We need another Housing purge

[Awha]

I don't think the goal here for anyone is punishment, though what you consider to be punishment may be someone else's goal. It's simply a guess, but I imagine most players consider it "correct" for a single player not to have multiple houses. For some of these players, it would be "correct" for SE to take away those additional houses. This is not a punishment, but a correction in what is currently incorrect, and has nothing to do with the player themselves that is responsible in some way for this incorrect situation.

I think many would be fine for a player that is behaving "incorrectly" to simply be corrected, and not banned or punished otherwise.

Many are posing their own form of correction disregarding the player, to remove the incentive for a player to perform in that incorrect manner, rather than to simply "police" the behavior. I think flaws and merits can be seen in both corrections, and perhaps they can be used together in some capacity.

This thread didn't start out about any specific player. It took specific player(s) themselves to make it about themselves for discussions about those specific player(s) to arise. At the end of the day no one cares what strangers are punished or not, only that justice and truth prevail, and that all systems are running smoothly.

I get what you are saying, but SE already grandfathered players from the old system into the new system when 4.2 hit, so if SE were to change their view regarding the current housing it would only be fair to grandfather players into the new rule set. I also agree many players are asking for a change in policy (which I personally do think is needed, our current system is simply not sustainable), but some are asking for both a change in policy and retroactive punishment, my issues lies with those few players. Either way I do hope with 5.0 SE does do something with the housing system.

[Kittypryde]

Nope. You can think I'm trolling, but I'm deadly serious with the idea of maintainance fees with regards to making housing a gil sink (what you were suggesting). The numbers I pulled up were arbitrary and came up with the numbers I did on the spot. I may have overshot the amount required, but I assure you I'm not trolling. And for the Ferrari thing, at least in the UK, the insurance is also much higher on sports cars in the UK, as is road tax, etc. So higher maintainance costs also apply there. Thus lending extra credence to the idea I suggested. With adjusted numbers and/or timeframes (so they're more accessible), would you still call me a troll, or would you be more willing to entertain the idea?

Honestly, I think the maintenance option would be a great idea. We could either throw Gil, or materials onto the houses. They could wear down like armor etc. This game has almost none of the Gil sinks that ffxi had, which is a bad thing. In FFXIV, we don't have to pay for job spells, arrows, bullets, ninja tools, etc. Gil is almost worthless to the point that SOooooo many players , at least on my server, are swimming in 500m-4x max Gil. We need more Gil sinks, be it minions from vendors that cost 10m, or 50m mounts, super mansions for 300m etc.

[Alleo]

Do not think anyone is against bringing up issues with the current system or the rules. Issue lies with those who also want SE to punish players retroactively for policies and or rules that may or may not exist within the current frame work that have no history of being enforced.

When someone states that they got the housing through transfer (which is only necessary if you cant get houses through regular means) that quite hints that this was done while the rules were active. And SE can and should look into such cases and see when these people got their houses and if they used an unintended loophole (because SE only wanted us to own one FC and private house per world and account) then they are going against the wish itself that was stated through these rules and should be punished. And after that they could finally go and state that the rules are back and anyone getting more no matter how they did it will get their houses taken away. Would be quite simple imo.

About maintenance: How about we create a situation where something like housing which has quite some options and items behind it, is there for everyone? Instead of going around and punishing the housing owners for SE "great" idea of making it not instanced..I am also quite sure that those that missuse the system are probably those that wont be hurt by such a fee or will just use RMT or botting to get enough Gil for it. While you will hurt anyone who just really wants to own a house for their own reasons. Increase the price of each plot when you buy it but let it be all..another fee will just split the people even more and we house owners are already forced to sub and go into the game every 45 days to keep it so we cant just take a longer break without losing that..

And lets not forget that everyone has a different view on what a good fee would be...make it too low and its nothing but a unnecessary second step to owning a house and make it too high and this would take many people away from it and maybe even just create another rage in the community. What if you own a house, are fine with the idea but suddenly they chose a fee that is way over the price you can pay? What if you are on a server that has a bad economy? How are these people making the necessary Gil? What if you are on a server with known bots that destroy markets? A fee just further protects SEs decision to make this not instanced.

[Kittypryde]

Why shouldnt every player have access to a house? We all pay a subscription for this theme park, and yet a majority of the players are blocked from enjoying one of the biggest rides. Even their ancient predecessor managed to give its housing to ALL characters. This is not a competitive game, and there is no reason for housing to be handled in this way - especially considering this is a subscription game.

Stop excusing SE for making a horrible housing system.

Why? Because SE made the mistake of not making instanced housing. They wanted housing to be rare when they chose on the ward system. They have stated tome and time again, that they will not do 100% instanced housing. That means that everyone is not entitled to a house. Yes, it sucks for some players who missed out ir were late to the party. SE made another mistake in letting all size housing be for personal use. They also made another mistake with not upgrading apartment sizes. Housing is better now than in the past, but they made countless mistakes implementing housing for FFXIV. And we have to make the best out of a half assed system.

[Awha]

When someone states that they got the housing through transfer (which is only necessary if you cant get houses through regular means) that quite hints that this was done while the rules were active. And SE can and should look into such cases and see when these people got their houses and if they used an unintended loophole (because SE only wanted us to own one FC and private house per world and account) then they are going against the wish itself that was stated through these rules and should be punished. And after that they could finally go and state that the rules are back and anyone getting more no matter how they did it will get their houses taken away. Would be quite simple imo..

Where I am coming from is if what was being done was truly an issue for SE, wouldn't they have done / said something by now? I have not been playing this game for all that long, started around the tail end of HW, but I do not think I have ever recalled SE ever making an official statement on the forums or loadstone regarding the issues around housing. So would it not be safe to assume they have no issue with it, and if by some means they have a change of heart and claim they have an issue with it so long after the fact then no it would not be fair of SE to take away players houses since at the time they clearly did not care enough to act on the issue.

Do not get me wrong SE is free to do whatever they please since it is their IP / game. Overall just voicing my own concerns on the matter.

[Hamada]

Where I am coming from is if what was being done was truly an issue for SE, wouldn't they have done / said something by now? I have not been playing this game for all that long, started around the tail end of HW, but I do not think I have ever recalled SE ever making an official statement on the forums or loadstone regarding the issues around housing. So would it not be safe to assume they have no issue with it, and if by some means they have a change of heart and claim they have an issue with it so long after the fact then no it would not be fair of SE to take away players houses since at the time they clearly did not care enough to act on the issue.

Do not get me wrong SE is free to do whatever they please since it is their IP / game. Overall just voicing my own concerns on the matter.

Again you are repeating posts that I addressed. It is not safe to assume you can exploit rules because SE did not say anything about not how to exploit rules, you sign a ToS agreement that does that anyway, we been over this. For them doing something by now, SE does not exactly address problems that only happen with NA, as someone else pointed out. I extremely doubt there is a Japanese player out there on the OF bragging how they exploit rules and obtained houses in an unfair manner, so the GMs have no real guidelines on this sort of thing. (how does admitting to an act on the OF effect actions taken in the game?) I will say this though, they are watching this thread like a hawk and if something fits their strict checklist it will get addressed. A lot of posts are deleted and:

That signature lol

hmmm I wonder what happened to the subject referenced...

[HyoMinPark]

Nope. You can think I'm trolling, but I'm deadly serious with the idea of maintainance fees with regards to making housing a gil sink (what you were suggesting). The numbers I pulled up were arbitrary and came up with the numbers I did on the spot. I may have overshot the amount required, but I assure you I'm not trolling. And for the Ferrari thing, at least in the UK, the insurance is also much higher on sports cars in the UK, as is road tax, etc. So higher maintainance costs also apply there. Thus lending extra credence to the idea I suggested. With adjusted numbers and/or timeframes (so they're more accessible), would you still call me a troll, or would you be more willing to entertain the idea?

Meh, I disagree with the idea of maintenance fees. Using real-life examples doesn’t really sell the idea to me either. I already pay a mortgage IRL; I’d rather not have to maintain one in a video game, too.

[Hamada]

Meh, I disagree with the idea of maintenance fees. Using real-life examples doesn’t really sell the idea to me either. I already pay a mortgage IRL; I’d rather not have to maintain one in a video game, too.

You do though, pay 15 dollars a month at least every 45 days or you lose your house.

[HyoMinPark]

You do though, pay 15 dollars a month at least every 45 days or you lose your house.

I’m talking about the idea of putting gil into the house a la a real-life mortgage, not my subscription. I get wanting more gil sinks, but I disagree with maintenance fees for a house.

My subscription goes for more than just maintaining a house since I actually play the game. I can’t speak for others, but if you’re paying $15/month to just maintain your house and not even play the game...

[Awha]

Nope. You can think I'm trolling, but I'm deadly serious with the idea of maintainance fees with regards to making housing a gil sink (what you were suggesting). The numbers I pulled up were arbitrary and came up with the numbers I did on the spot. I may have overshot the amount required, but I assure you I'm not trolling. And for the Ferrari thing, at least in the UK, the insurance is also much higher on sports cars in the UK, as is road tax, etc. So higher maintainance costs also apply there. Thus lending extra credence to the idea I suggested. With adjusted numbers and/or timeframes (so they're more accessible), would you still call me a troll, or would you be more willing to entertain the idea?

I rather they increase the price of the plot itself making the buy in own a plot much higher. While not popular I do think the price for large plots are far too low given how few they are. I was able to get one for around 20 mi. I rather housing be a gil sink in the regard to prices outside of maintenance fees.