Quote Originally Posted by Penthea View Post
I wasn't aware that the restriction broke anything.

I don't like that the solution to this is just to remove the restriction because that's essentially replacing one problem with another. But anyone who knows a lot about housing knows that SE don't exactly rank it high up on their list of things to improve. So I'm not surprised if that is what happened.

And before anyone says the restriction needed to be removed for the fc leader mechanic would work; SE could just change how that mechanic works.

For example the leadership could get automatically passed on to someone without leadership of a fc house on that server. In the event that no one in the fc is eligible due to every member being a fc leader on that server on another character, then the first player could get notified that if they relinquish leadership elsewhere they will become eligible to take on the leader role in that fc. They have, let's say, a two week window to redeem the fc and if they do not, then the next player gets the same option and so on.

SE could have both systems work fine. But well...they need to care enough about the housing system to do that. And they do not.
They do care about the housing system. We wouldn't get all the changes we get each expansion is they didn't. But that doesn't mean they have all the time and resources needed to make all desired improvements to the system.

Perhaps what they need to do is state that a player cannot lead more than one FC per world. If the player has a character that already leads a FC, their other characters may not start a new FC or be promoted to leader in another one they join unless they step down as leader on the other character first. It's highly unlikely any legitimate FC would have no members eligible for promotion.

One thing I'm finding interesting is that SE did update the housing information page on Lodestone back in October. It does still clearly state that a player is only allowed to own one personal and one FC house per world per service account. That runs counter to all the player claims that SE removed the ownership rules and left only the purchase rule in place.

SE may not be able to use programming to prevent the additional purchase but that shouldn't prevent the GMs from manually enforcing that rule where there is evidence a player is abusing the system to gain access to multiple houses.