Reclamation of Inactive Housing announced

[Catwho]

2. is more of any player who thought they might ever take more than a short term break at any point in the future. That dynamic has now changed for those that own an estate, as they'll forfeit their lot and potentially lose any permanent place-able items, and that destruction happens after the first month and a half of inactivity that player ever experiences, from 3.1 until an indefinite point (months? years?) in the future when/if housing accommodates enough players to ease back on restrictions.

I know I'm a weirdo that doesn't actually un-sub when I stop playing for a while. Money is tighter for others and that $15/month could make a difference. I keep paying with the intention of hopping on, and having to walk into my house would be a big motivation to do so.

[Seryl199]

I know I'm a weirdo that doesn't actually un-sub when I stop playing for a while. Money is tighter for others and that $15/month could make a difference. I keep paying with the intention of hopping on, and having to walk into my house would be a big motivation to do so.

That's all well and good, I see both sides of the argument here. I want everyone to have access to housing, but not everyone can have access to housing, which means it must be exclusive and limited in a way, which takes away from another player's potential to enjoy the experience because they don't pay a sub the same way. It's frustrating how housing is meant to be a community experience, yet the system is so flawed that it splits the community into warring factions.

[Niwashi]

5) The 35 day timer for storing removed housing items and the 80% plot refund is unexplainable for a system that is designed to only target inactive players.

5. It is explainable, although the truth tends to drive people up the wall. The short answer is deflationary gil destruction. Housing was implemented not merely as an amusement, but also as a means of removing gil from circulation by taking from the richest demographic of players. This reduces the disparity of held gil between the old money folks and new players. When housing filled up, this process ceased entirely. SE wants everyone involved in the homeowning process, as they're gaining or losing homes, to lose gil forever. Few people will ever accept this as positive, because people are inherently selfish, but it very good for noobs in the grand scheme of things.

Except this gil sink is working in reverse of that goal. It's a gil sink that very specifically targets players returning after a lengthy break from the game. That's not "the richest demographic". It's among the poorer demographics, players who are already behind the rest of the playerbase by not having played during recent content. Arbitrarily taking more items away from the poorer players who've already lost a house isn't a good place to put another gil sink. (Besides which, it's not just taking gil. It's taking trophys and mementos of past events, too.)

[Ibi]

33%? Where are you getting this number?

Adding Ishgard's housing wards to the wards of the existing three cities would increase the number of available plots by 33% (assuming they keep the existing cities the same and Ishgard has the same number of plots as the existing cities).

[Toguro]

snip

I can't remember whether or not you saw my "scenarios" post nor do I want to go back to find it. But with the vultures vs have-nots thing, let's just drop it now okay?

So the people are not like "vultures"(which was a simile anyway but..), they are players. Active players who desire a home. Understandable. Now... Scenario.. #7

The "Haves"- Players who have homes
The "Have-nots"- Players without homes

Houses are demolished. The "Have-nots" instantly take the houses. There's no argument there. People crowd when something is new in-game. The "Haves" are now "Have-nots" including the original "Have-nots" that got beat by the others. In the end.. no change. No fix. Just a change in position for a select few "Have-nots".

And also to make sure I remind you once more that I am not a selfish "Have", I am a "Have-not". And I do not think this fix will help the community as a whole. Only some people who win the race. The others who lose still lose.

Excuse me if I did not say I didn't have a house in my previous responses to you specifically. But I know I've said it in previous posts

[Yeldir]

Except this gil sink is working in reverse of that goal. It's a gil sink that very specifically targets players returning after a lengthy break from the game. That's not "the richest demographic". It's among the poorer demographics, players who are already behind the rest of the playerbase by not having played during recent content. Arbitrarily taking more items away from the poorer players who've already lost a house isn't a good place to put another gil sink. (Besides which, it's not just taking gil. It's taking trophys and mementos of past events, too.)

If you bought a house, you're the demographic they want to take gil from. As for returning players discovering their house is gone being a poorer demographic, can you provide evidence for this? How do you know many of them don't have tens of millions saved up anyway? Not everyone chooses to stop earning gil after they have a home. Home-ownership represents the biggest gil purchases in this game. Of course the people making them represent the richest demographic. Anyway, I'm quite certain SE knows the gil reserves of this demographic better than you do.

If you feel they're too aggressive with this demographic by hitting them for another 20%, that's your opinion. If you don't like the removal of trophies, that's your opinion, too. I like the destruction of all of these things because it improves the game's economy. Finally, if people got 100% of their gil back, Johnny Billiongil buying every lot he can get his paws on becomes a 0 risk venture. He's guaranteed to either break even or (more likely) come out stinking rich. The last thing SE wants to do is make land mogul profiteering even more attractive, which I suspect is a strong reason for the 20% hit. It's just too easy to turn a profit with full refunds as insurance against people who'd rather wait 45 days than pay your crazy release fees.

Adding Ishgard's housing wards to the wards of the existing three cities would increase the number of available plots by 33% (assuming they keep the existing cities the same and Ishgard has the same number of plots as the existing cities).

Ahhh. It didn't make sense to me in the context he was using it - as if 33% was all we'd get. I guess he was trying to downplay the space reclamation was in advance of.

Houses are demolished. The "Have-nots" instantly take the houses. There's no argument there. People crowd when something is new in-game. The "Haves" are now "Have-nots" including the original "Have-nots" that got beat by the others. In the end.. no change. No fix. Just a change in position for a select few "Have-nots".

You are ignoring the fact that housing reclamation exists to make housing lots used by active players. The "haves" that will lose their homes aren't around, and won't be around, for the most part. Their homes are wasted space. This creates a much more efficient use of limited server space. Efficiency is the entire purpose of the reclamation system, so that the many new wards they intend to introduce will not be ghost towns like so many wards are now. The change is that the houses will be used far more by players who are interested in spending time playing with them. That's it.

Reclamation isn't intended to solve any problem other than inefficient usage of server resources. With that solved, SE can justifiably spend more money on many new wards. They have said all of this before.

[Niwashi]

If you feel they're too aggressive with this demographic by hitting them for another 20%, that's your opinion. If you don't like the removal of trophies, that's your opinion, too. I like the destruction of all of these things because it improves the game's economy. Finally, if people got 100% of their gil back, Johnny Billiongil buying every lot he can get his paws on becomes a 0 risk venture. He's guaranteed to either break even or (more likely) come out stinking rich.

No, that 20% was the valid part. It's a good gil sink and nobody has argued against that (at least not that I've seen). This discussion point is about the 35 day timer before everything else is destroyed. And how much does it really help the economy for someone to lose their wedding cake, or their tree from last Christmas, or even simple things like their bed and table, when they're all untradeable anyway?

[Yeldir]

No, that 20% was the valid part. It's a good gil sink and nobody has argued against that (at least not that I've seen). This discussion point is about the 35 day timer before everything else is destroyed. And how much does it really help the economy for someone to lose their wedding cake, or their tree from last Christmas, or even simple things like their bed and table, when they're all untradeable anyway?

Ah, there is one part of this that I hadn't considered, now that you mention it - seasonals and other things that aren't generally craftable. If a player can make it, destroying it creates demand - but this doesn't really apply to some of these items, does it? They ought to be exceptions.

[Ibi]

Ah, there is one part of this that I hadn't considered, now that you mention it - seasonals and other things that aren't generally craftable. If a player can make it, destroying it creates demand - but this doesn't really apply to some of these items, does it? They ought to be exceptions.

Cue them all suddenly showing up on the Mog Station shortly after 3.1...

[Eidolon]

Cue them all suddenly showing up on the Mog Station shortly after 3.1...

And que the white knights still defending SE's cash grab tactics. Lol