We need another Housing purge

[GetFoesReqd]

The only thing I want to add to this, is in an interview not long ago, when asked about alts being able to use the houses of their mains on the same server, Yoshi P explicitly said they are working on making that happen so that, if you buy a house, every alt on that server can use it and there would be no need to own more than one "personal" house as it essentially becomes all you need. Presumably, any or all alts could be in the same, or different, FC's as well. It would go a ways towards further reducing the need for housing. But honestly, they will never take away someone's house. I myself have one extra house because I was grandfathered in. I think if they want people to give up houses they don't need, they will have to incentivize it in some way. Give out some kind of refund and reward for relinquishing it. A lot of people might not agree, but since we know they won't ever take them, it's kind of the only other option. Honestly, as for my extra, if they do allow alts into main's homes, I may just relinquish it, but if they have some manner of incentive, I would certainly be happier about it, and that may be enough to make a difference for some. And in the end, some is better than none. Especially on places like Gilgamesh, where there really is none.

[Hasrat]

There was also a point brought up a while back about how some hardcore raiders will have these setups to maximize expedition mats for food/pots or w/e it is raiders need piles of.

Despite being a small niche of the player base, I could understand SE not wanting to greatly disrupt their activity, since they probably also do far more than the average player to promote the game (via streams or vids or guides or whatever).

Whether true or not, I couldn't say.

[Penthea]

This is the kind of stuff SE needs to take a hard stance on because no single FC should own that many homes.

Fc tags are not unique labels. You're not looking at one fc owning several houses, you're looking at several different fcs who use the same tag. It is literally impossible for a fc to occupy more than one plot. This is probably why SE haven't done anything about it because they're not breaking any rules by sharing the same fc tag with their neighbours.

Yes it's obvious that this is a bunch of people in the same community coordinating their efforts but the fact remains that strictly speaking each plot has a different owner.

SE could strip them of some vanity and change the tag system so that each has to be unique. Sure we'd probably see "mew", "meww" and so on, but it would look less misleading and probably would turn people off doing this sort of thing if the residency list won't be uniform.

[KageTokage]

They really should've just imposed a "One house per account period" restriction instead of allowing for FCs to be used as a loophole.

House hording is enough of an issue just with alt accounts involved.

[Bellsong]

Fc tags are not unique labels. You're not looking at one fc owning several houses, you're looking at several different fcs who use the same tag. It is literally impossible for a fc to occupy more than one plot. This is probably why SE haven't done anything about it because they're not breaking any rules by sharing the same fc tag with their neighbours.

It's the same FC taking advantage of the system to profit off of workshops. Greed preventing other FC's and players from owning those plots, this is something SE does not want to happen anymore. They put member requirements on owning an FC estate but that wasn't really enough to stop this at all.

This housing monopoly has been a thing for a while on multiple servers, and you really can't pass this off as just a dozen FC's changing their tag to mew for some reason.

[Aster_E]

It's the same FC taking advantage of the system to profit off of workshops. Greed preventing other FC's and players from owning those plots, this is something SE does not want to happen anymore. They put member requirements on owning an FC estate but that wasn't really enough to stop this at all.

This housing monopoly has been a thing for a while on multiple servers, and you really can't pass this off as just a dozen FC's changing their tag to mew for some reason.

As someone on Greg server I can concur. It's the same few people running alternate FCs in addition to a main one with the one tag. Some cases of this are blatant or obvious than others.

[Penthea]

This housing monopoly has been a thing for a while on multiple servers, and you really can't pass this off as just a dozen FC's changing their tag to mew for some reason.

I didn't. I even said it was obvious that this is one group coordinating their efforts. My point is strictly speaking they're not breaking any rules.

Punishing that fc isn't simple:

• You can't punish them for owning more than one plot because strictly speaking they don't. It's several fcs with the same tag. Not one fc that broke the game and has several houses.
  
• You can't punish players for having a fc with a house on one character, and being in a different fc that also has a house on another. There are many legitimately separate fcs with these exact situations.
  
• You can't punish the fcs for funneling their resources to another fc. It is not against any rules to help another fc.
  
• You can't punish them for taking over a ward. It's very common for fc members to have their houses in the same ward as their fc house.
  
• So what's left then, punish them for sharing the same fc tag? Well then several other fcs who are unaware they share the same tag would be punished too.

I am not disputing that what that mew fc did is scummy. I'm saying that punishing them isn't a no brainer given that the activities they're doing aren't actually offences.

[Bellsong]

Which is why I said SE needs to take a hard stance on this, and that could be implementing new rules to prevent this, or just flat out saying they can't and aren't going to do anything about it. sure I can see grandfathering in people who had already done this because on a technical level they hadn't broke these new rules or any existing ones, but something needs to be done about it to prevent it happening going forward.

[Freyt]

Make no mistake, it's clearly against the rules, and the efforts made here are in clear violation of the rules. Just because you've circumvented the hard coded rules doesn't mean you haven't broken them.

[Brightamethyst]

Make no mistake, it's clearly against the rules, and the efforts made here are in clear violation of the rules. Just because you've circumvented the hard coded rules doesn't mean you haven't broken them.

No, it's not actually. Going against the spirit of the rule is not the same as actually breaking the rule. It may be sleazy and you may not like it (and I agree on that), but that doesn't make it against the rules.