Quote Originally Posted by Almagnus1 View Post
And you've got to accept that I have opinions you don't like... or perhaps you're one of these players with ill gotten gains and don't like the truth being pointed out?
The problem here between you and Catstab is complicated.

While Catstab is correct and nothing was obtained through "ill-gotten" means and is entirely by the rules at the time, that doesn't mean it's okay to own multiples of a limited resource. But none of us are in the right position to judge and condemn others for what they choose to do. So long as they use what they have then we can't complain about them having it.

it could certainly be made better with certain choices, but making players have to pay "rent" on an apartment only makes apartments less desirable, completely invalidating the point to the gil-sink mentality. Adding rent to houses would kill the desire for plenty of house-owners and all of the people that have houses probably are pretty well-off gil-wise, so it would need to be a large "rent sum" in order to make them consider relinquishing. Which has one of two end results. Either only the super-wealthy (and bots) own the houses, or every ward becomes a ghost town because nobody wants to pay 3M+ on a small, only to be charged an extra 50K+ every month to keep it.

(Exaggerated numbers, but you get the point)