Fake FCs' Housing Abuse

[Penthea]

There's always going to be the handful of people that want to stick a char in their friend's FC especially since we can roll 8/server.

How would you suggest handling that?

I think they mean being able to be fc master of only one fc that has a house.

[Almagnus1]

I think they mean being able to be fc master of only one fc that has a house.

How would that work if an FC leadership happens (like for example) if the FC leader goes AFK and the #2 picks up the slack and continues to run the FC?

[Penthea]

How would that work if an FC leadership happens (like for example) if the FC leader goes AFK and the #2 picks up the slack and continues to run the FC?

I assume SE would put in a mechanic that prevents someone who is already fc leader of a fc with a house to become the fc leader of a second fc with a house. Like...that's the only way it would work. SE would have to change something.

But that person's idea isn't mine so I don't know how they would answer you. Anyway I think their suggestion is excessive. Limiting house ownership to be per server would be enough, and there is no reason to limit apartment ownership at all. I do agree that all alts should have access to the same private home...but I think almost everyone agrees with this given how convenient it would be for everyone. Even SE agreed this would be a good thing.

[Almagnus1]

I assume SE would put in a mechanic that prevents someone who is already fc leader of a fc with a house to become the fc leader of a second fc with a house. Like...that's the only way it would work. SE would have to change something.

But that person's idea isn't mine so I don't know how they would answer you. Anyway I think their suggestion is excessive. Limiting house ownership to be per server would be enough, and there is no reason to limit apartment ownership at all. I do agree that all alts should have access to the same private home...but I think almost everyone agrees with this given how convenient it would be for everyone. Even SE agreed this would be a good thing.

The only reason I can see that being an issue is when RL interrupts FFXIV, and the FC leader has to pass leadership for RL reasons (which can happen for a variety of perfectly valid reasons). The one scenario I want to avoid is a situation where the leader passes it to the #2 in the FC, but #2 can't take it for whatever reason and the FC house gets released to the market which screws over the FC because of picking a #2 that can't have an FC house on their account. That's a large reason why I want the FC house bound to the FC and the game code does a check for unique active subscriptions and leaves the FC house attached to the FC if there's 4+ unique active subscriptions. IMO it's the FC that's the owner of the house, and not an individual person, so the house ownership should be based on the number of people needed to create the FC (which is 4). I'm also going with the assumption that SE intended the FC to be created by four unique players (identified by their subscriptions), and not four alts on the same account, since you cannot have an alt sign your FC charter.

The real root of that issue (aside from people wanting to own a house) are the expedition and gardening mechanics being locked behind various housing requirements, and in order to deal with the shell FC problem you've got to remove the workshop and gardening incentives from the FC (and hopefully Endwalkers does that with gardening).