Still possible to link more than 500m under Field.

This is supposed to be anomaly only? Forgot to turn it back on?

Comments

  • InvestigateXMInvestigateXM ✭✭✭✭✭

    Linking under Fields Links shorter than 8km in length can be created under Fields during the following periods: - from Friday, 13 Oct 2023 1700 UTC to Monday, 16 Oct 2023 1700 UTC

    So if everything works as intended, it'll be restricted again in about 7 minutes.


  • NysyrNysyr ✭✭✭✭

    I was linking after the given time. There's also a bunch of ghost links that are ingame and blocking but not showing on intel.

  • If longer linking is still allowed under fields - YAY! People who live under the fields of a diehard agent (or group of agents) can play! They still can't cross links, so it's still very limited, but at least they can build!!

  • MoogModularMoogModular ✭✭✭✭✭

    and now it's enabled for the rest of the anomaly 🙃

  • joecainjoecain ✭✭✭✭✭

    niantic's (lower case to show disrespect) war on fielding continues.

  • GrogyanGrogyan ✭✭✭✭✭

    I have already been quite vocal about this on Telegram and on Twitter.


    As this does more harm than most realise for Ingress as a strategy game.

  • DSktrDSktr ✭✭✭✭

    So,long-living links will stay till...when? Till anomaly end?

    Хватит делать из стратегии херню

  • EvilSuperHerosEvilSuperHeros ✭✭✭✭✭

    Ingress posted on their Telegram that this will be in effect until end of the current anomaly series.


    Likely whomever enabled it, is either on vacation, or was laid off. They need time to discoverie how to fix it. So we get to play with derps from red team, green team and blue team. So much for "control fields". Likely just need to rename those to "Fields" since they don't really control anything anymore other than outdated mu count / incorrect population maps.

  • mortuusmortuus ✭✭✭✭✭

    And team red is still not fielding imagine what will happen when they start lol

  • EvilSuperHerosEvilSuperHeros ✭✭✭✭✭

    Will likely do better than the local green team. But that's a pretty low bar these days.

  • GrogyanGrogyan ✭✭✭✭✭

    You miss the point of my post, whilst I adapt, opposition doesn't, because one of the KEY parts of Ingress is to take down.

    Ingress is a STRATEGY game!


    If I desire to go out and make large fields one day, take out Machina another, or do something else. There is the expectation that fields, of any size should be taken down.

    Now that fields with links that cover most of your city can be done there is zero incentive for the opposition to take them down.

    This results in Ingress not being a strategy game!

  • MoogModularMoogModular ✭✭✭✭✭

    The strategy changes...taking down portals has always been a choice. If you want to **** "the key points" is really doing anything in the game. Purposely doing no actions is strategy. That's been no different for faction dominated areas.

  • Like most long-living games, ingress also enable more and more "easy mode" changes to attract new and casual players.


    Ingress started out hard core and then made it easy over time:

    * XM only by picking it up on the map / power cubes

    * 4 hacks per portal / Multihack and heatsinks

    * limited inventory space / key-lockers

    * No fielding when someone put you under blanket / 500m or 8km inside-fielding

    ... etc


    While this may be appealing to casual and new players, I think the dedicated and die-hard players (I like to believe I am one of these) find it diluting to the essence of the game.

    Niantic, please remember that it is us old-timers that do a lot of recruiting and "social glue" in ingress... No more easy-mode please. I'm already looking forward to the return of the 0.5km linking limit.


    And before someone just replies "adapt", the fact that I'm still here 10+ years later, is a living proof of adaption. This is just MY $0.02 on the subject. You are welcome to differ.

  • joecainjoecain ✭✭✭✭✭

    "Adapt" - That's what I said to those wimpy agents moaning to niantic about being perma BAF'd and wanted under-field linking.

  • KonnTowerKonnTower ✭✭✭✭✭

    I still think it would be better to revisit the under-field linking to scale based on portal density. 8km for a populated area is a bit much. In rural areas? Not as bad. The work needed to math it out, balance it, and calculate the rate for each portal might not be worth the development cost at the moment though.

    I enjoy watching the babs all complain how they can't push other people out of the game anymore masked under the guise of strategy/skill. If you don't want people building under your fields, go out and take THOSE fields down. You've limited them to a playbox, go play with them. =P

  • VenomousToadVenomousToad ✭✭✭✭✭

    Linking under fields made micro fielding under large fields possible. In areas that created large fields with restricted access portals it allowed players to keep fielding even though they couldn't physically get to the portals to take the fields down. There are various ways people push players out of the game, permanent fields used to be one of them. Niantic geo blocked gameplay for the Pokemon game in some of those restricted access areas, should have been done in Ingress too. Instead linking under fields is what we get. Not a great solution but it is what it is. The other games get better solutions, which considering the huge player bases they should.

  • joecainjoecain ✭✭✭✭✭

    They don't call em control fields for nothing. 🤔

Sign In or Register to comment.