Major changes needed for housing

[linayar]

This is the intent and I think it's pretty clearly stated. The issue is it's implementation which isn't working and it appears they are unable to fix it.

"Each service account may only possess one free company estate hall and one private estate per World.

Once this limit has been reached, it is not possible to purchase further plots of land in the same World on that service account, including separate characters on the same World."

The intent is in the first sentence, but the application is in the second sentence, which only mentions purchase. If you are handed ownership of an FC that already has a plot of land, nothing is said about that scenario. You're not purchasing a plot as it already comes with the FC, so that limitation in the second sentence does not apply to you.

This is why FC housing is complicated unless there is a rule that you cannot own more than one FCs in the same world and automatic transfers would bypass your character.

[Kaurhz]

Still that is pigeon holding FC's to certain tasks they may not get enjoyment out of just to maintain their FC house cause we have to punish those that would probably barely free up 1% of total available plots.

Also the restriction put in place by SE were lifted by them they just never updated the rules. No tricks or exploits are required to amass multiple FC plots. Trust me I get the idea behind getting plots away from people with many plots but as someone who use to play feast for hour prior to the change regarding chat I am leery of pushing forward any system that makes it harder for legit smaller FC's or pigeon hold them into a certain amount of in game tasks that would allow them to keep their FC instead of just letting them play the content they want.

Bandaid fixes are nice in terms of providing a feel good response to the player base but what we really need is a more tangible fix.

Personally I would give up all my plots if they tied WC to Grand companies and if they allow plots to have more gardening plots no matter the size. Since I mainly have more then one plot for mass crossbreeding and and voyages. Know it does not solve the core of this issue but at least it does not pass the buck to the average smaller FC just to punish a minority of the player base.q

No, it's just tying an upkeep system to something that is intrinsic to the game. You do dungeons, you roll or pass on loot and you submit it to Grand Company. Practically any given activity you do in this game awards FC credits. "Probably", doesn't matter whether it's probably or indefinite there's hardly a justifiable reason in which you require more than the standard 1FC house and 1 personal plot, barring the need to be greedy about the matter.

It's not an exploit or a trick; as much as it is someone is just simply circumventing the limitations imposed on the housing system in order to acquire more plots for themselves and in the instance of certain individuals for no reason other than for the sake of it. Attach whatever word to this statement you like. The limitation is imposed for a reason, and that reason is they don't want individuals monopolizing the housing system, or marketing them off.

If you ask me their 'bandaid' has caused as many issues as what it has solved. That being said, frankly, if I had the choice of the matter then people would not have been grandfathered in. I'd have given them a 14-day warning that additional houses tied to their service account would be up for demolishing with costs incurred to purchase the plots reimbursed in full, but that's just me.

[LaylaTsarra]

If you are handed ownership of an FC that already has a plot of land, nothing is said about that scenario. You're not purchasing a plot as it already comes with the FC, so that limitation in the second sentence does not apply to you.

Well technically there is no owner of a FC it's owned by the members. It's not like a private estate. I do think however it's reasonable to assume that the intent was/is for only one character per account to be a leader of a FC. Be that as it may it certainly behooves SE to clarify the intent and to fix it given what is happening in reality for some users is certainly not what they had in mind in my view.

[linayar]

Well technically there is no owner of a FC it's owned by the members. It's not like a private estate. I do think however it's reasonable to assume that the intent was/is for only one character per account to be a leader of a FC. Be that as it may it certainly behooves SE to clarify the intent and to fix it given what is happening in reality for some users is certainly not their intent in my view.

There is an owner/leader of an FC because only that owner/leader can disband the FC.

I also think the intent is clear. It's just the application is lacking. The limitation should not only be about not being able to purchase more plot, but also not being able to possess more plots even if you did not purchase it.

Or, they can just fix it by preventing a service account from having more than one FC leader in the same world.

[Arillyn]

https://na.finalfantasyxiv.com/lodes.../housing_land/

Ok, according to the rules stated in the above link, while you can only "own" one FC plot per world per service account, the actual limitation seems to be on you purchasing a plot. You can technically have two characters on two different FCs with two different houses.

The question is whether you can then be given ownership (either automatically or manually) to both FCs. Does anyone know if there is a service account limitation on owning an FC? If you can own both FCs, then there is no actual limitation stated in the link above on owning both houses as well since you did not need to purchase either plot.

I would have to find it, but when SE made it so you could only have one FC house on a server, what happened was this: Person A & B are in an FC that owns a house (mind you that neither person A or B had to be the owner of the FC, they were just in an FC that had a house). And then say person B had an alt on the same world that joined another FC that didn't yet have a house. Person B's alt also doesn't own this FC, they are just in another FC on the same world. That FC that doesn't have a house yet will never be able to buy a house because someone in the FC has another character in another FC with a house. That's why they quietly changed it. I think their code couldn't deal with the nuance of the situation that someone could have two characters in different FCs on the same server and it would mess up another FC from getting a house ever - even if that person owned neither FC.

Bottom line - SE's housing system is awful and they need to make player housing unlimited so anyone can have a house (personal or FC).

[linayar]

I would have to find it, but when SE made it so you could only have one FC house on a server, what happened was this: Person A & B are in an FC that owns a house (mind you that neither person A or B had to be the owner of the FC, they were just in an FC that had a house). And then say person B had an alt on the same world that joined another FC that didn't yet have a house. Person B's alt also doesn't own this FC, they are just in another FC on the same world. That FC that doesn't have a house yet will never be able to buy a house because someone in the FC has another character in another FC with a house. That's why they quietly changed it. I think their code couldn't deal with the nuance of the situation that someone could have two characters in different FCs on the same server and it would mess up another FC from getting a house ever - even if that person owned neither FC.

It's fine to fix that. I think as long as neither character is the FC leader (or only one), there is no problem. They just need to prevent the case where both characters (or more) are able to be FC leaders that each owns a house.

Bottom line - SE's housing system is awful and they need to make player housing unlimited so anyone can have a house (personal or FC).

If they can, then sure. But if they cannot, then a firm restriction is better than a weak one that can be bypassed.

[NanaWiloh]

Not all multiple home owners are SINGULAR PLAYERS!!! Some of these people are actual entire FC's with members going out gobbling up homes. As for account to be 1 leader of FC wont work. I am FC leader I can give any member of my FC full control of the FC without passing leadership. There are only two things I cant grant them 1. The power disband the FC 2. Control what permissions I have as leader. Auto promotion takes 90 days to kick in and the momnet I log in it resets. Do to the 90 day promotion system and the fact that any member can reset the FC house timer, I techinically only have to log in 4 times out of the year to keep my rank has FC lead. How do we solve these problem well.. one charge 250k GC week in upkeep for FC houses. FC's with multiple homes GONE!! FC leaders have to play 15 hrs a week to keep their rank and they are the only ones who can reset the FC house timer. Take away the FC leaders ability to grant permissions to others..

To be blunt if you not willing punish innocent and less fortunate players then dont suggest these two idea's.

[Tlachtga]

housing probably isn't going to change

the playerbase is in a situation where they'll most likely keep paying the monthly sub even if they're not playing the game anymore in order to keep their houses.

yoshida's comments about how its fine if people take a break if the game isn't fun for them anymore, knowing full well people are highly unlikely to fully unsub given the terrible housing situation in place was *chef's kiss*

from a business standpoint, its bloody genius. why would you change that?

[Awha]

Not all multiple home owners are SINGULAR PLAYERS!!! Some of these people are actual entire FC's with members going out gobbling up homes. As for account to be 1 leader of FC wont work. I am FC leader I can give any member of my FC full control of the FC without passing leadership. There are only two things I cant grant them 1. The power disband the FC 2. Control what permissions I have as leader. Auto promotion takes 90 days to kick in and the momnet I log in it resets. Do to the 90 day promotion system and the fact that any member can reset the FC house timer, I techinically only have to log in 4 times out of the year to keep my rank has FC lead. How do we solve these problem well.. one charge 250k GC week in upkeep for FC houses. FC's with multiple homes GONE!! FC leaders have to play 15 hrs a week to keep their rank and they are the only ones who can reset the FC house timer. Take away the FC leaders ability to grant permissions to others..

To be blunt if you not willing punish innocent and less fortunate players then dont suggest these two idea's.

That is the thing though people are willing to do that just to come after the small group of players that have many houses. Which is weird to me. Especially since those who have multiple plots are operating within in allowed system presented by SE.

The sad reality is any tax, fee, change to relocation will simply impacted the general player base far more then any change aimed towards reigning in those who have excess.

People truly underestimate the lengths people will go to maintain their current standard of living and overestimate how prevalent this issue really is, and how hard it currently is to break into said market and do this.

Though I will say if SE is in a tight spot cause yes people like myself are greedy but people throw that around like it is inherently wrong or those that have care what people think of their actions. Like the GC idea would make it impossible for me to maintain all my plots that is for certain only at the obscene amount. I doubt most general players would look forward to having to farm GC seals just to keep their FC which is mostly the only action that could in practice make owning multiple plots impossible. Though can we say for certain it would not negatively impact the general player base.

On a side note I think SE needs to pick a stance on housing do they want it be to be finite resources that is meant to be scarce or do they want it to be viable for everyone.

[Ravenblade1979]

I must say I am impressed by responses. Lots of good discussion but in the end a huge portion of us agree changes need to be made