jack: (Default)
What I like about Ingress

You can make plans and follow them. You can say, "I have ten minutes, let me see if I can grab keys for these four many portals" or "Can I fill this hole in fielding". In pokemon, you can't really set out to *do* something most of the time.

There's a big incentive to visit different and out-of-the-way portals which is really interesting. Getting keys for them, or linking to them, mean the portals are *different*, not just "go to whichever ones are closest".

You can look up where's an interesting place to go to.

What I like about Pokemon Go

Filling the pokedex and collecting high-level pokemon gives you a form of progress which you can always increase. In Ingress, the only form of permanent progress was levelling-up, which was fun at low levels, but it was about conquering territory which was always transitory.

There's three teams, not two. I don't know why, but that seems to make it a lot more fun, both in how gyms change hands, and in meeting people.

The flavour is really nice, I love seeing different pokemon.

When you get to higher levels, there's not quite such a cliff of "now it's too hard to level up, and there's nothing else to do, there's no point".

Problems I'm starting to have with Pokemon

I've had a *lot* of fun with it. But I am starting to find some problems.

The new scanner sort-of works. It at least tells you what's within 200m. But it seems like that's not *totally* reliable. And it doesn't seem to tell you pokemon in order. But that means, I never have the satisfaction of tracking a pokemon methodically. It's either "walk along the river" or "rush backwards to establish the edge of the circle, then dash in one direction, and either frantically search around 200m from the first point, or reach another edge and triangulate". It's not a *fun* process, it's aggravating.

You don't play only at pokestops.

I mean, it's realistic that you don't get good intermediate indications of progress, you just have to try your best and then wait for success. But getting positive feedback is one of the things that makes games fun!

Now I have most of the pokemon which often spawn nearby, there's a lot less point going for a little walk and capturing some. I used to take a little wander, catch a few, come home. Now it's "go and see if there's a rare one, there isn't". Or, waste a bunch of pokeballs catching pidgeys I don't really need.

And it's hard to *work towards* filling my pokedex. ETA: Either someone tells you where a rare pokemon spawns, or you just wander around and hope. Either way, you get a random success for no reason, followed by a long period of failure.

So I may stop. But I wish it would become possible to start over, while being able to switch back to my original account occasionally. Like, in Ingress, having multiple accounts even if it took time to switch was a big advantage, because you could put multiple high-level resonators on a portal. But in pokemon, it seems like it wouldn't make that much difference. I'm sure I *can* start another account, but it would be nice if it was officially supported, "yes, that's what you're supposed to do, we won't ban you". Maybe with a built-in delay for switching or something.
jack: (Default)
In Ingress, you get points for linking portals together to form triangles covering an area of the city. You contribute to your overall faction's score (ie. satisfaction but no personal benefit) according to total size, but get points for the number of triangles.

I brought this question to mathsjam, given a certain amount of resources invested in creating the links, what's the maximum number of triangles? If you ignore triangles composed of smaller triangles, someone helpfully figured out the only thing to look at is, if you make as many triangles as possible from N portals, the thing that determines how many is just, how many points are on the border, and how many are inside? So N points in a rough polygon suck for this. But N points where three of them form a triangle round all the others give you the most points for the number of portals you use.

The other question is, if you count triangles inside other triangles, what do you get? It's a common Ingress tip that if you make a small number of fields, don't bother making individual fields, wait until you find three points with another inside the triangle, and then you can get four fields from four portals (if you join all the possible links, but it only counts if you make one of the interior links last, which must be from the edge into the middle not the reverse iirc). If you're making a larger contiguous set of fields, I think it's worth creating "four portal four fields" when you can, but since you'd get three of them anyway, it's less important. And I think (not sure) things are rarely arranged so you can get multiple "four portals four fields" unless the portals are really dense (?)
jack: (Default)
Do you want to join the shadowy conspiracy of aliens infiltrating the earth? Or the shadowy conspiracy rejecting them but adopting their methods?

Only NOW do I start to think "which side is correct?" is massively begging the question!

I think maybe I'm going to start calling the Enlightened "Kang" and the Resistance "Kodos" from now on :)
jack: (Default)
It reminds me of Crowly and Aziraphale in Good Omens. I had a lot of Chesterton portal keys already, and on the way home from work captured the unshielded opposite-faction portal blocking most of the potential links, and then captured the golden hind and linked them all to that. And then did it all over again at least once as some high-level players I hadn't known were inside knocked it down as fast as I could build it.

Which makes the exercise a bit pointless in terms of maintaining a friendly field over the area, because they would always win. But I couldn't help but notice, performing an entirely futile action twice, got a LOT more points. I stopped when I ran out of keys, I didn't want to stand there all night re-capturing and re-deploying. And I was out of lev 6 and lev 7 resonators and running out of lev 5. But fielding twice over got a bunch of points.

I've noticed before, there's two senses of progress: if you capture and hold area for your faction, your faction does better; but you personally get points for capturing things. A highly contested area gets you more points than an area you've "won". Which makes sense, both in terms of keeping the game fun and keeping people playing. But it seemed like a metaphor for business or war when it looks like a truce would be better, but individual people may be better served by ongoing conflict...

Active Recent Entries