Little Cup Analyses?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Great Sage

Banned deucer.
I got a PM from "eric the espeon" regarding Little Cup analyses, shown here:

eric the espeon said:
I am sending this to you two on Maniaclyracist's recommendation, if you are the wrong people to send this to please tell me who would be the best person to send it to.


As you may or may not have seen in this and more recently this thread the number of people who play the Little Cup metagame is growing fast, on the CaP server it is more popular than UU and Ubers combined and its following is growing by the day. We are improving the rule set and banned list, we have also written analysis for some the Pokemon that can be used there, as well as a guide about how EVs affect stats at Lv. 5.
However we are running into problems as it is near impossible to comment on and improve 10+ unfinished analysis in the same thread, they are getting buried under an avalanche of posts.

To solve this problem I would like to ask permission for everyone to be able to post Little Cup analysis in the Analysis Workshop subforum, if this is not possible (maybe you don't want peer edits for the more standard metagames pushed off the first page) an even better solution would be a separate subforum within Contributions & Corrections for us to develop analysis for the Little Cup Pokemon.


My second proposal is to put the finished analysis on the site, almost all of the Pokemon allowed in Little Cup do not have their own analysis as they are first stage NFE's so do not have there own analysis right now, the only exceptions I can think of are Scyther who is banned, Clamperl and Trapinch (Phione is banned under currant rules) who could have a separate tab, next to "Strategy" and "Moves", named "Little Cup Strategy", or if thats too much complication we could just have a single set for Little Cup in the normal analysis for those Pokemon.


Both of these proposals would also help us to promote and publicize what I believe is a fun and interesting emerging metagame.

eric the espeon
Of the little bit of opinion I have on this, I tend to lean towards not allowing it, because it would eventually result in "hey, why not do intermediate Pokemon like Ivysaur => hey, why not do Little Cup Pokemon at level 100 => hey, wait, what level should intermediates be at => etc.". It's not a really strong opinion though.

So, discuss what you think of this idea.
 

Bologo

Have fun with birds and bees.
is a Contributor Alumnus
You could just make the 1st stage NFE pokemon their own tier call LC or something. I've always thought that 1st and 2nd stage evos deserved their own separations anyway.

They seem to be working really hard on these analyses, so I don't see why we shouldn't give them a chance. If you change that name to LC, then when people look at the Little Cup article, they'll see that all of them are supposed to be level 5, and they won't really be able to justify having level 100, or 2nd stage evo analyses.

The little cup pokemon seriously do need their own analyses, because Little Cup, in my experiences, is even more offensive of a metagame than ubers, and it goes even faster. This is a completely different metagame than all of the other ones, and the pokemon that can participate in it all deserve analyses. I don't think anyone will want to do Caterpie, Weedle, or Magikarp analyses, but that's up to them.

If we're not going to put them on the SCMS, at least put something in C&C that allows all these analyses to be shown, because the people working on them have put a lot of work into them, and people are quite interested in this metagame.

I'd go with the first proposal. At least it isn't us that's actually making the analyses, so that allow us to focus on the standard metagame. We should only allow them if the people in that thread are going to keep making the analyses, because we shouldn't be forced to do it for them, since we aren't the ones that actually play it.
 
imo hell the f no. we have more issues to worry about atm before doing this. with the whole what's uber, garchomp/wobb, finishing tiers, metagame analysis, that should definitely be a lower priority
 

Jumpman16

np: Michael Jackson - "Mon in the Mirror" (DW mix)
is a Site Content Manager Alumnusis a Top Team Rater Alumnusis a Battle Simulator Admin Alumnusis a Smogon Discord Contributor Alumnusis a Researcher Alumnusis a Top Tiering Contributor Alumnusis a Top Contributor Alumnusis an Administrator Alumnus
that's pretty much exactly what i told GS on irc because he pmed me too but that also somewhat speaks of my apathy towards the little cup. i dont want anything to do with this at all and i think that speaks more if my focus on fixing standard play and its most pressing issues before worrying about anything else
 

IggyBot

!battle
is a Top Tutor Alumnusis a Top Team Rater Alumnusis a Forum Moderator Alumnusis a Battle Simulator Moderator Alumnus
imo hell the f no. we have more issues to worry about atm before doing this. with the whole what's uber, garchomp/wobb, finishing tiers, metagame analysis, that should definitely be a lower priority
I would rather figure this stuff out than worry about a metagame that's popular on a server that has a rather low level of competition (sorry doug).
 

Bologo

Have fun with birds and bees.
is a Contributor Alumnus
Well, I agree with you guys that we need to figure out the other stuff first. However, we could just make the subforum for the people making up Little Cup and treat it as one of smogon's projects. Just give whoever the leader of the project is temporary mod status so they can monitor the project by themselves without our help, so that we ca focus on the more important stuff. After all, we don't have to help out with the analyses at all, because the people who are making them in that thread are basically doing all the work. All we have to do is make the subforum and let them and their project manager do the rest of the work.

If anything, we don't even need to put them on the SCMS after. Just keep that subforum after and put the analyses in order or something and keep them in there. It might help prevent a lot of the work needed after the analyses are all done. I'd recommend finding someone to be the leader of the project first, probably eric the espeon.
 

Great Sage

Banned deucer.
I've thought of another reason to oppose this. We don't have separate analyses for ADV 200 mode, RBY with GSC tradebacks, or true GSC (or true D/P for that matter). If we allow anything other than the analyses for the "standard" game (such as Little Cup analyses), then there is nothing to stop people from demanding that we allow analyses for the things I mentioned.
 

Bologo

Have fun with birds and bees.
is a Contributor Alumnus
Well, we may not have had separate analyses for those, but we did include them in the normal analyses. For instance, there were 2v2 movesets in some of the R/S movesets, and some pokemon even had ADV 200 movesets, such as Trapinch. They don't even need separate analyses, because only a few movesets change. Most of the R/S pokemon in 200 did the exact same thing in 386.

However, Little Cup isn't even mentioned at all in anything besides the articles. This isn't something like GSC tradebacks where it only really affects a couple of the pokemon in the GSC metagame with their movesets, this is an entire metagame with tons of pokemon in it, and it's possibly the most diverse metgame out there right now.

I dunno, I guess that a lot of the LC pokemon do the exact same stuff as their fully evolved forms, and that's probably the biggest reason not to allow them.

Now that I think about it, someone who plays LC a lot should just make a thread in C&C with tiers in LC, because since a lot of the movesets are so similar to the fully evolved forms, tiering in LC is all that people really need if they're going to play the game. Whoever makes that thread in C&C can maintain those tiers, but it would most likely not go on the SCMS. They can tier it themselves, I guess, they don't need much of our help, besides moderation and such.

Basically, I'm pretty borderline on this subject right now. They don't necessarily need analyses, but people do need to know what's good and what's not in that metagame.
 

Misty

oh
is a Site Content Manager Alumnusis a Battle Simulator Admin Alumnusis a Programmer Alumnusis a Smogon Discord Contributor Alumnusis a Researcher Alumnusis a Top Contributor Alumnusis an Administrator Alumnus
stuff like this should be done after the standard metagame is stabilized. we can't even decide if garchomp is uber, so no.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

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

Top