Linking under fields

2»

Comments

  • A few hundred meters will be OK in the cities, but difficult for rural players.

    You can play the "big game" in different ways. I got my black illu on foot, bike and public transport.

  • I was disappointed to see that for the new event they got rid of the minimum length for links under fields, but then again, it's just a few days.

    I'm curious--how do players see linking under the fields as making the game more dynamic? You can do more actions, sure, but where's the collaboration? It's like, the permaBAF people are playing Solitaire, and the answer is to let the other team play their own Solitaire? I would predict an increase in lone wolf type behavior.

    I'll stop harping on this for awhile but consider that collaboration is the foundation of the game.

  • Ok so I really really like linking places and creating pretty pretty fields... All the fuss with faction vs faction ... It's fun but it's not my motivation.

    Seeing my links on Intel gives me a hell of a buzz.

    In my fantasy perfect utopia earth ingress would have an option for me purchase another colour layer I would be pink faction and micro field without anyone interrupting my pretty patterns. Then I may purple faction the next day a micro field the same park .... Omg layers like photo shop.


    That's my take.


    I'm very excited about linking under fields events but can completely get why it's not good for the game as an everyday thing.


    Perma bafs are evil evil evil. I don't know of a mechanism to solve them though.

  • chndrkchndrk ✭✭✭

    19m sounds like a better under-field-link-length limit to me, and four days a year is a good duration for allowing them. Being able to link under fields makes the game less interesting and will lead to negative unintended consequences.

  • "I'm very excited about linking under fields events but can completely get why it's not good for the game as an everyday thing."

    That's fair--one-off Calvinballs are fun. I'm more concerned about it becoming a permanent change.

    I also agree that permabafs suck but I'd rather see Niantic focus on a) incentivizing their destruction and/or b) making them more difficult to maintain

  • what negative consequences could it lead to?

    did they happen during the matryoshka event?

  • ToxoplasmollyToxoplasmolly ✭✭✭✭✭

    So, I agree that collaboration is — or, maybe, was — the foundation of the game. From the app store descriptions:

    BATTLE FOR CONTROL

    Dominate territories by linking Portals and creating Control Fields to achieve victory for your Faction.

    WORK TOGETHER

    Strategize and communicate with fellow Agents in your neighborhood and around the world.

    That's what hooked me on Ingress many years ago.

    But you can't just wave a wand to make people collaborate and work as a team. If a BAF is going to inspire any of that in the opposing faction, it's going to do so within the first few throws. When it reaches the perma-BAF stage, the issue is the resources each faction is spending on playing the BAF game. Ingress being what it is, at some point, brute force wins.

    Another reason why you can't just wave a wand here is that Ingress offers many things to do that do not require "collaboration." We literally have a Year 10 roadmap that's all about developing every aspect of Ingress except the sorts of collaboration exemplified by battling over control of territory.

  • MoogModularMoogModular ✭✭✭✭✭

    Wouldn't being able to field inside a BAF make it possible to reverse the action of fielding? Instead of fielding outwards, you could field inwards. I'm not sure if reverse onioning works in this case too?

    I mean this is providing some new gameplay strategies. Even the ones doing BAFs can take advantage of it especially if they basing it on anchors.

  • DSktrDSktr ✭✭✭✭

    Vote YES. Why not give LA/VRLA extra ability for as example 3/6 underfield links?

  • DrHydrosaurDrHydrosaur ✭✭✭✭

    I was thinking you could permanently allow under field linking but with some modifiers like:

    • 1/2 max link distance
    • 1/2 MU value
    • 1/2 max outgoing links (4 base + 4 per SBUL)


Sign In or Register to comment.