Can I report people for buying multiple houses?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alaeacus

On this particular point, I think SE needs to get their priorities straight. They are worried about offending the four people in the datacenter who are buying all properties in a single neighborhood and just sitting on them, at the expense of the thousands other players.

---

My general opinion about this is that as long as housing is a limited resource then the amount of houses an account can have should be much more strictly regulated, and that all players should be subject to the same restrictions regardless of time of purchase.

Grandfathering is a nice idea but the fact remains that in some cases this means a tiny amount of players own enough houses that could be used by 100+ players in just the wards they personally occupy. Never mind adding the entire effect of all of these hoarders together. I don't need to explain why this is a problem. It has been done to death in this forum. Some agree that it's unfair and that it should be changed, and some disagree.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alaeacus

I honestly don't think these people deserve reimbursement, as they KNOW the intention Devs have for the housing system, and they've made a conscious choice to find work-arounds/exploits to go against that intention.

---

While I don't hold a favourable opinion of these players, the fact remains that they did pay for their houses so if they're taken away they should get a refund. In addition to this they should be allowed to choose what they are going to keep instead of having things randomly taken away or have everything taken away.

But really what I want is proper instanced housing so everyone can do anything they want with as many houses as they desire. But that's an impossible dream. SE are clearly determined to hang on the current system. Which is very disappointing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alaeacus

I respect your position. But this isn't the U.S. Bill of Rights here. Rules change all the time, whether anyone was following them correctly or not. Games change their systems and sometimes it is a detriment to people who were following the rules. It isn't a punishment, even if you come out on the losing end. This happens every single day. When SE retired Diadem, it was not a punishment. It was an improvement. I KNOW there are people who saw it initially as a detriment and groaned that they couldn't get the achievements anymore, but they've already gotten over it. Look at all the decisions surrounding Blue Mage. Some people like them, some people don't. You cannot please everyone, You MUST make decisions that improve the game for the greater population, even if it is technically at the expense of a few.

---

From SE:

Effective in Feb 01, 2020, all current house plots will be reclaim by the system and need to be reclaim again. The player that claimed the plot can only keep for 30 days. It is because we MUST make decisions that improve the game for the greater population, even if it is technically at the expense of a few.

The number of players without a house is much greater than those who have one.
We MUST make decisions that improve the game for the greater population, even if it is technically at the expense of a few. Right?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Divinemights

From SE:

Effective in Feb 01, 2020, all current house plots will be reclaim by the system and need to be reclaim again. The player that claimed the plot can only keep for 30 days. It is because we MUST make decisions that improve the game for the greater population, even if it is technically at the expense of a few.

The number of players without a house is much greater than those who have one.
We MUST make decisions that improve the game for the greater population, even if it is technically at the expense of a few. Right?

---

Hyperbolic Fallacy. Terrible argument. "Taking all houses away from everyone who followed the rules all at once is horrible, therefore we should never take a single house away from any single person for any circumstances (even those people who are now in violation of new rules)." That's basically what you just said.

Nobody argued for such a drastic decision. Even my proposal sought appeasement, discussion, and middle ground. You are arguing against nobody.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Penthea

While I don't hold a favourable opinion of these players, the fact remains that they did pay for their houses so if they're taken away they should get a refund. In addition to this they should be allowed to choose what they are going to keep instead of having things randomly taken away or have everything taken away.

---

Sure, I can see your point. On the other hand, SE doesn't fully reimburse people who lose their house completely due to inactivity, even if that inactivity wasn't the fault of the player. Sooo ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ The world is a harsh place. Where do we draw the line?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alaeacus

Sure, I can see your point. On the other hand, SE doesn't fully reimburse people who lose their house completely due to inactivity, even if that inactivity wasn't the fault of the player. Sooo ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ The world is a harsh place. Where do we draw the line?

---

We draw the line at whether they're inactive or active. This is why active players would get a full refund, as well as choosing what they want to keep. I'm surprised you didn't see this. Everyone else likely would simply be subject to demolition, given that's what happens when you're inactive for long enough.

I get that you don't like these people, I don't either, but you seem to be a bit too interested in punishing them. We need a fair housing system, and a fair system would do the above.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alaeacus

Hyperbolic Fallacy. Terrible argument. "Taking all houses away from everyone who followed the rules all at once is horrible, therefore we should never take a single house away from any single person for any circumstances (even those people who are now in violation of new rules)." That's basically what you just said.

---

No one is making an argument
I am making a sarcastic statement in order to show how out of bound your idea is.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alaeacus

You cannot please everyone, You MUST make decisions that improve the game for the greater population, even if it is technically at the expense of a few.

---

Worst. Possible.Statement.

Like.. Ever.

You, as a Game Developer, should never alienate any of your customers, no matter the reason. and, to the same effect, You, as a customer should never feel like you have been cut out, because you're not as good as other players.

That is not how you make a successful game. While I do agree that -some- people certainly don't need 20+ houses for one person, there issue here lays with "Do they use all the space they have?" and "Is it actively hampering the games progression as a whole?"

If they use the space they own, you don't have any right, rhyme or reason to demand that place be taken from them, because you came late to the party. Same with progression. All of the "Housing" progression is entirely optional and only FC-related (to my knowledge) so with that aspect, plenty of people have tried to clamor about housing being FC only. But we as a community have seen just how empty those words are.

When housing is FC-Only, you have empty wards. Everywhere. Maybe a few houses, but mostly left vacant and unwanted. So Personal Housing gets opened, all the plots get taken up, only for the FC players to complain that they're cutting them off, despite having PLENTY of chances to get in before, yet chose not to.

Despite everyone demanding things change, not many people seem to actually want to take action or initiative and instead, just sit there and whine, expecting things to change when there isn't any reason for them to change.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kenky

You, as a Game Developer, should never alienate any of your customers, no matter the reason. and, to the same effect, You, as a customer should never feel like you have been cut out, because you're not as good as other players.

---

You do realise that a great deal of players are alienated by the current housing system, right?

In a good system we wouldn't need to be having debates as to whether house hoarders should be able to continue hoarding or not because in a good system the actions of another player would have zero effect on your own housing situation. But unfortunately this is not what we have and SE appear to have zero interest in reaching that milestone. So what happens instead? Threads like this. And they will never stop until SE somehow manage to create an insane amount of wards, or finally actually fix the system as a whole.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kenky

If they use the space they own, you don't have any right, rhyme or reason to demand that place be taken from them, because you came late to the party. Same with progression.

---

Do you mean raid progression? That comparison doesn't work. You can do an instance as many times as you like. Someone else killing a boss doesn't take up a slot that another player could have used to do the same. Literally nothing in the game works this way aside from housing. Even if you "come late to the party" the raid instances are still there waiting for you if you want to use them even long after the content lost its relevancy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kenky

Despite everyone demanding things change, not many people seem to actually want to take action or initiative and instead, just sit there and whine, expecting things to change when there isn't any reason for them to change.

---

How do you expect people to take action? Short of posting in online forums or unsubbing there is basically nothing an ordinary player can do. Do you want people to fly to Japan and protest outside of SE's HQ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alaeacus

I have a house. My comments are for the benefit of those who don't. Thanks. :)

---

You should refrain from doing so, since you're clearly not helping, and focus on replying to entire posts instead of overlooking everything that was said. :)

Wait, I thought it wasn't possible to even be in an FC with a house on an alt on the same account if you were already in an FC with a house on your main, let alone lead it. Or did they relax that?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TaleraRistain

Wait, I thought it wasn't possible to even be in an FC with a house on an alt on the same account if you were already in an FC with a house on your main, let alone lead it. Or did they relax that?

---

You can join up to 8 FC's whether not they have a house is irrelevant.