Separate FC Workshop from Housing

I don't know if this has been suggested already, but here goes.

As it stands right now, a single individual across multiple alts and alt accounts can own entire wards, restricting smaller and newer FCs from being able to win a home of their own. With such limited supply for housing, and an unwillingness to punish players who are using a loophole to own multiple houses on one account, I suggest that the dynamic and interesting gameplay system attached to the FC workshop should be uncoupled from the housing system entirely. I think this would be a fair compromise, and perhaps even disincentivize at least some people from buying up entire wards on their own, since they would also no longer require a housing plot in order to utilize the sub/airship system.

As an alternative, please add an NPC, or a door, to every Grand Company HQ to allow free company members to access the FC workshop via the grand company HQ their FC is allied with. That way, smaller FCs with limited resources (who cannot compete against others with far more gil and ability to bid over them) are still able to interact with all the features within the free company workshop.

It's such a dynamic and interesting system, it seems like such a shame to have it completely restricted to a section of the game that is entirely out of reach for the average player, for reasons entirely outside of their own control.

Yes, it's been suggested many times by me and by others.

As far as I know, SE has never made a direct response to the suggestion so we don't know if they're not interested in making that change or if there's some sort of code issue that prevents them from doing it. There had been a comment by YoshiP a couple of years back that they were considering making a personal version of the workshop but nothing has been heard about that since.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jojoya

Yes, it's been suggested many times by me and by others.

As far as I know, SE has never made a direct response to the suggestion so we don't know if they're not interested in making that change or if there's some sort of code issue that prevents them from doing it. There had been a comment by YoshiP a couple of years back that they were considering making a personal version of the workshop but nothing has been heard about that since.

---

That's disappointing to hear, but I'm glad many people have made the suggestion over the years. Ugh lol I guess it can't be helped but to keep asking and hope for the best

Aye it would go a long way to freeing up space I suspect. I think part of the problem is that to do so they would have to migrate the DB that is always tracking workshops; because workshops are like players with progression in the form of unlocks and each one has multiple constant timers that if they went out of sync might wreak havoc. Not to mention the problem of folks whom have like 50+ workshops and determining how many deployables a person is permitted. The reason its tied to the FC itself at the moment I think has to do with how it is able to be shared - so the FC tracks the timer versus the player that commences it; likewise for projects. Its why sadly I think we cannot have our friends help manage our island sanctuary.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tank2fish

It's such a dynamic and interesting system, it seems like such a shame to have it completely restricted to a section of the game that is entirely out of reach for the average player, for reasonsentirely outside of their own control.

---

I agree, it's a fun and unique game system and one of the things I like most about this game. It is not, however, out of reach for the average player at all. Especially not for reasons outside of their own control.

If a player has their heart set on doing company workshop content, then they simply need to find an FC that will allow them to use the workshop. Another option would be to start up their own free company to have a workshop of their own. Housing is still overabundant on the four new Dynamis DC servers ruling out any issues with obtaining a plot.

The company workshop system is functioning very well as it currently is. It can be one of the most rewarding systems in the game for players with the determination to manage one long-term. It is unlikely that this particular system is ever going to receive major changes such as complete removal or an additional method of access.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ayan_Calvesse

Aye it would go a long way to freeing up space I suspect. I think part of the problem is that to do so they would have to migrate the DB that is always tracking workshops; because workshops are like players with progression in the form of unlocks and each one has multiple constant timers that if they went out of sync might wreak havoc. Not to mention the problem of folks whom have like 50+ workshops and determining how many deployables a person is permitted. The reason its tied to the FC itself at the moment I think has to do with how it is able to be shared - so the FC tracks the timer versus the player that commences it; likewise for projects. Its why sadly I think we cannot have our friends help manage our island sanctuary.

---

I would hope it wouldn't be that difficult since we don't lose workshop progress when we relocate a FC house. The workshop progress seems to be attached to the FC and not to the house.

Instead of implementing a brand new subsystem which would also increase inflation (100% of accounts having access to sub/airship missions), the OP should instead continue to advocate for the remedy of players owning entire wards.

Misplaced energy for what seems like a beg for sub/airship missions.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jojoya

I would hope it wouldn't be that difficult since we don't lose workshop progress when we relocate a FC house. The workshop progress seems to be attached to the FC and not to the house.

---

Aye its tied to the FC itself; the problem with removal of Workshops from the FC Workshop is because the workshop is "part" of the FC and I suspect its tied to the House itself because loss of a FC house due to inactivity (no one going into the home) results in the Workshop also disappearing. Upon my consideration I think if you no longer had a housing requirement you would have a army of singular person workshops far greater then what we see currently.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ayan_Calvesse

Aye its tied to the FC itself; the problem with removal of Workshops from the FC Workshop is because the workshop is "part" of the FC and I suspect its tied to the House itself because loss of a FC house due to inactivity (no one going into the home) results in the Workshop also disappearing. Upon my consideration I think if you no longer had a housing requirement you would have a army of singular person workshops far greater then what we see currently.

---

You might have a point about the house. It's hard to say. Yet I still believe SE needs to do something so that housing can better serve its core purpose in player eyes. Whatever SE's original vision was is over a decade old. Times change and if they're going to use housing as a way to attract new players while retaining veterans, they need to do a better job with it.

Personally I don't care about an "army of single person workshops" appearing because the workshops aren't the best way to make gil and those running multiple generally are not inserting that gil back into the game economy. Having tens of thousands of additional players running their own workshop doesn't really bother me either because most of those players would be doing it to get access to the items that come from subs as opposed to using them to make gil. They're not going to go to the effort that the sub farmers do.

Most of the concern about workshops is overblown outside of the effect they have on house supply. Even that is smaller than some think, though it's still bad design that workshop demand can push players out of a chance to own a house. If Salvaged Accessories were the creating the gil problem that some think, SE would have killed the sell value by now just as SE killed the sell value of other items like demimateria in the past. It's something they could still do if an increased number of workshops turned it into a problem.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jojoya

You might have a point about the house. It's hard to say. Yet I still believe SE needs to do something so that housing can better serve its core purpose in player eyes. Whatever SE's original vision was is over a decade old. Times change and if they're going to use housing as a way to attract new players while retaining veterans, they need to do a better job with it.

Personally I don't care about an "army of single person workshops" appearing because the workshops aren't the best way to make gil and those running multiple generally are not inserting that gil back into the game economy. Having tens of thousands of additional players running their own workshop doesn't really bother me either because most of those players would be doing it to get access to the items that come from subs as opposed to using them to make gil. They're not going to go to the effort that the sub farmers do.

Most of the concern about workshops is overblown outside of the effect they have on house supply. Even that is smaller than some think, though it's still bad design that workshop demand can push players out of a chance to own a house. If Salvaged Accessories were the creating the gil problem that some think, SE would have killed the sell value by now just as SE killed the sell value of other items like demimateria in the past. It's something they could still do if an increased number of workshops turned it into a problem.

---

I agree that Housing really needs to at some point get more then lip service. I disagree that subs are not a cost effective gil making measure however - I mean 400m a month worth of gil with 40 characters is nothing to scoff at and I think theres probably more folks running subs in that fashion then gathering items to market board/use.

I also agree that SE probably could end the problem simply by blowing up sub instant gil returns and at the very least require sub fcs to play the market.

What SE needs to do is allow the workshop inside personal houses that a FC can have access as well if allowed by the home owner. They also need to limit owning FC to one as well because I'm tired of seeing Dynamis wards filling up with submarine farms and don't bother decorating them too.

Just make the workshop a part of the grand company the FC is associated with. Shouldn't be a huge deal to add a new room at the GC headquarters. That way even FCs without a house can utilize it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Acesfool

Just make the workshop a part of the grand company the FC is associated with. Shouldn't be a huge deal to add a new room at the GC headquarters. That way even FCs without a house can utilize it.

---

This proposal wouldn't even be a tradeoff where someone loses and someone wins. Just a win for every fc. It seems so simple and obvious it makes me wonder why the devs haven't implemented it yet. Is there a technical reason why existing submarine/workshop data can't be moved from housing wards to starting cities? Or do they want the workshop to be inside the house because they see it as a housing feature? Could this be another case where the devs are oblivious to the problems in other world regions, like in the case of RMT /tells and the animation lock being longer for people with higher ping? Maybe it's a part of a larger plan to incentivize people to spread out to smaller servers? Or is it possible that the devs are aware of the NA housing shortage, see it as a problem and simply do not have it very high up in their priority list? There are a lot of questions and not a lot of answers unfortunately.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Reinha

This proposal wouldn't even be a tradeoff where someone loses and someone wins. Just a win for every fc. It seems so simple and obvious it makes me wonder why the devs haven't implemented it yet. Is there a technical reason why existing submarine/workshop data can't be moved from housing wards to starting cities? Or do they want the workshop to be inside the house because they see it as a housing feature? Could this be another case where the devs are oblivious to the problems in other world regions, like in the case of RMT /tells and the animation lock being longer for people with higher ping? Maybe it's a part of a larger plan to incentivize people to spread out to smaller servers? Or is it possible that the devs are aware of the NA housing shortage, see it as a problem and simply do not have it very high up in their priority list? There are a lot of questions and not a lot of answers unfortunately.

---

Honestly, I believe it is the way it is now because they wanted to give players a reason for being in an FC. I know that seems rather simplistic but you have to consider the way the game was when it was implemented. Gil wasn't so easy to come by and it was a big deal if you could afford a house, even a small one. So I don't begrudge them thinking it was a good way to do it at the time. But times have changed and the players have found a way to abuse the system. And in doing so they're preventing a lot of people from getting a house.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Acesfool

Just make the workshop a part of the grand company the FC is associated with. Shouldn't be a huge deal to add a new room at the GC headquarters. That way even FCs without a house can utilize it.

---

I honestly can't think of a downside to doing this. Of the zillions of proposed changes to housing, adding access from the GC headquarters to the workshop seems far and away the easiest, with plenty of upside. As long as there is gil and thus RMT incentive to own a house, the sub farmers and RMT traders will be scooping up as many houses as the TOS will allow.

I've been looking at wards on the new Dynamis servers, and the ugly, empty sub farms outnumber the decorated houses by a wide, wide margin. I feel sorry for newer players who might be excited about housing, and then see the sad ghost wards all over Dynamis. So much for a "neighborhood" feel when every house is empty and identical.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Crafoutis

Instead of implementing a brand new subsystem which would also increase inflation (100% of accounts having access to sub/airship missions), the OP should instead continue to advocate for the remedy of players owning entire wards.

Misplaced energy for what seems like a beg for sub/airship missions.

---

Because the last thing this game needs is RMT farming accounts and shell FCs having less of a stranglehold on one of the best ways to make gil in the game. (which, by the way, barely requires even playing the game)

Oh woe, won't someone PLEASE think of the poor, poor RMTers?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NegativeS

Because the last thing this game needs is RMT farming accounts and shell FCs having less of a stranglehold on one of the best ways to make gil in the game. (which, by the way, barely requires even playing the game)

Oh woe, won't someone PLEASE think of the poor, poor RMTers?

---

I think unless you solve the workshop missions generating Gil - removing workshops from houses and making them FC based would actually result in more RMT - as it stands if the RMTer is needing a FC plot to generate funds; then removing that requirement would make it easier to flood the market would it not? I think you might be misunderstanding her suggestion; if you removed the ability for multiple FCs you would likewise remove the multiple workshops and then require RMTs to atleast control many more accounts.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ayan_Calvesse

I think unless you solve the workshop missions generating Gil - removing workshops from houses and making them FC based would actually result in more RMT - as it stands if the RMTer is needing a FC plot to generate funds; then removing that requirement would make it easier to flood the market would it not? I think you might be misunderstanding her suggestion; if you removed the ability for multiple FCs you would likewise remove the multiple workshops and then require RMTs to atleast control many more accounts.

---

SE can easily solve that if they feel that workshop gil generation has become a problem. All they have to do is change the value of the Salvaged Accessories. They've already done it in the past with other items and content that RMT had latched onto as ways to farm gil to sell. Would be a shame if those Extravagant Salvaged Earrings started vendoring for 300 gil each instead of 30,000 each.

I also don't believe that organized RMT has a big presence in housing, especially not compared to the past. There is no doubt some but the current restrictions make it very awkward and gil generation erratic. Organized RMT is better off sticking to the gathering and crafting bots for larger and more consistent gil returns.

They should restrict owning a FC plot like personals to just one per server and I'm ok with one per data center too. Also force anyone that has multiple plots in the same world demolish and refund the full cost of the plot, this would vastly cut down on submarine farms owned by one or two people in a ward.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jojoya

SE can easily solve that if they feel that workshop gil generation has become a problem. All they have to do is change the value of the Salvaged Accessories. They've already done it in the past with other items and content that RMT had latched onto as ways to farm gil to sell. Would be a shame if those Extravagant Salvaged Earrings started vendoring for 300 gil each instead of 30,000 each.

I also don't believe that organized RMT has a big presence in housing, especially not compared to the past. There is no doubt some but the current restrictions make it very awkward and gil generation erratic. Organized RMT is better off sticking to the gathering and crafting bots for larger and more consistent gil returns.

---

I don't think RMT is the reason for most sub-FCs; the sub-FCs are likely not running RMT but still have run somewhat amok.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shnrnr

A couple of other thoughts on ways to reduce the number of shell FC/sub shacks (if and only if subs still have to be tied to housing):
- remove the ability to earn company credits passively via GC turn-ins. This shouldn't affect FCs of any size with active players (beyond slowing down the leveling progress), but it would prevent FCs from being leveled in a matter of minutes, as well as from being able to send out sub voyages ad infinitum without playing the rest of the game.
- You know how you can't buy an FC house without 4 members who have been in the FC for a month? What about requiring 8 members who have been in the FC for a month before you can deploy sub/airships (every time)? Solo/duo FCs could still pack their FC with alts (which I think is fine). It would close the "FC transfer" loophole that allows a single player to own 8 FCs/sub shacks on a single server, because all their alts would have to be in a single FC in order to use subs.

---

Your first suggestion is one I've also posted in the past. I've always felt that company credit generation favored the GC Expert Deliveries too heavily when it should be emphasizing more active game play.

Your second suggestion might reduce the scale of some of the sub farms but it wouldn't eliminate them as there are usually multiple game accounts already involved.

I still don't feel that sub farms themselves are a problem. The problem is that they use up part of the housing supply. Detaching the workshops from housing would solve that and fully instanced housing would make it irrelevant.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jojoya

Your second suggestion might reduce the scale of some of the sub farms but it wouldn't eliminate them as there are usually multiple game accounts already involved.

---

True, although I don't have an issue with people having as many accounts as they want to pay for, and whatever houses are allotted to those accounts.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jojoya

I still don't feel that sub farms themselves are a problem. The problem is that they use up part of the housing supply. Detaching the workshops from housing would solve that and fully instanced housing would make it irrelevant.

---

I agree, hence the "if and only if clause" in my original comment :). I was just noodling other ideas in case there's some non-obvious technical reason that the workshop has to be tied to a house.