This new SYSTEM DOESN'T Work

[Greyhawk]

That's a strange response. "Adding more supply doesn't address supply".

???

It does address supply. What we don't know is how adequately it will address it for each world.

If you meant to say that it is not a final solution to the problem, then I'd agree.

So, we have 1000 starving people. We have 250 units of food, one unit for each person. But that's okay, because we gave 250 people food. We did a good thing! Then, we'll slowly try to give another 25 people some food next year. Maybe 50. Oh, but wait, we can't grow anymore food because there's a soil shortage. Oh, but we can add some soil we found, and create some independent greenhouses that each person can have, but it's not food really, it's a few crumbs.

See where I am going with this? No, adding more supply doesn't address supply when you aren't supplying the demand. You are giving just enough to let them starve to the point they die off, or they become so famished they give up.

[Arohk]

There has never been a house in the lottery that drew 400,000 bids. If you're going to use spurious "math" as an argument, at least make it realistic.

yeah always the exaggeration, the worst chance i had was ~2% on a large plot, which is an infinite inprovement over the placard clicking.

[UkcsAlias]

So, we have 1000 starving people. We have 250 units of food, one unit for each person. But that's okay, because we gave 250 people food. We did a good thing!

Bad example because food is a resource ment to survive. To get a closer example:

You can only give 250 units of food that are just enough for surviving, by splitting those resources, both wont survive. And as a result, those 250 units are just enough to save 250 people. The 750 other people in this case are out of luck. (this example fails at the part that the next cycle the people would be dead, which in ff isnt the case).

And adding supply, even if it would have been just 900 units while 1000 is demanded, is still greatly going to help. Its not optimal, but its a major improvement anyway. But lets say we add 900 plots: Instead of 750 that are out of luck, its then just 100 (yes, more supply means less interested people will also join in! it wont make it 0 demand). An 85% decrease! This then also reduces pressure upon later cycles. So your 25 extra units that are slowly given out, then are only going to face competition from 100 people instead of 750. So even here, it makes it more graceful.

[Battler-Ushiromiya]

I mean, random luck has nothing to do with skill.

Sure it does, get luckier

[Jojoya]

So, we have 1000 starving people. We have 250 units of food, one unit for each person. But that's okay, because we gave 250 people food. We did a good thing! Then, we'll slowly try to give another 25 people some food next year. Maybe 50. Oh, but wait, we can't grow anymore food because there's a soil shortage. Oh, but we can add some soil we found, and create some independent greenhouses that each person can have, but it's not food really, it's a few crumbs.

See where I am going with this? No, adding more supply doesn't address supply when you aren't supplying the demand. You are giving just enough to let them starve to the point they die off, or they become so famished they give up.

Where are you going with this? You're trying to exaggerate ownership of a house in a video game as being comparable to a real life survival situation.

You're in no danger of dying just because you can't get that house.

But hey, let's take your analogy a step farther. You know what people do in real life when they can't get what they need to survive where they are? They move to where what they want can be obtained.

There's a sea of empty plots in the ward where my Marilith character bought her house. Doesn't cost you a dime to move your character there unless you're already on a New world (which you aren't). The next lottery entry period starts tomorrow. You could be in a house on Sunday. You still get to play with friends thanks to the convenience of data center travel, which is also free to use.

Or you can wait until next year and take your chance getting a house with the new ward additions. Maybe you'll get lucky. Maybe you won't. Maybe you'll still be complaining about how you're in danger of dying because you can't be bothered to pick up and go where houses are available.

Yes, this system is crap. I 100% agree that SE should have done a better job from the start. Players shouldn't have to make a choice between being on the same world with their friends or having access to content.

But they didn't and we're stuck with the system as it is. Knowing that it could have been otherwise doesn't make it so.

You can either take advantage of the opportunities presented to you or you can go without a house.

[Kyssa]

Sure it does, get luckier

I've been lucky, but that doesn't mean everyone has.

Hopefully, the addition of new wards helps folks out though.

[Greyhawk]

Where are you going with this? You're trying to exaggerate ownership of a house in a video game as being comparable to a real life survival situation.

You're in no danger of dying just because you can't get that house.

But hey, let's take your analogy a step farther. You know what people do in real life when they can't get what they need to survive where they are? They move to where what they want can be obtained.

There's a sea of empty plots in the ward where my Marilith character bought her house. Doesn't cost you a dime to move your character there unless you're already on a New world (which you aren't). The next lottery entry period starts tomorrow. You could be in a house on Sunday. You still get to play with friends thanks to the convenience of data center travel, which is also free to use.

Or you can wait until next year and take your chance getting a house with the new ward additions. Maybe you'll get lucky. Maybe you won't. Maybe you'll still be complaining about how you're in danger of dying because you can't be bothered to pick up and go where houses are available.

Yes, this system is crap. I 100% agree that SE should have done a better job from the start. Players shouldn't have to make a choice between being on the same world with their friends or having access to content.

But they didn't and we're stuck with the system as it is. Knowing that it could have been otherwise doesn't make it so.

You can either take advantage of the opportunities presented to you or you can go without a house.

Jesus Christ, no I'm not. Stop being so literal with my analogy. It's like talking to a robot.

[Serenitey]

Jesus Christ, no I'm not. Stop being so literal with my analogy. It's like talking to a robot.

Well you are blaming them but it was a fairly ridiculous analogy.

[Themarvin]

There is househorders everywhere and there is quite alot people that just keep on making FC's on other servers and the likes to then buy an additional house... and call it being enthusiast...

If you do housing in FFXIV, you are hardly a house enthusiast at all.

[VerdeLuck]

The problem isn't the format, it's lack of enforcement and prevention of abuse. You can throw as many plots as you want at it, but people will just make alts, transfer x mil gil to those alts, and buy up 10, 20, 30+ houses, hell some have entire wards to themselves they make into private RP villages. Excess houses get snapped up because nothing prevents greedy players from doing it, and then when new players come in and want to try out the housing feature, they get stonewalled because everything is already spoken for and there's nothing else. The new plots and new worlds are going to last a few months at most, a few lottery cycles before all the larges and mediums are snapped up, and then the remaining smalls bought on alt chracters.
If adding new wards is SE's accepted solution, they're basically going to have to commit to adding about 2 new wards to every area and world every odd patch to keep up with players on the current implementation and I doubt that's feasible in any way.
There are probbaly enough plots in the game already for any player who actively plays to get one reasonably if they didn't allow multiple houses per person, but that's not the reality we're in now or that they've committed to.