Fake FCs' Housing Abuse

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gravy9

Like do you bother to read or click the links?

How are character at level one warrior, as their only job, going to invest time in a the FC workshop

Unless there some new mythical PTW access feature you can use them without having any crafter leveled.

As for the temporary delay of auto demolition from SE. It is what it is. After the delay went right back to how it was. Just be thankful you had enough income to pay for a sub still

---

Only the fabrication station requires DoH classes to be leveled. Anyone can buy airship and submersible parts off the MB to run airship and submersible voyages. Anyone can plant seeds if they have the seeds and soil.

No PTW needed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LaylaTsarra

They are not going to kick people (take away their properties) with FC's regardless of size. There were no stipulations other than needing 4 members to start one and being a certain rank in GC in order to purchase a property. The take away crowd isn't going to win this one. If there are new rules implemented it will affect new FC's after the date of the new rule implementation and i highly doubt they'll change them.

What they do need to fix however is the ownership issue where ONLY one alt/character can be leader of a FC per server. That is the crux of the problem with people owning multiple FC's.

And frankly I'd have no problem with those with alts who all own multiple FC's on the same server and who have bypassed the intent of the rules to actually have to transfer ownership or have them taken away.

---

The take away crowd always kinda scare me tbh, there’s so many of them asking, I’m always a bit afraid SE would cave in.

And I 100% agree there’s should be restrictions of how many alt/characters can be FC leaders on one server!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Big_Bap

Yeah, I guess you don't know a thing about FC workshops. Funny you're complaining about someone who is more invested in this game than the hundreds who didn't care to enter their house in nearly a whole year. Educate yourself before calling someone a "bot".

---

Still obsessed with workshops...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Drkdays

Still obsessed with workshops...

---

Relevant as ever baby. Catch up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Big_Bap

Relevant as ever baby. Catch up.

---

No it's not...

Shell FCs and workshops uses are not the same topic, you dorrito. You can have one without the other. FCs housing abuse just makes it, and many OTHER things easier to use in abundance.

What is it you like to say?

Educate yourself.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Drkdays

No it's not...

Shell FCs and workshops uses are not the same topic, you dorrito. You can have one without the other. FCs housing abuse just makes it, and many OTHER things easier to use in abundance.

What is it you like to say?

Educate yourself.

---

You are hilarious, as always.

First off, there is no such thing as "FC housing abuse", just your own projection of what is acceptable and what isn't. If you want to die on that hill, go ahead and state your case, I'll gladly provide GM discussions about the topic.

Second, so-called "shell FCs" are exactly what players who run fleets end up using. But yes, obviously, not every "Shell FC" out there is used for workshop purposes. What you have obviously failed to notice is that the the OP is talking about houses that follow the same pattern fleet owners use. Let's look into it since you don't know much about it.

Leaders look identical: Check
Leaders are low level: Check
Leaders follow a naming convention: Check
FC names follow a naming convention: Check
FC tags follow a naming convention: Check
FC foundations are within the same timeframe: Check
Omnicrafter present: Check
Supplemental alts for FC transfers of bound items/inventory management: Check
Houses are next to each other for ease of convenience when FC hopping: Check
Houses are identical: Check
Houses are primarily/exclusively built on small plots: Check
More than 8 houses, which implies more than 1 account are being used: Check

You go and find me an example that meets the criteria above that doesn't qualify as a player or a group of players who isn't/are not heavily invested in workshop related content. Better yet, you go and ask the very people who are into that sort of gameplay if that looks like someone who's running a fleet or not: https://discord.gg/kUWXPrT

I know you won't even ask, because you prefer to be upset at the world for playing differently than you do, but you can't say I didn't try :)

Since you are on Gilgamesh, would you like to talk about the metrics when it comes to "Shell FCs" that are not used for workshops?

Another long pointless list.

It's GASLIGHTING at it's worst.

SE needs to redefine FC standards to match their own rules. One player should not be able to own a whole ward or more, FOR ANY REASON.

That's the real issue and has been for YEARS, no matter how you may defend how a player is following the rules,

the rules themselves are the problem.

You might disagree, but unknowable amounts of protests against the current system disagree with you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Drkdays

Another long pointless list.

It's GASLIGHTING at it's worst.

SE needs to redefine FC standards to match their own rules. One player should not be able to own a whole ward or more, FOR ANY REASON.

That's the real issue and has been for YEARS, no matter how you may defend how a player is following the rules,

the rules themselves are the problem.

You might disagree, but unknowable amounts of protests against the current system disagree with you.

---

Once again you deliver.... nothing. I didn't expect any less from you /clap

You tried to be a smart*** without even looking at what the OP brought up and obviously, you're gonna cry about gaslighting. Textbook comedy right there. Keep deflecting about what is right and what is wrong.


EDIT: Btw, "she'll FCs" with 1 member represent 2.1% of all available plots: JP 2.5% / NA 1.7% / EU 2.1%

Imagine literally screaming about 2% of homeowners, when the majority are actively using their house, instead of complaining about the thousands of players who sit on empty personal houses. #logic

It's not even completely about usage, though that's a big part of it.

SE has noted that there is a problem with the number of houses vs players.

SE has tried to restrict the number of houses a player can have per account.

SE fails to modify FC housing acquisition, so the above two notes aren't adequately being handled.

A greedy player can, and does still have an unlimited access to more housing.

PROBLEM DETECTED.

I believe the OP was talking about shell FCs taking up large numbers of plots. Not the virtues of having multiple workshops, or even if said FC are using them for that.

Don't change the subject and claim others are wrong about that subject, cause you know what that is?

Hint, starts with being full of gas.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Drkdays

It's not even completely about usage, though that's a big part of it.

---

I don't see you complaining, why?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Drkdays

SE has noted that there is a problem with the number of houses vs players.

---

Yeah, that's why it's one personal house per server. So why are you not complaining about personal housing when nothing prevents a player from walking up and buy as many FC houses they want? You're probably gonna reply with the outdated lodestone guide, because you never tried to purchase multiple houses. ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Drkdays

SE has tried to restrict the number of houses a player can have per account.

---

Personal houses, yes. Restrictions on FC housing lasted a whole two weeks ever since housing came out in 2013...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Drkdays

SE fails to modify FC housing acquisition, so the above two notes aren't adequately being handled.

---

Maybe it's because it's a non issue? Read that again, you need it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Drkdays

A greedy player can, and does still have an unlimited access to more housing.

---

Greed is subjective. Running 40 workshops isn't as greedy as holding on to a personal house that isn't being used.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Drkdays

PROBLEM DETECTED.

---

Your logic.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Drkdays

I believe the OP was talking about shell FCs taking up large numbers of plots. Not the virtues of having multiple workshops, or even if said FC are using them for that.

---

Yeah, because the OP is oblivious as to how workshops work in this game. That should have been very clear by now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Drkdays

Don't change the subject and claim others are wrong about that subject, cause you know what that is?

---

You're the one who refuses to look at factual evidence and logic. What about you stop bringing up your emotions into this discussion. I know it might be difficult because you have no expertise on the subject, but you could try... or just admit you are wrong.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Drkdays

Hint, starts with being full of gas.

---

Nominal? Try again.

EDIT: You should read this: https://forum.square-enix.com/ffxiv/threads/428847

People like you are repeatedly getting slammed on the other side of the Pacific.

Another long pointless list. Ya, it's my logic. Oh, and that book-long list of other forums about the same subject that you continue to clog with YOUR logic (hypocritical) every time they pop up.

You are not a reliable source of information, bud, no matter how much you think you are and no matter how often you demean everyone who disagrees with you.

I say you are wrong because everything you say is obviously self-interested. You make that clear as day just with your little house symbol at that bottom.

It might as well be your corporate logo. Go sell your falsehoods elsewhere.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Drkdays

Another long pointless list. Ya, it's my logic. Oh, and that book-long list of other forums about the same subject that you continue to clog with YOUR logic (hypocritical) every time they pop up.

You are not a reliable source of information, bud, no matter how much you think you are and no matter how what often you demean everyone who disagrees with you.

I say you are wrong because everything you say is obviously self-interested. You make that clear as day just with your little house symbol at that bottom.

It might as well be your corporate logo. Go sell your falsehoods elsewhere.

---

At least you have the merit of being consistent in being wrong and uninformed. If I'm not a reliable source of information, what is the Lodestone then? I dare you to find inaccuracies in the data I have gathered. But once again, I know you inside out and you won't do it because you couldn't bear to be wrong about a topic. Not that you really care about anything but your fragile feelings anyway. What's going to be your next take after the Lodestone being an unreliable source of information? The Earth's flat? ;)

Lol, I like how you disprove yourself instantly. You say you provide good information in one sentence then claim to know everything about me in the next. You don't know me and I don't know you.

But what I do know is that the housing situation has been a problem for years and that the only people to defend it are the ones who are benefiting from it. Like people who own an entire ward and who delight in telling people that it's all thanks to the current housing rules.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Drkdays

Lol, I like how you disprove yourself instantly. You say you provide good information in one sentence then claim to know everything about me in the next. You don't know me and I don't know you.

---

Disprove? You cannot accept that you are wrong about a topic you barely understand. You've done so repeatedly and have made no effort to provide any rational and logical evidence to back your claims. You won't even comment on issues that are unrelated to FC housing because it would put you in a bad spot (not that you're doing great in that department anyway). I know exactly what you are.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Drkdays

But what I do know is that the housing situation has been a problem for years and that the only people to defend it are the ones who are benefiting from it. Like people who own an entire ward and who delight in telling people that it's all thanks to the current housing rules.

---

Who is defending the housing situation? Show me posts on here where players fully admit that the housing situation is perfect. Good luck trying to put the spotlight on me, my list of issues with the housing system is pretty lengthy. I have to concede though, you are right about not knowing who I am... I don't even own an entire ward. The hole you are digging is truly bottomless.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Big_Bap

You ignore the most obvious way to obtain an FC house... purchase one off someone.

Players purposely chose to ignore the easiest and safest option. Hard to have sympathy for someone when they decided to pick the worst option available to them.

---

This you? These are your quotes supporting the current system by buying FCs.

This is just a tiny sample, and one of the main reasons why shell FCs are abusive. This option undermines everything about the current requirement to camp plots. People are making big money by grabbing FCs with nothing alts to hold til a buyer is found while hiding their true intentions behind "it's for a workshop, bruh."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Drkdays

This you? These are your quotes supporting the current system

---

How I am supporting the current system in that post? I'm telling someone there's a better alternative to obtaining an FC house over wasting your time camping with a bunch of other people.

I'll make your life easier since you're never gonna find a post where I fully endorse the current system:

-Houses are way too cheap
-Personal housing should have never been mixed with FC housing
-Personal housing requirements are too low
-Free Company housing requirements are too low
-The period of time before an estate is considered as abandoned and relinquished is way too generous
-Suspending the demolition timer under any circumstances, other than ones that are directly affecting SE and their infrastructure, is detrimental


It's like you're begging to be consistently wrong... are you ok?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Big_Bap

The houses that can be considered as grandfathered since 4.2, minus the first two weeks, are personal houses. As of today, the only thing that restricts the amount of FC houses a player can purchase is the amount of characters on a single service account (despite what the housing guide tells you).

These houses bring in well over 200m per week with very minimal effort. Mostly through workshops yes, but they also allow us to farm a ridiculous amount of shards through gardening and being able to prime over 50 tier 3 FC buffs per week, which is also a major benefit when 99% of the FCs out there can only get 2-3 per week at most.

---

FC requirements are too low, huh? This you, too? You don't seem to mind the lack of requirements here.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Drkdays

FC requirements are too low, huh? This you, too?

---

Where am I even talking about FC requirements in there? I know I shouldn't laugh, but it feels like you are losing grip with reality.

Being able to purchase a FC house at rank 6 is too low. Just like being lvl 50 and having the ability to purchase a personal house. Requirements are outdated and you need immediate help.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Drkdays

You don't seem to mind the lack of requirements here.

---

Its's not very challenging when you can level an FC from rank 1 to rank 6 under two minutes. Unlike you, I don't mind a good challenge. I think I can hear your violin from over here.


EDIT: Pretty funny how you keep throwing those posts at me. If you didn't notice, I don't mind defending what I write. Sadly, I can't say the same for you. How mentally exhausting is it when you have to a dodge every single question huh?

"The only thing that restricts the amount of FC houses a player can purchase is the amount of characters on a single service account."

In other words, you say you can buy as many FC houses as you want with no other restrictions on as many characters as you can create.

That's
You
Talking
About
Requirements

Or lack thereof that allow you to create shell FC.

And the second paragraph is you doing just that.
Sounds pretty supportive to me.
You sure are fun to quote.

This lack of requirements is what needs to be changed. Ty, and goodnight.

I think it's pretty clear that you guys aren't going to agree, so it's probably time to move on.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lothian

I think it's pretty clear that you guys aren't going to agree, so it's probably time to move on.

---

I wish that were possible, honestly.

I just can't stand rude players, those who argue against fixing what's broken about housing, or those who flaunt having what others don't.

Yeah, I'm on your side in that I think this guy is rude. I don't really have enough information to disagree with either of your perspectives, but I wouldn't bother arguing with someone who obviously isn't open to disagreement, and will condescend and insult anyone who doesn't agree. So, again, better to move on.

Alright, so I'd need to see how the Auto-Demolition timer works. AFAIK, the timer checks if the players enters his house and reverts back to 0, starting the whole counter from scratch.

What if an FC under minimal player count doesn't reset the counter at all? Okay, that would be the standard demo timer would kill single person FC houses, but that would mean you'd just get 5 or so bots to rotate around your shell FC and reset the timer every month or so, annoying but easy to do, if not eminently flagable.

But... What if the timer didn't revert to 0 even IF the FC had more than 6 players but instead it just shaved off some time off the demo counter? You don't need to stop counting compleyely, right? So lets talk amounts.

What if once a day, every day, you shave 36 hours out of the demolition using the same prompt that would stop the timer? You would easily be able to keep it at 0 if you just have the required members on the FC every day to shave it down, especially if any FC member going into the house counted as an auto-demo slower. But if you didn't had the ammount, you'd need to fill your FC, every day, to slow down the auto-demo timer by a bit, and then empty it out again to fill another possible shell or do whatever those cheaters do with those accounts. And maybe an FC recruiting the same members day in and day out might raise a couple of eyebrows.

This shouldn't be impossible to implement, check if the FC is over the minimum players to own an FC house (And I'd argue make the minimum more like 8 or 10 players but this goes beyond my point) and if it doesn't, don't stop the demolition timer. Even if it DOES, only stop it by a bit instead of reverting back to 0. You already have to visit your FC house every day to refresh Company Buffs and the like so normal FCs shouldn't even notice the change (Even a completely passive FC that just likes to spend money and decorate their houses all day.)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Catstab

So how does this proposed system work?

Option A) Member number 4 leaves. The house demolishes immediately. This means that regular members can destroy the FC house by leaving in the right circumstances. Any officer who can boot members now also has permission to destroy the FC house. FC splits would commonly result in the house being demolished, and both leftover FCs having to re-purchase.

Option B) Member number 4 attempts to leave the FC. The game says "You may not leave <Free Company> until more members have joined."

Option C) something else

---

I think a good way to fix this, would be to tighten the requirements for being granted any real estate. For example, medium and large houses should be exclusively for FC's with a member count of 50+ for medium, and 100+ for large. If the member count drops below those numbers, the demolish timer starts ticking (timer might need adjustments for this). Also, the FC level would need to be alot higher in order to purchase a House (like lv15-20).

You probably ask "why the harsh requirements?". The reason is simple, not only would this strongly discourage Botters from buying those Houses (since it would require them to fill the entire memberlist with dummies in order to keep the thing, which then could easily be identified and banned by a GM), it would also completely destroy any plans from people which illegally try to sell their houses to other players at ridiciolous prices or just keep a low membercount on a large house just for extra storage space.

As for small houses, FC's at level 10+ and a membercount of 10 or more should be allowed to bypass the timer which starts ticking when plot becomes avaiable.

As for how exactly "bypassing the timer" would work, it could be something similar to a petition sheet item(can be bought at the GC counter for alot of seals) and would require the minimum amount of players to "sign" it, of which, logically, only FC members with the granted rights, can sign.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Anhra

member count... and 100+ for large.

---

lol no.

Under this proposed change, people are making and selling their alts as house batteries. "Full account owner offering 7 alts to sit in your FC so you can buy/keep a large. 7m gil per year"

Do people just post suggestions without thinking about them for more than 2 seconds?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Catstab

lol no.

Under this proposed change, people are making and selling their alts as house batteries. "Full account owner offering 7 alts to sit in your FC so you can buy/keep a large. 7m gil per year"

Do people just post suggestions without thinking about them for more than 2 seconds?

---

How would you even enforce said contract? What's stopping me from just dropping out of the FC after being paid? Also, just 7mil for an entire year worth of attention and will you really keep track of this? Also, you can do this all of once, are you really willing to increase your subscription rate to make a single gil transaction? And even if you did and had 7 accounts sitting on a 100-man fc, that would be one huge ammount of alt accounts being used.

Are YOU sure you thought about this for more than 2 seconds?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Anhra

I think a good way to fix this, would be to tighten the requirements for being granted any real estate. For example, medium and large houses should be exclusively for FC's with a member count of 50+ for medium, and 100+ for large. If the member count drops below those numbers, the demolish timer starts ticking (timer might need adjustments for this). Also, the FC level would need to be alot higher in order to purchase a House (like lv15-20).

---

FCs with large and medium houses (or who want to get one) would simply start mass inviting random players and stop culling the ones who go inactive instead of clearing them from their rosters like many currently do.

FC level wouldn't be barrier to those abusing the system, who likely know a lot more about how to rank up a FC quickly than members of a normal social FC do. Do you even know how a FC gains ranks and the most efficient ways of getting them? Ask most players and they'll reply "do quests", which is actually one of the least efficient ways to gain ranks.

There's also no reason to limit mediums and larges to FCs only. Any size house can have an aetherial wheel stand, workshop and private chambers, the only FC specific content in housing. I know of smaller FCs who have more active members online on a regular basis than some of the huge FCs out there. It's not hard to View Company Info for a players to see how many players are online in their FC.

I dislike the abuse of FCs by solo players to get additional housing in a system where houses are a limited resource but the last thing I want to do is see housing become the incentive for FCs to end up like the cesspool guilds of WoW during Cataclysm when the guild perk/level system was introduced. A big FC is not automatically a better FC. A big member count is more often than not solely to boost the FC leader's ego while the general membership gets neglected.

We're right back to square one. If SE would use a housing system that accommodated every player who wanted a house, discussions like these would be unnecessary because the loopholes some individual players use to obtain more housing than the published rules allow wouldn't impede another player's ability to get a house. For that matter, every player who wanted to have multiple houses could do it so there was no special snowflake status for any player when it came to housing.

ESO is an excellent example for what a housing system should offer all players. Imagine what an amazing gil sink it would make for this game if every player could own multiple houses if they wanted, much better than the ugly gold mount reskins are accomplishing as a gil sink.

The FC system in general needs a review but dreaming up more ways to complicate a system that shouldn't need to be complicated in the first place isn't accomplishing anything.

I sort of agree with Housing Auctions acting as Gil Sinks. BUT, it would essentially just be an An-Cap free market nightmare, pretty much like house flippers were. I actually like the idea of making housing the place where you go to burn gil like it was going to fly you to the moon, but you'd also need a very good regulator so that the value of a house doesn't skyrocket so high as to make an RMT gil seller cream his pants.

Instance housing would just increase Player Save File size They're rationing Armory Chest slots by giving the Belt Slot spaces to Main Weapon and Rings, what makes you think it is a good idea to shove an entire house worth of items and respective (Possibly gliched) positions in there? The save file for houses are on the wards, not on the player characters. And finally just giving more houses by way of more wards solves the issue for all of 2 hours before it's absolutely all taken and we're back to Status Quo. This is why Status Quo needs to be improved. This is why single-player FCs only so a player can have his second or third Large House is a disgrace. And this is why the random timer needs to die.

Please before anyone else posts a suggestion on how to fix housing take a step back. Take a look at all the flaws and loop holes your idea may have and how it could possibily be taken advantage of. A Housing fix should fix the issue of getting a house for Honest players while making it hard for dishonest players to keep or get more. If a fix punishes Honest players by making it harder to keep a house or harder to obtain one, then its not a GOOD FIX to the problem.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ReiganCross

Instance housing would just increase Player Save File size They're rationing Armory Chest slots by giving the Belt Slot spaces to Main Weapon and Rings, what makes you think it is a good idea to shove an entire house worth of items and respective (Possibly gliched) positions in there? The save file for houses are on the wards, not on the player characters. And finally just giving more houses by way of more wards solves the issue for all of 2 hours before it's absolutely all taken and we're back to Status Quo. This is why Status Quo needs to be improved. This is why single-player FCs only so a player can have his second or third Large House is a disgrace. And this is why the random timer needs to die.

---

Items placed/stored in housing aren't handled any different for apartments than they are for houses. The items are part of the apartment's inventory, not the character's. That inventory data doesn't move around with the character as they go from zone to zone (which is what SE struggles with).

It would be nice to see SE enforce their published rules regarding multiple house ownership per account. It's puzzling why they don't considering how many of those players with multiple FC houses are clearly only doing it to earn personal gil instead of actually running active free companies.

The random timer is the only thing giving players a chance to be able to directly buy a house without having to pay crazy fees to a flipper. Remove the random timer and flippers go back to dominating house sales just as they did prior to 4.2. The timer system could stand improvements but it's a necessary evil as long as the wards are the only way to get a house.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NanaWiloh

Please before anyone else posts a suggestion on how to fix housing take a step back. Take a look at all the flaws and loop holes your idea may have and how it could possibily be taken advantage of. A Housing fix should fix the issue of getting a house for Honest players while making it hard for dishonest players to keep or get more. If a fix punishes Honest players by making it harder to keep a house or harder to obtain one, then its not a GOOD FIX to the problem.

---

It's good to go ahead and post a new idea. Sometimes those flaws only become apparent in discussion with others who take a different approach or have different experience from you.

But players should take a moment to search the forums to see if their idea is truly new. Too many separate "I have a great new idea - let's have a lottery!" threads have been started over the past 4 years because the poster didn't bother to search. If I do a search using the keyword lottery in the Housing forum, I get over 100 search results. It's not a new idea, the pros and cons have been debated many times over. Another thread is not going to accomplish anything.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ReiganCross

Are YOU sure you thought about this for more than 2 seconds?

---

100%, friend. Thanks for asking.

So I, like many players, pay for more than a month at a time, so I'm a full sub and I can fit up to 7 alts on my account per server.

The proposed change means a head-count requirement for FC housing, similar in concept to the head count requirement for FC forming.

At present, people offer a one-time fee to sign FC charters on frequent occasion. So if alts are for sale to form FCs, alts would be for sale to house them in larges. Hopefully that makes sense.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Catstab

100%, friend. Thanks for asking.

So I, like many players, pay for more than a month at a time, so I'm a full sub and I can fit up to 7 alts on my account per server.

The proposed change means a head-count requirement for FC housing, similar in concept to the head count requirement for FC forming.

At present, people offer a one-time fee to sign FC charters on frequent occasion. So if alts are for sale to form FCs, alts would be for sale to house them in larges. Hopefully that makes sense.

---

To expand on what Catstab said, in case it's unclear: people would just create dummy alts they never intend to play and let them sit and rot in the FC of someone who wants to play solo. And that's only if someone's own alts didn't count towards the 4 character requirement, which they do.

Option C can be a 30-45 day timer to replace member 4 in order to preserve the house

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Warghoul570

Option C can be a 30-45 day timer to replace member 4 in order to preserve the house

---

It wouldn't fix anything when you can just make alts to join the FC.

Require 6 players from 6 different accounts for house to stay active and it will go into demolition mode... or put on tax on FC houses like 2millions per month, which means more people would eb better in one, and with that involve a player tax of coin drops like 5% or something that will stack up, untill fulfilling the requirements, also would promote more active FCs.

That would probably punish more people than you think.

I admit to wanting to create a FC just for myself, no alts, no friends, and get a single house, finally, to be that FC house, because it has things not available for a private house. I don't want 2 houses, I just want the 1. Eventually.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Themarvin

Require 6 players from 6 different accounts for house to stay active and it will go into demolition mode... or put on tax on FC houses like 2millions per month, which means more people would eb better in one, and with that involve a player tax of coin drops like 5% or something that will stack up, untill fulfilling the requirements, also would promote more active FCs.

---

So... FCs with 5 or 4 players are SOL? FCs that are small friend groups exist, dude.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Themarvin

Require 6 players from 6 different accounts for house to stay active and it will go into demolition mode... or put on tax on FC houses like 2millions per month, which means more people would eb better in one, and with that involve a player tax of coin drops like 5% or something that will stack up, untill fulfilling the requirements, also would promote more active FCs.

---

1. They can't even figure out how to let you mail your own alts or visit another one of your own character's personal house, they won't be able to sort out '6 different accounts'. And even then, people would just pay or ask for friend alts to bloat their fc artificially.
2. Taxes are dumb and also bad. There are tons of people that bust their cheeks affording so much as a small house and they'd never be able to handle upkeep. This doesn't mean they somehow don't deesrve a house.
3. Taxing player coin drops isn't a system that exists either, and it seems very silly in general. Far too complicated just to stop less than solo fcs from existing. And even then less than 5% of housing is owned by FCs.

These suggestions aren't even worth the effort of implementing as FCs aren't the cause for housing deficit anyway, as less than 30% of all houses are owned by FCs in general.

Easiest way to solve this is to require that FCs cannot keep housing unless they have at least four active subscriptions associated with the FC. Either way, people are still going to find loopholes in whatever gets implemented and continue to exploit that...

That said, I'm still in favor of adding additional requirements that are generally invisible to an active FC because the entire thing with shell FCs needs to go away.