Multiple Houses

[Jojoya]

@catstab what you dont seem to realize is a couple players (120 per server) still doesn't compare to the 200 people potentially in a free company who could own 1 of thoses houses. So lets say 10 houses are actually owned buy 1 person or FC. That has the potential of allowing 2000 people to have a home. So if 120 houses are owned by 5 people on a server take away all but 1 from them thats 115 houses that become free. Now max case scenario FC's buy every house. Maximum amount to benefit would be 23,000 people per server. Minimum of 115. And only people who would suffer is 5 people. Now I get it that not every house will be owned by an FC but WAY more people will benefit from the few who lose. Them are the numbers and it's hard to argue with it. 200 people max having access to say 200 plots? Thats a lot of wasted potential especially since most of those FC's probably only have 1 active member.

Except the reality is few FCs have 200+ active unique members. In most cases those members don't benefit from the FC owning a house because officers tend to rigidly restrict house decorating privileges and rarely spend any gil made from gardening, workshops and company credits on the members. Access to purchasing FC chambers mean nothing when players can easily buy an apartment with or without FC membership.

You're dramatically inflating the potential impact when there just aren't that many multiple house owners out there, grandfathered or not, and most worlds don't even have 23,000 active players.

Do yourself and everyone else a favor. Turn your crusade toward something that actually would make a dramatic and positive impact on housing for the community - expansion of the instanced housing system - instead of on a dead cause that would only benefit a handful of players per server.

[ERMITANYO]

Enter improved instanced mass housing available for all sprouts and non-sprouts, that is aesthetically pleasing and includes amenities like large scale gardening, a market board next to a main aetherite linked to other mass housing areas within the world and of course allows inter server travel as well.

A player can still try their luck on the rare resource plotted housing but with significantly lessened stress.

[Catstab]

me saying they would do that if they aimed for fun is still a lot more relevant to the conversation as it ACTUALLY pertains to your comment

I'm going to explain what a 'red herring' is. It's a meaningless distraction from the conversation at hand, generally used when someone is backed into a corner but not ready to stop talking.

Person A: This company should take away people's earned rewards, so they can be distributed to different people

Person B: That goes against their standards of ethics, they would never do it

Person A: Well, they make expansion packs! (this is a red herring)

Regarding the "What if 5 accounts own 120 houses" comment, that's mathematically not possible. Even with 8 personals and 8 FC houses, it would take 8 accounts to hold 128 houses. It seems unlikely to me that 8 accounts are built up like this on any one server. It is unlikely to the point of impossible that all 112 houses freed up by your proposal would go to FCs. As an aside, most FCs have many fewer than 200 members, and almost every FC with anywhere near 200 members has housing.

Anyway, again, SE doesn't revoke already earned rewards. Grandfathered houses are here to stay until their owners quit the game.

My advice would be: petition for SE to enforce a 1 FC house per account guideline in future purchases. Currently they do not, and it is perfectly possible to collect 8 FC houses on any account. People continue to do this and while it is not the core problem with housing, it is undeniably detrimental.


EDIT: OP says the above example 'is dumb.' Here's the actual conversation:

Square needs to make people with multiples like that choose a house and then auto-demo the rest... that should be what they get for being greedy.

(This company should take away people's earned rewards, so they can be distributed to different people)

SE would consider taking away earned rewards as unethical and won't consider doing it. They would also consider it anti-fun

(That goes against their standards of ethics, they would never do it)

If they wanted more fun they wouldn't have destroyed the abilities every expansion... like for instance the PLD tank stances

(Well, they make expansion packs!)

I'm calling out this changing the subject to Paladin tank stances in the middle of a discussion of business ethics as a way for OP to distract from a debate they don't have anything left to contribute to.

[Basch1990]

Except the reality is few FCs have 200+ active unique members. In most cases those members don't benefit from the FC owning a house because officers tend to rigidly restrict house decorating privileges and rarely spend any gil made from gardening, workshops and company credits on the members. Access to purchasing FC chambers mean nothing when players can easily buy an apartment with or without FC membership.

You're dramatically inflating the potential impact when there just aren't that many multiple house owners out there, grandfathered or not, and most worlds don't even have 23,000 active players.

Do yourself and everyone else a favor. Turn your crusade toward something that actually would make a dramatic and positive impact on housing for the community - expansion of the instanced housing system - instead of on a dead cause that would only benefit a handful of players per server.

how about you read my post again? I think you missed a few key word. Like idk. Maximum? Minimum? Oh and potentially? Did I say every FC has 200? Did I say my numbers were exact? No. I gave a hypothetical scenario. And you and me seem to have a different opinion on a handful it seems. The people who own these multiple are the handful especially when compared to the amount of people who could buy a house if they lost them.

[Basch1990]

EDIT: OP says the above example 'is dumb.' Here's the actual conversation:

(This company should take away people's earned rewards, so they can be distributed to different people)

(That goes against their standards of ethics, they would never do it)

(Well, they make expansion packs!)

I'm calling out this changing the subject to Paladin tank stances in the middle of a discussion of business ethics as a way for OP to distract from a debate they don't have anything left to contribute to.

Way to skip out the post where somebody asked me to clarify, dude. Way to try and manipulate posts to work in your favor XD sorry dude but till you are ready to actually read everything and stop making stupid grasps at things that literally doesn't make sense, I'll let you do you. Lmk when you are ready, bruh

[Basch1990]

No, you didn't. Take a peek.

By the way, hypothetical scenarios that are impossible are called 'hyperbole' and have no place in arguments.

They've already decided to let them keep them. You don't like it? Well, you quitting won't bankrupt the company. Obviously it's best for them if you continue to play, which you appear to be doing.

Please read this one again, and move on.

Now max case scenario FC's buy every house. Maximum amount to benefit would be 23,000 people per server. Minimum of 115. And only people who would suffer is 5 people. Now I get it that not every house will be owned by an FC but WAY more people will benefit from the few who lose. Them are the numbers and it's hard to argue with it. 200 people max having access to say 200 plots? Thats a lot of wasted potential especially since most of those FC's probably only have 1 active member.

I didn't? Read this again. Proof you aren't reading anything. Just skimming. Later, bruh.

[Basch1990]

By the way, hypothetical scenarios that are impossible are called 'hyperbole' and have no place in arguments.

Good thing my scenarios aren't impossible. With how thing were, plenty of people. Had the potential especially since FC's bought entire wards. All they had to do was buy 2 full wards to get 120. Makes it absolutely possible. Sorry dude.

[Catstab]

Way to skip out the post where somebody asked me to clarify, dude.

Someone asked you to clarify because what you said made no sense. Your response to "SE will never take away houses, it goes against their ethics" was "they took my tank stance!"

Good thing my scenarios aren't impossible.

They are, though. Let's dive back into your so-called 'hypothetical situation.'

So if 120 houses are owned by 5 people on a server

8 personals + 8 FCs x 5 accounts = 80 houses, absolute maximum. So your hypothetical scenario is what if people exist who have 12 characters per account? That's not possible, so you can stop worrying.

Please try to stick to the conversation we're having and avoid being insulting or combative. Or just stop posting. This is a dead thread.

[Jojoya]

Please try to stick to the conversation we're having and avoid being insulting or combative. Or just stop posting. This is a dead thread.

Appreciate your efforts Catstab but there's use arguing with her. She's firmly stuck in what she believes and incapable of listening to reason.

She's also got the same right to post here as any of us. Best to ignore her if you find her arguments more irritating than entertaining.

[Basch1990]

Someone asked you to clarify because what you said made no sense. Your response to "SE will never take away houses, it goes against their ethics" was "they took my tank stance!"



They are, though. Let's dive back into your so-called 'hypothetical situation.'



8 personals + 8 FCs x 5 accounts = 80 houses, absolute maximum. So your hypothetical scenario is what if people exist who have 12 characters per account? That's not possible, so you can stop worrying.

Please try to stick to the conversation we're having and avoid being insulting or combative. Or just stop posting. This is a dead thread.

And here you go talking about current. Wonderful. When this entire post is not about the 8 MAXIMUM that you can get RIGHT NOW. But hey. You do you, bruh