Having the MU count for the opposite faction is just asking for problems. That would do nothing but discourage people from using the new feature and lead to a lot of toxicity. Many would sit out because they wouldn't want to help the other team's score, and others just trying to get AP would get yelled at by their own faction. It would completely undermine the purpose of having such a feature.
Fields under a field give zero mu, that's all that should change... it doesn't need to be complicated.
But when they implement that i'm a bit worried that extra layers (starting from an outside anchor) under an existing layer/field will not be rewarding mu anymore.
It is funny to experiment changes to the rules for a limited period.
With the proposals that a field created under an existing field should "not count towards the cell's score" or "give zero MU", I feel like there is another side-effect that is worth considering:
If you look on the Intel Map or in the Scanner, and you see a collection of nested fields, how do you determine which fields actually count towards the current score? How do you prioritize which opposition fields to smash?
I think I still lean towards the simplicity of, "A field is a field is a field." If someone's allowed to create it, then it should count the same as any other field.
Would the double AP be doubled again if I use an Apex?
Yes, every existing AP bonus will be doubled once an Apex is active. This is how you can get x4 AP across the board during the yearly anniversary period, for example.
Thank you, guess I need to go to town tonight and destroy some fields and links with an apex on and rebuild it all.
Thank you for the shout out @NianticBrian :)
I've made a video on what's now possible because of this event, it goes live in about half an hour: https://youtu.be/WlmZZvssiwE
The biggest one? That's not hard.
If the biggest one is removed, the one below it is now the biggest one, and it's MU is what hits checkpoint. "The topmost field counts towards MU." It doesn't matter if it were created before or after the other.
This has horrible strategic issues, especially with things like last second reversals, but it's not hard for a player in the field to discern.
Perhaps a temporary RED faction would be a more exciting twist. After the event, faction members could be switched back.
If people are worried about certain colored fields preventing them from playing, this may be a better solution.... could be just as temporary and yet test the game to see if a 3rd faction us viable.
People are reluctant to switch from blue to green or vice versa. If there was a third faction, it could help to minimize large bafs by minimizing the amount of people playing for one particular faction.. IMHO
Perhaps a temporary reset of the playing board could be done for just the length of an event.... Everything gets reset back to where it was after the event is over.
Just some thoughts
it’s an opinion like many others, I think that being an event, it’s worth what it’s worth.
But in fact this goes against all the mechanics of the game and against all the strategists, if an entire city is under fields, then it is up to the other team to counter it, this is ingress, it is certainly not correct having a big fild to control the area and now everyone helse are going to scratch everything inside, or even, make millions inside a field of a few k's, the game, from the beginning, has its essence, to change that for a new player to play, (as your opinion), is to completely distort the game. but being an event, it is worth what it is worth.
everything is fine 4 me, with your opinion, so let me ask you the opposite, and why are new players are not lazy? or don't have someone to motivate, or explain the game? they simply cannot make fields, after they can, then with apex, it is hours or a few days to reach L8 , and then afterwards they will solve the problem as a team, or alone, or will these players be too lazy, I am talking and I do not have megafilds controling my faction, before on the contrary, of course I try to will take advantage of it, but if I think it's fair ... I don't. someone wasted time and resources trying to control and protect the area.
Just my opinion
"The topmost field counts towards MU."
I read the proposals as being tied to when the fields were created. 🤷♂️
But anyway, that particular take effectively nukes layered fields as a mechanism for running up the score — which is close to how I thought the scoring worked when I first started playing, oddly enough. 🤔
@57Cell great vid! Always love your enthusiasm.
Do you believe something like this should/could be a permanent fixture? My main concern is what you're effectively showing in the video. My compromise is to see Nia add limitations to link distances while under field (derived from average portal density around each portal). Would be interested what you think a valid balancing mechanism could be so field planning still exists.
I thought only "impossible" links would count as Matryoshka links. But after throwing my first link from inside a field I already hat 6 Matryoshka links. Is this how it should be?
See added link in red.
@katzenverwalter did you create 6 total Links or 1 total Link since the start of this temporary event?
As far as i remember I created two adjacent triangles as play areas - that would be 5 links; then I did my first inside-out link and checked stats which showed 6 Matryoshka links. So it seems every link thrown during the event counts- not only the "special" links.
Edit: I just checked the event description. Seems that the behaviour is to be expected. Sorry for the confusion.
It does nuke layers for scoring. And it should. When people first started, layers were seen as the 'cheap way' to get a high score rather than actually fielding a larger area. Then they became the way people intentionally submitted portals to craft spines.
Lore wise (because I know some people are obsessed with everything matching lore) layers make zero sense, because you can't capture a mind twice.
From a strategic sense, it would also allow players to remain competitive even when a big field went up. Instead of being so far in the hole that logistically there's no point trying, single layer scoring would allow people to catch up by taking down the field then fielding themselves over multiple checkpoints. It would be less about how many layers you could put up and more about how many minds you covered, again.
Living the dream.
I made some fields under my own fields, with portal I missed last time I was spinning around my home portal, and I have to say I enjoy this event a lot, forces you to change the way you think if you want to optimize things a bit, this is fun.
Is gonna be a medal for this one?
Awesome idea for a limited period of time!
Also, I would have loved the #SustainableWithNiantic event span a little longer.
If you don't agree, you're not required to read or reply to it.
I'm free to post my opinions and feedback about the event.
Not sure if I'd like it to be a permanent feature... of course it makes good fielding easier, but inevitably also takes away some of the challenge. If this were permanent, a field that once took 50 agents operating in the dead of night could now be done by a patient, slow-slogging agent in an isolated area, with much less planning required.
There's no glory in climbing Everest if they install an escalator.
Ingress has always been something like Calvinball though, with sudden rule changes (some permanent, some temporary, and so forth). That's an exciting thing
Yeah, it's fun for now, because it's different. But on the long run I'd hate this change.
I dont understand why we have stats for fields made but no medal whats the point ? if i want look up my fields made i check weekly stats. and they will blank out the stats once the event finishes.
Loving the event! Had a bunch of fun figuring out the new puzzles to solve to squeeze out every link and field I could yesterday.