Disallow Relocation, At Least Temporarily

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mimilu

You view my suggestion as s punishment

---

You're suggesting the removal of an existing quality of life upgrade, under the mistaken impression it will have a side effect of positively influencing player behavior.

Removing quality of life upgrades from the game simply reduces quality of life for players. You'd think that was obvious - but here you are, acting like you haven't heard my point when I've said several times that this change brings only bad things, and no good things.

You call my facts opinions but you are suggesting removing a beneficial feature from the game. This is objectively bad, not opinion.
You say that patching out a quality of life upgrade would change player behavior, but that's a guess. And I personally disagree with your guess, and I think anyone who understands system design will also disagree.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Catstab

You're suggesting the removal of an existing quality of life upgrade, under the mistaken impression it will have a side effect of positively influencing player behavior.

Removing quality of life upgrades from the game simply reduces quality of life for players. You'd think that was obvious - but here you are, acting like you haven't heard my point when I've said several times that this change brings only bad things, and no good things.

You call my facts opinions but you are suggesting removing a beneficial feature from the game. This is objectively bad, not opinion.
You say that patching out a quality of life upgrade would change player behavior, but that's a guess. And I personally disagree with your guess, and I think anyone who understands system design will also disagree.

---

Uh...they're suggesting a cooldown, not a complete removal.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Catstab

You're suggesting the removal of an existing quality of life upgrade, under the mistaken impression it will have a side effect of positively influencing player behavior.

Removing quality of life upgrades from the game simply reduces quality of life for players. You'd think that was obvious - but here you are, acting like you haven't heard my point when I've said several times that this change brings only bad things, and no good things.

You call my facts opinions but you are suggesting removing a beneficial feature from the game. This is objectively bad, not opinion.
You say that patching out a quality of life upgrade would change player behavior, but that's a guess. And I personally disagree with your guess, and I think anyone who understands system design will also disagree.

---

Like Penthea said, I am not suggesting the removal of relocating, just suggesting adding a restriction/cooldown to make it easier for those who don't own a house, FC or personal.
If you view putting limits or restriction as the same thing as removing a function, then I don't know what to do for you. It's a common thing for scares resources.
Also, what happened to this not being your problem? >w>

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Penthea

Uh...they're suggesting a cooldown, not a complete removal.

---

A cooldown exists. OP is suggesting it's removal. Person relentlessly claiming that limiting relo will help people is suggesting lengthening to 8,640 times it's current length. (yes, literally)

In the case of social FCs, both are unacceptable reductions to quality of life. It's not going to happen, plain and simple.

Argue for the timer to be abolished or replaced with a better system. That improves life for campers.

Removing (or limiting severely) a quality of life upgrade only reduces quality of life. It's a bad idea.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mimilu

If you view putting limits or restriction as the same thing as removing a function, then I don't know what to do for you

---

While I appreciate your attempt to use my own arguments against me, you've misread them. Here, go back and look again.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Catstab

Limiting it in a way that would force people to use the old system is objectively a bad idea

---

I get that you only want to increase the cooldown 8600-fold. This would force people to occasionally use the old system. This would be a bad change, as I've said. Don't change what I've said and argue against your imaginary version of me, please.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Catstab

I get that you only want to increase the cooldown 8600-fold. This would force people to occasionally use the old system. This would be a bad change, as I've said. Don't change what I've said and argue against your imaginary version of me, please.

---

It wouldn't force anyone who plays in the confines of the rules to do anything. Only those who don't want to play with in the parameters would suffer, which is not mine or the devs' problem (unless cheating is involved, which the GMs will handle).
If someone is as bloodthirsty as your example that they would destroy their FC at the chance to get Mist 5/35, that is on them, not on the community.
If they can't be patient and wait so others can have a chance at getting a house, then that is on them.
And what cooldown are you talking about? The 5 minute one? Like that is substantial in any way.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mimilu

those who don't want to play with in the parameters would suffer

---

Exactly my point, thank you.

Burdening FCs with a conditional need to partially disband to relocate is an unreasonable amount of suffering. Especially since your suggestion offers no benefit whatsoever. You only guess that it will change player behavior. No evidence suggests you are correct in this guess.

Placing this restriction on private estate owners could possibly be considered. Placing the restriction on FCs conditionally removes their access to a quality of life feature, and there is no justification for it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Catstab

A cooldown exists.

---

And it's only 5 minutes. We know there are cases in which players have used this small cd to troll first time buyers. They are rare but they exist and some have engaged in this multiple times, not just once. Some chose to do this in new wards which frankly very much spoiled the chances of some players to get a house without the dreaded placard spam.

Relocation does present problems to first time buyers. Bringing in a longer cd will increase the chances of first time buyers being able to get a house. Sure a plot is opened elsewhere after someone relocates but you are not told by the game where this plot is, and it can easily mean several more hours of placard spamming if you go to that plot. This is demoralising to say the least, which is very evident from the many complaints in these forums from players who experienced exactly this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Catstab

In the case of social FCs, both are unacceptable reductions to quality of life.

---

Speaking as a leader of a social fc, I disagree. If your fc has a house you're already very fortunate. I fail to see how waiting to relocate would be very detrimental to a fc. The only really impactful mechanical thing from getting a bigger house is extra gardening patches. Yes having a bigger space is nicer, but that's all it is. Nicer. It doesn't lock fcs out of certain features.

Yes I am a leader of a fc who did relocate to a bigger house but at the time there were much smaller limits on the amount of npcs and crafting stations you could have in a house. The limit was so low that a cottage couldn't have one of each of the very useful npcs. These are the primary reasons why we chose to move because we wanted to provide as much as possible for our fc. These limitations are no longer so tight. So these days a fc in a cottage doesn't keenly feel the limitations of the size of their house, obviously aside from furnishing space.

A fc or an individual getting a nicer house doesn't matter more than a homeless individual or homeless fc getting their first house.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Catstab

Removing (or limiting severely) a quality of life upgrade only reduces quality of life. It's a bad idea.

---

It's a redistribution of QoL. By placing a longer cd on relocation for those who purchased or relocated their house, it makes it easier for first time buyers to get a house.

Again I say that 30 days is too long. I think a week or two would be enough.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Catstab

Exactly my point, thank you.

Burdening FCs with a conditional need to partially disband to relocate is an unreasonable amount of suffering. Especially since your suggestion offers no benefit whatsoever. You only guess that it will change player behavior. No evidence suggests you are correct in this guess.

Placing this restriction on private estate owners could possibly be considered. Placing the restriction on FCs conditionally removes their access to a quality of life feature, and there is no justification for it.

---

Again, you, the leader of an FC with a medium house and who is clearly gunning for Mist 35, are only prioritizing FCs that own a house. Screw anyone, FC or single-player, who doesn't already own a house.
The poor, poor relocators need to be protected! I mean, the housing timers can go past 24 hours, 288 times the 5 minutes wait new house owners have to wait before they can relocate, but you know, people who already own houses need them more. >w>

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mimilu

Again, you, the leader of an FC with a medium house and who is clearly gunning for Mist 35

---

Please stop bringing up the imaginary Catstab you have inside your head. The real me is right here. Honestly, stop. I've said enough here in this thread that you have plenty of material to use in this discussion and you don't need to make stuff up about me. I'm very uncomfortable with you imagining what I must be thinking according to you, and then acting as if I said those things. I'm not 'clearly' anything. If you have a question, ask it.

I'm the leader of an FC. We have an LB 41. We do not desire to relocate ever again. I argue on behalf of all FCs that would like to relocate.

Mist 5/35 is commonly considered the most desirable large in game, although some people consider shirogane 30/60 to be just as good. I used 'placard Mist 35' as an example of an opportunity that could not be passed up. Any FC leader with the opportunity to claim a house like that will do it - whether your suggestion goes through or not. So your suggestion fails to save the house and partially disbands the FC, thereby creating suffering for no benefit.

Again, lets make things better for campers, not worse for relocators.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Catstab

I'm the leader of an FC. We have an LB 41. We do not desire to relocate ever again. I argue on behalf of all FCs that would like to relocate.

---

I am stunned that you think so many fcs would be greatly hindered by a cd on relocation that's only a week or two. Most fcs and players who just got their house or relocated are too busy being happy in their new spot to be looking to move again so soon.

Especially considering that purchasing and relocation is not free. The costs add up fast if you relocate a lot in a short space of time, which is money most are not willing to spend. New wards are always announced long before they are launched so a fc could easily choose to abstain from relocating until the new wards come so that they're not on cd when their favourite plot becomes available.

But it's clear you're not willing to budge on your stance that increasing the cd is some sort of despicable idea that would put fcs through some manner of torture, and anything else I have to say about this to you would just be repetition.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Penthea

Most fcs and players who just got their house or relocated are too busy being happy in their new spot to be looking to move again so soon.

---

So, you can't control when a stranger's plot auto-demolishes. Things like 'a placard Mist 35' just happen. They happen any time, at random. You cannot plan for it. You don't have to want or be ready it to happen for it to happen. It's just a thing that happens.

If a mist 35 opens while an FC that is currently inside their suggested cooldown has access to it, it is very likely that the FC will elect to pursue the opportunity at all costs. This would cause damage to the FC that the current system prevents. Creating a system that causes extra damage is a bad idea.

Again, let's make things easier for campers, not harder for relocators. The answer isn't "damage a groups player experience until both groups are comparably miserable."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Catstab

So your suggestion fails to save the house and partially disbands the FC, thereby creating suffering for no benefit.

Again, lets make things better for campers, not worse for relocators.

---

Because suggesting raising the placard prices so that only people who treat the game like a cookie clicker can afford them is totally looking out for campers (and totally not going to make RMTing more profitable). >w>
My suggestion only makes it "worse" for those who want to relocate right after buying a plot (thus leaving another plot with a reset sales timer for campers to loose out on to another relocator, repeating the cycle), who frankly, like Penthea said, should be thankful that they were able to get a house at all with this system. FCs and players who have owned a house longer then the cooldown wouldn't be effected until they relocated, which I would hope an established homeowner/FC would know what they want by that point.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mimilu

Because suggesting raising the placard prices... is totally looking out for campers.

---

500 million gil is nothing to a player that wants to be among the 432 players per server to have a personal large.
125 million or less gil from 4 or more members is nothing for an FC that wants to be one of the 144 per server to have a large.

Even owning a small house is only available to 2,880 characters per server. For something that exclusive, people can rake together 40 million.
The 960 FCs per server that have smalls can probably handle getting 10 mil or less per member together.

These were the prices in ARR era, though they were adjusted by server to compensate for population. We as players begged Yoshi-P to slash them. He said "wealthy players will buy out wards if we do that." We insisted. He caved.

So you have it right there that multiple plot owners would be crippled by the price hike, and with the price hike we can do away with the timer. Frequently, campers spend 100+ hours at small plots before achieving a purchase. So my suggestion saves campers ~100+ hours at the cost of a reasonable amount of gil.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Catstab

500 million gil is nothing to a player that wants to be among the 432 players per server to have a personal large.
125 million or less gil from 4 or more members is nothing for an FC that wants to be one of the 144 per server to have a large.

Even owning a small house is only available to 2,880 characters per server. For something that exclusive, people can rake together 40 million.
The 960 FCs per server that have smalls can probably handle getting 10 mil or less per member together.

These were the prices in ARR era, though they were adjusted by server to compensate for population. We as players begged Yoshi-P to slash them. He said "wealthy players will buy out wards if we do that." We insisted. He caved.

So you have it right there that multiple plot owners would be crippled by the price hike, and with the price hike we can do away with the timer. Frequently, campers spend 100+ hours at small plots before achieving a purchase. So my suggestion saves campers ~100+ hours at the cost of a reasonable amount of gil.

---

Yes and the prices were cut because no regular player could afford them at the time, leaving housing for only those who treated the game like a business and made house-flipping lucrative (both for gil and for real money).
A large number of players trying to buy small houses now can only afford small houses because they like playing the game casually and/or worry more about what they're doing is fun versus lucrative.
All your suggestion would do is punish players who play casually, which in my eyes is worse.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mimilu

those who treated the game like a business and made house-flipping lucrative

---

Today players like this own multiple houses, sometimes several. Just like Yoshi-P said they would under a cut-price system. Saying 'no one had that money 7 years ago' doesn't mean anything. Everyone has the money now.

I don't think "less than half the gil you made doing the story + ~100 hours of blood sweat and tears" is a good price for a house. Camping is anti fun. Camping is so anti fun that people are suggesting we make the housing system even worse than it already is on the off chance that it might reduce the suffering.

My suggestion cripples people who would become multiple house owners. It also saves campers ~100 hours each. That's a lot of gameplay time given back to the players. Gameplay time = fun.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Catstab

Today players like this own multiple houses, sometimes several. Just like Yoshi-P said they would under a cut-price system. Saying 'no one had that money 7 years ago' doesn't mean anything. Everyone has the money now.

I don't think "less than half the gil you made doing the story + ~100 hours of blood sweat and tears" is a good price for a house. Camping is anti fun. Camping is so anti fun that people are suggesting we make the housing system even worse than it already is on the off chance that it might reduce the suffering.

My suggestion cripples people who would become multiple house owners. It also saves campers ~100 hours each. That's a lot of gameplay time given back to the players. Gameplay time = fun.

---

Making housing only for the rich is also anti-fun and anti-casual, especially considering home decorating is considered casual content.
Your suggestion doesn't hinder those with gil from buying multiple houses because most of them are more then willing to use bots to spam placard and harvest mats/craft goods to sell on the marketboard. Hell, there are even bots for clearing hardcore content like savage raids and Ultimates.
My suggestion would slow down the bot-users from jumping from one plot to another. There's one on Exodus that does this regularly with the same Goblet plot: They send a bot or two to spam the placard, one gets it, it leaves to go relocate to another plot, if another bot isn't there, another is sent to scoop that plot back up, rinse and repeat. I've reported them and all their alts (which were extremely obvious) and nothing came from it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mimilu

Your suggestion doesn't hinder those with gil from buying multiple houses

---

20 small houses now = 60 million

20 small houses at ARR pricing = 800 million

So multiple house owners can get or spend 800 million as easily as they can get or spend 60 million? No, they cannot, obviously. My suggestion would slow them down 10-fold.

But we're getting way off topic. This thread is not about a price hike. I only gave it a passing mention on the very first page of the thread, and you've brought it up days later in a poor attempt to prove that I do not support campers and derail the conversation from the fact that your suggestion only creates suffering in the hopes that something good will come of said suffering. In the likely event it doesn't bring any positive change, your suggestion does nothing but reduce quality of life. "Let's reduce QoL" is not a helpful suggestion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Catstab

20 small houses now = 60 million

20 small houses at ARR pricing = 800 million

So multiple house owners can get or spend 800 million as easily as they can get or spend 60 million? No, they cannot, obviously. My suggestion would slow them down 10-fold.

But we're getting way off topic. This thread is not about a price hike. I only gave it a passing mention earlier and you latched onto it.

---

And again, it wouldn't slow them down if they are using bots to earn gil.
But you are right, your suggestion took us off topic.
My suggestion still stands. It prevents characters/FC from plot hopping (leaving plots with reset buy timers that give other relocators time to scoop it up, repeating the cycle) and slows down bots, allowing those without houses the chance to buy reasonably-priced housing.

hey guys why don't we just disable auto-demo again until most of the world is vaccinated

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Windstryker

2. Do away with relocation entirely. Don't like your plot? Sorry. If you want to move, you have to sell the existing plot first.

---

How to make everyone engage in discord housing resale 101

Housing relocation is one of the better features associated with our housing system and it needs to stay. Don't support the OP in the least.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Catstab

So, you can't control when a stranger's plot auto-demolishes. Things like 'a placard Mist 35' just happen. They happen any time, at random. You cannot plan for it. You don't have to want or be ready it to happen for it to happen. It's just a thing that happens.

If a mist 35 opens while an FC that is currently inside their suggested cooldown has access to it, it is very likely that the FC will elect to pursue the opportunity at all costs. This would cause damage to the FC that the current system prevents. Creating a system that causes extra damage is a bad idea.

Again, let's make things easier for campers, not harder for relocators. The answer isn't "damage a groups player experience until both groups are comparably miserable."

---

I'm sorry but you're acting like this will make it near impossible for anyone to relocate.

It doesn't. The only ones who might be inconvenienced are the ones who used an opportunity to relocate recently. In the case of a 30 days cooldown, that would be maybe 50 house owner out of 5,760?

Since you're so fond of exaggerated fonts in this thread.

No one is going to dismantle a FC and relinquish the FC house in an attempt to bypass a relocation cooldown when it means the FC will no longer have a house in the current housing environment.

Oh well, so that one FC who had relocated in the last 30 days can't relocate again to get Mist 5/35 but that didn't stop the other FC that hadn't relocated in the last 30 days who wanted the house just as bad from getting it. There's only going to be that one winner and a whole bunch of disappointed losers with the ward system and lack of supply.

The increased cooldown hobbles the habitual relocators. They have to decide if that new plot they're thinking about relocating to is worth it over sitting tight in case their dream plot becomes available. That's not a bad thing if they're making it harder for new buyers to get a house by resetting the purchase timer on what becomes available as they leapfrog house to house.

It doesn't stop the vast majority of house owners, FC or private, from relocating because they haven't recently relocated.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jojoya

]No one is going to dismantle a FC and relinquish the FC house in an attempt to bypass a relocation cooldown when it means the FC will no longer have a house in the current housing environment.

---

This is plainly incorrect. I don't know why you wrote it, as you almost certainly know it's incorrect. People aren't going to pass on a dream house over a 30-day cooldown if there's a way around it.

Large houses still sit open 5-20 minutes on some servers. You can do the actions I describe in 45 seconds, especially with more than one officer kicking people and breaking down subs.

And I don't think it will make relocation impossible. I think it will cause FCs to occasionally partially disband in desperation. Which is the reason the relocation system, in relatively unlimited capacity is needed. You can just read my post on page 1, and nothing has changed since then.

Moving house used to be the FC-killer. Relocation saved it. Nixing/nerfing relocation puts the Fc-killer back into the game. Fc-killer bad. Bad no good. No patch bad into game when game already good.

The argument "Well I personally wouldn't make that mistake, so I refuse to acknowledge it's a design flaw" is folly. You design a product to be used in the worst case scenario, not set your user up to fail.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Catstab

This is plainly incorrect. I don't know why you wrote it, as you almost certainly know it's incorrect. People aren't going to pass on a dream house over a 30-day cooldown if there's a way around it.

Large houses still sit open 5-20 minutes on some servers. You can do the actions I describe in 45 seconds, especially with more than one officer kicking people and breaking down subs.

---

You still are not thinking this through. If they relinquish their current house, their status changes from relocation to purchase and they will have to wait out the purchase timer before they even have a chance to buy it.

What are the chances that Mist 5/35 will remain unsold for the 4-22 hours necessary before it's available for purchase?

ZERO It is a lost cause before they even finish dismantling the FC because the house will have been sold within 10 minutes of becoming available. The housing discords see to that with the way they monitor available plots.

Again, no FC is going to dismantle itself and relinquish a house when all that will happen is they will no longer have a house at all. They will instead wait for something to become available when they are once again eligible to relocate. 30 days is not that long a period.\

Maybe you're getting confused about whether I'm discussing the abolition of relocation altogether or if I'm discussing an increase to the cooldown for relocation. I'm discussing the increase to the cooldown. I would definitely be against removing relocation altogether.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Catstab

You design a product to be used in the worst case scenario, not set your user up to fail.

---

Games are designed to set the user up to fail all the time. That is what creates the challenge that drives many players and the satisfaction that comes from not failing and beating the challenge.

When it comes to houses in this game, the system is already designed for the player to fail because there are not enough houses for every player.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jojoya

What are the chances that Mist 5/35 will remain unsold for the 4-22 hours necessary before it's available for purchase?

---

You accuse me of not thinking this through, and yet despite the fact that I've been clear that mist 35 stands as an example of "a desirable upgrade" you're here acting as if the only house any FC would ever upgrade to is that one, and acting as if all servers are very high population.

Some FCs have LB 12 for a dream plot. If they find their LB 12 on day #28 of their 'cooldown' and boot all their members so they can buy a house, it would be considered a repercussion of this poor suggestion. Right now, this can't conceivably happen. So we're adding something harmful into the game, and hoping people don't make mistakes and harm themselves with it. That is the mindset of someone who has never designed anything for use by people. And it shows.

Said it about a dozen times now - The problem for campers is the timer. The problem is not relocators. The only way relocation should ever be nerfed is if it is entirely removed along with the timer and replaced with a better system.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jojoya

What are the chances that Mist 5/35 will remain unsold for the 4-22 hours necessary before it's available for purchase?

ZERO It is a lost cause before they even finish dismantling the FC because the house will have been sold within 10 minutes of becoming available. The housing discords see to that with the way they monitor available plots.

---

Yea even on dead servers the mansions get snapped up very fast. It's always the cottages that devalue. Mediums sometimes but very rarely. Mansions? Maybe long ago when the player base was much smaller, but not now. And well considering NA rarely has open plots...well yea, no need to say more about that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Catstab

You accuse me of not thinking this through, and yet despite the fact that I've been clear that mist 35 stands as an example of "a desirable upgrade" you're here acting as if the only house any FC would ever upgrade to is that one, and acting as if all servers are very high population./snip.

---

This is absolute folly. You are suggesting that the FC leader's "perfect plot" opens up, so they're willing to go entirely houseless for a CHANCE to get their 'ideal' spot? Because guess what, they still can't relocate. They would literally have to do all the things you said, get rid of their housing, and then camp the placard. Not just purchase outright

No one, and I mean no one, would be willing to do that. You're talking about this farfetched thing that is so far away from reality as to not be in the same world any more.

Relocation is not okay. Relocation should not allow you to cut the timer.

Relocation should only stay if they, too, are subjected to the dumb lockout timer like the rest of us, and get a cheery red light that says "this plot is not available for relocation yet."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Catstab

You accuse me of not thinking this through, and yet despite the fact that I've been clear that mist 35 stands as an example of "a desirable upgrade" you're here acting as if the only house any FC would ever upgrade to is that one, and acting as if all servers are very high population.

Some FCs have LB 12 for a dream plot. If they find their LB 12 on day #28 of their 'cooldown' and boot all their members so they can buy a house, it would be considered a repercussion of this poor suggestion. Right now, this can't conceivably happen. So we're adding something harmful into the game, and hoping people don't make mistakes and harm themselves with it. That is the mindset of someone who has never designed anything for use by people. And it shows.

Said it about a dozen times now - The problem for campers is the timer. The problem is not relocators. The only way relocation should ever be nerfed is if it is entirely removed along with the timer and replaced with a better system.

---

You're still missing the entire point Jojoya and others have made. If this hypothetical FC demolishes their house, this automatically puts them on the timer system. Therefore, if LB 12 isn't available to purchase yet, they're risking someone else beating them to the placard click and winding up with absolutely nothing. In no way, whatsoever, is your scenario remotely plausible unless the hypothetical "dream plot" is literally able to be bought in the very split second they demolish their FC. And lets be real here, they wouldn't even get the menu opened before someone grabbed it.

What your saying just doesn't make any logical sense.

Relocation is a great thing! It has fueled many trolly nights for me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Venjamin

You are suggesting that the FC leader's "perfect plot" opens up, so they're willing to go entirely houseless for a CHANCE to get their 'ideal' spot? Because guess what, they still can't relocate. They would literally have to do all the things you said, get rid of their housing, and then camp the placard. Not just purchase outright

---

Let me try to explain this, even though it's clear that aspects of housing and human nature are being left out of your thought process.

Your FC wants Lavender Beds 15. Recently you moved from Goblet outer ring to Goblet poolside. Lavender Beds 15 is one of 6 plots open today.
Options:
A) Wait the month, and keep looking for your dream plot afterward. You may never see it again.
B) Break the house down and camp for the new one
C) Break the house down, ending the relocation cooldown attached to the estate. Check the 6 open houses for being purchase-ready. If one is ready, buy it and relocate to your dream plot (before you try it: no, purchasing does not trigger relocation cooldown, only relocating does)

You call option B and C "farfetched things that are so far away from reality." But you're plainly wrong. They are the only options other than "accept defeat" and they both can work. That means people will try them. And if they do, they have to break their FCs down.

So currently:
-No one has to break FCs down for housing reasons, ever.
-Campers only face the timer once, then access the housing market freely

The suggestion:
-Sometimes social FCs die, but only if their leaders dare make a mistake in your deeply flawed system
-Campers camp every relocation they ever want, because standing at a placard adds replayability to ff14

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ForteNightshade

What your saying just doesn't make any logical sense.

---

See the above post.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Catstab

-
B) Break the house down and camp for the new one
C) Break the house down, ending the relocation cooldown attached to the estate. Check the 6 open houses for being purchase-ready. If one is ready, buy it and relocate to your dream plot (before you try it: no, purchasing does not trigger relocation cooldown, only relocating does)


So currently:
-No one has to break FCs down for housing reasons, ever.
-Campers only face the timer once, then access the housing market freely (THIS is the problem.)

The suggestion:
-Sometimes social FCs die, but only if their leaders dare make a mistake in your deeply flawed system
-Campers camp every relocation they ever want, because standing at a placard adds replayability to ff14

---

Firstly: No. Why would you be allowed to relocate directly after purchasing? The suggestion, ultimately, is designed so that players can't jump the timer. That is the problem.

Secondly: "Facing the timer once" is either a head-in-the-sand best case scenario, or a plain lie. So far in the last two weeks I've played the "camp the placard" game DOZENS of times.

Third: The system is ALREADY deeply flawed. The suggestion just makes it so people who ALREADY have a house don't have a SIGNIFICANT advantage over those who do not. I don't care about relocation, in the end. I think relocation is fine, with one caveat: I care about relocation taking priority over those who do not have a house. I would take the massive price inflation of house flippers over this "hey spend several hours doing NOTHING because of FOMO/playing the placard roulette, only to have someone walk up and relocate onto the plot you've been camping." Like, HALF of that equation is already garbage, the second half just propels it into the core of Trash Planet.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Venjamin

Firstly: No. Why would you be allowed to relocate directly after purchasing?

---

Because that is how it works! Have you even played final fantasy? The 5-minute relocation cooldown is activated upon relocating, not on initial purchase. Changing it to 30 days doesn't change that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Catstab

Because that is how it works! Have you even played final fantasy? The 5-minute relocation cooldown is activated upon relocating, not on initial purchase. Changing it to 30 days doesn't change that.

---

Sure I have. I just haven't played with a house, because I have lost my rounds of placard roulette thusfar. Once more, you are WILDLY missing the point. Relocation should NOT be allowed to cut the timer. They should have to sit and camp with the rest of us schlubs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Venjamin

WILDLY missing the point.

---

This after you read "don't say this isn't how relocation works, because it is" and responded "but that's not how relocation works!"

Just re-read my post above if you want to know my point.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Catstab

This after you read "don't say this isn't how relocation works, because it is" and responded "but that's not how relocation works!"

Just re-read my post above if you want to know my point.

---

Your point is that people without a house should be treated worse than people who already own a house, and is therefore not a good one.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Venjamin

Your point is that people without a house should be treated worse than people who already own a house, and is therefore not a good one.

---

Your point is that you love placard clicking for hours so much, you want to do it every time you move, too. You want to waste hundreds of extra hours of people's time. It's also not a good one.

Improve things for campers, don't create issues for relocators. Relocation should go away. But only because the timer itself is gone. Lengthening the cooldown is only a change for the worse.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Venjamin

Your point is that people without a house should be treated worse than people who already own a house, and is therefore not a good one.

---

There is nothing wrong with relocations. It does not take a house away from those available. The problem is the timer and that needs to be addressed. The long times associated with the cooldown before a house becomes available is ridiculously long. I sincerely doubt SE will remove relocations as an option but the request to include a longer cooldown before a house owner can transfer again is a good one. Multiple transfers in a small space of time needs to be discouraged.