Hey everyone. So truth be told, I was not expecting to take nearly as long to get final limits posted. I have been taking the feedback you have all provided over the last few days and been working to push the existing limits in a direction that hopefully will be more acceptable to everyone regardless of where you stand on the issues with dynamic limits. After some reevaluation, discussion with the TLT, and many calcs, I have settled on these limits moving forward.
T = 2.5 | Base Limits | Swords Dance | Dragon Dance | Shift Gear | 50% Recovery |
---|
PS | 140 | -5 | -5 | -20 | |
SS | 100 | | | | |
PT | 130 | | | | |
ST | 130 | | | | |
BSR | 590 | -10 | -10 | -15 | -5 |
Speed Limit | 126 | | | | |
PT+ST Limit | 220 | | | | |
The most noticeable changes are the reductions to Dragon Dance and Shift Gear. The limit of Dragon Dance was eased back to be in line with Swords Dance. Even though Dragon Dance is not as immediately threatening with the fire power it offers, the speed boost offered is still a reasonable concern to have for the move. Both PS will be reduced by 5 and the BSR will be reduced by 10. The reduction in BSR only accounts for the limit imposed on PS and prevents reallocation into the other limits. This is not an additional restriction. Shift Gear on the other hand is a weird case. Given 31’s ability to operate at some of the lowest speed tiers with Shift Gear, PS was restricted in a way to account for this. -20 PS was used to limit a user’s ability to drop speed in exchange for a monstrous attack stat (159/78 is possible at a PS of 140). Compared to Dragon Dance and Swords Dance, the BSR penalty does not fully account for the drop in PS. It allows users the ability to reallocate some of the lost PS into either tankiness or special sweepiness. A lesser reduction of -15 BSR should hopefully compensate for the weak attack stat faster speed stats face or the low speeds stronger attack stats face.
I previously referred to less than desirable attack+speed when addressing the speed limit of 126. While perhaps not the best wording on my part, the real target of my commentary was the fact it is rather easy for users to drop a few points of base attack in exchange for large amounts of speed when considering the fastest base speeds. For example, when adhering to the limits of 140 PS at a T of 2.5, 122 ATK/126 SPE and 120 ATK/144 SPE result in similar PS ratings (139.28 vs 139.26). That is a difference of 2 base attack and 18 base speed. Since the change in attack is so negligible, it only incentivizes maxing out the base speed of the Pokémon. This problem is present regardless of T-value, so adjusting T down to increase speed’s weight in the equation is not a solution. There was a similar trend I noticed back with the old calculator during Astrolotl’s project in that once you exceed a particular speed threshold, the PS value stopped changing (since you have successfully out speed everything in the game). This means that you could give it any speed with no consequence and that is sort of what is happening here. While we are no longer in a meta where Zeraora is the fastest thing in the game, we still see remnants of this problem. Once you start to reach the higher speed tiers, there are fewer Pokémon left to out speed and the gaps between base speed grows. We are reaching base speeds where raising it has few consequences so there is little reason not to take the max. Given our concept and selection of Diamond Storm, 126 speed is the minimum needed to out speed and threaten all unboosted Diamond Storm targets. If there was a more significant tradeoff at higher speeds, I would be more inclined to consider no speed limit, but, under the current circumstance, I cannot allow it in good conscience. As for the remaining speed limits under boosting, I have done away with them and you will be expected to adhere to the 126 limit for all spreads.
As for comments regarding offensive counterplay, Stratagem (ignoring potential grass coverage) and Dragapult exert an immense amount of pressure on these fast & frail builds. Their ability to overwhelm 31 should be a welcomed and valuable balancing factor when considering faster spreads. To compensate for the speed limit, the original tankiness and BSR were set in a way to allow these average bulk builds to still perform well into Tapu Koko and Zeraora despite not being able to out speed.
Finally, the BSR penalty for 50% recovery was reduced to a -5 to have them be more competitive to spreads that account for Pain Split with lower HP. The general lack of resistance mono-ground has compared to other Pokémon also indicates that the penalties should be less. This probably should have been a part of the default table given that the combination PT+ST limit is 220, but setup is a very distracting and worrisome element that occupied most of my attention. This should be more than sufficient in circumventing issues with bulk and recovery.
Other than that, the other limits will hold. As a reminder, limits are cumulative. For example, if a stat spread is considering SD and Recover, then the limits for that spread would be 135 PS/100 SS/130 PT/130 ST with BSR 575.
Before passing the limits over to SHSP for approval I do need a moment to address this:
It doesn’t add up to me to try and warp the process this hard without a solid basis for the uncompetitiveness of it, and thus far I’m not convinced there is one. Why not ban a certain amount of tankiness, then, or recovery, for the DD subs? Or ban Taunt for the SD sets? These are equally arbitrary options if you’d like, especially considering the well-acknowledged agreement that a generalized build has not been established yet (merely shadow-established by topic leadership?). The optics of exercising this level of control are not good, imo, and I am a former mod and TLT member and I do know how to measure these considerations from a leadership standpoint.
I likewise disagree with Zetalz that the stats leader is owed any ease or difficulty when it comes to evaluating the stat spread submissions. It is not the stats leader’s job to evaluate the spreads at all, truth be told, beyond the submissions’ overall balance and justifications. Instead it is entrusted to the stats leader to guide discussion and to curate a balance of options for the community of voters to make *their own* evaluations. The stats leader is free to vote in the poll but is not free to manipulate the process to their liking or cut off ideas they disagree with at the knee.
We as TLT members are elected to the positions of SL and TL because we are deemed to be well-experienced in both the meta and community. We are entrusted with the ability to make administrative decisions for the project. Within these responsibilities, there is a level of expectation that we will exercise our knowledge and intervene when the project stands to get problematic despite a majority opinion. That is why we are tasked with determining intelligent community consensus. As someone who has worked on 60% of the projects this generation in a leadership position, I feel beyond qualified to recognize a problematic decision and am able to course correct to ensure reasonable products. Given the unexplored territory of open-ended role plus the wide array of defining moves, constructing a solution that avoids shooting ourselves in the foot AND still being accommodating to user freedom is a hard task to ask of any user. It is hours of calculations, pushing the limits, and recognizing what can be problematic. Limits are intended to better guide inexperienced users. My job as stat SL is to not grant excessive freedoms that only stand to hurt users or the submission process. Leaving full discretion to users only serves to disadvantage new users since a lack of familiarity with the project or meta can result in questionable spreads. Just because a spread is within the limits does not make it automatically fine. This does not impede the democratic process of CAP or negatively impact user freedom. This is not a manipulation of the process. This level of control is needed to streamline all stages and help guide users in a way that their contributions will be both recognized and meaningful.
With that out of the way, I hand the conversation over to
SHSP.