Process Guide Workshop for Create-A-Pokemon.

[latinoheat]

Ok i know it is early but the concept discussion stage is horrible. Every fanboy comes in with their favourite idea, its allowing single people to determine factors like typing and stat spreads. There is no real way a topic leader can sort through all the ideas and select 10 without it being based solely on what that single person likes. Also you say don't be specific but yet people are allowed to say shit like defensive dragon, which already determines

a)Typing
b)Stat spread

Atleast poll the primary typing first and go through concepts from there.

 

[eric the espeon]

Agreeing strongly with Latino, if we have a type (I think we should do both types first) then we have can have a focused discussion, the way we are doing it now literally ANY idea is possible.

 

[DougJustDoug]

The concept discussion is new for this CAP, and it will take some time to work out the best way to handle it. I think having a Concept help focus the CAP project is a good thing. Obviously, I am very concerned about pre-determining any concrete aspects of the pokemon as a result of choosing a Concept. I've tried to make it clear in the OP of the Concept Discussion, that the Concepts must be general ideas. Let's see how the discussion plays out, and if adjustments to the process are necessary, we'll do it.

The idea of "Concept first" or "Typing first" is a bit of a "chicken and egg syndrome". The Concept might be easier to focus if typing is already determined; but, typing is also easier to focus if the Concept is already determined.

Chicken and egg...

 

[latinoheat]

its clear that it doesn't work just from this first topic alone. You have at least 100+ concept ideas how you expect one person to pick 10 from that i don't know.

Typing has to come first, this is basically the same as making a create an evolution project then asking everyone to vote for what they think needs an evolution, without narrowing down the options with a typing poll.

 

[Hyra]

Definitely agreeing.

About 2 or 3 pages of the concept poll are one line ideas between the same two or three people. The first few pages had well thought-out ideas, but from page 3/4 to page 7, its just say what ever springs into your mind without considering the impact on the metagame. For comparison, I thought my submission would be one of the lower quality ones, but its actually one of better ones in the thread.

 

[tennisace]

It's a bit late now, but see my post there. Like Hyra said, the last few pages have been fanboyish to say the least. It should go back to typing first. Also, would it be too much to do a create an evolution project alongside this?

 

[Hyra]

@ Tennis:

the evolution process is meant to be modeled off the CAP process. If the CAP process has flaws, the CAE will have the same flaws, which isn't very good.

 

[tennisace]

True. However, since it's an evolution, it's roll is already set to an extent, as is typing. So there wouldn't be as many flaws as the CAP portion because there isn't much room for the same flaws.

 

[Syprus]

I agree with Latino that we should do a Typing Poll before we do anything else. That will give everyone a general idea about it and would narrow things down instead of random ideas flying around.

 

[latinoheat]

Also if concept poll is kept, each person is only allowed to submit one idea.
People have thrown out 6-7 ideas, if they only get one chance they may put more thought into it.


For the Create An Evolution thing i think we need a seperate topic to discuss the process and other things such as criteria for evolution.

 

[Syprus]

Deck Knight already made a couple of rules about the Concept Submissions and they seem decent enough.

 

[DougJustDoug]

This thread has really outlived its original purpose. This started as a way to peer edit the Process Guide document that was being written. It has since morphed into a general purpose thread for discussing CAP project policies and procedures. In that regard, it has been a valuable discussion thread. However, I think it would be better to have a thread explicitly created for that purpose.

I am closing this thread and I will create a new one for discussing CAP policy. If, at some point in the future, we engage in a significant rewrite of the process guide, we can always create a new workshop thread, if necessary.

Please see the new CAP Policy Review thread for continuing discussion on many of the issues we have been covering here.