If by "last year" you mean 2020, sure.
However.... Nia could introduce mods to alter a decay time much like ito+ & - for hack items
Mod - would slow a decay down to 10% (10 days).
Mod + would speed up decay to 20% (5 days)
Thwt is at current 15% rate as baseline
But theyll need to solve lag issues with Qcaps first anyways
Wow, all of that sounds super interesting!
What are "senior chats"?
What is RGNN?
What is WIRR?
Ambassadors - you mean the XMAs? Have we been useful???
Where do you find sitreps etc posted on social media?
IUENG discussion on telegram - I never figured out how to use it. At the moment, I am at 8687 unread messages and have no idea how to process the backlog. Are there any good 3rd party tools?
Down arrow best arrow. Just read it when you're around, don't read it when you're not.
Why would you want to recharge? Isn't the decay good? You can then play again after your 'delayed' chat.
I'd like to see higher decay rates, with the player count diminishing I just walk around and hack, I have to wait until it dies out so I can play again :(
Decay should increase if anything. Permanent strongholds are bad.
Personally, doesn't affect me, but talking to new players on two different continents, they've got the bug, and want to build more, but don't want to hold 600 keys when they only have 2000 slots, and one had 900 keys. Aside from suggesting "Pay for stuff", the preference was to be able to build and "enjoy it until someone stops me."
To quote one: "Isn't the point of this to hold the territory? So if no-one attacks it, shouldn't I want to keep it captured?"
Well I'd argue that especially as a new player, using your inventory takes priority over anything else. It is the way to make progress in stats (badges required for leveling) and AP.
So decay = good, unless it's some large field that benefits the cycle. Using inventory is good, deploy all the things, link all the things, progress.
If you are tired of waiting for decay in one area, move yourself to a different area to play. Sooooo many areas are completely grey these days. Soo much easy AP and places to build, build, build.
Nah, thanks. I play in my village and I don't really want to take my car out to play Ingress. I want to go out and walk around (with or without my dog) and no longer participate in large OPS (there is no team anyway but even if there was) because:
I have to take my car out to places that have portals despite living in a "big city". It's about a 15-20 minute drive for me to play in any portal clusters. But we have lots of portal clusters. Multiple parks with 150+ portals that are usually grey most of the time unless I field them up. Park by my office is 150+ portals (was only about 30-50 portals when I first started playing back in 2013). Plenty of walking in said parks. Just gotta drive to get there.
This is a balance between "The concept of the gameplay" and the "Meta method of levelling". Once a player hits level 8, standard teaching is to tell them to play in whatever way they enjoy the most. The obsession with levelling to 16 isn't universal. At 8 many players then simply settle into a routine, because the overall goal here on a per-person basis is fun.
With the change suggested in combination with the experiment in Q4 (assuming it became permanent) this would provide significant flexibility for players to choose how they prefer to play.
Here they are:
I don't know about "senior chats" though. That term sounds like pure trolling.
IUENG chatgroup (not IUENG news channel) is not worth reading. It's all about a fixed set of players chitchating and flattering a specific moderator there (and even attacking other, multiple players including me verbally, before a housecleaning requested by community manager). Just ignore the 8687 messages. You won't lose anything.
Because they dislike. That's it. They have the rights to do so, as stated by the author of this thread.
They might feel vindicated that this is not a good idea. Why 14%? Why not 13.5%? 13%? 12%?....
Or they are probably just bored of threads that seem trying to improve player base or helping other players but as underlying thoughts actually are trying to show his cleverness or professional experience. Who knows. Who cares. The author of this thread firmly believes that when other forum users do the dislike, there is always nothing strange and no doubts should be raised.
Thus no need to make an issue of it. It's just off-topic. Please concentrate on the topic of this thread.
Are you accusing specific players' of doing dislikes upon you as a revenge? Too much drama.
As a so-called XMA, please help build a better community by being polite to other forum users.
The moderator can see who make the dislike very clearly and judge whether it's what you said.
If you feel attacked, file a report. Please do not defame unspecific players here in the comments.
Because some players hate seeing specific portals' being controlled by the same batch of owners all the time.
Because some other players do not agree the symbolic and funny -1% adjustment proposal. Why not -15%?
Aren't those possible reasons obvious, valid and easy to come up with?
@TheKingEngine: Responding to the only bit of relevance to the thread that isn't complaining:
Why 14%? Why not 13.5%? 13%? 12%?..
Because 14% is 8 days decay. One longer than the length of a week.
13% would be acceptable as it maintains the 8 days, but it's not necessary.
12% or 11% would be 9 days. 10% would be 10 days.
The purpose of this change would be to allow people to return to the same place on the same day and not have to rebuild if they don't want to. It assists casual players who enjoy seeing their work remain up, without having to carry hundreds of 'recharge-only' keys.
Personally it doesn't help me, but talking to new players, the concept of "I'd like to keep it up because I put all this work in, but I have no inventory space" is a recurring thing. So I'm putting the idea out there, to give new players a good sense of achievement early in their leveling, before they start **** badges etc.
As a "so called XMA", you've been blocked by me primarily because your responses generally do not build a better commmunity, so I only respond to the parts that are constructive. I know who's doing the "dislike brigade" on my posts. It's the same people every time, not because they actually dislike the idea, but because they dislike the source.
If you want a better community, you have to be part of it too. When the next round of XMA applications come up, if you're genuine about making a better community, you should apply.
I just marked your comment here for future reference.
A few years back a 'cabal' of posters decided that anything they posted was being "dislike bombed" and therefore grouped up to repeat the process to anyone who didn't agree with them. Sort of like the usual Ingress reaction of "They're doing this thing I can't prove, but I know, so I'll do it back" (even though the initial group isn't doing it).
and the implication:
The question remains. Why 8 days? Not 9 days? 10 days? 11 days?
You have probably expressed your thoughts on this. But some players don't agree. That could be the reason for their dislike.
I don't know why you chose to do comments with drama by accusing other players of doing dislike bomb on you when your proposal is simply not very welcomed, not you personally. Please just embrace the fact.
Err by senior chats I mean local faction based community chats that are a subset of local faction players for those interested/trusted for more strategic chat. (IE field planning, community moderation etc). Most of the world has them. Then there are supra regional chats for discussion between regions etc.
WIRR & RGNN - already answered above
Ambassadors are not XMAs, Ambassadors mostly deal with spoofing / feedback to Niantic on community, bouncing ideas off, which Niantic mostly ignores. There are XFAC Ambassadors located around the globe.
I like the idea of decay altering mods.
Your reasons may be obvious but I disagree on their validity.
I have a hard time having much sympathy with an agent who wants to hold on to 900 portals without keys and without visiting them more often than once a week.
Key lockers allow one to hold 500 or 600 keys of one is so inclined to control so much.
I have to think such players are relatively rare, and almost certainly not new players to the game.
If you want to keep a portal charged and you can’t visit it once a week, keep a key.
If you want to keep 1000 portals charged up, maybe visit some more than once a week.
There's been times where valid criticism is made or Niantic says one thing as a reply and yet you still go off on your tangent.
I will always be blunt about issues because there's no point/game for me with trying to drag it out.
Not sure what you're on about when I'm responding to someone else...
As mentioned above key lockers were the response. And it's only new players who try to hold all of that. The longer someone plays the more they learn their limits, but the biggest issue with new players right now is retention.
Older players are focused on spoofers or feature change, but newer players are the ones who quit easily.
No, it doesn't. The 14% was specifically chosen to increase the full decay time to be one day longer than a week, so that people can act on a regular schedule.
It's not a question that wasn't answered in the original post.
However, in an effort to encourage people to "go outside", changing the decay rate by only 1% would allow people to visit a given area on the same day each week.
You can disagree on the value, but the "why" is not a mystery to anyone else.
Everything that to ANY extent helps facilitating the turnover of portals is welcomed by players who don't want to see many portals always owning by the same player.
You can't say because inflation still exists so whether to rise the interest rate for another 50bp or 75bp makes no difference.
The thing about playing Ingress is that not everyone wants the same thing. Some like you may want faster decay so there's more turn-around. Others may want slower decay so that there's more opportunity to find higher level portals when there are fewer players.
Yes exactly, and that's why some players clicked disagree. As you were questioning why, I'm telling you why. Simple and straightforward. Looks like actually you already knew how players looking for faster decay would think.
I never asked why people disagree, or imply that they shouldn't disagree. I even gave a reason to disagree with the proposal. I was replying to "why not do this" in the original proposal and gave what I thought was the best reason for why not.