Put an actual fix to Housing 1.0 - not another more ward thread.

First hear me out on the points, there is too much about adding more wards and the likes and to actual getting towards ACTUAL housing problems is largely overheard.


1. 1 House 1 FC per Data Center

2. 100% control over placement, it is becoming a farce that you need to use ingame glitches to place furniture as you want due to lack of axis/angle control, it is ridiciolous that you had full control in MMO's from 2003.

3. Anti Grandfathering System, max 1 Workshop per account per DC, only gardening plots on 1 House per DC, that is to make it fair for all parties regarding creating wealth and possible reduction of RMT as well.

4. Increase items in houses/apartments, but getting ingame item to do such, it can only be done on 1 FC and 1 House Per DC of choice, item will work scaled after house size, upgrade. for small 50. upgrade 2. additional 50 upgrade 3. additional 50 and 4. additional 50.. for Medium add it be 75 each step, and large 125 due to additional size. cost of ingame item same no matter size of plot, certain things needed to be done ingame for and the likes, relocating to a new house and it will scaled up/down.

Above also could be done in a game from 2003, I still fail to see why nothing has happened.

5. Full account access personal house, but only for the choice of 1 per DC.

6. Make all gardens look the same from the outside of plot, and step inside instance once entering the plot, will then load garden outlook, it will and should serve tonnes of server ressources and maybe even permit real windows instead of fake ones and maybe reduce the entire system to like 3 ward instances.

7.

8.

9.

10.

1. What about players playing on different servers? What do you count as a data centre? Logical or regional?
There is probably a minority of people playing on different servers and FC but we do exist.
I don’t think it really going to solve a whole lot by punishing people for their way of playing the game.

I read it as you’re trying to get at people creating shell FC and making multiple FC on same server to buy multiple plots, yes? It’s not that big of a problem. It’s a few servers who had this issue in the past but you’ll be hard pressed to find recent examples of this, at least from my own research on all EU worlds. Maybe it’s a NA thing?

125 for a large? Not nearly enough. 200 slots extra at a minimum as it gives you 200 per floor. And even then you are stretching it thin. 125 would still result in people walling off whole areas more often than not still. Great way to show you do not actually own a large house. I don't want to go buy some random pointless item to expand my house, just expand the slots. I would actually like to use my entire mansion not 1/3rd of it.

Also you suggest arbitrary restrictions for what reason exactly?? "5. Full account access personal house, but only for the choice of 1 per DC." Why? If you play on two DC for whatever reason you should still be able to access your house on all chars on both DC. Why you want a limit on it? To make life worse for people for funsies?

Anti grandfathering will never happen, you cannot just snatch things away from people who got things under a previous system. It destroys any faith people have that their efforts will not suddenly be for nothing if you set that precedent. They worked within the rules and got their houses fairly, whether you like it or not is irrelevant.

Limiting gardens and workshops again why? RMTer do not need to go to the hassle of getting a house then growing crops and crafting workshop things when they can just have 1000 bots gathering mats for them to sell. This lottery round just passed on Alpha and Raiden only the most popular plots and a few others have sold so far. Going to actual players and not bots that I can see so far from roaming around and checking.
People share houses, I have my own 2 mansions on zodiark and I share 2 plots of friends whose gardens they do not use. I would still under your rules have access to more than you and can produce more than you.

And unless they are going to create a whole instanced ward, which I would love btw. There is no reason to stop displaying people's gardens. If they removed people's gardens and made every house outside look the same it defeats part of the reason the wards are the way they are.

A fully instanced ward per area would be great. You can get whichever plot you want and ppl are less likely to sit on a plot they are dissatisfied with, my friend has had a plot in the goblet 18 months and it is empty cuz its not actually the plot he wanted. He wanted a medium, he got one. But it is not the one he wanted so he has no motivation to actually decorate the thing. I can imagine other people are in a similar situation.

Just to nitpick, mostly but..

Housing wasn't a thing in 1.0.

It was added in patch 2.3. Now for the points!

1. I doubt this would ever really be implemented, purely because then all of your eggs go into one FC basket, rather than being a part of several FCs (for different reasons)

2. More control would be great, but people are very likely to abuse the 100% control in some fashion. The only ones coming to me at present would be locking you in a cage you can't get out of without teleporting, or blocking the door somehow.

3. No. Leave the grandfathered players alone. SE has said they've done nothing wrong and to this day they leave them alone. That means SE doesn't see them as doing anything wrong. Stop gunning for them.

3a. 1 workshop per DC? No. 1 gardening plot per DC? Sure, hardly anyone uses them anyways outside of growing Thav. Onions once every few months, so making it harder to grow them is objectively a good idea! (This is sarcasm, if you hadn't caught on.)

4. Increasing item count on houses / apartments will always be welcome. A large still doesn't feel very 'decorated' when you've maxed out its limit. But this is coming from someone that really likes clutter.

5. I see nothing wrong with giving every character on your account access to your house.

6. So.. You want to force -another- loading screen onto players, just for stepping onto their property? Yeah, that'll go down well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kenky

3. No. Leave the grandfathered players alone. SE has said they've done nothing wrong and to this day they leave them alone. That means SE doesn't see them as doing anything wrong. Stop gunning for them.

3a. 1 workshop per DC? No. 1 gardening plot per DC? Sure, hardly anyone uses them anyways outside of growing Thav. Onions once every few months, so making it harder to grow them is objectively a good idea! (This is sarcasm, if you hadn't caught on.)

---

on 3. even if they didnt do anything wrong at that time. Things can change a lot over time. Something that used to be free IRL often also results into costing money, just because intialy the downsides werent known. And sometimes things become illegal. Grandfathering is an issue for a balanced distribution of houses. 3a is on that at least something to prevent the economic unbalance.

And for grandfathering 1 house i dont realy see that much of an issue. But for those who took entire wards i would consider it fair if those lose nearly all their houses. As that just falls under disruptive behaviour and cannot be excused by grandfathering anymore. And especialy those who did this in ishgard should lose every house, because that is clearly exploiting a mechanic that was supposed to limit housing. It was clearly even stated 1 house per account per DC as a fair measurement. Taking an entire ward through FCs is on that just an exploit, and the only fair punishment here would be to destroy all houses without gil refund. That way this behaviour is clearly shown to not be tolerated. For those who had this situation grandfathered, they can get the gil back and choose which houses they want to remove (and still keep 3 - of which 1 large and 1 medium max).

Grandfathering is in many cases just a false excuse to keep those who exploited to keep their houses.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by UkcsAlias

But for those who took entire wards i would consider it fair if those lose nearly all their houses.

---

How is it fair to take away things that people earned through playing ball with the systems? Housing in a video game, meant to be played for Fun, should never be compared to actual laws, regulations and the housing issues of reality.

Again. For like the hundreth time. Grandfathered players and "Hoarders" have what they have, because the servers they play on didn't have a large population, or a population that didn't care about housing. Nobody was touching them and nobody really cared about them until after the population boom in Stormblood. (This is dependent on servers, of course. As Balmung for example has always had a housing issue. Purely because it's the RP server and they want their hidey holes.)

They earned them. They worked up the gil to buy what they have and now are free to hold onto it until they choose otherwise. No company in existence (no smart company, at least) would take away 10 things a veteran player earned (and risk losing that veteran player) to give Timmy 1 of them, only for Timmy to leave a month later.

Instanced Housing would solve this and I now stand firmly in the stance that MAYBE Island Sanctuaries could be tweaked to serve the Housing population. Make a Capstone questline that allows you to build a small / medium / large house (upgrading over time, maybe?) and be given all the systems a house offers. (Crossbreeding. Everything else is FC-systems) Meaning that Ward Housing could still retain its "appeal" as having neighbors and an FC-workshop / Airship use, or personals that wants to keep them for personal reasons.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by UkcsAlias

on 3. even if they didnt do anything wrong at that time. T

---

They aren't going to take things away doesn't matter how many times you and yours and the OP repeat this it's not going to happen.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by UkcsAlias

Grandfathering is in many cases just a false excuse to keep those who exploited to keep their houses.

---

The only exploit here is people like you trying to take things away from people who did nothing wrong. Get over it People following the rules will not be retroactively penalized because you want it to be so. They didn't use any exploits they simply walked up to a placard and bought the house, Grandfathering affects a small number of people who bought homes for alts prior to 4.2 and that decision has already been made.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by UkcsAlias

It was clearly even stated 1 house per account per DC as

---

I know it's hard but try and get your facts straight. It's one house per server not DC and the developers are continuing to allow people to buy houses on other servers in the new rules for 6.1. If you're not happy petition to have the RULES changed. Anyone buying a house on another server/dc shouldn't be penalized if the rules change at a later date.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by UkcsAlias

on 3. even if they didnt do anything wrong at that time. Things can change a lot over time. Something that used to be free IRL often also results into costing money, just because intialy the downsides werent known. And sometimes things become illegal. Grandfathering is an issue for a balanced distribution of houses. 3a is on that at least something to prevent the economic unbalance.

And for grandfathering 1 house i dont realy see that much of an issue. But for those who took entire wards i would consider it fair if those lose nearly all their houses. As that just falls under disruptive behaviour and cannot be excused by grandfathering anymore. And especialy those who did this in ishgard should lose every house, because that is clearly exploiting a mechanic that was supposed to limit housing. It was clearly even stated 1 house per account per DC as a fair measurement. Taking an entire ward through FCs is on that just an exploit, and the only fair punishment here would be to destroy all houses without gil refund. That way this behaviour is clearly shown to not be tolerated. For those who had this situation grandfathered, they can get the gil back and choose which houses they want to remove (and still keep 3 - of which 1 large and 1 medium max).

Grandfathering is in many cases just a false excuse to keep those who exploited to keep their houses.

---

If removing grandfathering would completely fix the problems when it comes to players obtaining a house, it might be worth exploring.

It won't. It will only address a small percentage of the outstanding unmet demand for houses. Maybe 100 players will get a house while several hundred others will still be left without one.

Why take away things long time, loyal players fairly earned when it doesn't fix a problem and only serves to make those players upset?

No one covered by the grandfathering clauses exploited the system to get what they have. The people who exploited the system gained their houses after grandfathering clauses were added to the game. It's not the grandfathering clauses protecting the latter players - it's SE's inept system design and failure to enforce the intended ownership rules that allows them to continue exploiting that protects them.

Players need to stop with the harping about grandfathering and demolition because all you're doing is letting SE off the hook for their poor decision making by wanting other players punished. Push SE into fixing the supply problem instead. If they would fix the supply problem, every player could have multiple houses if they wanted. No one would have to worry about demolition when they take a break from the game.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by UkcsAlias

on 3. even if they didnt do anything wrong at that time. Things can change a lot over time. Something that used to be free IRL often also results into costing money, just because intialy the downsides werent known. And sometimes things become illegal. Grandfathering is an issue for a balanced distribution of houses. 3a is on that at least something to prevent the economic unbalance.

And for grandfathering 1 house i dont realy see that much of an issue. But for those who took entire wards i would consider it fair if those lose nearly all their houses. As that just falls under disruptive behaviour and cannot be excused by grandfathering anymore. And especialy those who did this in ishgard should lose every house, because that is clearly exploiting a mechanic that was supposed to limit housing. It was clearly even stated 1 house per account per DC as a fair measurement. Taking an entire ward through FCs is on that just an exploit, and the only fair punishment here would be to destroy all houses without gil refund. That way this behaviour is clearly shown to not be tolerated. For those who had this situation grandfathered, they can get the gil back and choose which houses they want to remove (and still keep 3 - of which 1 large and 1 medium max).

Grandfathering is in many cases just a false excuse to keep those who exploited to keep their houses.

---

Oh my god how many people are gonna get this wrong, it is one house per server not DC. How is it so many people that want to suggest changes to housing and esp ask for houses removed from people don't know fully the rules of housing. One person having an entire ward sucks but it's a drop in the bucket of demand for houses. Taking their houses won't fix the issue.

Really starting to think a lot of people who are winging about not getting a house have not done their research into the system. Others are not willing to sacrifice for the house, so a house cannot be that high of a priority for them. I really wish SE would give us all a house but can we stop just gunning for people who have the houses.

I always like how you can tell who owns an entire ward and who doesnt in these threads

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Oizen

I always like how you can tell who owns an entire ward and who doesnt in these threads

---

I think it’s more like a principle that you shouldn’t be retroactive be punished for following the rules.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Oizen

I always like how you can tell who owns an entire ward and who doesnt in these threads

---

Only in your dreams, Oizen. Only in your dreams.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Oizen

I always like how you can tell who owns an entire ward and who doesnt in these threads

---

And who are those might I ask who own entire wards here? Nothing like making up stuff in your mind to suit your agenda. People who buy houses on other servers play alts there and interact with more than one data center. Being in one spot is boring but you do you. At least with DC travel you can now visit some of those without an alt but that wasn't always the case and you still are restricted to regional visitations.

I don't think anyone here supports FC abuse and it's on SE to fix and stop it. They've had plenty of time to do it but for whatever reason it's still a problem. Whitewashing the community who doesn't agree with the OP's constant trolling when it comes to taking things away from people who did nothing wrong isn't going to be given a free pass.

SE makes the rules. People who play this game should follow them. The intent is one FC and one Personal per server and that is PER SERVER until they elect to change it or to even go so far as restrict it to one house per account. It's on them to act and expecting them to retroactively apply new rules isn't going to happen.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aelin_Ashryver

Oh my god how many people are gonna get this wrong, it is one house per server not DC. How is it so many people that want to suggest changes to housing and esp ask for houses removed from people don't know fully the rules of housing. One person having an entire ward sucks but it's a drop in the bucket of demand for houses. Taking their houses won't fix the issue.

---

The limited housing is a server load issue, someone taking up a ward is taking excessive load. Solving this is a mandatory fix on that as it opens up housing to more people. It might not be enough, but especialy with limited resources, doing these things can matter.
And note, while i said DC instead of server, note that server only amplifies my statement since it indicates it worse than what i stated. And this safer choise can just be done since i cant be bothered looking up every single detail. I know there is a limit based on something like a server, and that was more than enough.

And ward takeovers can be considered an exploit. Even if you used multiple accounts to achieve this. First note that even if an exploit isnt documented, or was ignored for a while, they can still decide to punish for it. EULAs almost always give this option available as it simply means the game dev keeps themselve in control. It doesnt matter that you used multiple accounts for this, and it doesnt even matter that you have 1 house per account. Since in this case its very clear that whatever you did is clearly breaking balance. As single person its unrealistic to expect them to have 10+ accounts, with 8 chars on each of them. And then still being able to normaly play the game. Those accounts are purely made for breaking the system.

It goes even further, as you already notice, frustration about the housing system are clear, and its very clear which sort of players are a major issue. Such behaviour can also be considered part of the abusive behaviour. And again gives SE an option to act against it without any need to change any rules otherwise. Its all about interpretation here, and the overal experience.

And why do we need to know every single detail when clear troublemakers are openly visible anyway?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Oizen

I always like how you can tell who owns an entire ward and who doesnt in these threads

---

Wait, how many people do you think own whole wards? The grandfathered exception houses account for less then 1% of housing per server(a number that can never go up because it is no longer possible for them to purchase more houses). Off the top of my head i can only think of the mateus couple who own a whole ward who would qualify as "grandfathered" houses. Shell FCs are a different problem, but last time someone did a serious count they were still only around 3% - no where near as widespread as some people seem to believe.

1. No. Further restricting access to housing isn't the answer. It causes more issues than it solves and SE has shown they are reluctant to actually police anything or enforce the ToS anyway.

2. Agreed on this one. I'd love to have more control over furniture placement.

3. This will not happen, find another talking point.

4. Item expansion in houses would be lovely, and I'd love it if they communicated with us why slots are restricted as they are and if they can fix that in the future and if not, why not.

5. It would be excellent to be able to share your personal house with your alts. But again, more restrictions on housing access is a hard no from me.

6. This one I'm not even sure about, no opinion.

7. Invest in more instanced housing options. Expand apartments to be larger than a bread box, have options that allow people to purchase them in sizes that match medium and large houses.

8. Invest in Island Sanctuaries to include an instanced house of some sort if they aren't already planning to go that route eventually.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Oizen

I always like how you can tell who owns an entire ward and who doesnt in these threads

---

And who would those posters be?

I know of a couple of infrequent posters who own entire wards (or at least an equivalent number of plots spread across multiple wards) but one hasn't posted in probably 8-9 months (unless they're doing it on a new forum avatar) and the other one hasn't posted in this thread.

Are you suspecting me just because I'm against removing grandfathering? Sorry to disappoint you. I have my medium personal and my small FC (while my FC is mostly me it does have other player members and I also invite players looking for temporary homes while they try to find a FC they feel is a good long term fit). That's all I have for houses. I've got opportunities with my characters on other data centers to get a house but I don't because I know me taking another house means one less player able to get one.

On the other hand, I have played other games where the developers would take away earned rewards from players and saw what that would end up doing to the player base and the game in general. It's never worked out for the better. I don't want to see it happen here.

People like you can only think of a single solution - take things away from others so you can have what you want. Be damned to what anyone else wants.

I can think of a better solution - SE fix the system so every player could be a multiple house owner if they want. That's far better than taking things away. We know it's possible. We watch other games do it.

I hate being a broken record but we need to stop blaming other players, stop punishing other players for a failure on SE's part not the player's.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Oizen

I always like how you can tell who owns an entire ward and who doesnt in these threads

---

There are definitely some posters you see regularly who pop up and love to tell anyone without a house why they either don't deserve a house or actually don't want one, they just don't know it yet.
Honestly just transition to a system where you pay a little extra on your sub if you have a house, and more for multiples, to fund the hardware on housing area expansions. People can still have their dumb private RP wards, and it won't feel like such a slap in the face to get objectively less game than other people for the same monthly sub for those of us who aren't lucky enough to get even a single house.

Let us take a moment to salute the hero at house #27
https://i.imgur.com/NV835jh.png

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nepentha

5. It would be excellent to be able to share your personal house with your alts. But again, more restrictions on housing access is a hard no from me.

---

Making this feature only available when you only have 1 house is a fair enough way. You do not punish those owners as they dont lose anything. But they can definitely miss out on this feature that way, and get motivated to get rid of their 2nd house.

Its these small things that over time can add up and do quite a bit.

For multiple house owners, making farming less effective is on that just another way to achieve this result. And while this might actualy 'punish' them, do note that those without house are punished significantly harder.

Instanced housing sounds nice, but note that houses are already instanced (hence there is the chance you cant enter your house as others are already inside theirs)... its just that the ward isnt.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by UkcsAlias

Making this feature only available when you only have 1 house is a fair enough way. You do not punish those owners as they dont lose anything. But they can definitely miss out on this feature that way, and get motivated to get rid of their 2nd house.

Its these small things that over time can add up and do quite a bit.

For multiple house owners, making farming less effective is on that just another way to achieve this result. And while this might actualy 'punish' them, do note that those without house are punished significantly harder.

Instanced housing sounds nice, but note that houses are already instanced (hence there is the chance you cant enter your house as others are already inside theirs)... its just that the ward isnt.

---

The problem with this manner of thinking is... where does it end?

I dislike slippery slope arguments, but I've actively seen people sliding right into them on these forums enough to know that's pretty much what will continue happening.

People are so focused on taking away things other people have that they lose site of the actual issue: Supply. You can restrict and restrict and restrict til all you can have is 1 house (FC or personal, you can't have both!) per IP address that you'll lose to demolition if you don't log into it every 3 hours and it still won't solve the problem.

As for instanced, SE has said many times the wards themselves take a lot of space. Yet we're about to get an entire island we can run around on. Somehow, I think they can figure out how to make instanced housing work if they put their minds to it.

Keep them coming, will soon make 2.0.