[Feature Request] Allow microfielding under existing fields

Since I started playing Ingress, one of the biggest issues I've seen for player retention is the inability for new players to create fields. Seasoned veterans on both sides relish in delight being able to "cover over" low level players, effectively hoping to push them out of the game. They do this so people have to drive multiple towns over, just to open the field for playability.

Given the state the game is currently in, we really should be encouraging people to stay.

Would it be possible to allow linking while under a field with limitations?

Potential Limitations:

1) Links still wouldn't be allowed to cross other links.

2) The maximum link distance would be significantly restricted while under a field. This way people could still play(microfield) in portal dense areas, but couldn't create large MU chunks while under another field. Maybe the equivalent of a level 2 or 3 portal distance? This could be tweaked to make sure large fields still rule, but don't disallow leveling to occur.,

3) Maybe only allow agents under a certain level to use this feature? Level 8? Level 10?



  • mortuusmortuus ✭✭✭✭✭

    I agree, when a new player after going through tutorial cant make fields and dont understand why i fully get it they lose interest and quit, u should be able to do fields under existing but with a penalty with less MU or points or something ??

  • Kevinsky86Kevinsky86 ✭✭✭
    edited July 2020

    Your claim that veterans create large fields in the hopes to discourage new players from staying, instead of for example, you know, cell score, is quite the assumption there bud.

    But I agree with the general core of your post that permafields that cover vast area's of land can be problematic and support the idea to create fields under fields considering the current game state and player bases state in a lot of area's.

    This also removes the need for having to virus an ally's portal if it anchors a not so large field that covers a lot of potential AP.

  • KonnTowerKonnTower ✭✭✭✭✭

    I'm just saying I've heard it from both sides that to discourage competition, new players are regularly covered. Even in areas MU isn't worth anything.

    It's effective, however I believe for the health of the game it should be resolved.

  • TheFarixTheFarix ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited July 2020

    I've personally had this happen to me early on when I started playing (between L3 to L8). A particular player would constantly throw BAFs over the area where I was actively playing. The few times I used a flip card to take down the field so I could play, they then complained to me on comms that I wasn't being a "team player" and the micro-fielding I was doing to level up was "pointless".

    But I think the real solution isn't to let people field under a BAF, but to change the scoreing system altogether in a way that rewards mutiple smaller fields far more than BAF. One of the reason that many people use justify BAF is that it is the most efficient way to obtain a high score for your team. But what if the scoring system changed so that fielding small parks became the more efficient way? That would drasticly change the game's dynamics in a way that allows the game to be more inclusive.

  • GrogyanGrogyan ✭✭✭✭✭

    This has been an issue since Ingress came out in 2012

    Many have suggested many things to improve it.

    Yesterday, whilst out for a walk, came up with an alternative,

    Creating a field under a field generates half the amount of MU

    This would still encourage players to take down the big fields, if they want to chase down the scoreboard. And still encourage local play

  • edited July 2020

    The number of places under a permanent field is so miniscule compared to the vast seas of grey that this is a bad solution for non-issue.

    Killing the game because a spoofer keeps fielding over Canberra is attacking the wrong problem.

    Post edited by Perringaiden on
  • Yes, it would be nice to link under an existing field. I like to make mid-sized fields (with sides between 1 and 10 km), but sometimes I hesitate because I don't want to field over the playground of casual players in the area.

    My proposal would be to make two rule changes:

    • It is possible to link and field under an existing field, but the MU counts only towards the illu medal, not for the regional score
    • It is not allowed to link to the corners of the covering field

    It would also be nice to have a second regional score for the number of fields held by each faction, to reward micro-fielding and multi-fielding.

  • KonnTowerKonnTower ✭✭✭✭✭

    I really like the idea of adding additional regional scores. Maybe a rotating game mode every week? It would keep the game fresh. Heck, even the regional primary score could rotate modes too.

    Going to put that down in my notes for good game improvements.

    I agree on worrying about covering lower level players. Or just anyone trying to level. Big frustration to worry about who you're going to mess with making a large field.

  • KonnTowerKonnTower ✭✭✭✭✭

    @NianticBrian adding a comment with your name as during FS in NYC you mentioned we should tag you on game improvement suggestions.

    Also, messaged you in TG when you asked for ideas.

  • 1valdis1valdis ✭✭✭✭✭

    I disagree with the proposition.

    Linking/fielding while under fields makes many sophisticated fielding strategies, and field arts like homogeneous fields obsolete. Because building them in a right way without cheating (link from inside field) is the main reason they're that hard and respected.

    Inability to create links/fields inside another field is sometimes why they put up in the first place. I remember people BAFed entire Moscow, then while the field was intact they destroyed much stuff inside it, and then lifted the field only to create huge field art afterwards. It was incredible performance which wouldn't be possible if linking under fields was possible.

  • grendelwulfgrendelwulf ✭✭✭✭✭


  • KarM3LKarM3L ✭✭✭✭

    I suspect the world would just be permi baffed,

    those into micro fielding generally dont care for cell score and some strategies imployed in planning bafs/counter bafs rely on being able to clear under fields.....


  • gazzas89gazzas89 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Could just allow micro fielding for lower level players, like up to level 5 or 6, under big fields, as most low level players wouldnt be going for bigger fields anyway. I do agree though that new players arent encouraged much to play, n not that low level but I've discovered that the more I try, the more the higher level players on the other team want to assert dominance by hitting my local area and turning everything with high level shields to stop me changing back easily, it's apparently a tactic used often to discourage new players from playing or getting up levels, and they give the idea of "allowing to play", so micro fieldingunder fields for lower level players is a step in the right direction

Sign In or Register to comment.