This is what i call BULLCRAP

[Kaurhz]

Regardless of whether it is possible, or whether it is against the ToS or not, the fact ultimately does remain that it fundamentally abuses a system that is intended to prevent people from purchasing multiple FC plots. There is a reason the restrictions are put in place on member count to purchase, and on a number of FCs an individual can purchase a house by default.

Now, as far as I am concerned whether intentional or not the developers in large enable this behaviour due to their reluctance to step on toes, so this issue will just continue to happen regardless of what 'restrictions' they try to apply.

I would think that it should be pretty simple to understand that these restrictions were put in place to prevent the very behaviour being exhibited in the screenshot, regardless of whether it is done via a workaround or not.

[Jalei]

intended to prevent people from purchasing multiple FC plots.

While I understand the point you're trying to make, the current system put into place simply does NOT mean to prevent said action. This could have been prevented properly but to say the current system is intended to prevent this, that's simply false. Make 8 fc's, all bid, claim plot, leave fc, claim plot, leave fc, repeat. Nothing prevents this with the system you refer to. This method shouldn't even be a loophole available to players but it is because SE simply doesn't care. And that's the truth of the matter at the end of the day. Until they do care, people will keep using the system as intended because that's just how it works.

[Stormpeaks]

While I understand the point you're trying to make, the current system put into place simply does NOT mean to prevent said action. This could have been prevented properly but to say the current system is intended to prevent this, that's simply false. Make 8 fc's, all bid, claim plot, leave fc, claim plot, leave fc, repeat. Nothing prevents this with the system you refer to. This method shouldn't even be a loophole available to players but it is because SE simply doesn't care. And that's the truth of the matter at the end of the day. Until they do care, people will keep using the system as intended because that's just how it works.

people will keep using the system as intended because that's just how it works.

This.
/10char

[Kaurhz]

While I understand the point you're trying to make, the current system put into place simply does NOT mean to prevent said action. This could have been prevented properly but to say the current system is intended to prevent this, that's simply false. Make 8 fc's, all bid, claim plot, leave fc, claim plot, leave fc, repeat. Nothing prevents this with the system you refer to. This method shouldn't even be a loophole available to players but it is because SE simply doesn't care. And that's the truth of the matter at the end of the day. Until they do care, people will keep using the system as intended because that's just how it works.

Then I would be delighted for you to share the very intention of this system. If the limitation imposed on housing is that you must not already own an FC plot on the same server on a given service account. Housing is one of the few avenues in this game where SE has seemingly elected for half-baked measures, taking the randomized timer, for example, and the insistence on continuing with a system that inarguably will always fall drastically short of the demand.

Yeah, I'm sorry but their own sloppiness doesn't really negate intent. I just simply don't see any other purpose of a system that has the imposed limitation that you cannot have more than 1 FC plot per server, is there any other purpose?

[Jalei]

Then I would be delighted for you to share the very intention of this system. If the limitation imposed on housing is that you must not already own an FC plot on the same server on a given service account. Housing is one of the few avenues in this game where SE has seemingly elected for half-baked measures, taking the randomized timer, for example, and the insistence on continuing with a system that inarguably will always fall drastically short of the demand.

Yeah, I'm sorry but their own sloppiness doesn't really negate intent. I just simply don't see any other purpose of a system that has the imposed limitation that you cannot have more than 1 FC plot per server, is there any other purpose?

I had actually typed up a lengthy response but in the end, what I say doesn't mean anything to you and I can safely make that assumption based on the fact you clearly just don't get it and never will. So I'm not going to try forcing the understanding on you. It would only annoy me when you aren't going to budge from your view you claim exists. However, I will say again that nothing done by Yoshi P and the dev team points to any intent to prevent multi house ownership. If it did, two things wouldn't exist. I'll list them and I'm done with this topic because quite frankly I really don't care.
1) Nothing prevents you from buying 100 fc's from other players(multi house ownership that isn't against ToS)
2) Nothing prevents you from making 8 fc's and buying 8 plots on the same world(multi house ownership that isn't against ToS)
If the actual intent was to prevent this, these wouldn't exist currently. They'd have been fixed long ago. So in the end, just accept that nobody at SE actually cares whether you own 1 house or 30 houses. There's no intent, no sloppiness, just lack of care. If you want only 1 house, cool. If you want 100 houses, cool. Doesn't bother me nor my gameplay experience. Its just a game and not one that I ever intend on letting upset me.

[Kaurhz]

I had actually typed up a lengthy response but in the end, what I say doesn't mean anything to you and I can safely make that assumption based on the fact you clearly just don't get it and never will. So I'm not going to try forcing the understanding on you. It would only annoy me when you aren't going to budge from your view you claim exists. However, I will say again that nothing done by Yoshi P and the dev team points to any intent to prevent multi house ownership. If it did, two things wouldn't exist. I'll list them and I'm done with this topic because quite frankly I really don't care.
1) Nothing prevents you from buying 100 fc's from other players(multi house ownership that isn't against ToS)
2) Nothing prevents you from making 8 fc's and buying 8 plots on the same world(multi house ownership that isn't against ToS)
If the actual intent was to prevent this, these wouldn't exist currently. They'd have been fixed long ago. So in the end, just accept that nobody at SE actually cares whether you own 1 house or 30 houses. There's no intent, no sloppiness, just lack of care. If you want only 1 house, cool. If you want 100 houses, cool. Doesn't bother me nor my gameplay experience. Its just a game and not one that I ever intend on letting upset me.

So you meant to insist that the land ownership restriction as per:

You do not have a character on the same World on the same service account that purchased and maintains a free company plot
* If the character in question purchased the plot, they may still submit a lottery entry for the purposes of relocation.

Does not show any apparent intent to prevent people from having multi-plot ownership? K then. You do you, I guess. I simply asked you a question whilst restating my interpretation of the aforementioned limitation, something to which you elected not to answer whilst subsequently going on some pointless tirade with your introduction. But hey, well done. Transferring ownership of an FC plot to a friend whilst you purchase another plot, and then subsequently have it transferred back circumvents that restriction. Hence sloppy.

[Jalei]

So you meant to insist that the land ownership restriction as per:



Does not show any apparent intent to prevent people from having multi-plot ownership? K then. You do you, I guess.

Yawn...you just don't get it. What you quoted is just words, there's no actual intent to prevent anything. At this point I can't help but wonder if you even understand the word intent and what it actually means. I'll assume you don't. Like I said, your view will never see more than one angle so good talk bud lol.

[Kaurhz]

Yawn...you just don't get it. What you quoted is just words, there's no actual intent to prevent anything. At this point I can't help but wonder if you even understand the word intent and what it actually means. I'll assume you don't. Like I said, your view will never see more than one angle so good talk bud lol.

Considering it is an enforceable restriction I would beg to differ, and no I think you're the one that fundamentally misunderstands what is meant by the word intent. The intent is what you aim to achieve through a given action. Not the result itself, as sloppy as it might be.

[Yodada]

So you meant to insist that the land ownership restriction as per:

the magic word is "and" so try to read it as it is and you will feel magically enlightend

(just in case: it doesnt say, purchase, give fc lead away, rinse and repeat)