Forcing players to pay to keep housing is unfair.

[Kaethra]

To play the devil's advocate here, I'm interested in peoples' opinions on this while considering that active duty military play these games as well. If I cared about a house (I don't) and bought one, should I really lose it just because I get deployed for several months to a year? One could argue the whole "not using it" scenario, sure. But if my subscription says active (which it does when I'm deployed) because I have the income to do so, why shouldn't I get to keep the items I worked for, the house included?

Now, I'll say the housing situation in this game is absolutely horrid, and its implementation is the reason for my lack of interest in it, but I'm just curious what reason(s) is/are valid for simply having an active subscription to be sufficient to "keep what you kill".

If they ever make an exception, that should be it. Deployed players should keep everything.

When Everquest 2 was not F2P, I deployed to Egypt and was gone for a couple of months. When I came back, I only had to pay the weekly rent cost (cost less then gear repairs) to open it for the next week. All my stuff was where I left it.

As I said earlier in this thread. Deployed players help us all keep playing the game. Its not too much to ask for them to be able to keep certain features when they are called to duty (one that could cause them permanent injury or end their lives for our safety). That's the honorable thing to do.

The best and fair thing to do for everyone would be to open more districts as current plots fill up. Districts are instances. It doesn't hurt anything to open more up. Nor does it cost anything (the data storage info is VERY small due to instantiation of objects, to put it shortly, our computers bear the brunt of that storing the actual models and textures locally). This way they could extend the period before destruction/closure or even eliminate it entirely.

That would allow everyone to have access to the features they've paid for.