What if you could "take over" your own teams level 10 gyms
For example, if you beat all 10 in 1 pass... you conquered the Gym and you could put a pokemon into the Gym.
Keeping 10 the max, the lowest CP defender would be removed
This would let people still try to power up thier own teams gyms.
Answers
Yeah I get your point that it seems against Gyms being accessible to lower level players,
But I am not entirely sure that would be true.
It wasn't Level 10 Gyms being the Problem
It was Static Level 10 Gyms that were the problem.
This would open another way to make the Gym turnover from the other side.
I beat my first level 10 Gym when I was in my Low 20s. (currently 34) It was hard. Had to dodge and use my 6 best pokemon. But that was before the CP changes too so I didn't have as many options back then. Even back then, I could have beat a level 10 Gym, and put 1 of my pokemon in it, I would have.
If you weren't selfish, you wouldn't be suggesting this, because you're asking for the same thing to be made more accessible.
This would essentially make multi accounting legal. It's more or less the same result - you defeat a friendly gym to kick out the lowest mon so that you can place your own, except you also don't have to train it back up again.
There are less people willing to make a new account from scratch, and then level it up to be able to fight gyms just for the purpose of kicking others out, than if only your main account was required.
If you didn't have to constantly log out and back in to switch accounts, or didn't need to have an old phone that runs Pokemon Go or buy another one, the amount of people that would kick out others from their own gyms would definitely increase, and we don't need that.
This sounds selfish because you are level 34 now...
You wouldn't like this if you were still in your low level 20s.
Using an alt-account is simply cheating and people who do should get banned/deleted.
You would only want this since this primarily benefits high level players at the detriment of everyone else (34 is fairly high).
That said, in my area, some gyms are now minimum 2700+ CP now (usually Vaps, Rhydon, Snorlax or Gyrados) with ALL mons powered up well past level 30. I plan to power up well past 30 as well, since everyone else is and you have no choice...
If anything, I'd probably be more supportive of even larger gyms like 20 spots or more for more dense areas perhaps...Make the prestige 10k again and more people can put mons...This also makes bubble strat even more powerful though so they should find a counter first before doing something like this.
Actually I would. I started beating level 10 gyms then. Shrug.
I enjoy a challenge and having more level 10s to beat wold be nice.
Although I would admit our experiences are different because I have never seen a level 10 Gym with 2700+ at bottom. I usually see a minimum of 5 pokemon in the 1800 - 2400 range.
And it wouldn't have been hard to power up one into that range back then.
Ironically I guess in grand scheme of things I am looking at the game completely opposite as you guys.
Let's say it's a Red Gym.
You are looking at it from the Point of View of the Red Player kicked out at the bottom. "Oh thats selfish kicking them out"
I am looking at it from the Point of View of the Red Team. Making that Gym stronger, discourages other teams from taking it out.
Shrug, i get your point and point of view, I just find your insults silly.
((Well not really since Gyms arent hard to take down really))
Honestly, I don't think you "get" it...at all.
and are living in your own "what's the best for my scenario" mindset.
Just look at what everyone else has posted already and clearly, you don't get it.
We all know gyms are easy...if say, your top CP mon or a mon you put after clearing it was 2800 and you clear a gym, and put it at the bottom (say, everything else was 3000+, and I clear it back and kick you out, how does that help anyone?). You're merely assuming at lvl 34, your mons are higher CP. What if the gym was all level 35+ and lowest CP was 3100?
You wanted honest comments, you got a lot (pretty much EVERYONE) disagreed with you and all you can go back on is it makes the gym stronger...
Honestly, gyms are brain dead easy and were easy when most near all of us was level 20.
The insults are not even that, they are just comments that (you wanted them after all), that this idea of yours is not good and would be bad for the game...
If you need more gyms, go find some others to prestige or knock down a few...
Shrug,
The insult was the insistence that my idea was motivated by personal greed gain.
I look at pokemon go at the Macro Level. Teams holding territory.
I know for example heading South from my local yields a huge number of blue gyms. West, a small pocket of 7 yellow gyms. NE, a large number of Red Gyms.
I get I seem to be in the minority here, and that most people are looking at the idea at the individual player level. Live and Learn.
it is though (personal gain at least). Level 34 have way stronger mons than level 20-29 you're essentially eliminating them from gym contention by being able to knock them out ?
Also if you're insulted by people sharing their opinions when you asked a question it may be better not to share it...
shrug oh well, agree to disagree :)
Shrug, I should know better than to get insulted on the internet :>
I just find a distinction between: "Your idea is bad because X, Y, Z" and speculating on my motives of my idea.
The funny part is usually people who speculate on motives behind an idea have a personal motive on why they dislike an idea.
Ideas are good or bad without Motive Speculation
Totally accept it seems based on small number of responses that the idea is bad to most people.
My preferred way to get turnover in static lvl 10 gyms: Make a time limit for how long any mon can be there, say 1 week. Then it goes back home, the gym gets a small prestige loss, and boom, there's a place opened up. Possibly make an exemption for the gym "king".
Static lvl 10s are a real problem again since the latest training change, at least around where I live, and they're also largely filled with cheaters. To some extent I gain from it as I have a few decent mons stuck in them that I can collect on every day, but it's not good for the game. I reckon a 1-week max stint is fair.
Not sure why the word insult had to even be used...this is a public forum/internet and if you post a question, expect people to comment and I don't think anyone (me included) wanted to "insult" you or anyone. This idea is just bad on every level and many people shared their thoughts. If you don't agree, then I think you miss the point that kicking out your own teammates is just, in concept "selfish" since it simply is selfish (and take their spot) to boot your own teammates.
I think most people just saw this as self serving since as a lvl 34 player now, you can put a mon near (or possibly near) the top of a level 10 gym which generally, if people are in a rush or have limited time, won't be torn down as fast.
I think we can all agree gyms are pretty easy and it was never a hard thing to do, just time for most folks (30 - 60 minutes).
Overall, in summary, kicking out your own team members for any reason is probably a negative for the game. If you wanted to help your team, like I said, just take over a rival gym and prestige a ton of spots...Your fellow team members will probably put stuff down. Yes, it can be taken over, but if organizing a group, a lvl 10 filled immediately would not be taken over that quickly probably.
The idea that "making the gym stronger" with gyms so easy to begin with is just a weak point since it's not really THAT much stronger...and in most cases, it's even weaker. Say, put a 3k dragonite that a 1k Cloyster can destroy doesn't help the 2600 maxed Lapras (or Polywrath) lower in the gym since CP is used to rank (which I totally don't agree/support).
Edit:
Wanted to add that if you wanted to "...in looking at the game like a Team Territory Conquest Game", wouldn't actually TAKING a rival gym make more sense to gain territory? No territory is gained AT ALL when knocking out a lower mon...
while actually taking another gym (there are plenty) means you get more territory and all your rivals lose territory.
This is why none of the comments you state makes any sense even with the territory gain reasons you state. You just "lost" one player on your team when kicking your teammate out while when building a new gym, you add yourself (+1) and the other teams may lose -10...you also get + for any other people that show up to join your gym...have friends, this can be +7 or +10...much better overall in gang turf wars.
Remember, I don't think putting a "stronger" mon really does crap honestly...If I want a gym down, it's coming down (and everyone thinks this way I think)...
It makes sense to me if 1 Pokemon beats everything in the gym that it should get an immediate "in" AND be healed to 100%, if the trainer agrees to place him there. This would make more sense in training lower level gyms where it is possible to beat several defenders with a strong one.
It could work like this: at the end of the successful battle(s), Team Leader appears and offers the top slot, either accept immediately and benefit from free healing, or decline - no harm, no foul.
