Fortress: private Groups

LucoireLucoire Posts: 1,189 ✭✭✭✭✭
edited May 14 in Feature Requests #1 latest comment 20 September, 2020, 01:46 pm.

People want to play together. This Suggestion is trying to adress that AND how it could be implemented.


Disclaimer:

  • This Suggestion makes a certain number of assumptions about what "can" be done and what can't be done. If you disagree with those assumptions, please don't do it here.
  • This is a Brainstorming, nothing suggested here is final - constructive feedback is appreciated
  • This idea has come up before. If it is considered "a duplicate" of already existing ideas, please merge the posts @hpwulola


The idea:

  • When in the Fortress-Overview (where you can see all of the Floors), players are given a new Button at the very top of the list.
  • When that button is tapped, they're asked whether they want to CREATE or JOIN a private group
    • When they tap CREATE, they're asked to Select a FLOOR and upon confirming that, they're asked to select a Runestone. Following that, the player is presented with a Floor-Lobby. On the top, a randomly generated Symbol-Code of length 3 using the Exploration-Families is shown.
    • When they tap JOIN, they're asked for a Symbol-Code of length 3, using the "Exploration-Families" as available symbols. If the Player enters a code of a Private Group that has that combination of symbols, they're asked to select a runestone. Following that, they're presented with the Floor-Lobby.
  • The private Floor-Lobby does not have a "countdown"-Timer or a way to retroactively change the Floor.
  • Once all players tap "Join" in the floor-lobby, the Challenge starts.


For the Knight-Bus, there's an additional Suggestion:

  • In the Floor-Lobby of the Knight-Bus-Fortress (Private Groups only), any Player can tap a free Participant-Slot. Once they do, they're presented with their friendslist from which they can send an invite. Said invite is valid for 2 minutes. During those 2 Minutes, said participant-Slot is reserved (and considered as "unjoined" in regards to starting the challenge). The invited Friend is sent an app-notification to accept or decline the Invitation. If they chose to accept, they're then asked to select a runestone after which they're added to the private Lobby.


Note:

  • This can be used to play alone aswell
  • The Invite via Friendslist assumes that the Knight-Bus-Fortress-Instances wouldn't become overpopulated by having too many Players join one particular one. This might not be the case.
Reply

Comments

  • KaioZelKaioZel Posts: 11 ✭✭
    edited May 14 #214 May, 2020, 08:44 pm.

    Hmm.. is the second one inspired from my idea? Just some add-ons to the invite system.

    1. When you're in the knight buss foretres, it's a public spot, so to have a private level, the mechanics should be to bring you into a private fortress (eg. with no players in it), not a private dungeon within the public fortress. What I suggest for that function is for it to have "code" that sends you (upon "create party" or something similar) to an empty fortress ("automatic search foretress query" if { fortress=no players; then: Join } (++), eg. only way to make it populated (other than those with invites) is for players to physically go there.
    2. After the "Host" will choose a level and invite friends: which should be a invite "accept" decline" pop up in the middle of the screen to the invited and picking friends to invite could be a checkbox system to invite from friends list.. at least not; invite-friend list-choose friend-repeat, shorter process=good design (a function showing "Online" players here would also benefit the system.. a lot) then those who accept, will come together on the private fortress ground on the chosen level of the host (after picking runestone of course). Where the "host" will be the one to decide when the round starts *start round* (in case someone don't click join) could alternatively have a 'host can kick' system here, but, might be a bit extra work, up to devs.
    3. After the round is complete, there are a few options 1. The host comes back to the loading screen and chooses the level that "pulls" the players in with him or (probs more code) 2. the first "player" to choose a level pulls in the rest (similar) or 3. They choose manually like any other foretres with a regular countdown (hence having to locate each other again, but not being bound to the host to "start" levels anymore), probs the easiest to realize codewise. Anyhow I think the developers can pick the most suitable option here and think for themselves what is best implementable. (I'm pretty sure the players will adapt either way)

    If one player makes no actions throughout one fortress battle, or runs out of energy it ought to be an automatic "kick from fortress" function as well.

  • LucoireLucoire Posts: 1,189 ✭✭✭✭✭
    #314 May, 2020, 10:49 pm.

    Thank you for your Feedback, @KaioZel

    As for your Suggestions, my goal was to provide a simple function without any unnecessary complexity - as complexity breeds errors.

    1. I wanted to provide players a tool to get to the same Instance of the Knight-Bus-Fortress - so they could play privately AND play together with others. Also, I thought that the Knight-Bus-Fortress is most likely built as a separate virtual instance - with it's own reserved hardware. Therefore transitioning (LOADING-SCREEN OF DOOM!!!) from that to a separate space is likely to be complex and therefore prone to bugs.
    2. Your suggestion wouldn't stop people to invite more friends than Slots available - a conflict which to resolve would require more complexity and therefore be more prone to bugs. It's easier to think about which Profession is needed and therefore invite a very specific friend. Additionally, a private Group is intended for FRIENDS. There shouldn't be any need for "Kicking". Also, since there is no communication, starting the Challenge itself should require a consensus, instead of the "authority" of the "leader" - also something that shouldn't be a thing among friends. The "ready"-Button within the Floor-Lobby is perfectly suited to create a consensus between the Participants.
    3. I would think that Players might disagree what they actually want after the Challenge. So why not give them the absolute freedom by returning them to the Fortress-Lobby again, where they could chose - instead of being "forced" to do what someone else decided?


  • KaioZelKaioZel Posts: 11 ✭✭
    #416 May, 2020, 06:21 pm.

    @Lucoire You make some good points, but I also disagree in a couple parts..

    1. "Play privately AND with others" Well privately, while the invited friends having the option to invite more friends (in theory the friends, friends, friend or further could end up in there) is sort of public enough impo. I hypothise the majority of players would agree that they'd want an actually private instance, not 'sort of' private before it goes public again.. it would sort of mess with the whole purpose. - regarding it being a separate virtual instance, Would just make a difference in whether server, or foretress. Idk, but I thought it was an actuall foretress, since on the challenges page, on my "tales of beedle the bard" (which you get from foretresses) it says I found it in USA... where I've never been. Which lead me to think it's an actual fortress. Might be a coinsidence, and tbh idk. But the devs will know the most applicable route anyhow.
    2. Well, there is a really easy fix to that... such as: once 5 numbers of participants has queued up, the "late" accepters will get a "message" saying it's already full or invite expired yarayara. and then once someone leave invites opens again. It's a common thing in a looot of different queue up games. Meanwhile no need for kicking and all joined is fair enough. I don't really see a problem with either, they both just have pros and cons. I simply suggested mechanics from countless other queue up games, just using fortresses instead of servers. (fortnite, cs go etc.)
    3. Well, for me it does not make a huge difference. But, they could always exit the foretress whenever (even in "my version")... I just figured the purpose of the private fortress was to team up, not to split up, making it harder to get "full" matchups again if they are given complete freedom. (which I imagine they'd want in most cases) - Then leading to the players trying to "find where the others went" for the majority of the instances. Which is a pro for freedom, but makes everything one extra step everytime. So again, pros and cons.

    Meanwhile formulating that, I see two opposing ideas on this.

    1. The invite systems limited to 5 'should' also pull them together (as resources are limited in such a setting of "just" 5), eg. less freedom. It has the pro of being effective and having minimal resources (players) for maximum effect (time). (eg. I really don't support the idea of giving 5 people in a private fortress freedom to split up, when it's limited to 5)
    2. An unlimited invite system (well meaning the "Limit" Niantic put on a normal "public server"), (perhaps more like your idea?) could still pull the players after maxed queue "into" the fortress instance, but outside the dungeon instance. This has the pro of making a more populated "private fortress" while still being more populated (like a public foretress) but only with your friends and the friends friend etc. But also the con of someone inviting a potential leecher (or similar), and the effectiveness of completion will definitely be slower.


  • LucoireLucoire Posts: 1,189 ✭✭✭✭✭
    #516 May, 2020, 07:24 pm.

    @KaioZel


    My Usecases:

    • A Family of 2 or more wanting to play together but also with a full group of 5 people.
    • Currently, there's no mechanic to reliably get all Family-Members on the same Fortress-Instance. My option would permit that: One would open the Private Group, the others would join and then either play completely isolated OR disband the private group and join other people.


    As for your "Easy way to fix", well, Easy is a question of perspective. Completely avoiding a conflict by limiting the number of invites by slots available is far easier than resolving the conflict of "more invites than slots". And by limiting the invite to 1 per free slot, that is fail-safe even if multiple members can invite.


    Audience

    Also keep in mind that "Private Groups" have a different audience than Public Groups.


    Public Groups are randomly unreliable both in regards to experience and Professions, they want to play - not necessarily with this group but with any group.

    Private Groups - at least in my mind - are people who trust each other and who WANT to play with each other; people who treat each other as equals, not as leader and followers.

  • Jeje002Jeje002 Posts: 25 ✭✭
    #617 May, 2020, 05:59 am.

    The problem is that there is a need for friends to enter the same virtual fortress with a group of friends... (Have spent an hour trying to find my mates ;) ) Once in same fortress - battles can easily e set up with friends...



    Now as suggested by others, like @Lucoire , I do also see several options to build this:

    • Like in POGO raids - set up a private Knightbuss destination "Private ticket" (vs random ticket) that allows a team (this way they mustn't be friends, though smart is to be friends) to set destination to same fort. (Optionally this could even be a totally private fort if 5+ members join, but I'm not totally happy with this as one might leave earlier and then a random player might fit in)
    • Knightbuss takes everyone to the gates of Hogwarts where every player then selects the fort they enter into. Also information about how many of max there currently already is in a fort. (Problem here is that the virtual forts with many in them lure a majority of newcomers, so balanceload between fortresses become harder.)
  • Magpie31Magpie31 Posts: 1,223 ✭✭✭✭✭
    #717 May, 2020, 06:08 am.

    @Jeje002 Has a good point about the Hogwarts gates. If the various Hogwarts fortresses had names, like Transfiguration, Great Hall, Divination, Quidditch Pitch etc, the it would already make things easier. Some people could do easier chambers while waiting, if we could say "Meet you on the quidditch pitch".

  • KaioZelKaioZel Posts: 11 ✭✭
    #817 May, 2020, 12:45 pm.

    Okay, So what you really want is simply for friends to "end up together" in a public fortress? That's a fine outcome too. If you're confident you won't acquire stalkers/randoms pushing in between you guys. And if you don't have a third party comms software, it's rather easy for someone to just "hop" in forcing you to either "jump out and re-try" (if you want the 5 player "party" in) It's still better than the current solution, I just don't think it's optimal.


    With that said, Inviting more than the 5 people into the instance is hardly a difficult code to set up... They already have a function to "join" a public fortress. you just need to "add" the same function and replace with the "specific" private fortress, ending up in the lobby... I'd like to hear a certified WU developer comment this, but it's not any harder than any of the other functions mentioned.


    And it's really not bug prone (whether max 5, or max 20 in fortress).. Obv there would be put codes to fail-safe the invites as they expire and prevent the player from joining after a spot is no longer available. (and that's a way smaller code than for ex. the coding of the personal profile page, perhaps similar to one of the sections'ish)

    + This has all been built in several games, it would not be complicated for Niantic to realize bug-free. (so I'd rather argue the optimal implementation, rather than what might be more bug-prone..)


    btw, personally, I barely know any personally who play the game. (although I'm trying to recruit lol..)

    I would be forced to play with 'friends' that I don't know in rl.

    I'd just invite the fitting level and eventually I'd get to know who is reliable and who is not lol. But yeah.

    So my "trusting" of them would have to be acquired after experiencing a match up with them.


    Knightbuss takes everyone to the gates of Hogwarts is not bad also. Probs the simplest of all the suggestions to code. They just have to put names on all the public instances and list them for your choosing. With a list of how many players in each of course.

    With this one it would still also be nice with an invite function though.


    Lastly, partly of topic, not seeing the profession level of users in fortresses is also part of the public match up issue.

    You never know who is "ahead of the dungeon level" and who is behind. No matter the type of player they are, if they lack the level to put up a fight it would largely explain the issue of the party and hence make it easier to evaluate whether a party is good or not.

  • LucoireLucoire Posts: 1,189 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited May 17 #917 May, 2020, 01:44 pm.

    @KaioZel

    I think it would be best to focus on the GOAL ("specific people wanting to play together") rather than the MEANS ("being able to select the specific instance")


    My suggestion is aimed at ensuring that people who REALLY want to play together can do so without having to worry about a random, uninvited person jumping in.


    EDIT: I did try to keep other Usecases in mind though, for example the one I mentioned earlier.

  • Jeje002Jeje002 Posts: 25 ✭✭
    #1017 May, 2020, 02:28 pm.

    @KaioZel

    We are already now playing with friends in same Hogwarts virual fortress (can take up to one hour to everyone into same one... bu the it¨'s a go for as long as one stays in the castle)

    I see no problem with arranging battles together with others. Yes sometimes we need to hop out - as all couldn't fit in. But you learn the Technics to do that as well... And even if you are 3 (auror,magizolog&prof) you can be sure to have a smooth Dark 5 game - as you let 2 random players join you. We just synchronise everything among ourselves and random players are kinda carried there alongside.


    Knowing in RL your friends

    I'm a member of a Finnish HPWU discord server - I really don't know who the other players are... That's not essential... What is, is that while we play we are talking to each others and coordinating actions... As first we talk which prof gets the focus from aurors to cast Profiency power charm. Then each player informs magizolog when he/she is about to pass out - so magizolog can revive. Also if random players with us, we look at them in-between battles and inform the magizolog about any actions needed. And last but not least... We respect the basic idea that all players fight against those that they are good at - even the elite foes. It's not so much about knowing someone in RL, it's about the communication between team-members that make the team so efficient...

  • LucoireLucoire Posts: 1,189 ✭✭✭✭✭
    #1117 May, 2020, 03:08 pm.

    @Jeje002

    If you know that your Companions are experienced and skillful, if you can trust them to do the right thing, you don't even need to be able to talk to them. Trust and Faith enable colaboration without communication.


    That's part of why I've suggested this: so that you have 100% control over who is in your group - either by inviting them or by sharing the 3-symbol-code with them.

  • Jeje002Jeje002 Posts: 25 ✭✭
    #1217 May, 2020, 04:25 pm.

    @Lucoire

    Yes you can play by faith - but it's smarter to be able to communicate to magizologist about revive needs etc. Makes everyone's play much faster ;)

  • LucoireLucoire Posts: 1,189 ✭✭✭✭✭
    #1317 May, 2020, 05:30 pm.

    @Jeje002 fair enough but communication would be an entirely different topic.

  • RazorgirlRazorgirl Posts: 128 ✭✭✭
    #1418 May, 2020, 04:12 am.

    I like this idea, given the world we live in currently, but assuming that this idea is implemented, what purpose would actual Fortresses have in the game if this idea was put in place?


    Since the Knight Bus was implemented the only benefit a Fortress has over the Knight Bus is that you can (once lock downs are over) get together with Friends and tackle a Fortress Challenge as a team, without pesky randoms getting in the way.


    I feel like implementing your suggestion would make physical Fortresses useless/defunct in the game. That is, why would you choose to use a physical Fortress rather than use the Knight Bus.

  • LucoireLucoire Posts: 1,189 ✭✭✭✭✭
    #1518 May, 2020, 07:17 am.

    Thank you for your question, @Razorgirl


    Before the lock down and the introduction of the Knight Bus Fortress, our local community would regularly gather at a sponsored Fortress in the city centre.


    To elaborate, sponsored Fortresses are a result of a company partnership with Niantic. In case of Germany that is Telekom, the biggest provider of telecommunication services. Said partnership includes 4 bonuses: better Fortress gifts, more Fortress XP, spell-energy as additional reward , and a QR code to scan in the shop of the partnering company which unlocks discounts.


    That being said, even in that physical Fortress we often had random passerby join our sessions, thereby disrupting our group composition. So even in a physical Fortress, private groups would be useful.



    TL;DR: sponsored Fortresses are preferable to the Knight Bus Fortress.

  • MtPolluxMtPollux Posts: 700 ✭✭✭✭✭
    #1618 May, 2020, 01:18 pm.

    While it's true that sponsored fortresses are better than normal ones, the vast majority of fortress locations are not sponsored. There has to be a better incentive to choose a physical fortress over the Knight Bus other than the knowledge that sponsored fortresses exist.


    My guess is that once the world comes out of lockdown, there will be a limited number of times per day that one can use the Knight Bus fortress. This will require those who want to do more than a few battles to go to a physical fortress.

  • Magpie31Magpie31 Posts: 1,223 ✭✭✭✭✭
    #1718 May, 2020, 02:00 pm.

    @MtPollux While I suspect you are right, I sincerely hope that instead, they adjust the rewards. E.g. Increased challenge and wizarding and challenge xp from physical fortresses, guaranteed fragment drops, higher chance of extravagant gifts. Make it worthwhile going to real life fortresses, while still leaving the unlimited Knight Bus option for rural or remote players, or for those wanting to play with global friends.


    I hope that @hpwulola and the team are listening to these conversations. The Knight Bus has completely changed my gameplay and allowed me to play with a team of friends. I really hope that doesn't become limited!

  • CBG92CBG92 Posts: 288 ✭✭✭
    #1818 May, 2020, 06:51 pm.

    agree completely @Magpie31 I am enjoying actually being able to complete daily assignments now. I know they said that it was permanent but hadn't thought about them charging for it😓 I would hate that and hope they just adjust the rewards. Stinks not getting the good ones but I can get over that

  • LucoireLucoire Posts: 1,189 ✭✭✭✭✭
    #1918 May, 2020, 07:25 pm.

    Thank you for your feedback, @Jeje002

    I appreciate the thought and would like to apologize for not going into details over them.


    Focus: Fully Private Groups

    The primary goal of my suggestion was to enable people to seclude their fortress game session from other people. Inspiration for that was the similar feature from Pokemon GO where you can set up a private group for Raid-Encounters. Also please keep in mind that the feature of "Private Groups" would also be implemented for "regular" Fortresses (as in "not knight bus") if my suggestion was followed.


    I do recognize though that people also want to play together but without secluding themselves and did try to keep it in mind while designing my suggestion. It wasn't the primary goal though so I would politely ask you to create a separate post for that suggestion - as I would not want to see either of these ideas get lost in the talk about the other one.


    Fortress Population

    I don't think that we're ever going to see which Knight-Bus-Fortress is how "overpopulated", mainly because it would imply exposing info about the server-environment - which would be a severe security concern. That's why I also don't think that we're ever going to see the option to "chose" the Fortress-Instance to go to (as that's basically an invitation for a denial-of-service-attack).


    What I rather consider possible is to see an implementation that focusses on the GOAL rather than the TOOLS: allowing players to join "whichever fortress instance" their friends are currently in - which coincidentally is exactly what my suggestion would enable via the invitation-system.

  • KaioZelKaioZel Posts: 11 ✭✭
    edited May 18 #2018 May, 2020, 11:01 pm.

    Sounds good to me then. No complaints. Since I dont have much experience using that friend joinup way. (Just speaking ideologically)


    Though considering a lot of people lack friends who play (concerning the physical vs knight buss case) it would be worh mentioning it serves two purpose other than the lockdown case.

    1. Solo player without physical player friends or player in rural area no longer has to solo foretresses. which is forever better with randoms than alone.

    2. The impaired (worse move-ability) now have more physically friendly options to play from.


    Niantic would be wise to keep it that way even after quarantine ends.

    Because if they would for some reason removed it. It would cause a lot of critic and further drop in playerbase. Nerfing might be within a reasonable boundary. But a lot of negative feedback would surface. So they're better of leaving the Kn rewards as it is. Impo. Instead of nerfing, it would serve them better to simply 2x the physical once reward. As then there wouldnt be much for players to complain about.


    Since thats an invite to greater rewards, rather than an impairment to what players have gotten used to.

  • RazorgirlRazorgirl Posts: 128 ✭✭✭
    #2119 May, 2020, 01:55 am.

    Melbourne has a sponsored Fortress in the CBD. It's the Princess Theatre where, prior to lockdown, it was showing the Harry Potter stageplay. But my question wasn't about Sponsored Fortresses, it was about standard Fortresses.


    There is a Fortress in a park across the road from where I live. I can tell you that since the Knight Bus has been implemented, I have stopped using that Fortress. Why bother when I can access the Knight Bus from my couch?


    I used to gather with local players at a merchant district where we could access 5 Inns from the one café. If we wanted to undertake a Fortress Challenge, we had to go on a ten minute walk to get to one as there is an abundance of Inns and no Fortress at this location. Why would we bother going to the Fortress that's a couple of blocks away, when we could just coordinate jumping aboard the Knight Bus?


    While I love the idea of this suggestion, I feel like it would make every Fortress in existence worthless. Sure, Sponsored Fortresses give some token benefits, but if this suggestion was implemented there would be no benefit to using a proper Fortress rather than the Knight Bus.


    There is a technique that can be used to allow Friends to undertake a Fortress Challenge together on the Knight Bus - I got to use it last night. It's an utter PITA to use, and it takes a while (10 - 40 mins) for people to sync up on the same server, but it works. Until one of you gets booted from the Challenge and/or you need to restock on Spell Energy and then you have to start all over again. So yes, given the world we live in now, I want to be able to play with my friends - local and foreign.


    But I also want there to be a point there being a Fortress across the road from me. I might not be able to access it from my home, but I want it to have a purpose in this game, rather than me wishing it was an Inn or a Greenhouse like I currently do.

  • LucoireLucoire Posts: 1,189 ✭✭✭✭✭
    #2219 May, 2020, 01:15 pm.

    @Razorgirl

    But that's already the case. In areas where a sponsored Fortress is, there's absolutely no incentive to use any of the other fortresses - making them essentially useless.


    And as you elaborated yourself, even without my suggestion, you can have all benefits (like playing with your friends) of a "regular" Fortress in the Knight Bus - even if that strategy is a PITA.

    That being said, my suggestion was not aimed at "empowering" regular Fortresses to the point where there's actually an incentive to use them after the lockdown; instead, my suggestion was aimed at providing an EASIER way to play with your friends & protect those who want to Fortress alone from being joined by random people.

  • DCELLDCELL Posts: 11 ✭✭
    #2319 May, 2020, 02:35 pm.

    Yes to setting up a party!!!!!


    Another improvement to the Knight Bus is to display the level of the profession for each player.


    Also, maybe develop some type of grading system for players to display their proficiency in battles, since there are those players who just camp for rewards and let everyone else do all the work.

  • RazorgirlRazorgirl Posts: 128 ✭✭✭
    #2419 May, 2020, 02:52 pm.

    Sponsored Fortresses do not invalidate every other Fortress in the City. It might lessen the value of Fortresses that are a stone’s throw from a Sponsored Fortress, but what you’re suggesting makes every Fortress in the world have less value. Because why would you bother trekking to a Fortress when you can stay put, send an invite to your mates, and do Fortress Challenges with them without having to go anywhere?


    As much as that idea has great appeal, it lacks game balance.


    Maybe if the Knight Bus gave less XP than standard Fortresses, or if there were certain rewards that could only be gained from a standard Fortress, then that might help give your idea some game balance. But gamers usually react poorly to nerfing so I can’t see players taking a reduction in Knight Bus rewards well, even if it was done once lockdown ends.

  • NavikNavik Posts: 35 ✭✭
    #2509 July, 2020, 07:18 am.

    I would tweak the idea a bit...


    Be able to set up a private party (with the ability to invite your online friends), and then opening it up for the public to join (maybe at this point start the normal countdown timer?) or start with your invitees.


    Maybe give your friends the ability to invite their online friends as well? This would create the chance of over-inviting though, so maybe first only allow the creator of the private group to send invites, then allow them to delegate the ability when they choose?

  • LucoireLucoire Posts: 1,189 ✭✭✭✭✭
    #2609 July, 2020, 11:46 am.

    Be able to set up a private party (with the ability to invite your online friends), and then opening it up for the public to join (maybe at this point start the normal countdown timer?) or start with your invitees.

    @Navik Thats a good idea, I like it. Thank you for the contribution.


    As a result, I would adjust my suggestion:

    • Once all Members of the Private Group have tapped the "join"-Button, the Creator of the Group is presented with a popup where he can chose between "FIGHT" (which would move the group into the actual challenge) and "QUEUE" (which would transform the Group into a public one that others can join - starting at 120s Countdown and resetting the "JOIN"-State)


    Maybe give your friends the ability to invite their online friends as well?

    That is already part of the Suggestion. Any member of the private group can "tap" on a free slot and invite based on their own friendslist - that isn't exclussive to the Group-Creator.


    This would create the chance of over-inviting though, so maybe first only allow the creator of the private group to send invites, then allow them to delegate the ability when they choose?

    Well, since any invites are tied to the actually available slots and once the invite has been issued results in "reserving" those slots, overinviting can't happen.

    That being said, the first to issue invites is obviously the Creator of the Private Group since (s)he is the only member of the group after its creation.

  • GryphonknightGryphonknight Posts: 9 ✭✭
    #2720 September, 2020, 01:39 pm.

    what purpose would actual Fortresses have in the game if this idea was put in place?


    @Razorgirl

    Just like Ingress Prime, and Pokémon GO, it is all about the cool gifts.


    Sponsored Fortresses give better gifts and many waypoints have cool photos or history.


    One of our favorite gifts is a mural on a local bike shop, another is a historic place related to the USA constitution, a third is a sponsored Fortress near our work.

  • GryphonknightGryphonknight Posts: 9 ✭✭
    #2820 September, 2020, 01:46 pm.

    [Suggestion] Add a Hogwarts button to the Friends list


    Edit:

    Posting my version here to keep the forum less cluttered.


    It takes Gryphonkit, my wife, and me about 15- 50 minutes to get the same Hogwarts Fortress.


    Add a `Hogwarts` button to the Friends list. When the friend is in a Hogwarts Fortress, the `Hogwarts` button will light up. Clicking the lit `Hogwarts` button will take you to the same Hogwarts Fortress as your friend.


    Gryphonkit, my wife, and I will often spend 40+ minutes farming Runestone gifts in Hogwarts. Add Baruffio’s Brain Elixir to the potion choices while in a Fortress chamber.


    Edit:

    This will not replace physical Fortress.


    We have several physical fortress that give cool gifts ( photos or history ) sponsored gifts ( better loot ) or are in range of 2x to 5x high level inns for replenishing energy for free ( in Hogwarts you have to spend money in the shop to get additional energy).

Sign In or Register to comment.