We need another Housing purge

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NotOliverB

Also where is the exploitation when they have lifted the restrictions for a single FC house per account?

---

Did they lift the purchase restriction? There was never an ownership restriction put in place, all the checks are when going to purchase a plot fresh for an fc without a house.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dustytome

Did they lift the purchase restriction? There was never an ownership restriction put in place, all the checks are when going to purchase a plot fresh for an fc without a house.

---

As I've already mentioned in this very thread, all of the temporary changes to housing were in place when they doubled the amount of wards available. You could not purchase more than one FC house per account up until the lifted the restriction for new personal house a week or two later. But please, if you have 3 service accounts and own half a ward, feel free to contradict me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NotOliverB

As I've already mentioned in this very thread, all of the temporary changes to housing were in place when they doubled the amount of wards available. You could not purchase more than one FC house per account up until the lifted the restriction for new personal house a week or two later. But please, if you have 3 service accounts and own half a ward, feel free to contradict me.

---

I was asking if they lifted the restriction you mentioned. If you were purchasing multiple fc plots after restrictions were put in place, I assume you were buying the fcs from other people or purchasing plots on one account without the restrictions and leaving them with characters on an account that would have been restricted from purchasing it themselves? Please don't read the post in a 'gotcha' tone or anything, I'm genuinely curious if they did lift the restrictions or you use the work-around that existed from the beginning of the new purchase rules.

Correct, I did have to transfer ownership from service account #3 to my service account #2, #1 already being loaded with 9 houses when they doubled the amount of wards. That restriction was dropped when they allowed anyone to purchase a house. You can now purchase as many FC houses as you want, just like it's always been aside from those two weeks where people could only relocate or purchase an FC house.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jijifli

Can we not make this a Balmung thread?

Specially when OP is not from Balmung?

---

This is a Balmung problem though, or specifically, a problem with housing on high population servers. The problem has mostly been fixed on medium and small population servers, with only a few more QoL additions (and maybe a few more wards, at least on medium servers) that would make it completely fixed. High population servers however, need something else done that should only apply to those servers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lambdafish

This is a Balmung problem though, or specifically, a problem with housing on high population servers. The problem has mostly been fixed on medium and small population servers, with only a few more QoL additions (and maybe a few more wards, at least on medium servers) that would make it completely fixed. High population servers however, need something else done that should only apply to those servers.

---

On Midgar there are still a few mediums and lots of smalls free for the taking. Every now and then a Large will show up but people often transfer to that plot with in 24 hours.

If they want to fix the FC issue, allow FCs to use apartments for their FC ships or just unlock airships and subs and make them available for all characters, then move airships and subs into the Grand Company Barracks.

So either the mods are watching this thread quite a bit, or someone's been heavy on the reporting. Posts seem to be disappearing :X

@dustytome

Since your post was removed, I'll answer it regardless.

Larges are poorly designed, "expensive" and offer no benefits over a small or medium. I care about my houses, I don't do it exclusively for money. I'm not looking for a face-off with the company as obviously wouldn't have anything to gain from it... or lose, but that's another story. I don't know what you're trying to get at with being transparent. I'm playing by the rules, just like everyone else.

Sounds like we need to purge players not housing

Even after the latest housing rules, the more "tactical" players can easily bypass the new rules by making fake FC's ( <XFHL> <HOME> anyone?) to get each of their members their own house. Yet, SE does nothing about it, and that means people who actually really want a house can't get one cause the fake FC's buy them all. Those 2 FC's I mentioned are rampant house buyers on my server and own a lot of homes in almost all the housing districts. #Totalscum.




/2 cents

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OliverB

@dustytome

Since your post was removed, I'll answer it regardless.

---

Not my post that got removed. :)

The one thing I know about the current housing rules is that it causes some servers to have issues where people claimed to want houses and yet tons of houses are still available.

When I got my house I wanted on so badly that I didn't care what spot it was because I just wanted a house to have a house... and yet folks are upset now not because they don't have housing options but because they don't have the exact house they want... which is silly in my book.

I get that the OP isn't quite the same issue but it does bother me that folks are acting like homes aren't available and they are. Granted on more congested servers it might be more of an issue but I'm on a standard server.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wiccan026

The one thing I know about the current housing rules is that it causes some servers to have issues where people claimed to want houses and yet tons of houses are still available.

When I got my house I wanted on so badly that I didn't care what spot it was because I just wanted a house to have a house... and yet folks are upset now not because they don't have housing options but because they don't have the exact house they want... which is silly in my book.

I get that the OP isn't quite the same issue but it does bother me that folks are acting like homes aren't available and they are. Granted on more congested servers it might be more of an issue but I'm on a standard server.

---

They probably want a specific plot, yet its taken up by some guy who wants to resell it for 300M Gil or by a guy who grandfathered in and owns 10 houses. Who knows.

All I know is, spite all the new rules, if their idea of fixing the issue is to add another ward then fine, sure, it will mean more players will have a chance at a home, but its gonna just keep fanning the flames, and it will eventually burn so hot and so bright it will entrance those wanting a house but cant due this, or that excuse to go on even worse witch hunts for players like OliverB to scream and cry out to put in some new feature or implement that will cost those players all but one house they own. Then more backlash will erupt then it just goes back and forth in circles until it finally settles somewhere and then......




SE gives up and just puts in instanced housing.

/golfclap

TLDR; There are people with more time and money than any country's gdp combined. Sub games is not "immune" againsts P2W, it's just more visible on F2P. Have you no control, young man? /thread

I don't like instanced housing but I'm also aware FC has no value in this game. Some FCs like to take entire ward to have this false sense of community value, same with people with both personals and FC housing. Their choice and they're right because the game allow it. For now, you can ignore it OP. Until SE understand the meaning of the word "massive" in MMO, there's not much players can do. They will always use the server limitation excuse when zone is instanced already.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Okamimaru

Sounds like we need to purge players not housing

---

While I happen to agree sightly with this statement, it really not the player fault that SE built a system that greedy people could take advantage of. All they keep doing is putting stupid band-aid fixes in that aren't actually fixing the problem. In fact, in some cases, it making it worse like as we see here. Greed rear it ugly head and said person so bold to come to this thread and even just put it out there. And why are they so bold? Because they know there a slim chance that SE won't even act upon it or fix the problem.

I agree, anyone who owns more then one house (one fc, one personal) per account should have them taken away. However, does anyone here think that will stop those who got the cash to burn? Nope. They'll just go and buy more service accounts and keep buying up houses. These people are really no better then RMT, maybe even worse to be honest. They buy up as many houses as they can and then throw it in the face of the community like, "HA HA, look what I have. 10 houses and you have none!" And they think their just the coolest people in the world when really just a ---, well you fill in the blanks there. I'll give you hint, starts with a "P" ends with "S".

In any case, unless SE starts acting upon these players like Oliver, they'll be here rearing their ugly heads, waving their so called "achievement" of having 10+ houses. And you know all their really doing is crashing the market board. This I have no doubt of. If you ever wonder about the price of an item going down super fast, just look to the person who owns those 10+ houses. You'll find your answer there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NotOliverB

...I did have to transfer ownership from service account #3 to my service account #2, #1 already being loaded with 9 houses when they doubled the amount of wards. That restriction was dropped when they allowed anyone to purchase a house. You can now purchase as many FC houses as you want...

---

Having read more, I've changed my mind. If you can now purchase multiple FC houses the rules do need to be tightened.
As to the actions described in the first sentence, surely that is an exploit? It goes against the spirit of the restrictions even if it was technically 'legal'.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MaybeOliverB

I couldn't care less what lazy people think about what I do. If they truly wanted a house, they would have one.

---

Are you posting with your own alt characters to give your own posts more likes? Like really?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Freyt

I completely agree with that, however:


Clearly the effort that's been made here has been done with the current changes in mind, with just a single service account.

.

---

You must be daft, they literally just posted with 3 different accounts... Or did you not read the name of the poster at all??

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hamada

They did not put all those restrictions for people to work around them:

---

Nobody is working around anything....you just don't understand the rules.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hamada

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.
It is a CLEAR ToS violation.

---

this has absolutely nothing to do with what is going on and im just baffled you even pasted this lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hamada

You cannot have people owning multiple homes when they make them so limited.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OliverB

I own less than 1% of the houses on Gilgamesh, it's not like I own an entire city-state housing area. There's 7 active players in my FC. I use all my FC houses for an insane amount of tier 3 FC buffs. So yes, I think my actions are justified.

---

FC buffs make no sense, literally. Most of us keen on fc workshops know exactly what you're are doing and why so stop pretending. But yes, I will agree. You don't need 18 houses.. period

Maybe high pop people need to consider low pop servers if they really want a house. There's really nothing to do with a personal house besides play The Sims: FF14 edition and grow krakka roots.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alleo

Are you posting with your own alt characters to give your own posts more likes? Like really?

---

I like how they use the other 2 accounts to cheer themselves on.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Solarra

Having read more, I've changed my mind. If you can now purchase multiple FC houses the rules do need to be tightened.
As to the actions described in the first sentence, surely that is an exploit? It goes against the spirit of the restrictions even if it was technically 'legal'.

---

It is not legal, SE flat out says in the ToS:

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.

---

So they clearly explained here how they broke this:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NotOliverB

Correct, I did have to transfer ownership from service account #3 to my service account #2, #1 already being loaded with 9 houses when they doubled the amount of wards.

---

So by FC ownership transferring, they exploited that "loophole" and SE flat out says not to do so.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pastahnak

Maybe high pop people need to consider low pop servers if they really want a house. There's really nothing to do with a personal house besides play The Sims: FF14 edition and grow krakka roots.

---

Stop with the "high pop" server crap already. All your doing, just like SE, is using it as an excuse. Low pop, High pop, it doesn't matter. It a problem regardless. Even people on low pop servers are doing it, they just aren't noticed like the higher population servers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cylla

Low pop, High pop, it doesn't matter. It a problem regardless. Even people on low pop servers are doing it, they just aren't noticed like the higher population servers.

---

What are you talking about?
It does matter.
There is simply no system can satisfy the Balmung with such monesteric size of population

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Divinemights

There is simply no system can satisfy the Balmung with such monesteric size of population

---

Not true at all. SE didn't have to create housing as a finite source. Instanced housing is a thing in many games, and could work in XIV as well. As it is now, most wards, even on Balmung, are practically dead. What is the point of them? And even with instanced housing, there are ways to make it so you can still have neighbors and a hangout spot for your friends/FC members as seen in other games.

However, SE is just continuing to double-down on their shoddy housing system, and this is the result we get. Sure, the immediate issue of no available housing is currently just an issue for high-population servers, however, it's still a horrible system that should probably be overhauled. This is a subscription game, and it's pathetic that all players cannot have their own housing if they wish.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SinisterJoints

You must be daft, they literally just posted with 3 different accounts... Or did you not read the name of the poster at all??



Nobody is working around anything....you just don't understand the rules.



this has absolutely nothing to do with what is going on and im just baffled you even pasted this lol






FC buffs make no sense, literally. Most of us keen on fc workshops know exactly what you're are doing and why so stop pretending. But yes, I will agree. You don't need 18 houses.. period

---

What people like Hamada fail to understand is the FC leadership system>FC house ownership. FC's need to have a leader even if the player has other characters in other FC's with houses on the same world. The changes that were put in place during the last Ward expansion were temporary and gone now as well. The rules are now back to as they were where every character on your account can buy and own a FC house. But owning 18 houses is just crazy and not needed :P

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Skivvy

Not true at all. SE didn't have to create housing as a finite source. Instanced housing is a thing in many games, and could work in XIV as well. As it is now, most wards, even on Balmung, are practically dead. What is the point of them? And even with instanced housing, there are ways to make it so you can still have neighbors and a hangout spot for your friends/FC members as seen in other games.

However, SE is just continuing to double-down on their shoddy housing system, and this is the result we get. Sure, the immediate issue of no available housing is currently just an issue for high-population servers, however, it's still a horrible system that should probably be overhauled. This is a subscription game, and it's pathetic that all players cannot have their own housing if they wish.

---

Not to mention it's a ticking time bomb if this game ever needs to do server merges. I know that's a long ways off and something no one ever wishes to think about, but what's SE going to do when they have to merge down servers and people happen to own the same plot on the servers affected? Normally I wouldn't be worried, but this game has such an epidemic of spaghetti code that I can easily see that as being a gigantic issue that either will require one person losing out on their plot, both for the sake of 'fairness', or just an entire reset of the wards to avoid the hassle entirely.

Frankly I don't quite understand the aversion to instanced housing. Especially since the one other game I've played that had FF14's system, LoTRO, had all the same problems we're having here. The only difference is that they could have hundreds of wards per housing area with nary an issue. But in fairness to FF14, LoTRO is exceedingly old and not very resource heavy, so that isn't necessarily a point deduction in LoTRO's favor. It still didn't stop wards from essentially being dead there however.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hamada

I like how they use the other 2 accounts to cheer themselves on.
So by FC ownership transferring, they exploited that "loophole" and SE flat out says not to do so.

---

Sorry to shatter your little dream, but I was guided here by friends. They most likely upvoted my posts. I can start upvoting myself if you want, or I can even go back and upvote the posts you think I upvoted myself.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Divinemights

What are you talking about?
It does matter.
There is simply no system can satisfy the Balmung with such monesteric size of population

---

The TC and everything being referenced in this thread has nothing to do with balmung. Why do you keep bringing that up? Cylla had a perfectly fitting comment, so I got no clue what you are trying to get at.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NanaWiloh

What people like Hamada fail to understand is the FC leadership system>FC house ownership. FC's need to have a leader even if the player has other characters in other FC's with houses on the same world. The changes that were put in place during the last Ward expansion were temporary and gone now as well. The rules are now back to as they were where every character on your account can buy and own a FC house. But owning 18 houses is just crazy and not needed :P

---

What you fail to understand is that there is a person posting here explaining how they exploited the system while under those restrictions. They obtained 7 houses unfairly because of this. They posted here explaining how they unfairly gained 7 houses with the restriction by having account 3 buy the FC house, then changing the leadership to each alt on account 2. Because 9 houses was gained prior to the patch, and the second account can have 2 legitimately, that leaves 7 houses gained due to breaking ToS guideline 2.1. The post they made in this thread, post number 84, is proof of that violation. Really shocked seeing someone post how they did a game exploit on official forums, thought I saw everything.

I am confused what rule is being broken here? I do not see it. Honestly what I see is someone using multiple accounts to gain an advantage which has always been a thing in MMO'S

Housing purge... purge... The Purge.... Just think of all the good the Purge does... wow, did my mind go places.

Imagine if they solved housing crisis via PVP… defend your house or loose it... It could be the new PVP mode!

Just kidding... just kidding /humor

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Awha

I am confused what rule is being broken here? I do not see it. Honestly what I see is someone using multiple accounts to gain an advantage which has always been a thing in MMO'S

---

http://support.na.square-enix.com/ru...2&tag=users_en
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.

I will explain this again, and you can look back on post 84 of this thread. They had to buy houses on account 3 for a FC, transfer that FC to account 2 to an alt. Once that was done, they used account 3 to buy a house for a different FC they owned, and transferred it over account 2. They did this to get around the restriction SE had in place. So because they where exploiting a loophole, it breaks 2.1 of the tos, what I quoted here. Why is this hard to understand? They gain 7 houses using this loophole, not all 18 are in violation but doing that act for those 7 are. (Based on what they said in this thread anyway, if we assume everything that is stated as fact)

Having more then one account for an advantage is not what I am commenting on, I am commenting how they exploited the game and explained on the OF in this very thread how they went about doing that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hamada

I have no idea what I’m talking about

---

Hilarious how you come up with scenarios. You have no idea about my previous distribution of grandfathered houses and how many houses I had in my possession when the restriction was ongoing. But please, keep on making hypothetical scenarios, it’s good entertainment.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hamada

What you fail to understand is that there is a person posting here explaining how they exploited the system while under those restrictions. They obtained 7 houses unfairly because of this. They posted here explaining how they unfairly gained 7 houses with the restriction by having account 3 buy the FC house, then changing the leadership to each alt on account 2. Because 9 houses was gained prior to the patch, and the second account can have 2 legitimately, that leaves 7 houses gained due to breaking ToS guideline 2.1. The post they made in this thread, post number 84, is proof of that violation. Really shocked seeing someone post how they did a game exploit on official forums, thought I saw everything.

---

FC system > Housing System what part of that dont you get. There is no rule against Buying a FC house passing leadership leaving then starting a new FC and getting a new house. If this was the case so many players would be in violation of the TOS it would not even be funny.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OliverB

Hilarious how you come up with scenarios. You have no idea about my previous distribution of grandfathered houses and how many houses I had in my possession when the restriction was ongoing. But please, keep on making hypothetical scenarios, it’s good entertainment.

---

You said it right here:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NotOliverB

Correct, I did have to transfer ownership from service account #3 to my service account #2, #1 already being loaded with 9 houses when they doubled the amount of wards. That restriction was dropped when they allowed anyone to purchase a house. You can now purchase as many FC houses as you want, just like it's always been aside from those two weeks where people could only relocate or purchase an FC house.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hamada

You said it right here:

---

Gottem.

Seriously though, if you are going to break the ToS, coming to the forums and bragging about it is a really stupid move. I hope the end result is a ban of at least 45 days so that housing demolition kicks in.

The Devs need to treat this kind of thing seriously, housing is very delicate right now, it's good for some servers, and not for others, and people gaming the system should be appropriately dealt with

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Divinemights

What are you talking about?
It does matter.
There is simply no system can satisfy the Balmung with such monesteric size of population

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cylla

Stop with the "high pop" server crap already. All your doing, just like SE, is using it as an excuse. Low pop, High pop, it doesn't matter. It a problem regardless. Even people on low pop servers are doing it, they just aren't noticed like the higher population servers.

---

Please read. Thanks.

*edit - Let not go there with the whole Balmung thing as if I don't know what going on there. I moved off Balmung about two weeks ago. It isn't just Balmung suffering, so let just stop there and agree that it a problem for every server be it low or high pop.

The default housing rules are as follows. Every character on your account no matter what world they are on. Are allowed to own 1 FC house either by being a FC leader or Member of a FC that already owns a house. The temporary rule change set it so that characters on the same account and world could not PURCHASE a FC house while one of them was part of a FC that owned a house. It did not repeat did not change the ownership rule!! A player with 1 account buying multiple FC homes on the same account all at the same time. While retaining ownership on that account during the temp rules would have been a TOS violation. A player using 2 accounts is not cause the accounts are treated as two seperate players.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NanaWiloh

A player using 2 accounts is not cause the accounts are treated as two seperate players.

---

That may depend on the GM, the post history on this thread indicates that it is one person. Had they kept quiet then maybe you would be right, but by making lots of noise about what they have done, I don't think a GM could turn around and say that it is two people, the evidence is there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lambdafish

That may depend on the GM, the post history on this thread indicates that it is one person. Had they kept quiet then maybe you would be right, but by making lots of noise about what they have done, I don't think a GM could turn around and say that it is two people, the evidence is there.

---

But the question is, will they do something about it or just turn the other way like normal and pretend they didn't see anything?
This isn't the first time it happened. Think about a year ago someone brought up an issue where in two people bought a whole ward. As far as I'm aware, those two people still have that ward claimed to themselves.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lambdafish

That may depend on the GM, the post history on this thread indicates that it is one person. Had they kept quiet then maybe you would be right, but by making lots of noise about what they have done, I don't think a GM could turn around and say that it is two people, the evidence is there.

---

The Temp rule was per account. Coming in now and saying it applies too people with multiple accounts and punishing them after the fact would look bad on SE. As stated before its not against the rules for the leader of FC with a house to pass leadership leave start a new FC and get a new FC house. If that was the case a lot of players would be in violation of the TOS mulitple accounts or not.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cylla

But the question is, will they do something about it or just turn the other way like normal and pretend they didn't see anything?
This isn't the first time it happened. Think about a year ago someone brought up an issue where in two people bought a whole ward. As far as I'm aware, those two people still have that ward claimed to themselves.

---

That was different, there was no restrictions in place then. With this, they flat out explained how they got around the making purchases of FC houses when it was restricted to one FC house per account. Because they kept feeding FC houses to one account, being owned by 2 people or 1 does not matter, they where clearly bypassing a restriction, thus violating 2.1. Also as far as I am aware, they never came to the OF explaining how they bypassed or exploited some loophole.