Decrease the demand for houses with taxes

[Archaell]

We have this situation here in which everybody wants a mansion but there are just not enough of them to go around. Too many of players can afford it and so they feel obliged to get the mansion because there are no drawbacks of owning one. Demolitions help with the issue, but not enough so - introduce property taxes.

For example: Let's start with 10% of plot cost per month.

Large enough upkeep would make players more content with smaller houses or motivate them to join friends/free companies to share the load among members. Also players would be more likely to just let the houses they don't use much go to save on gil. The housing zones would be used more actively and more players would be able to touch the housing.

It wouldn't be a popular change but it has its benefits.

[Krokov]

I disagree such a change would be very unpopular and unnecessary. It wouldn't really decrease the demand either players who want will still get it why should everyone as we're be punished with paying extra for the upkeep of a house. There are players who have spent a long time probably saving to get the house but they won't they would just be quiteridiculous to add a taxing to houses in order to try to manipulate people out of going for mansions.

[Dzian]

I disagree such a change would be very unpopular and unnecessary. It wouldn't really decrease the demand either players who want will still get it why should everyone as we're be punished with paying extra for the upkeep of a house. There are players who have spent a long time probably saving to get the house but they won't they would just be quiteridiculous to add a taxing to houses in order to try to manipulate people out of going for mansions.

A lot of players would be happy with a leasing system or rental system If it actually meant they could take those breaks yoshi keeps telling players its ok to do...

I'd happily cough up for upto 6 months of a lease (1 patch cycle) if I wanted to say drop my sub till the next patch release and actually take a break from the game..

it's been suggested numerous times before in various ways. such as a ventures style currency for plot leases which could be bought using gc seals or something or just paying a ward keeper direct gils.

It would alleviate some of the demand as well as many plots just sit there with an empty house that never gets touched or used.. if they were to combine such a system with something like giving apartments access to an allotment / balcany garden area you'd free up even more houses. as theres more than a few people who own a house just for the gardening..

A leasing system would work much better than the Demo system, that system is borderline useless as it's been suspended more of the games life than it has been active.

[Kenky]

1. Wrong channel. You'd need to go to Housing for this rant to stick.

2. Players are already paying taxes in this thing called their "Subscription Fee". Don't try to add more caveats.

Adding a "tax" to housing would make it so that only the richest players (or people that can gather/craft the expensive stuff!) will be able to own them. And bots.. So you'd be giving all the plots to Bots. Kudos to you.

[Yshtola_Cat]

Even though I believe introducing some sort of tax would be irrelevant given how much gil is in circulation, it would be better than having a "gil sink" that ends up reimbursing nearly the entire amount of gil that was originally spent when a house is ultimately being auto demolished. Reinstating devaluation and dusting off the 2.1 housing price sheet is the only meaningful solution.

But good luck talking about economics with the people in here. Yet alone have them understand that the so-called supply issue is not caused by a lack of supply, but by prices that have yet to be adjusted in nearly 6 years.

[Amenara]

Even though I believe introducing some sort of tax would be irrelevant given how much gil is in circulation, it would be better than having a "gil sink" that ends up reimbursing nearly the entire amount of gil that was originally spent when a house is ultimately being auto demolished. Reinstating devaluation and dusting off the 2.1 housing price sheet is the only meaningful solution.

But good luck talking about economics with the people in here. Yet alone have them understand that the so-called supply issue is not caused by a lack of supply, but by prices that have yet to be adjusted in nearly 6 years.

The problem with talking about the economics of ff14 housing is that the supply is completely arbitrary and fake. SE could redesign the system to get rid of supply issues if they wanted to dedicate their dev resources towards that, but they currently refuse to do so because of an outdated idea on how their housing should work. If they added a tax to housing, what would it accomplish? It would probably alienate more people from the game and anger a larger portion of the player base because now people with houses are being retroactively punished for having a house and new players are going to be even more punished over wanting a house.

[Yshtola_Cat]

The problem with talking about the economics of ff14 housing is that the supply is completely arbitrary and fake. SE could redesign the system to get rid of supply issues if they wanted to dedicate their dev resources towards that, but they currently refuse to do so because of an outdated idea on how their housing should work. If they added a tax to housing, what would it accomplish? It would probably alienate more people from the game and anger a larger portion of the player base because now people with houses are being retroactively punished for having a house and new players are going to be even more punished over wanting a house.

I think you entirely missed the point given how you used "supply issue". Regarding the second half, do you know what a deterrent is? Players were "punished" when they adjusted prices the first time, then they were punished when auto-demolition was brought in and one last time when prices were adjusted again.

The OF will cry as it always does. The players that don't come here every single day to cry about how miserable their gaming experience is will be just fine.

[Amenara]

I think you entirely missed the point given how you used "supply issue". Regarding the second half, do you know what a deterrent is? Players were "punished" when they adjusted prices the first time, then they were punished when auto-demolition was brought in and one last time when prices were adjusted again.

The OF will cry as it always does. The players that don't come here every single day to cry about how miserable their gaming experience is will be just fine.

So the solution is make housing prohibitively expensive again to lower demand instead of just fixing the arbitrary supply issue and allowing everyone to experience all of the content the game has to offer? K...

[ForteNightshade]

A taxation will accomplish next to nothing except to hurt newer players even further. Using myself as an example. I have over 300M. What system could you implement that would remotely phase me without seriously impacting the enjoyment of players with nowhere near my gil count? 1M gil per month wouldn't even dent my total. I made that back selling the Troll mount from Unreal farming. If you push that number higher, it'll make housing near impossible for most players to maintain - especially nowadays when crafting is near worthless in terms of profitability.

All this does is punish players who don't have loads of gil saved up and encourages RMT. I can guarantee you people will pay real money just to offset the rent fee.

[Kranel_San]

The only game I know of that implemented housing taxes in recent years is new world, and I'm pretty sure it was very much disliked than a lot of bad things in that game.