Automatic Home Demolition is Resuming!!

[Bobby66]

The 45 day auto demolition for houses is really egregious and runs contrary to YoshiP comments that one should simply unsub during a content lull.

Given that each major content patch is 3-4 months apart, an auto demolition timer of at least 90 to 120 days is more tolerable if their advice to players is to unsub during content lull to avoid losing their houses.

If you are not playing why exactly do you need a house? It is not contrary to his comments, if you do not want to play during a lull unsub, and if one is not playing they do not need a house.

[DeNada]

If you are not playing why exactly do you need a house? It is not contrary to his comments, if you do not want to play during a lull unsub, and if one is not playing they do not need a house.

On the contrary, no one really need a house except for perhaps active FCs who need a place for their FC members to congregate and socialize.

If you put it that way, why does any individual need a house, you might as well just remove individual housing and make it FC only with measures such that shell FCs are taken out as well.

Is it fair to someone who saved up 50 million gil to buy a house and lose it all simply because he is following YoshiP advice to unsub during a content lull?

[Bobby66]

On the contrary, no one really need a house except for perhaps active FCs who need a place for their FC members to congregate and socialize.

If you put it that way, why does any individual need a house, you might as well just remove individual housing and make it FC only with measures such that shell FCs are taken out as well.

Is it fair to someone who saved up 50 million gil to buy a house and lose it all simply because he is following YoshiP advice to unsub during a content lull?

So you are saying someone should keep a house even if they are not actively playing? 45 days is enough time to log in once and run into your house, if you are unable to keep up with that commitment so be it.

Personally I would be all for removing personal housing and making everything FC only.

[dspguy]

If you are not playing why exactly do you need a house? It is not contrary to his comments, if you do not want to play during a lull unsub, and if one is not playing they do not need a house.

It isn't like when you take a break for longer than 45 days you come back and have lost access to your mounts, titles, gear, etc. Why should a house be any different?

[Deveryn]

It isn't like when you take a break for longer than 45 days you come back and have lost access to your mounts, titles, gear, etc. Why should a house be any different?

This is the problem, though. We've become spoiled with the idea of having all this stuff that doesn't even matter and taken it for granted. You can't compare housing to all those other things because they don't take up nearly as much space as housing would.

[Bobby66]

It isn't like when you take a break for longer than 45 days you come back and have lost access to your mounts, titles, gear, etc. Why should a house be any different?

One is a finite resource the other is not. Sure in a perfect world everyone would have a house, thus no need for a demo timer. We do not live in a perfect world. Losing a house sucks, happened to me, had large father passed away did not play for nearly a year. and lost it. Shit happens, but I was not playing thus I had no need for the house. Why is that so hard to understand when it comes to a finite resource being able to hold onto just because seems silly.

[Jojoya]

It isn't like when you take a break for longer than 45 days you come back and have lost access to your mounts, titles, gear, etc. Why should a house be any different?

Because at this point in the game's life cycle, houses are a limited commodity. The other items aren't. A mount dropping for one player doesn't prevent another player from getting that mount. Someone getting an achievement that grants a title doesn't remove that achievement from the game so no others can get it.

You're right that housing shouldn't be different - yet it is. Hence the need for demolition.

Until such time as SE changes the system so supply of houses is not a problem, players need to weigh their desire for a house against their desire to take extended breaks from the game on occasion. They still have access to housing in the form of apartments if they want those long breaks that badly. They can still be tenants in the houses of their friends who don't take long breaks and so aren't at risk of demolition.

[dspguy]

Because at this point in the game's life cycle, houses are a limited commodity. The other items aren't. A mount dropping for one player doesn't prevent another player from getting that mount. Someone getting an achievement that grants a title doesn't remove that achievement from the game so no others can get it.

You're right that housing shouldn't be different - yet it is. Hence the need for demolition.

Until such time as SE changes the system so supply of houses is not a problem, players need to weigh their desire for a house against their desire to take extended breaks from the game on occasion. They still have access to housing in the form of apartments if they want those long breaks that badly. They can still be tenants in the houses of their friends who don't take long breaks and so aren't at risk of demolition.

I would disagree on some accounts. If a mount drops and you win it, I do not win it. The same way if I own a house, you do not own that house. We might eventually both own a house (and mount) though.

Also, it isn't really clear if there is a housing shortage. Are there any plots left on these new DC? If so, then there is not a housing shortage. Switch servers, buy that plot. DC travel to a more populated server. Problem solved. It is a solution. Not one many people will like. But there are lots of players that left servers with no housing available to buy a house in the new DCs.

[Reinha]

I would disagree on some accounts. If a mount drops and you win it, I do not win it. The same way if I own a house, you do not own that house. We might eventually both own a house (and mount) though.

If a mount drops, the group can then run the instance again and generate a new mount until everyone in the party has one. That's the basic principle of farm groups. Players can't generate new houses. Houses are limited but mounts are not. That's why unused houses need to be released and given to other players, but mounts do not.

[dspguy]

If a mount drops, the group can then run the instance again and generate a new mount until everyone in the party has one. That's the basic principle of farm groups. Players can't generate new houses. Houses are limited but mounts are not. That's why unused houses need to be released and given to other players, but mounts do not.

As I said in my previous post, there is no housing shortage. I just jumped on Dynamis DC. Popped around to the various housing wards, went through wards 13-24 on all 4 servers. There were ~1000 plots up on just one server. Jumping around to different servers, about the same on each. And the supply will go up if SE adjusts wards 10-12 to be for individuals again, we'll see another 600ish come available per server.

Roughly 4000 plots up right now. For any player in that region. Can't get a house on your current server? Hop on Halicarnassus, for example, and you can get a house. The argument that houses should be treated differently than any other aspect of the game is silly. The only argument I've heard is "but houses are limited." Sure, but you can still get one. So they are not limited. It is moot.

And my quote was taken out of context anyway. The fact does remain, if a mount/plot is available and your "bid" wins, I do not get that mount/plot and I have to try again. However, in BOTH cases, they are available.