BYE FC Exclusivity for this round. New housing Indo.

[Almagnus1]

For the 3-10 member FCs you could make the wards open up area by area, so wards of smaller FC's wouldn't look so empty because they are not as big as others but it may still cost the same amount of ressources then a full ward, so yeah, poor useage of the ressources sadly.

Please explain why any FC that has less than the number of players needed to create it (which is 4) should be able to own property. IMO all FCs that have 3 or less members should be stripped of their property after a sufficient amount of time has elapsed so they have the opportunity to bring their FC to bring it up to at least four members.

[PewPewPewPewPew]

Please explain why any FC that has less than the number of players needed to create it (which is 4) should be able to own property. IMO all FCs that have 3 or less members should be stripped of their property after a sufficient amount of time has elapsed so they have the opportunity to bring their FC to bring it up to at least four members.

Please explain why you think the number of people in an FC correlates with the proficiency of that FC and the effectiveness/activity level of that FC. And why that number being over 4 is so specifically the difference between being deserving of a house and not. There are 3-man FCs that are more effective and active than some 50-man FCs.

And if you're going to go back to FCs being less than 4 people being a leading cause of housing shortage, go look at the other posts where it has been cited showing that 1 to 3 man FC's that own plots are still less than 6% of all plots across all the servers entirely. Maybe you avoided that post because actual data scares you and leaves you no room to dish out more of your silly suggestions. All your ideas seem to require the demise of people who you make you angry.

[Almagnus1]

Please explain why you think the number of people in an FC correlates with the proficiency of that FC and the effectiveness/activity level of that FC. And why that number being over 4 is so specifically the difference between being deserving of a house and not. There are 3-man FCs that are more effective and active than some 50-man FCs.

And if you're going to go back to FCs being less than 4 people being a leading cause of housing shortage, go look at the other posts where it has been cited showing that 1 to 3 man FC's that own plots are still less than 6% of all plots across all the servers entirely. Maybe you avoided that post because actual data scares you and leaves you no room to dish out more of your silly suggestions. All your ideas seem to require the demise of people who you make you angry.

That's still about 6% of housing that can be allocated to people that can actively use it. SE said we aren't getting more new wards because they can't do the heavy datacenter work that would be needed due to covid, so if that inefficiency can be eliminated through adding an FC restriction (that should have always been there to begin with), that's still about 6% of housing that's back in the market.

Why are you in favor of wasting 6% of the housing?

[PewPewPewPewPew]

Why are you in favor of wasting 6% of the housing?

The fact that you are so nit picky over small numbers like 1 to 3 people in an FC or 6% makes it very clear why you completely dodged the main question I asked you as a followup to when you drilled another user in this thread over how everyone with less than 4 people in an FC should have their house taken away. You clearly have no rational argument to support your insane reasoning. In favor of 6% housing you say? 6% is such an insignificant number that only someone like you looking to pick a fight over every little pebble would irrationally concern themselves over. Hell you'd probably even cry over 1% if you had to just to push your meaningless opinion war.

Let me re-post the question you completely dodged so you can think about it again and so we can stay on the topic at hand.

Please explain why you think the number of people in an FC correlates with the proficiency of that FC and the effectiveness/activity level of that FC. And why that number being over 4 is so specifically the difference between being deserving of a house and not. There are 3-man FCs that are more effective and active than some 50-man FCs.

[Almagnus1]

The fact that you are so nit picky over small numbers like 1 to 3 people in an FC or 6% makes it very clear why you completely dodged the main question I asked you as a followup to when you drilled another user in this thread over how everyone with less than 4 people in an FC should have their house taken away.

Why should an FC that has less people THAN THE NUMBER REQUIRED TO CREATE IT be able to buy a house?

Stop dodging the question and answer it already.

You clearly have no rational argument to support your insane reasoning.

SE said they can't add hardware due to Covid, so the only other choice is optimization. In other words, force everyone to comply by the same restrictions outlined at https://na.finalfantasyxiv.com/lodes.../housing_land/ .

And yet, asking SE to enforce reasonable restrictions upon everyone that will free up additional housing because they can't add more servers at the moment is somehow irrational....

Yeah, you are right. And strip away every private house that has not at least 3 tenants.

Private house =/= FC house

What do you have against private house owners?

[Mhaeric]

Private house =/= FC house

What do you have against private house owners?

Whoosh.

[Kenky]

In other words, force everyone to comply by the same restrictions outlined at https://na.finalfantasyxiv.com/lodes.../housing_land/ .

And yet, asking SE to enforce reasonable restrictions upon everyone that will free up additional housing because they can't add more servers at the moment is somehow irrational....

Private house =/= FC house

What do you have against private house owners?

No. Not "in other words". Optimization doesn't mean compliance or enforcement of rules. Look up the actual term, please. Incase you're against that, let me say what it means here.

Optimization means (in FFXIVs case, that is) to optimize the movement of data, both in download and upload packets. Optimizing that load would mean less stress on the hardware, as less of the data itself would be clogging up the digital pathways, even if it means more data passes through said pathways. a 10MB hole can certainly deal with a constant stream of 8MBs, but a giant wad of 1MBs at the same time may clog it up.

And yes, Private houses =/= FC houses. But if you were actually paying attention to housing in general. You'd realize that FC housing barely scrapes above 30% of all owned plots (the number isn't concrete, but that's a general ballpark estimate) So where do you think the 70% is? Private housing. The fact you are so adamant in terminating 6% of the housing (that you dont even know gets used) means anything that isn't FC-related (while also complying with your personal belief of it having to be X number of players in said FC, which is laughable in its own right, given a single person can get four of their alts into an FC and circumvent the problem. Almost as if that's already occuring! Huh.) is also under the same scrutiny of "It's not needed, thus get rid of it."

The fact that it had to be explained to you shows how pointless this entire conversation with you is. But here we are again!

I mean, hey. They can easily fix the FC player requirement in just a flick of the switch. Make it so three / four unique accounts need to be considered active within a set time. But they're not going to do that, because that is a reason for FC members to either kick everything that's not online every day, or make people avoid FCs even more than they already do, completely contradicting the entire point of Free Companies and FC-Housing in general.

To create a small Community and promote making friendships. Though that depends on the FC, it is at least (in my personal view, which can be wrong mind!) what the system is for. Same with Guilds in WoW and Guild Wars and.. Other MMOs and such.

[Almagnus1]

The fact you are so adamant in terminating 6% of the housing (that you dont even know gets used) means anything that isn't FC-related (while also complying with your personal belief of it having to be X number of players in said FC, which is laughable in its own right, given a single person can get four of their alts into an FC and circumvent the problem. Almost as if that's already occuring! Huh.) is also under the same scrutiny of "It's not needed, thus get rid of it."

I've also pointed out that loophole many a time, and you'd know this if you had actually been reading what I have been posting rather than skimming and going off of your hot take.

They can easily fix the FC player requirement in just a flick of the switch. Make it so three / four unique accounts need to be considered active within a set time.

And that would be a very solid solution to the entire shell FC problem, and I would be fine if that check was done on a per FC basis. I mean, we're talking about putting another 300 or so houses back onto the market, and that's the equivalent of adding another ward to each neighborhood (and then some) by fixing the FC loophole.

[worldofneil]

Why should an FC that has less people THAN THE NUMBER REQUIRED TO CREATE IT be able to buy a house?

They can't.

At the point the person tries to purchase a house for an FC the system checks the current members. If it's 3 or less it won't let them buy the plot. If it's 4 they're eligible to buy it.

Yes they can then go below 4 members and still keep the house, but that's not what you asked...

[Almagnus1]

They can't.

At the point the person tries to purchase a house for an FC the system checks the current members. If it's 3 or less it won't let them buy the plot. If it's 4 they're eligible to buy it.

Yes they can then go below 4 members and still keep the house, but that's not what you asked...

Ok, why should an FC that drops below the number to people required to purchase it be allowed to keep it?