We are continuing backend server testing that may temporarily increase latency on the Ingress app and on Intel Map Learn More

[idea] Game Core Change - Huge fields

k30v1nk30v1n ✭✭
edited February 24 in App Feedback

The Problem

In this discussion I would like to point some problems with a game core feature that is fielding. For me this it is the most fun thing to do, at home you plan some fields then you go outside and do it.

But for some reason that I can totally understand some players that have time and money make HUGE fields. And I can totally understand because this is awesome right? Spread your field all over the state, I would proud myself.

Otherwise, all the people and portals inside those huge fields just feel frustrated, new players just can’t understand, they don’t even know about intel yet to see what’s going on, they just stop playing because “there is nothing to do”.

This is probably the top reason some players stop playing and others don’t even start. Here are some examples of what I’m talking about:


To the people inside this huge fields this game is dead. The only thing you can do is upgrade portals, hack, and then wait 1 week to do it again or hope to someone destroy. Fun 😑

My Proposal

It’s obvious how this huge fields impacts the cell’s score. So my point is not to block fields, but they automatically break after a checkpoint or cycle.

The reason could be many:

  • The portals inside the huge field is pushing and breaking the field from inside, and after the checkpoint all links break, and it’s keys forgotten.
  • The huge field cannot handle controlling too many MU at once, so then it collapses and removes the three portals links but keeping portal ownership.
  • The shapers interferes if they notice a huge difference in the battle between factions, so ADA or JARVIS remove the fields before they come
  • and so on :)

The point is, the game should incentive tiny fields for the game’s and players’ health, this will make a huge difference on the score for sure, but it’ll be way more fair with those just walking and using public transportation, compared to those with cars that are really willing to go miles away to build a field covering the entire cell for 6 months.

Sorry for the long text, I’m really pissed with it.

Edit 1: better explanation about my suggestion and removing the word “explode” to people don’t understand that the portal ownership was removed.

Post edited by k30v1n on
«134

Comments

  • Please take a look @NianticBrian @NianticCasey @NianticAbhishek@NianticAustin

    Players: who agrees please like this post so then we can make a sort of impact somehow

  • Yeah! That’s cool, it requires cooperation what is even better. And maybe I wrongly used the world “explode”, if you keep it reading you’ll see:

    Keeping the resonators but erasing keys and links

    I’ll edit it to clarify. Thanks for adding your thoughts 👍🏼

  • HydraulinskiHydraulinski ✭✭✭✭✭

    Oopsy! I actually didn't saw that part and just jumped right to erasing keys 😅


    I like to add that this is probably one of the best ideas/solutions about this topic. It wont change much, and will keep people playing regularly. Both the the ones making the field and the one who were actually damaged by being unable to play before. One CP or maybe 24 hours, still a very long time and can ruin a whole free day of someone. And it's gonna stop being a war of who can recharge more Vs who can redo more (going outside to play).

    Other solutions I thougth were:

    1. giving AP boost for actions under the field of your faction. This way people of your faction will still enjoy the field somehow.

    2. new weapon to attack field from under it, like throwing a torpedo and it going to the closest portal of the field (preferably the one with less links). This will still require strategic, synchronization and going to the right spot (since it will start by destroying the first layer).

  • HydraulinskiHydraulinski ✭✭✭✭✭

    A one million field (usually layered, so many more) it's a game changing in the score. People will still try to break it.

    But yes, maybe one CP is really fast. It could be at least at the beggining of every cycle, or a timer of 1 week after (a decaying system like resonators, but not rechargeable. One week is enought to control the cell and prevent everlasting fields.

  • mortuusmortuus ✭✭✭✭✭

    I always hated that u cant field inside a field... i bet many players quit because of that, totally understand that... they should redo all field thing... there are cities where players throw out huge fields no matter how many times u take it down, if some only play for MU points then new players cant do anything inside... only cap or atack... how fun :s


  • I like this idea, but how would you define the size of a field to be destabilized? Would it cause agents to go a few steps further to make layers just smaller than the size that would be destabilized and just layer them more heavily?


    Just thoughts.

  • ToxoplasmollyToxoplasmolly ✭✭✭✭
    edited February 24

    At first blush, I kind of like the idea that portals anchoring “large” fields (in terms of geographic area, in terms of MU, maybe both) should decay more quickly over time. The effect could scale smoothly, so that there aren’t magical thresholds that people can take advantage of.

    In the day or two after such fields go up, the current decay mechanic can remain unchanged. Let the fielders bask in their glory, and let the opposite faction use teamwork to take the fields down.

    After a week, it’s perhaps time to remember that Ingress is a game that’s meant to get you out and about. If the fielders want their “large” fields to stay up, maybe they should have to spend “heroic” amounts of XM maintaining them.

  • XQlusioNXQlusioN ✭✭✭✭✭

    You know what also requires cooperation?

    Actually destroying the fields and making sure they stay down

  • k30v1nk30v1n ✭✭
    edited February 24

    Ok... I see a lot of people here just thinking I am not willing to go to that anchor, that its because 8 hour far from here, no one plays there. A lot of people agree that staying under a huge field is not fun at all, and as a new player sometimes you don’t even know what’s going on.

    You guys are harassing my suggestion saying I’m not connected to my community, the fact is that I am, and it’s a few people, it’s not a big group as you may have and had spoken as 100+.

    I though on this suggestion not to break the game but improve it instead. Having this huge fields simply blocks this new players on small communities that you may don’t understand, and also, helps players ecosystem.

  • HydraulinskiHydraulinski ✭✭✭✭✭

    I believe the ones more disconnected with their local cummunities are the ones throwing and maintainging needless BAFs with no consideration with the players inside. The current scoresystem is obviously broken.

  • 1valdis1valdis ✭✭✭✭

    Creating BAFs is fun. Creating them in a way they stay more than a day or two is even more fun. Having those fields actually stay more than a week or two is not so fun for people inside them. But honestly I don't know what can be done about that.

    Let people throw links inside a field? This will ruin core mechanics of how multilayer fields, homogeneous fields and field arts work. That's a no-no. There were also cases when people created BAFs for the whole reason to clean up everything inside it to build a field art after the fields go down.

    Creating some specific game rules to make BAFs harder? That's a no. I want to cover my city while opposing the other faction rather than the game itself. Punishing those who organize and make immense efforts to move keys, create plans, and actually cover just seems plain wrong; they should be rewarded instead.

    Give players of the same faction some kind of bonuses when under fields? Sounds good but will punish those of the opposite faction even more.

  • 1valdis1valdis ✭✭✭✭
    edited February 24

    I kinda like the idea with discharge. The discharge rate can increase over time too, but instead of dicharging more energy each day, it could discharge more often, for example first in 24 hrs, then in 23.5 and so on, asymptotically getting closer to zero seconds. You need to be very careful about the rate though.

  • That measures would require the game designers to think of. I personally think about X MU. X portals are not accurate for areas that we don’t have a high portal dense areas.

    And also agree with you that thise kind of BAF should require a huge amount of people to make it and maintain, and don’t allow just one person.

    That together with progressive difficult to maintain, if this field is up to one week should be barely impossible to maintain.

  • Yeah this also sounds reasonable enough, within a week it should be nearly impossible to maintain such field up.

  • Actually, the solution is simple. Redo the decay formula to take into account the amount of MU that the portals and fields are supporting and accelerate the decay to accommodate for the increase in demand. As a side note, any fields over a certain amount of MU should not be able to be recharged, to ensure that game play will be viable after the fields decay away.


    This allows them to remain up after a few check points, but decay faster so that the agents stuck under the field can get back to playing sooner.

  • MxxMxx ✭✭
    edited February 24

    The idea of higher decay rate the larger the field(mu and/or area) or the more fields it anchors is interesting. But at the same time it still will kinda discourage the other team from putting the effort into killing it sooner...🤔

    Maybe if it stays up for longer than a cycle something has to be done? This will also allow players in one-sided areas to be able to play a bit more.

  • 1valdis1valdis ✭✭✭✭

    Yes, still opposite team should not wait an eternity and not do anything themselves. Because I think many people will lose the point of covering if the game will be helping the side of losers.

  • 1valdis1valdis ✭✭✭✭
    edited February 24

    If you wish to make the change for anchors to discharge even slightly faster with time than they are now, you have to somehow encourage those people who cover to offset this change, so they won't lose their motivation in turn, knowing that the game is against them. AP boost for friendly faction players? The more big layers, the bigger is boost? Suboptimal because you can't link/field under fields and that's the main source of AP...othervise sounds legit. Will result in quick entire city takedowns though :D Just my thoughts...

Sign In or Register to comment.