FC Chest just gets raded, and GMs can do nothing.

[Neuflune]

you need to remember, SE will not touch how the player play.
snip

We're on the same page that an FC has to be distinct from a personal house. The point I'm making is that the current handling of SE does not make for a safe environment especially for the members, as the Master already has complete control and can mitigate any damage that a member can inflict to the FC. A member basically plays Russian roulette with free companies.

People were kicked for no good reason. In duty finder this can be reported, but in FC it cannot. The Master was not even subbed when he kicked the FC members, he just logged in during one of the free log in weekends. He then never played again until Heavensward. He did not lose the plot even after six months and came back as if nothing happened. I was harassed in FC environment. In Tell it can be reported, but in FC it cannot. The environment does not change the gravity of his words, the only difference is that SE would not touch the issue.

Square could simply view the FC and chat logs to see if any of this was true, and make a decision based on that.

In other games, I have also joined guilds but this is the first MMO wherein a lot of content is (at least initially) gated behind the guild feature (gardening, chocobo training, chocobo dyeing, company workshop).

[Shneibel]

text was here

The thing you mention above about leader harass have also happen in other mmorpg, let it be f2p or p2p, so it is nothing news. Join a clan & guild since 2000 for me have always been a hit or miss and there is really nothing you can do about it neither make it safe environment. I believe safe environment in a clan/guild is something player create and not thing that hand out automatic.

In FFXIV, if the leader not log in within 30 or 35 days, leadership will change to another person, so I don't know if your ex-FC get to make use of that function, but that is a function to keep FC running add by SE, so in a word, isn't it a system to help safe environment ?

SE has clearly stats back in ARR that they will not interfere with how player play the game and that goes to FC and LS chat, scam and cheat and harass with 3rd program (parse) is another story, so report thing happen in FC and LS, SE will not do anything.

About the relinquish house plot, I don't think I need to say anything more about it since there are a lot of thread about that topic, there is even one topic explain how the system will not work

note: when I say ex-FC as I assume you already left it, I mean who would stay in that place anyway ?

[DarkDedede]

Really dude, move on. It is your own fault so stop try to blame the thing on SE.

The item have NEVER bound to FC

No thanks. This discussion is far to interesting. Considering how binding works for gear, and some furniture, it's rather odd that airship parts can be easily passed around. If this becomes standard practice, I'm not sure how long it will be allowed to continue.

As for SE "not touching how players play," I'm not sure I completely agree with you there. They have been making adjustment, and playing the occasional killjoy, for quite some time now (pretty much every update). Or perhaps you were referring to something else, and used improper wording?

The real issue isn't what happened, or how it's handled. What I find most troubling is how easily it can get out of hand, and how the current policies basically allow it to get that way. I'd imagine if and when it does eventually get to that point, I'm going to wager they'd do a bit more than simply hide behind their robot responses. You may not like it, but I really don't see it going any other way but in that direction.

[Neuflune]

snip

I left the FC when he harassed me and another person. About a month later, the Master logged in, kicked everyone else but his IRL brother from the FC and logged out until Heavensward was implemented. The FC that I have now, I created it and invited the people who were kicked.

The mastership-handover feature would have worked if there was actually someone else left in the FC. But since SE allows an FC to have just one person and not even the minimum amount of founding members, the Master could kick anyone he wanted and retain Mastership.

I understand that this happens in other MMOs as well, but here in FFXIV where specific content can only be done when you have an FC, SE might want to reconsider how they handle it.

P.S. I hate the character restriction.

[Shneibel]

As for SE "not touching how players play," I'm not sure I completely agree with you there. They have been making adjustment, and playing the occasional killjoy, for quite some time now (pretty much every update). Or perhaps you were referring to something else, and used improper wording?

the 2nd part, I am not quiet understand what you mean, can you be more specific ?

[DarkDedede]

the 2nd part, I am not quiet understand what you mean, can you be more specific ?

Well the first thing that comes to mind is their dungeon design choices, specifically measures to prevent speed running. There have also been adjustments made to Triple Triad Tournaments, because people were taking advantage of the system. There have been various steps put into place to curb player behavior. They make changes to prevent cheating, which was technically allowed in the game. Is it cheating, if it's allowed in the game? Then they claim no liability for stealing, which also is also technically allowed in the game. Again, it seems to be the general consensus that nothing was stolen, since it was technically allowed in the game aw well. I really don't see how speed running dungeons, or taking advantage of TT tournament rules is any different than creating alternate characters with the purpose of defrauding other players. All three cases are a form of disruption to the gameplay experience of players, which I'm pretty sure is prohibited in the terms of service. While it is ultimately SE's discretion what they do and do not choose to define as "disruption," I can't help but notice a bit of an issue here.

Now correct me if I am wrong, but I'm going to assume that you were referring to SE staying out of matters that are more related to FC politics. I do agree that SE should tread lightly in this area. However, I'm not sure if outright claiming no liability, especially when there are players that are clearly taking advantage of the system that they are responsible for, is the best business decision. Of course, that's more of a matter of customer service politics, which is a different beast entirely. Needless to say, I do not envy the person that is responsible to make these decisions.

[Niwashi]

For those saying to block chest access from new members, keep in mind, you should generally allow all members to access at least one or two of the chest tabs. Passing items around, especially to new people, is the primary purpose of why a company-wide chest even exists in the game. Maybe keep the third chest restricted to officers and above to store special items that you're in fact not offering to the company. But if any members are locked out of the whole thing, you may as well not consider them members at all.

[DarkDedede]

For those saying to block chest access from new members, keep in mind, you should generally allow all members to access at least one or two of the chest tabs. Passing items around, especially to new people, is the primary purpose of why a company-wide chest even exists in the game. Maybe keep the third chest restricted to officers and above to store special items that you're in fact not offering to the company. But if any members are locked out of the whole thing, you may as well not consider them members at all.

I agree. I assume we are going to get more FC chest space, as more ranks become available. I wouldn't mind having one tab as a "dumping ground," where if it does get looted, they'd basically be doing the FC a favor by making more space.

Also, it would be a nice option to be able to relabel each tab to something other than "Items." I'm pretty sure this isn't an option already.

[Nyerieri]

Some people posting are still missing the fact that the free company chest is a shared resource between members in a free company, which can be restricted. Shared resource = If they have access, they can do whatever they want with the item. If you have something important, put it in a tab no one has access to but rank 1 & 2 if you want.

It if the free company masters right to kick whoever he/she chooses, it is their free company. This is pretty standard.

As far as the airship parts go - put them in the locked tab and guess what? you won't have a problem like this again. Also make sure everyone does not have access to "Airship Registration / Dismantling" so they cannot take your current ship. This setting is not a standard setting everyone got when it was introduced. I believe only masters got it.

The point of a free company is so the player base can run each one how they see fit. There is no one size fits all for free companies. I personally think there are a few tweeks they could make to the current system, namely adding new authorization for free company credits since they have expanded it a ton. Also the promotion / demotion could use some work.

[Enkrateia]

Greetings, DarkDedede!

This thread was brought to my attention, and I am currently looking into the situation. There may have been a miscommunication on the part of the GMs about our ability to investigate, and I am making sure that this was looked into. Sufficient evidence to treat this type of behaviour as fraud can certainly be difficult to obtain; however, these types of situations are ones that GMs can look into to try to find such evidence and rectify the damage that was done.

Thank you for your patience while we look into this.

LGM Enkrateia