Half of a ward being owned by one person

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PaalHenrik

He's just got his undies in a bunch. Something must really be bothering him that he's chosen this crusade against multi-owners. First it was RMT, then sub farming, then multi-owning. He also forgets that the things SE writes about regarding housing are guides. There is nothing in the ToS about it. He can't even find it.

---

I can understand the frustration. The system is allowing some players to get multiple houses while other players have been unable to get a house at all. That should not be happening in a modern MMO unless the developers actively publicize the system as a competitive feature of the game intended to bestow prestige on those lucky enough to get a house.

But he's going about things the wrong way. At best, he's only going to end up getting more threads locked if not deleted.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CatStarwind

I have never once attacked other players. I have in fact gone out of my way to make clear this is a game mechanic issue.

Please do not put words in my mouth or take my comments out of context. Thank you.

---

I haven't put words in your mouth nor taken what you said out of context. Trying reading the sentence you quoted again. I used the word "I", referring to myself. I said nothing about you, nor was it implied to be about you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jojoya

I haven't put words in your mouth nor taken what you said out of context. Trying reading the sentence you quoted again. I used the word "I", referring to myself. I said nothing about you, nor was it implied to be about you.

---

Apology accepted.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PaalHenrik

He's just got his undies in a bunch. Something must really be bothering him that he's chosen this crusade against multi-owners. First it was RMT, then sub farming, then multi-owning. He also forgets that the things SE writes about regarding housing are guides. There is nothing in the ToS about it. He can't even find it.

---

Most likely doesn't have the house he wants and has lost every lotto to get the house he wants. Attitude certainly doesn't help, and necroing threads doesn't either.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lakhesys

Most likely doesn't have the house he wants and has lost every lotto to get the house he wants. Attitude certainly doesn't help, and necroing threads doesn't either.

---

Back to changing goalposts and getting personal, oh yeah the pro rmt and ward hoarders are sure nice people, can't wait until someone starts harassing my fc again!

Housing should be 1 plot per unique individual it's that simple.
I have no problem with grandfathering stuff that already happened but future wards need this change so more unique players can get a plot.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ZiraZ

Back to changing goalposts and getting personal, oh yeah the pro rmt and ward hoarders are sure nice people, can't wait until someone starts harassing my fc again!

Housing should be 1 plot per unique individual it's that simple.
I have no problem with grandfathering stuff that already happened but future wards need this change so more unique players can get a plot.

---

And how do you enforce that ? Me and one or two other people already explained to you that it's impossible to do it. You cant block people from making new accounts, and you cant block people from getting houses on said new accounts.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ZiraZ

Back to changing goalposts and getting personal, oh yeah the pro rmt and ward hoarders are sure nice people, can't wait until someone starts harassing my fc again!

Housing should be 1 plot per unique individual it's that simple.
I have no problem with grandfathering stuff that already happened but future wards need this change so more unique players can get a plot.

---

When were the goalposts changed?

I believe it's more the non-sequitor of "just mad", which does detract from the issue at hand. It is not helpful to make this about any specific individual. The loophole exists and how it is exploited and abused should be addressed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ZiraZ

Back to changing goalposts and getting personal, oh yeah the pro rmt and ward hoarders are sure nice people, can't wait until someone starts harassing my fc again!

Housing should be 1 plot per unique individual it's that simple.
I have no problem with grandfathering stuff that already happened but future wards need this change so more unique players can get a plot.

---

Do you have numbers on how many unique players that want a plot still do not have one?

We can't use total number of entries as the number since entries frequently include players trying to relocate their current house or obtain a house for an additional character. With many wards now being mixed purchase on all but the new worlds, we also can't separate out FC entries from personal entries in those wards.

Considering the number of available plots across all of NA right now, it seems unlikely that number is very high. Those who want a house have the opportunity. If they're not taking advantage of the opportunity, seems like they really don't want a house after all.

To address some of the common retorts I know are coming:

Keeping someone from buying a plot for an alt on a lower population world is not going to suddenly make a supply of plots available on the congested worlds for those who want a house but can't be bothered to transfer their character(s).

Data center travel does work when it comes to playing with friends and FC. I'm seeing more and more Travelers out and about in the open world doing content. I'm continuing to see players from other data centers showing up in my roulettes. It does make it an effective option for those who want to continue playing with friends but also get a house.

SE does not benefit from having mostly empty wards when the purpose of using the ward system was to create a feeling of neighborhood and community. That feeling does not happen when most plots sit vacant. If the players who claim they want a house won't transfer to where the available plots are, then there's no reason to prevent players looking for an additional plot for an alt from purchasing one for the sake of getting the wards filled up to get those neighborhoods created.

SE did at least do one things smart - they have left wards 25-30 on the new worlds unavailable for purchase for the time being. As the currently available plots fill up on those worlds, they can slowly open the new wards one or two at a time instead of ending up with a bunch of barely used wards.

Can it be they'll start using that as the system for ward additions in the future? We can hope but one thing seems certain. They're still not going to add enough wards for the presumed demand on the congested worlds. They're only going to continue to add more wards when there is need on most worlds.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CatStarwind

I believe it's more the non-sequitor of "just mad", which does detract from the issue at hand. It is not helpful to make this about any specific individual. The loophole exists and how it is exploited and abused should be addressed.

---

That's because when you've been asked multiple times to cite specifics about the problem (ie: how many houses would be freed up if the loophole was closed) you deflect, insult, or just ignore the question. Stop pretending you want to have a serious conversation when you're on a crusade, with zero regard for how much or how little it will help.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PredatoryCatgirl

That's because when you've been asked multiple times to cite specifics about the problem (ie: how many houses would be freed up if the loophole was closed) you deflect, insult, or just ignore the question.

---

I'd be most interested to know the specific servers where players are denied fc housing or personal houses because of one person owning half a ward. As of right now, no EU server falls under that category. Even if someone were to buy half of a ward on my server, there would be hundreds more fc plots in all districts combined.

Even now in Coeurl you can find at least 20 open plots, as of last night.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PredatoryCatgirl

That's because when you've been asked multiple times to cite specifics about the problem (ie: how many houses would be freed up if the loophole was closed) you deflect, insult, or just ignore the question. Stop pretending you want to have a serious conversation when you're on a crusade, with zero regard for how much or how little it will help.

---

It is not deflection when it isn't even relevant to begin with. I'm not sure where you think I've been insulting either. While still not explicitly "moving the goal post" this and posts like it are simply noise at best, mudding the waters at worst. Even if zero houses would be freed up it still doesn't negate the fact that a loophole is being exploited and abused.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CatStarwind

Clearly.


I do wonder what it's called when you circumvent a restriction. Especially when done to a severe degree.

---

bro, you got a problem

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CatStarwind

Even if zero houses would be freed up it still doesn't negate the fact that a loophole is being exploited and abused.

---

There it is. You finally admit it. Even if no one is helped you still want to punish people because its a rule. You are literally missing the entire reason rules exist in the first place.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PredatoryCatgirl

You are literally missing the entire reason rules exist in the first place.

---

So for what reason then do you believe the following rule exists?

https://i.imgur.com/ynRd4Db.png

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CatStarwind

So for what reason then do you believe the following rule exists?

https://i.imgur.com/ynRd4Db.png

---

To stop house hording and free up more plots. And yet you've just said that even if it doesn't serve that purpose, it should still be followed. You are literally saying a rule should be followed because its a rule. I won't go into all the historical examples of why that's a bad idea, but it is.

That basically destroyed any hope that you're able to be reasoned with, so I'm out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PredatoryCatgirl

To stop house hording and free up more plots.

---

Indeed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PredatoryCatgirl

And yet you've just said that even if it doesn't serve that purpose, it should still be followed.

---

Well, does it serve that purpose or doesn't it?

Here, let me answer my own question since it's apparently a tough one:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jojoya

Probably because the intent of the system has never changed. They want players limited to ownership of one personal and one FC house so more players and FCs have the opportunity to own a house.

They failed to find a way to program that limitation into the game without breaking other game play related to FCs and so had to remove the restriction from the game's programming.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PredatoryCatgirl

I won't go into all the historical examples of why that's a bad idea, but it is.

---

Oh please do, gives us your examples of games that's made rules that should not have been followed.

Game rules, right? Because I trust that you're not going to try and bring up some stupid irl shit that's irrelevant to this very specific conversation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PredatoryCatgirl

There it is. You finally admit it. Even if no one is helped you still want to punish people because its a rule. You are literally missing the entire reason rules exist in the first place.

---

Closing loops right now = future wards and housing districts will allow for more unique players to own a home, and it will be a positive change for the grand majority of people.
I don't think people here are expecting SE to go on a holy crusade to remove shell FCs and multi house owners, that would all get grandfathered just like it always has when new housing rules are implemented and enforced.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ZiraZ

Closing loops right now = future wards and housing districts will allow for more unique players to own a home, and it will be a positive change for the grand majority of people.
I don't think people here are expecting SE to go on a holy crusade to remove shell FCs and multi house owners, that would all get grandfathered just like it always has when new housing rules are implemented and enforced.

---

I don't disagree with the idea of making it harder to have multiple shell FCs. That was more a criticism of him personally. There's only so many times I can be quoted out of context, ignored, and gaslit before my decorum slips. But that's why he's blocked now.

Also, its incredibly hard to restrict FC housing in a way that can't be circumvented without stepping on individual players who are not actually doing anything wrong. Unless SE is going to go in and manually enforce the "one FC house per server per account" rule, I think this is the best we're going to see.

Also, none of this would be a problem if they would just make a system where there were enough houses for everyone.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PredatoryCatgirl

lThere's only so many times I can be quoted out of context, ignored, and gaslit before my decorum slips.

---

You realize anyone can just look at a user's post history right? Or is this why it's only "necroing" when it's posts you'd rather keep buried?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PredatoryCatgirl

Also, none of this would be a problem if they would just make a system where there were enough houses for everyone.

---

You can always just play literally any other game. No need to subject yourself to the practically unique way FFXIV does it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CatStarwind

You can always just play literally any other game. No need to subject yourself to the practically unique way FFXIV does it.

---

Perhaps the same could be said toward your objections to people finding ways to own multiple houses.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pablomaldito

Perhaps the same could be said toward your objections to people finding ways to own multiple houses.

---

"Finding ways" is the difference. I in fact want to play the game as written. Not break it and find ways to force it to be a different game.

Taking the plots? Not ever going to happen. Not all of them are sub farming RMTers so there's no chance they'd do a blanket punishment. Multi-owners are extremely common on JP DCs and those wards have been toured on stream. I used to visit those kinds of wards when I was on Mana and they're more well done than 99% of the houses I've toured on Crystal, most of which are empty shells with one or two junkmonger NPCs stuck inside, no subs, and no garden.
If you really wanted to 'fix' the housing shortage in such an unfair and egotistical way, you'd start with demolishing the houses of people who don't bother to ever put furniture inside or use any features of housing, but keep theirs from demolishing by walking inside once a month because they don't want to lose what they essentially view as a status symbol.
I wanted a house for my two person FC but couldn't get any on my old server, so I moved to a server that had lots of free FC housing and got a small in The Goblet. There were extra personals for a while, there still are some on other servers. There is plenty of housing on Dynamis and low pop servers but everyone *needs* to have that overpopulated server personal. Yet most housing wards still remain as ghost towns littered with unused empty houses even on rp & raiding hotspots like Balmung and Gilgamesh because nearly everyone who claims to want a house doesn't actually want it for anything other than having one. Sour grapes.

Transferring to a dead server is not a solution or an argument related to the topic of this thread, basically everyone arguing against 1 person owned wards already has a personal and an FC house and nobody is expecting SE to deal with damage already done, it would be too hard and costly, we're just giving feedback so the loopholes get closed for future wards, this will also help those dead servers in the future once they stop being dead and they get healthy populations; changing the housing rules has happened before, don't know why people are acting like this is inconceivable.

If people had a little bit of taste, people wouldnt have to take entire wards, using a bright pink or bright red carbuncle in the middle of shirogane when it has an amazing neighborhood, ruining it for everyone else in that ward doesnt make you cool I promise you.

Blame those people.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stormpeaks

If people had a little bit of taste, people wouldnt have to take entire wards, using a bright pink or bright red carbuncle in the middle of shirogane when it has an amazing neighborhood, ruining it for everyone else in that ward doesnt make you cool I promise you.

Blame those people.

---

Especially with what she was wearing, right?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PredatoryCatgirl

Especially with what she was wearing, right?

---

I'm not sure I understand what you mean lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Grinnaux

Taking the plots? Not ever going to happen. Not all of them are sub farming RMTers so there's no chance they'd do a blanket punishment.

---

Having more than one FC house on a single service account on a single world is already a violation of the rules, no RMTing required.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Grinnaux

Sour grapes.

---

I do like wine.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CatStarwind

Having more than one FC house on a single service account on a single world is already a violation of the rules, no RMTing required.


I do like wine.

---

It is not a violation. It is not against the ToS. Keep on grasping.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CatStarwind

Having more than one FC house on a single service account on a single world is already a violation of the rules, no RMTing required.

---

Show the part in the Terms of Service where it actually defines that multiple ownership on a single account will be met with enforcement or consequences. (No your little housing graph or chart that says "you can only own one house" is not part of the terms of service or a rule/law.)

Guess what, you can't because there are no defined consequences. It's about as much of a violation as someone taking more than 1 piece of halloween candy from the bucket with a sign that says "Take only one". Too bad so sad!

Also, tell me how you 100% prove each and every house is actually owned by the same person. No really, show me how you managed to figure out beyond fc tags or names or lodestone information that someone is in fact the same person on the same account.
Do you have access to mogstation database information and customer information?

How do you know 10 houses owned by an FC with identical names and tags are not 10 separate people on 10 separate service accounts that decided to come together for the hell of it and make them all the same? Just because you think it's infinitely unlikely that it's the scenario I just described still does not prove beyond assumption. Let me guess you saw someone in a discord or on reddit brag they own 10 houses? Anyone can verbally declare ownership over 10 houses or hell ownership over Limsa but you still can't actually validate it.

You literally cannot prove it, and a GM will not search a player up and down based on a player assumption. You know, like how police have to get actual permission based on evidence to look for something. Enjoy your witch hunt, you'll never win.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChooChooTraaaaaaaaain

Show the part in the Terms of Service where it actually defines that multiple ownership on a single account will be met with enforcement or consequences. (No your little housing graph or chart that says "you can only own one house" is not part of the terms of service or a rule/law.)

---

Have fun chasing your tail on this. I blocked him after my third request to actually provide a citation as to the location and verbiage in the TOS went ignored.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PredatoryCatgirl

Have fun chasing your tail on this. I blocked him after my third request to actually provide a citation as to the location and verbiage in the TOS went ignored.

---

I am not waiting for it. I'm here to show he can't produce anything. Only losers block people they cannot win an argument with.

Every attempt to justify why people can't or shouldn't own multiple houses regardless of the method in the history of this forum falls flat on it's face because it boils down to people's personal morals and ethics based on their emotions running wild in the moment.

A handful of repeat posters come here when their anger swells up just to throw out buzzwords like ToS or RMT or Rules or 'Slumlord' and then make a Christmas wishlist of doomsday punishments to satiate their dark desire for revenge. Yet not a single shred of evidence is ever provided and it's all based on assumptions and a thirst for personal justice. "We all know they are RMT'ing and breaking ToS!!". No, you don't know and you still have not shown actual hard evidence.

Disgraceful.

A literal witchhunt. What was that about morals again? Only applies when its convenient of course.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChooChooTraaaaaaaaain

I am not waiting for it. I'm here to show he can't produce anything. Only losers block people they cannot win an argument with.

Every attempt to justify why people can't or shouldn't own multiple houses regardless of the method in the history of this forum falls flat on it's face because it boils down to people's personal morals and ethics based on their emotions running wild in the moment.

A handful of repeat posters come here when their anger swells up just to throw out buzzwords like ToS or RMT or Rules or 'Slumlord' and then make a Christmas wishlist of doomsday punishments to satiate their dark desire for revenge. Yet not a single shred of evidence is ever provided and it's all based on assumptions and a thirst for personal justice. "We all know they are RMT'ing and breaking ToS!!". No, you don't know and you still have not shown actual hard evidence.

Disgraceful.

A literal witchhunt. What was that about morals again? Only applies when its convenient of course.

---

And what if SE does crack down on it? Are the handful of players going to quit? You and I both know they won't.

Even if you think they will, their subs are insignificant compared to how many players would benefit and stay subbed longer for it.

The whole "it's not against tos!" doesn't matter. SE can change their mind in a heartbeat. Tos binds the players, not the company.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Troxbark

And what if SE does crack down on it? Are the handful of players going to quit? You and I both know they won't.

Even if you think they will, their subs are insignificant compared to how many players would benefit and stay subbed longer for it.

The whole "it's not against tos!" doesn't matter. SE can change their mind in a heartbeat. Tos binds the players, not the company.

---

Lmao, as if people are quitting because of housing, and its obvious you dont know how many accounts multiowners have, their subs outweighs the complainers and quitters (quitters because of the housing situation), dont worry.

If you are clueless you should just ask.

And nah, SE wont say no to more money from multiowners, as its a monthly payment x the number of accounts.

They wont "crack down" on it, keep on dreaming.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChooChooTraaaaaaaaain

Show the part in the Terms of Service where it actually defines that multiple ownership on a single account will be met with enforcement or consequences. (No your little housing graph or chart that says "you can only own one house" is not part of the terms of service or a rule/law.)

Guess what, you can't because there are no defined consequences. It's about as much of a violation as someone taking more than 1 piece of halloween candy from the bucket with a sign that says "Take only one". Too bad so sad!

---

I mean, I can.

Quote:

---

Land Ownership - You do not have a character on the same World on the same service account that purchased and maintains a free company plot

---

Quote:

---

2.1 Cheating and Botting. You may not create or use any unauthorized cheats, bots, automation software, hacks, mods or any other unauthorized software or hardware designed to modify the Game and gameplay. In addition, you may not take advantage of game system bugs and exploits during gameplay.

---

But you already covered worming out of that:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChooChooTraaaaaaaaain

By the way. The Terms of Service is not evidence.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChooChooTraaaaaaaaain

Anyone can verbally declare ownership over 10 houses or hell ownership over Limsa but you still can't actually validate it.

---

How convenient. All the players who have self reported here and on the discord are just lying. They're certainly working hard to keep that lie alive, between harassment campaigns and ensuring the exploit gets as little attention as possible. When people show you who they are, believe them the first time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PredatoryCatgirl

Have fun chasing your tail on this. I blocked him after my third request to actually provide a citation as to the location and verbiage in the TOS went ignored.

---

You do realize more than once you've directly quoted me showing the pertinent TOS verbiage.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChooChooTraaaaaaaaain

A handful of repeat posters come here when their anger swells up just to throw out buzzwords like ToS or RMT or Rules or 'Slumlord' and then make a Christmas wishlist of doomsday punishments to satiate their dark desire for revenge. Yet not a single shred of evidence is ever provided and it's all based on assumptions and a thirst for personal justice. "We all know they are RMT'ing and breaking ToS!!". No, you don't know and you still have not shown actual hard evidence.

Disgraceful.

A literal witchhunt. What was that about morals again? Only applies when its convenient of course.

---

Are you well? It might be time for a break, especially if you're going as far as creating an alt account just to continue gas lighting.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CatStarwind

...creating an alt account just to continue gas lighting.

---

You posted this exact same response and misleading deflection elsewhere. So I will also post the same response to your shameless deflection to ensure other readers understand that you are posting the same baseless arguments on other posts in this forum.

What you posted:
https://i.imgur.com/c1HIr52.png

The lines you quoted are from two separate documentations.
>> The section you quoted for 2.1 Cheating and Botting is directly pulled from the Terms of Service.

>> The line you quoted about Land Ownership is pulled from Additional Plots and Purchasing Guide. This is a completely different entity from the Terms of Service.

--------

The argument you are pushing about Land Ownership does not reside in the Terms of Service, or even indirectly. Details below:

• Land Ownership guidelines are not included in the Terms of Service.
• Land Ownership that exceeds the amount of 1 FC and 1 House is not detailed, identified, or regarded to as a bug.
• Land Ownership that exceeds the amount of 1 FC and 1 House is not detailed, identified, or regarded to an exploit.
• Land Ownership that exceeds the amount of 1 FC and 1 House does not have a consequence with a violation in the same language or nature as section 2.1 Cheating and Botting or other related sections that have consequences tied to actions in the Terms of Service.
• Owning more than one service account is not detailed, identified, or regarded to as an exploit or bug.
• Circumvention of the suggested plot maximum per the Additional Plots and Purchasing Guide does not fall under the pretense of section 2.1 because it does not fit the criteria of being a bug or an exploit.

You have failed to make a valid connection between bug/exploit and multiple house ownership.

--------

Did you know that per the FFXIV Forum Guidelines you are violating one of the listed rules about "Posting a number of posts with the same content"?

Again, enforcement begins with yourself.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CatStarwind

I mean, I can.




But you already covered worming out of that:




How convenient. All the players who have self reported here and on the discord are just lying. They're certainly working hard to keep that lie alive, between harassment campaigns and ensuring the exploit gets as little attention as possible. When people show you who they are, believe them the first time.




You do realize more than once you've directly quoted me showing the pertinent TOS verbiage.



Are you well? It might be time for a break, especially if you're going as far as creating an alt account just to continue gas lighting.

---

Funny how you will gladly talk about multiowners "harassing" you, just like you called me a stalker for responding to you a few weeks back, because apparently responding to you is stalking, yet you are the one harassing people because you think you are in the right, when multiple people have proven you wrong by even showing you that it's not in the ToS, and is barely a "guideline" which you can decide to follow or not follow.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Troxbark

And what if SE does crack down on it? Are the handful of players going to quit? You and I both know they won't.

Even if you think they will, their subs are insignificant compared to how many players would benefit and stay subbed longer for it.

The whole "it's not against tos!" doesn't matter. SE can change their mind in a heartbeat. Tos binds the players, not the company.

---

They changed the rules on housing before and did not take the houses from players who had multiple. They already set precedent that a change of rules will not penalise those players who worked under old rules fairly. The rules as they are now is 1 private and 1 fc house per world. I have 1 private and 1 fc house across 3 worlds for a total of 6 plots. I went to the bother of preparing characters for the new servers and won my new houses without competition. The new EU servers still have hundreds of free plots. I committed no small amount of time to leveling, doing msq and now maxing crafters on both those characters for the sake of my dream plots.

Truly baffling why there is so much rage when atm there is an entire new NA dc to fill, soon more servers on that dc. New EU servers with hundreds of houses still available too. If you won't either make an alt or move your main then housing is not that big a deal to you after all. I'd even bet the ones on packed servers complaining over housing will also be raging at the huge queues on next expansion release. I wouldn't say I am taking anything from anyone when there are hundreds of empty plots still. In a perfect world wards would scale with demand on their own, apartments could be upgraded to larger size etc. I would love that. I'd get myself one of the beach front cottages in the mist and my little dream house collection would be complete. Asking for those things at least makes some sense, especially upgrading apartment size. Removing maybe a couple hundred plots across all DC from multi house owners wouldn't make much of a dent and you would still whine to take houses away from people for some other reason.

Anyway, imma chill sipping tea at my lb 11! Enjoy your rage.