of Screens Hyper Offense as it bypasses those field effects similar to the Infiltrator Ability. This concept aims to take previous in-game examples of Pokémon such as Sirfetch'd but refine them for OU viability.

Questions To Be Answered -
  • What are the various avenues we can consider when it comes to designing a Pokémon that takes advantage of consistently dealing Critical Hit Damage? What sorts of sacrifices must be made and how can we offset these sacrifices to create viability?
  • How can we offset the opportunity cost of utilizing a consistent Critical Hit Pokémon compared to a traditional sweeper that utilizes moves such as Swords Dance or Calm Mind?
  • Should there be consideration for Moves or Abilities that automatically guarantee a Critical Hit? Moves such as Flower Trick and Conditional Guarantees such as the unused Merciless come to mind are a worthy consideration. Does this give us more flexibility with regards to Ability and Stat distribution?
  • With the ability to ignore Defensive and Special Defensive stages, the Screens such as Reflect, Light Screen and Aurora Veil and potential counterplay in Strength Sap or Intimidate, how can we ensure that the Pokemon remains to be manageable in a stance where an opponent has to fight against this Pokémon?
Explanation - Random Critical hits are generally a point of intense frustration within the Competitive Pokémon Metagame and has been frowned upon since the series' inception in 1996. Despite this, a Pokémon's Critical Hit chance is capable of being manipulated to more consistent odds. Abilities such as Super Luck, moves such as Night Slash or items such as Scope Lens all increase the Critical Hit chance of a Pokémon. A Critical Hit multiplies the damage of an attack by x1.5, ignores any Defensive or Special Defense stat stages of the enemy, as well as ignoring the attacker's Attack or Special Attack stat drops. In addition, it also bypasses Reflect, Light Screen and Aurora Veil. Certain abilities such as Sniper are further able to augment the damage of the Critical Hit.

Despite these apparent upsides to Critical Hit and the ways to manipulate the odds to where it is possible to attain 100% Critical Hit chance using a variety of Moves, Abilities and/or Items, these type of sets are largely considered to be ineffectual. This is largely because a Critical Hit only multiplies the damage of an attack by x1.5. This means a move such as Focus Energy only provides a boost equivalent to Howl only 50% of the time, whereas Swords Dance will consistently provide doubled damage. The one notable exception is Regulation A of official Pokémon VGC content, which had certain Hydreigon sets run a Scope Lens Focus Energy set. This allowed Hydreigon to continually spam the move Draco Meteor as Critical Hits ignored the Special Attack drops on Hydreigon.

GameFreak has made a variety of Pokémon and items have a strong affinity with Critical Hits. The most notable example is Sirfetch'd, which is a Pokémon that can hold the Stick Item to raise its Critical Chance by 2 Stages -- paired with a move such as Leaf Blade which increases Critical Chance by 1 Stage, Sirfetch'd is capable of guaranteeing Critical Hits. Despite this, Sirfetch'd is largely considered by many players to be a unviable pokemon in Sword and Shield OU (Ranked in NUBL) and even in opportunities where Sirfetch'd WAS used in lower Tiers, Sirfetch'd often ran a Life Orb or Choice Band set (Although sets using the Stick are present on the Showdown Damage Calculator). Granted, this can be attributed to Sirfetch'd terrible stat spread (notably very poor speed for an offensive sweeper) and a Pure Fighting type that held it back significantly against threats such as Toxapex and Clefable.

Discussing this concept with the CAP Discord Server brought about some concerns with regards to how limited the Movepool or Ability discussion would be for this hypothetical Pokémon, although while moves such as Night Slash or Cross Chop do incur only a chance of raising the Critical Hit rate, other moves such as Frost Breath or Flower Trick do provide guaranteed Critical Hits. I believe there is plenty of avenue of exploration and experimentation when it comes to Critical Hits. This concept aims to utilize an underappreciated mechanic and provide some nuance to an offensive sweeper that could provide a good basis for stat spread and movepool.
Last edited:


is a Site Content Manageris a Social Media Contributoris a Community Leaderis a Community Contributoris a CAP Contributoris a Contributor to Smogon
CAP Co-Leader
final submission

Name - A Lot's Gonna Change

Description - This Pokemon finds success by using Terastallization to change its primary role or playstyle.

Justification - While Terastallization has its fair share of controversy surrounding it, it's nonetheless the defining feature of Gen 9, and is unarguably a complex mechanic that has turned much of what we knew about playing and building upside down. Because it's so new, it's also almost completely unexplored. This concept aims to tap into this unexplored design space so that we can learn more about Tera's effect on the CAP process and produce more informed creations going forward. I think we stand to learn more from a deep look at Terastallization than almost any other concept at this point.

Questions To Be Answerd -
  • Are certain moves, abilities, and stat spreads more conducive than others to enabling two distinct modes of play?
  • How would having a Pokemon that performs two different roles at two different game states affect teambuilding? Is Tera alone able to compress roles in a way that allows for more building flexibility? What can we learn from an extreme example of this?
  • Would it better to start with an offensive role and transition into a defensive one, or vice versa?
  • What is the full spectrum of possible roles this concept allows for? For example, a particularly obvious one is as a setup sweeper, but are there any less obvious options that would still be effective?
  • Are there any existent Pokemon that change gears mid-game, with or without Tera? What can we learn from these examples?
  • Does this concept necessitate trying to "lock" CAP34 into one specific Tera, or will CAP34 have the freedom change gears successfully with a number of Teras? Is one of these options better/more consistent/easier to design around/etc. than the other?
  • The optimal/preferred Tera type on a given Pokemon is always subject to change depending on metagame developments. How would this fact impact our choices during the project, as well as CAP34's success into the future?

Explanation - Terastallization is basically like a limited in-battle form change that every Pokemon has access to, but more often than not, the way it's used is fairly straightforward. You might see a defensive wall use Tera to deal with an otherwise terrifying threat, or a hazard lead use Tera to block Rapid Spin, or an offensive sweeper use Tera to dodge status, escape being revenge killed, or boost its STAB moves. The majority of the time, Terastallization is used to perform as a more effective version of what something already is. I am interested in pushing the mechanic to its limits to create something truly bimodal––something that uses Terastallization to fundamentally change its gameplan, role, playstyle, etc. in the midst of battle. There are a few examples I can think of: for one, in early SV when the power level was lower, you would often see Venomicon perform as a reliable wall for most of the game, then utilize Tera fighting in conjunction with Stamina and Body Press to become an unorthodox late-game win condition. Great Tusk and Volcarona can perform similarly, leveraging their defensive utility early game before transforming into fearsome setup cleaners once they use Tera at the perfect moment. However, examples are pretty rare as far as OU/CAP go, and they are almost always some variation of "defensive pivot -> setup sweeper." I think the possibilities are much broader than this, though, and even within the formula of "defensive -> offensive" there's still a lot of uncharted territory.
Last edited:
Not open for further replies.

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