Approved The Mediocre Mon

Status
Not open for further replies.
after toxic is active it is immune to status.
magic bounce is way better than natural cure- the ability to bounce back all status moves is far beyond absorbing status
magic guard has other bonuses to offer such as no recoil from life orb or from hazards it allows to come in absorb status multiple times
Like i said shed skin is about the same-not better it's a little worse it's main advantage is the ability to stay on the field(keep boosts)
 
We're getting slightly off topic here.

I think to fulfill this concept, according to Imanalt's interpretation which was accepted by Tarontos, we should create a Pokemon which fills a niche that players cannot immediately see after looking at its moves, ability, typing and stats. In essence, it looks mediocre, but is actually viable.

The challenge is twofold:
1) Find a niche that intelligent players won't spot from looking at its stats, moves, ability and typing.
2) Make the CAP mediocre but still able to fill this niche and therefore, be viable.
 

Imanalt

I'm the coolest girl you'll ever meet
is a Tiering Contributor Alumnusis a Battle Simulator Moderator Alumnus
no KhosroTheGreat thats just not what we're saying. We're saying it shoudl have no standout qualities but the sum of them shoudl be good. That's the challenge...
 

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
So I really, really don't like this concept for numerous reasons, but I think the most important one is something I only just realized.

This CAP is basically impossible to do moving forwards. There is no way to magically fall upon an OU viable mon with no obvious standout qualities without first starting at a desired final set(s) and then working backwards. That's just not how CAP works. Either a massive amount of the whole process would have to be decided in Concept Assessment, or it would be literal guesswork the whole way.
 
While I'm not a fan of this concept myself, I would still say it's CAP viable. Regarding the above concern that we would have to plan the whole thing out in advance, I would expect the process to instead go something like:
Concept Assessment: What kind of role do we want this Pokemon to take?
Typing: Pick a typing with a couple good offensive and/or defensive qualities, as well as a couple bad offensive and/or defensive qualities.
Every subsequent step: try to find "mediocre" options that complement what we have so far. If we chose a Ground/Fire type, maybe we give it Levitate or Water Absorb as an ability. Both options are mediocre in their own right, yet on a Ground/Fire type they would be worth a lot more than they are to other mons (such as a Psychic/Dragon for example). Then moving on to stats, maybe we give it just enough bulk to wall certain offensive threats with its typing/ability combination.
My point is, I could see the CAP moving forward in a manner without pole jumping or "reverse building" by simply trying to find mediocre options that can combine with "the CAP so far" to be something better each step of the way. That said, I still don't think I would like this concept because instead of most of the discussion being on relatively objective criteria (Ability X will pair well with Typing Y's STAB options) I'm expecting it to go more like what we already saw in this thread. Namely, bickering over the definition of "mediocre" (Grass/Psychic is mediocre. No, it resists ground, electric, and water, so it's good. Wrong, it has a ton of weaknesses and bad STABs, so it's bad). This is a recurring conversation that I think will just define the entire CAP, and I would rather avoid all together.
 
I'd have to agree with srk's concerns about this concept.

The thing is, mphallor, that Levitate or Water Absorb would be a 'standout quality', as Imanalt put it, on a Ground/Fire type. In addition, the 'trying to find mediocre options that can combine with the CAp so far is pretty much the guesswork that srk spoke about in his comment. Without a direction of where we want the CAP to go, this will either lead to the Pokemon not fulfilling the concept because it has 'standout qualities' or it'll end up having no 'standout qualities' but the sum of these qualities won't be good, as the concept intends. Unless we're super lucky and our guesswork happens to be spot on.

Without finding a direction for the CAP, a niche for it to fill, allowing it to have no 'standout qualities' but still be viable, it's very unlikely we'll pull off the concept. However, as srk said, in doing this, we would have to decide pretty much all of the CAP in Concept Assessment, which is obviously undesirable.
 
Just reading this, all I can think about is Victreebel from last generation. Victreebel was capable of surviving every tier because it was so wonderfully mediocre. Then a slew of better mixed attackers and sweepers came along and threw Victreebel into PU. I think a concept like this probably requires a little more research to find the pokemon that weren't really specialists but still did well in past generations and formulate questions about what this pokemon should have strengths and weaknesses in to survive the new meta. I'd be both for and against this because it doesn't seem like something that would encourage a new playstyle and it definitely doesn't seem like a gamebreaker. It just looks like the makings for another usable Pokemon.
 
First of all, I think we should agree on how "mediocre" is mediocre, especially stat-wise, since good/bad stats are easier to visualize than good/bad abilities, movepools, and such (if any, because stats are numbers so they're more immediate to compare).

Personally I find a bit excessive to call Celebi's stats and ability "mediocre". Even with Megas and the general power creep, the little onion is still an all-100 pixie with the solid Natural Cure. Sure, its typing and movepool aren't the best, but I hardly see it as all around mediocre. As for the often mentioned Clefable, there's nothing mediocre about it except its stats, same with Sableye (excluding its Mega).

Overall, I believe that our MediocreMon will need to forgo its namesake mediocrity is at least one of the four "places" (stats, ability, typing, movepool) to actually be useful. Pre-XY Normal-type Clefable still had good abilities and moves and it was overall bad.

(Last minute thought: or perhaps, we can find an unexplored niche to fill and make MediocreMon just barely good enough at it to be usable despite everything?)
 

nyttyn

From Now On, We'll...
is a Forum Moderator Alumnusis a CAP Contributor Alumnus
While there are a number of concerns about the project, I do believe that it stands on its own two feet as a concept strong enough to base a CAP around. It's certainly managed to stir up a lot of discussion in the assessment thread alone, and while it will require a more indepth concept assessment than usual, I think that's a far cry from impossible. In addition, this would provide a lot of interesting discussion about what, exactly, mediocire yet still viable can be considered in this power creeped meta of mega titans, like Mega Charizard-Y and Mega Sableye.

Approved 1/2

 
I want to like your post but i can't hm well any ways I love approval.
Besides that an interesting note is mono typing, for Ok typing offensively, mono typing is (almost) always inferior for an offensive mon as the lack of a secondary stab prevents it from getting past(most of) at least three types. of course not saying dual types are always good at offense as many provide overlapping coverage or are walled by certain types(steel/ dragon, grass/psychic,Dragon/fairy is walled by virtually every steel type. I think defensive typing is a little more... abstract because it has more to do with usage(and general type usage), looking at fairy that typing is only so effective (deffensily) due to it's weaknesses(few) being so uncommon, offensivly it is good because it hits several generically good defensive typings( Dragon, fighting, dark(not so much )) Super effectivly. Fairy is just a genaricly good typing.
 
I kind of agree with Billy the Uncle and Toebag on this one. I think this concept is really interesting, though I feel that if we want this Pokemon to be a successful CAP, and viable in OU, we may need to make sure it has at least one good thing going for it. When I say good, I mean above average, not a stand-out quality that immediately gives it a niche (Azumarill comes to mind, because despite its mediocre stats, Huge Power automatically brands it as a physical attacker).

All the arguments made in the thread so far--Celebi, Clefable, Zapdos--are all great examples, however, each of these Pokemon has at least one good thing going for them, despite being average at other things. Zapdos and Celebi especially show us that a Pokemon doesn't necessarily need a low BST to be considered "average". In fact, with all the power creep in XY and ORAS OU, I think it would be fun to see how high of a BST we can make an "average" Pokemon out of. I believe that to even make a viable OU Pokemon, we're going to need a certain BST baseline to prevent it from failing immediately. As tempting as it is to make Glailie and give it a good niche, it still probably will be outclassed unless we create a new niche entirely, though that will also need some exploration on our part.
 
I actually really love this concept, because of the kind of creativity it encourages. It's basically a blank palette to paint on, and though I understand that there's not really a "direction", I think it really gets the brain juices flowing :)

I think we would have to not simply theorize about "mediocrity", but lay out and define what actually is "mediocre." Like, how high of a BST is too high, and how high can you put a single stat before it stops being "mediocre"? (Maybe average out stats in OU, and put all stats of this 'mon below that threshold?) What typing or type combination is "mediocre"? What constitutes a "mediocre" movepool, and what moves are "mediocre"? What abilities are "mediocre"?
 
I actually really love this concept, because of the kind of creativity it encourages. It's basically a blank palette to paint on, and though I understand that there's not really a "direction", I think it really gets the brain juices flowing :)

I think we would have to not simply theorize about "mediocrity", but lay out and define what actually is "mediocre." Like, how high of a BST is too high, and how high can you put a single stat before it stops being "mediocre"? (Maybe average out stats in OU, and put all stats of this 'mon below that threshold?) What typing or type combination is "mediocre"? What constitutes a "mediocre" movepool, and what moves are "mediocre"? What abilities are "mediocre"?
If we're looking at the current average for OU, an average mon has a BTS of about 570 tending towards physical aggression with 3 regular weaknesses, 4 regular resistances, a single immunity, and potentially either a quad weakness or a quad resistance. Note that these are unweighted averages not taking into account frequently held items (though it does take into account the Huge Power on Azumarill and abilities that add immunities). Going off this, mediocre defensive typing would include:

Monotyped: Bug, Dark, Dragon, Fighting, Flying, Grass, Ground, Ice, Psychic, and Rock
Dual-typed: Bug/Dark, Bug/Dragon, Bug/Fairy, Bug/Fighting, Bug/Ground, Bug/Ice, Bug/Normal, Bug/Psychic, Bug/Rock, Dark/Fighting, Dark/Ice, Dragon/Flying, Dragon/Ground, Dragon/Ice, Dragon/Rock, Electric/Fairy, Electric/Grass, Electric/Ground, Electric/Ice, Electric/Rock, Fairy/Fighting, Fairy/Ice, Fairy/Poison, Fairy/Psychic, Fighting/Flying, Fighting/Ground, Fighting/Ice, Fighting/Normal, Fighting/Psychic, Fire/Flying, Fire/Grass, Fire/Ice, Flying/Ice, Flying/Psychic, Grass/Ground, Grass/Ice, Grass/Normal, Grass/Poison, Grass/Rock, Grass/Water, Ground/Ice, Ground/Poison, Ground/Psychic, Ice/Normal, Ice/Psychic, Ice/Water, Normal/Rock, Normal/Water, Poison/Psychic, Rock/Water

This is just as defensive typing mind you. Now let's look at offensive typing. Dark, Dragon, Fairy, Fighting, Ground, and Water all tend to be on the strong end of offensive typing. Specific combinations of types such as Electric/Ice should also strike you as a tad excessively good. Normal/Rock and Grass/Ice are also on the list, which should strike you as far below mediocre. Eliminating those, our list becomes:

Monotyped: Bug, Flying, Grass, Ice, Psychic, and Rock
Dual-typed: Bug/Ice, Bug/Normal, Bug/Psychic, Bug/Rock, Electric/Grass, Electric/Rock, Fire/Flying, Fire/Grass, Flying/Ice, Flying/Psychic, Grass/Normal, Grass/Poison, Grass/Rock, Fire/Ice, Ice/Normal, Ice/Psychic, Poison/Psychic

So this should be about the list of types that are okay but not incredible.
 
Last edited:
most mono type, offensively are going to have problems I can not think of a single thing in the upper viability(a- and up)(that is their for offense) that is a mono type except for politoad and tornadus-t and clefable(those are mostly there for their typing/ abilities)
both of which are decidely not average in at least on way(politoad(drizzle) tornadus(high speed decent offense regenerator+u-turn)
once we get to the b tier we have raiku, conkeldor, azelf, and Serpeior each of these have something going for them raichu has 115 base speed plus stab volt-switch, azelf gets 115 speed with explosion and stealth rocks, while conkeldor has high attack and a variety of abilities to abuse, Serpeior has one of the best abilities in the game.
Mono types that arn't too god defensivly should be fine

Ice+fire get's crap for coverage it is resisted by every fire and water type
you can't even get perfect coverage with combination of stabs and a single move(not to mention heatran and(volcanion) exist
(4 times weak to stealth rock)

ice+electric yes that is good to remove
but you removed alot from your list that wasn't necassry such as types whee mono types resist both stabs

ground may be good but it's safe to say not that good considering that their are only two any where above b- in ou and at least one of those is a lengendary(landours counted as one) and the other is definitely their for defense(hippowdon)
flying may be good on offense but rember we don't necasarily giving it reasonable stabs for that type(just look at ho areodactyly/landourus got screwed)
you should really look at dual stab coverage and what it is walled by coverage before you remove something
 
Last edited:
most mono type, offensively are going to have problems I can not think of a single thing in the upper viability(a- and up)(that is their for offense) that is a mono type except for politoad and tornadus-t and clefable(those are mostly there for their typing/ abilities)
both of which are decidely not average in at least on way(politoad(drizzle) tornadus(high speed decent offense regenerator+u-turn)
once we get to the b tier we have raiku, conkeldor, azelf, and Serpeior each of these have something going for them raichu has 115 base speed plus stab volt-switch, azelf gets 115 speed with explosion and stealth rocks, while conkeldor has high attack and a variety of abilities to abuse, Serpeior has one of the best abilities in the game.
Mono types that arn't too god defensivly should be fine
That's only true of this gen, and only because most of the Megas either added another type or went to something with multiple types. There are plenty of offensive types that would be fundamentally unfair. There's also the issue of movepool. Anything that has STAB Draco Meteor or STAB Earthquake inherently doesn't have a mediocre movepool. A Fighting type would have to have Brick Break as it's only STAB in order to have a mediocre movepool, and that's not going to happen on a monotype.

Ice+fire get's crap for coverage it is resisted by every fire and water type
you can't even get perfect coverage with combination of stabs and a single move(not to mention heatran and(volcanion) exist
(4 times weak to stealth rock)
That's my bad on that one. I wrote it down as Ice/Fire and mentioned it as Ice/Fire, but somehow I got it processed in my head as Electric/Fire. I'll fix it.

ice+electric yes that is good to remove
but you removed alot from your list that wasn't necassry such as types whee mono types resist both stabs
Can you give me an example? The only ones I removed were ones where either one type was way too good (As was the case with the Dragons) or ones where the combination of the two types would have prevented it from even being playable (Like Grass Ice).

ground may be good but it's safe to say not that good considering that their are only two any where above b- in ou and at least one of those is a lengendary(landours counted as one) and the other is definitely their for defense(hippowdon)
You missed Gliscor, Garchomp(regular and mega), Mamoswine, Quagsire, and somehow inexplicably Rhyperior and Diggersby (Those seem a little too high on the list, but I digress).

flying may be good on offense but rember we don't necasarily giving it reasonable stabs for that type
you should really look at dual stab coverage and what it is walled by coverage before you remove something
This part just confuses me. I never argued against Flying being a mediocre type. In fact, my list of mediocre types has an incredible number of flying types on it. As for the dual stab coverage thing, Dragon Steel gets hard walled by Steel, but I don't think anybody would argue that isn't the most bonkers typing in the game.
 
Why are we talking about typing combos? It's not really the time or place for this.

We should instead be discussing a general direction which this CAP should take, or ways to improve the concept for a second QC approval.

So my own thought is that perhaps this should be a pokemon with not very spammable STABs (but nonetheless useful), while its typing offers some key resists and a movepool which gives it some supportive niche . A utility attacker is the better way to phrase what I'm on about.
While this is my own thoughts, what are other peoples ideas about this pokemons roles or what team archetypes it could fit into?
 
Some of the previous examples brought up in this thread of Pokemon that are "average" were pretty much all defensive/utility Pokemon, so I think that would be a good initial direction to take. Toebag 's utility attacker sounds like a very "average" type role that I think fits the concept pretty well. With unique STABs and a shallow, but usable, support movepool, it could fill a previously unavailable niche to check unusual, but present threats.

I think making mediocre qualities into a defensive threat would be also entertaining to see, because at first glance, this CAP wouldn't seem defensively capable at all, but ends up doing a good job in whatever defensive niche we would give it, perhaps using unconventional or "mediocre" defensive typing and giving it unusual bulk or immunities, with a usable enough movepool to be a defensive pivot or support.
 

Birkal

We have the technology.
is a Top Artistis a Top CAP Contributoris a Top Smogon Media Contributoris a Site Content Manager Alumnusis a Battle Simulator Admin Alumnusis a Senior Staff Member Alumnusis a Community Contributor Alumnus
Yeah, I agree with nyttyn here. There is enough to this concept to sustain us throughout the entire project. Do we have much to learn from this project? Perhaps. We'll tell in time. But from a logistics standpoint, I could see this concept driving us through the entire process easily. What defines an average typing? Does overall movepool or amount of viable sets play a role in how average a Pokemon is? There are enough questions here (specially in the OP) to keep us going throughout the project. I like it.

I also went through and gave it a grammatical tidying-up. It should be a bit more presentable now :>

QC APPROVED 2/2

(This thread will remain open, but the Topic Leader is allowed to slate it when the time comes.)
 
I like the typing stuff NC put forward, but I still fail to see how we are going to fundamental problems with this concept:
1) If you have an okay/mediocre/[insert choice adjective here] movepool, an okay typing, okay stats and okay ability, then how is it going to more than okay overall i.e. why not pick something better?
2) If you want it to be a mon with no stand-out features, but is good overall, how do you get something good without having at least one stand-out feature? The only real way I can think of getting a CAP which is viable past competent competitive players without them immediately noticing its stand-out feature(s) is for it to have a niche, similar to Zapdos' niche of defogger that can beat Bisharp, except that Zapdos has stand-out features, such as its powerful SpA.

If we are to fulfill this concept, while still creating a viable Pokemon, we need to decide what niche it is going to fill, because otherwise it will either end up:
1) being not mediocre and/or having stand-out features, or
2) not being viable, because it is mediocre and/or has no stand-out features, but its not good overall, because it is outclassed by other Pokemon and has no niche to fill
 
i think the way to go about this concept, is do eactly a the concept says: make a mon with average stats, abilities and an average movepool, but what needs to be done is make the mon in such a way that it is not outclassed by other mons, therefore providing a niche so it can fulfill its concept. I think this concept would be fun to do and make for a simpler process.
 
The thing with "mediocre" abilities is that there are quite a few that actually have applications, they're just not on the right Pokemon. One that comes to mind immediately is Sap Sipper, which has potential in OU, but isn't "great", because even though we don't see many Grass-type offensive moves (which is the ideal use for Sap Sipper, to block damage), Grass-type support moves like Leech Seed and Spore are seen fairly often. Its only OU user is Azumarill, which relies on Huge Power to be as strong as it is, so any Sap Sipper sets pretty much go out the window. I think we need to take a closer look at some abilities that more popular Pokemon in OU don't use on purpose. It's there that we find the "mediocre" ones that we can use to carve out niches for this CAP, and that's something that will be very interesting and fun to research.
 
Slightly off topic, Sap Sipper Azumarril I've seen in Monotype, Iron Caliber , if that would be of any interest to you.

Getting back on topic, the two replies above seem to suggest that we go for the first approach I mentioned previously, the 'mediocre everything, good overall', rather than the 'no stand-out qualities' one. Question is: Would Sap Sipper be mediocre/a stand-out quality?

For me, most competent competitive players would immediately see the niche that Iron Caliber puts forward, through Sap Sipper's limited use in OU and possibly through stats made for the CAP to do this. The problem with the second approach I mentioned in my last post is that, to not be 'stand-out', things need to have limited use, which also makes it considerably easier to see the 'stand-out' quality of the CAP, so its incredibly hard to fulfill.

Therefore, the first approach seems to be the way to go, and the 2 replies above seem to agree with me that the CAP will definitely have to fill some sort of niche. I therefore think that we should alter the concept to include this, and we should also consider how will this affect the questions the concept puts forward. Particularly, the one asking how we keep the concept from becoming too niche may need to be changed.

So, getting onto the things Iron Caliber suggests we do to fulfill this first approach to the concept, I think that looking at abilities which good Pokemon have but don't use is an interesting proposal that we should definitely look at, but it does have a few things we should be cautious of. Firstly, that we don't just copy the Pokemon we look at, i.e. something like Azumarril except only changed to work better with Sap Sipper. Secondly, that we make sure that the ability is mediocre, not just mediocre on that mon, but this is something I trust we should all be able to do. Lastly, we should be careful that these Pokemon are not outclassed by their 'parent' Pokemon (this kinda fits in with point 1 too), and generally, not outclassed in their general purpose. What I mean by this is that niches have some sort of type (e.g. offensive, physically defensive, specially defensive, pivot, stally etc.) and there will be other Pokemon that will function in these types. Therefore, this CAP must be not be outclassed completely by these Pokemon, in that it's not too niche and is still viable enough to gain enough usage alongside these Pokemon, but obviously, it must stilll stay mediocre (and hence, not outclass them).

Lastly, on the use of Sap Sipper, its mediocrity will be heavily based on its typing (does it take away a weakness or a resistance etc.).
 
Normally I just lurk, but I'd like to offer up a couple points.

If we accept 1) that mediocrity of certain features of a Pokemon are sometimes based on individual qualities (the most ludicrous example being Levitate on Rotom-F), and 2) that we want each individual feature of the Pokemon to be mediocre in and of itself (like the typings NumberCruncher so graciously provided), then even Sap Sipper would need to be heavily weighed in direct relation to the typing/stats of the CAP (I think we can all agree Swampert or even Gastrodon would be significantly more terrifying with Sap Sipper). I just think we should be very careful about providing immunities anywhere, as that is often a total game changer.

I will also say that while I very much understand and sympathize with the concerns about building this CAP, the challenges seem to boil down to being difficult rather than impossible, and for that reason I say we may as well go for it. It will demand extensive creativity but it can be done. I mean come on, imagine a really heavy Fire/Ice-type with Heavy Metal and Heat Crash. Slap a Choice Band on that and I don't care what your Attack stat is, you're doing some damage. Obviously that's far from an ideal example but it's just meant to illustrate that Pokemon is a very big game, and if we look hard enough I think we can find some previously foregone moves, abilites, etc., and with some flavor help and imagination build a cool Pokemon that can hold its own in OU. Remember, we're not trying to make a suspect; we just want to be OU viable.
 
Thank you, KhosroTheGreat . I probably wasn't quite specific enough in the direction I wanted to take with Sap Sipper, I was mostly just using it as an example of an under-appreciated or "mediocre" ability due to Grass-type's lack of offensive presence in OU. I'm sure there are plenty of other examples, but I was mainly just showing how it's entirely possible to define a "mediocre" ability in today's metagame. Along with the typing information that NumberCruncher provided and some general guidelines on BST we should be A-okay with all of the technical stuff. The main issue is going to be, like KhosroTheGreat said, finding a niche and making the CAP good enough to fill it, but not outclass other Pokemon, or make a new niche that this CAP can fill while still being mediocre.
 
I've run some numbers on the current metagame to look at about where this thing's stats needs to be in order to fit concept, so as we get a better idea what we're looking at before we try to force a niche on this thing it can't realistically handle.

Speed is probably the most important stat not to overdo or underdo. A mediocre pokemon with no speed isn't going to get played. A pokemon with oodles of Speed isn't mediocre. I'd assume outspeeding 25-50% percent of the metagame isn't to unreasonable to ask. In that case, no matter what this pokemon is aiming to do, it should probably only get 71-90 Base Speed. To get a gauge as to where that exactly is in the grand scheme of things, this means the pokemon ought to outspeed Bisharp, but not Life Orb Landorus-T.

Attack is a little harder to gauge without knowing what this pokemon is going to end up doing. Obviously we shouldn't be comparing this thing with Garchomp if it ends up being a Specially oriented wall, but if it is going to be a Physical attacker, weighing it's attack against Chansey and Gengar is counter-productive. So for this section I'm considering the top 50-62.5% of the metagame as where a dedicated mediocre attacker should be, and the 25-37.5% range to be about where a non-dedicated mon should be.

Thus a CAP a leaning on its ATK stat should be in the range of 96-124 (Better than Gliscor, worse than non-Mega Gyarados), whereas if it isn't going that route, it should really be between 80-90. Applying the same to Special Attack reveals a range of 96-114 (Better than Gothitelle, worse than Raikou) for a dedicated Special Attacker, and 65-95 otherwise.

Health, Defense, and Special Defense are a bit trickier still, since it takes two stats to determine bulk. However, we can reverse engineer the set of acceptable totals using what we know. Assuming we used the same method as with Attack and Special Attack, we get:

Health: 70-91
Defense: 95-104 if physically defensive. 80-90 otherwise.
Special Defense: 97-104 if specially defensive. 80-90 otherwise.

This maps to about 139-149 PT and 141-155 ST as high ends and 120-127 PT and 123-129 ST as low end.

Just something to consider when coming up with ideas.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

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

Top