What do you think about being able to field under an existing field, but not gaining MU?

2»

Comments

  • If we could only field under same faction fields, how many agents would just faction change or recurse to the dominant faction to play casually and give up entirely on the competitive aspect of Ingress?

  • KonnTowerKonnTower ✭✭✭✭✭

    I feel negating MU gained is a bit of a weird mechanic. Would rather see link distances severely limited while under a field. Agents shouldn't be able to strategically nest a large MU field or throw a long blocker, but should be able to microfield. Would also give link amps some addiitonal utility in the game.


    The ability to recreate large MU fields while under a field is too overpowered, but being able to go local and level/play normally is a big win.

  • GoblinGranateGoblinGranate ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited April 2021

    Big fields dies: internal field should still be counting 0 MU, although this could imply some MU calculation rework when it comes to cell scores.

    Opposing blockers: that happens already, not sure how this would be making a difference? Also, fielding faction can work inside the field to fight this aswell.

    Fields as clearer of other fields: I don't get this, can you extend this concept a bit?

    Making fields costly to maintain: this would not be a real solution as reloaders would not be affected, which is the main cause to this issue. Doing this server side, for example, after the end of a cycle, would be a real game changer and I'd even support it since the game would be much less static (although spoofing would still be the same).

    Just noticed about your censored word not being censored on the quote! 😮

    This is not how I understand the suggestion: if you missed a link, you missed a field with its score as I understand the fields created INSIDE count 0 MU no matter who created it.

    About lack of damage, that is the exact point I'm defending, since NO ONE can play normally under a field, not just opposing faction, and there are just too many aspects of the game lost while inside a field, so I disagree on this point.

    Layer system removal: that would definetely "diminish the intelligence and strategy of the creation", not sure how do you conceive such strategy then...

    About your suggestion: I don't believe that makes a real difference with suggested by OP.

    I like this one, reducing link distance range can help preventing possible abuse of blockers but not preventing normal local gameplay as distances tend to be much much shorter.

  • grendelwulfgrendelwulf ✭✭✭✭✭

    The ability to field within fields, unabated is game breaking in the long run. What's the point of fielding over your opposition if it doesn't hinder their play? I really feel you should need to use a special super charged link amp mod to be able to throw links from inside a field.

  • I think the point is you get more MU per field than they do. The current status quo is game breaking in the long run. The active players I see these days are old hats for the most part. Very few new agents start and keep with it, they get bored and quit. The game must evolve or continue to slowly decay.

  • grendelwulfgrendelwulf ✭✭✭✭✭

    It's up to older players to mentor and make the game fun for the newer ones.

  • GoblinGranateGoblinGranate ✭✭✭✭✭

    Wouldn't a super reduced link distance be a fair trade for that?

    Clearly you don't live under a super fun permafield...

  • I think the problem with this is that it requires one to be part of the community to enjoy the game. I don't disagree that this can make the game more enjoyable, and I don't think there is anything wrong with mentoring a player, but I do not agree that it should be a requirement.

    I don't know about your area, but communities can be rather toxic. I completely understand if a new player would not want to be involved in the drama. Furthermore, what if they simply are not interested in playing the way that you mentor. I personally love layered fields, but I know many of the "if it shows, I throw" mindset. It can be frustrating but they have every right to play as they see fit as I do.

    No one should have to make the game fun for another player, I think each player should be free to determine what is fun for themselves. If they want to coordinate, great. If not, that is OK too. But right now it is too easy to shut down someone who doesn't want to dance to the older players tunes.

  • ZeroHecksGivenZeroHecksGiven ✭✭✭✭✭

    This might be only my experience, but as a "newer" agent, I just don't see the point in winning cycles. I literally have no stake in old drama and what that group did 7 years ago or some old story the OGs laugh about now. So now, even 3-4 years later, I still can't be convinced that I should spend a couple nights a week gathering keys for a field I should maintain. For what? To defend beef spanning nearly a decade with a bunch of obsessed people who actually do more to drive people out of the game than foster a fun community worth engaging in?

  • mortuusmortuus ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited April 2021

    fielding and not gaining MU wouldnt make any sense, sure u could get AP but work on your MU badge ? forget it... seems weird compromise to me since this game is more important build MU then earn personal AP...

  • VenomousToadVenomousToad ✭✭✭✭✭

    Had this fielding and linking under fields been a permanent thing implemented several years ago I don't believe the game would be as inactive as it is now. As it stands there's just a handful of players left and next to no communities. There's a few exceptions out there but overall it's nowhere near the same numbers as it used to be. Many players left the game because they couldn't play under fields. That's the mechanic used to dominate areas. At the time nobody saw this as detrimental to the game. But times have changed. The mu game is no longer played. It's just ap **** for those left. So for me I say this short term change should be implemented long term. I see both sides of the argument too. But we need changes to keep it going.

  • This might be only my experience, but as a "newer" agent, I just don't see the point in winning cycles.

    What do you see as the 'point' of the game then? Ever increasing AP?

    After the first 100 million, that is less of a concern for many players, aside from the super grindy obsessed players.

  • ZeroHecksGivenZeroHecksGiven ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited April 2021

    I enjoy working on some of the medals, throwing large fields, working on AP, back and forth with the other faction.

    I definitely question what my "point of the game" is often. I guess I don't see any value in winning a cycle because there is no gain. Usually when you win, you reap some reward, right? Bragging rights don't mean much to me and it's obvious it doesn't mean much to other agents, including some in this very thread. Granted, I do understand that it's the general premise of the entire game.

    I'm sure that my feelings about cycles are related to my location to some degree. I'm on the "winning" faction basically since I've started, so I have no idea what it's like to actually duke it out and have close scores.

    And that's one of the hardest, but best parts about the game right? I imagine what's one "way of life" for ingress is completely the opposite for the other faction in your own area, but definitely in other cells and regions.

  • ToxoplasmollyToxoplasmolly ✭✭✭✭✭

    I'm sure that my feelings about cycles are related to my location to some degree. I'm on the "winning" faction basically since I've started, so I have no idea what it's like to actually duke it out and have close scores.

    When the scores are close, for cycles on end? It's a long, neverending siege, punctuated by occasional moments of epic feats.

    After the first <insert arbitrary number> cycles and wins, it becomes less of a concern for many players, aside from the super score-obsessed players.

  • GrogyanGrogyan ✭✭✭✭✭

    In my opinion, IF linking and fielding becomes a permanent feature.

    Then fields created under said field should score half the MU, compared to normal fields created above other fields.

  • KonnTowerKonnTower ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited April 2021

    Yes, many have "Admit defeat" over the years. Except they don't say anything. They just leave.

    Congratulations. Part of the problem, not the solution.

  • I've lived in 4 different cities since I started the game. And in each one I've been part of either building the community, or rebuilding the community, except for the latest where they weren't in any need of building.

    Yet again, you're doing "that thing".

    "Only my solution can solve it, and any other ideas won't work".

    I've pushed for many alternatives over the past few years to help recover the community. We recently regained the ability to identify when players joined the game for example, which given time will help rebuild community outreach. But only if players use it, and see a benefit to having a community. Claiming I'm part of the problem, because I think that this method will do more harm than good isn't "part of the problem". You're driving the game away from it's roots, into a boring AP grind. People regularly quit because the game has become a boring AP grind, and just when we're starting to get new features that will enhance the game, you think it's a good time to double down on the repetition and solo play?

    All this change does is give people more reason to not care about other players, on either faction.

  • ToxoplasmollyToxoplasmolly ✭✭✭✭✭

    During the halcyon days of Ingress, locally, many Agents seemed driven by exploration and/or the local back-and-forth. The vocal amongst us might tell epic tales of BAFs and eeking out cell score wins, but I can't say that's what many, or most, agents were driven by.

    I do think that Ingress has always had a fair number of "independent" or "casual" Agents who are content to do their own thing, and a fair number of Agents who enjoy the camraderie of their faction mates but don't necessarily want to dedicate their lives to the cell score game. Ingress needs those Agents, because they're a vital part of making the game board feel alive, and it's not as if there's a magic switch that can turn them into community focused and cell score focused players.

    So, I do want to see Niantic and Ingress draw in new players, and I do want those new players to feel like that they can effectively engage with game board, no matter their local circumstances. And for the relative few who ask, "is there anything to this game beyond what I alone can do?", I also want there to be a "community" that they can connect and play with.

    Perhaps Matryoshka doesn't strike the right balance, but I'm not yet convinced that it is totally without merit. I mean, just a few hours ago, I saw some folks organize and throw a BAF, even when their faction was set to win the cycle comfortably, just because they could, and I saw someone take it down, presumably because they just didn't like such large fields by the opposite faction, even when their own faction was already on track to lose the cycle by a miserable margin. 🤷‍♂️

Sign In or Register to comment.