[Housing] 1 House Per Service Account. 1 FC Per Service Account.

[Reinha]

You're right. My issue with relocation is what I wrote about in my first post, not about it superceding the lottery system. If I enter for a house and I don't have anything, I shouldn't be able to lose it to someone who already has a home but just wants to move to a different plot. If the intent behind lotteries is to create a fairer system, then people who have nothing should be prioritized over people who already have something but don't like the view.

"I deserve a house because I've been subbed for years."

"I deserve it more because I'm homeless."

"I deserve better odds because I'm unlucky."

None of that is fair. Fair is when the game doesn't favor someone at the expense of another. You're not special or more deserving of a desirable plot just because you don't have one yet. Goblet has bad plots with zero bids and if your server is an exception, move. It's free.

[RitsukoSonoda]

Instanced housing can be so much more than just the inside of a house (like our apartments). You can have a large property all to yourself, including an outdoor area as well as the house itself. Wildstar (RIP) even had the option to have an island instance with several of your friends. Everyone still got their own personal section of land to design, but your friend's plots were just a short distance away for visiting. I would absolutely take that in a heartbeat over our ward system.

With the way the game servers are essentially structured. The instanced housing you mention would be more like private wards which would cause and exponential increase in load on the servers before increasing the number of homes. Basically it would amount to a whole lot more of those messages of zone transfer or entry failed due to congestion try again later until a mountain of new hardware was added to the data center. Additionally they'd have to rework the programming on furnishings as I don't recall wildstar housing having a transition between indoor and outdoor. You just walked in and out similar to NPC buildings in the city/states and outpost like areas.

[VerdeLuck]

Remind me again why people don’t want instanced housing, but come up with ideas like OP? I wish people would stop trying to punish players because of the housing systems poor design. The absolute only thing that is going to solve the FFXIV housing crisis is instanced housing. No matter how many ways people try to limit, demolish, punish people who already own a home, there will never be enough plots for everyone. The answer is simple, allow people who want instanced housing to have it and the people who refuse can live in the neighborhoods that already exist.

We have come to the conclusion that they will never do instanced housing. Yoshi-p had said multiple times it directly conflicts with his and the developers' vision of housing for it to be instanced. They want it to be a perpetual public space for wards, and for housing to be both rare and a status symbol. With both of those, we can pretty readily conclude that they will not put instance housing in the game other than in a heavily stripped down fashion like apartments. The only thing left to do is to accept this ward system and to try to find ways to limit or reduce greedy players' ability to hoard what is a limited supply status symbol.

There also is the dilemma about having ward housing alongside instanced housing. If both are allowed to exist together, one would be superior (most likely ward housing) so people would still just fight over that one if it was in limited supply. Why have an instanced house if you can try to go for a ward house that has more features?
And on the other hand, if instanced housing was limited to people who didn't have ward housing and had better features, there would be plenty of angry people. It's quite a lot of issues stacked up that would have to be navigated, and based on how apartments are recieved by the community, it probably wouldn't be worth it.

[Avatre]

-Clear 1 savage fight of current patch (so you can't unsync Shb for example)

No.

I don't savage raid because I have no interest in it, and I have a FC house and a personal house from my own hard work for the personal, and luck with the FC one. So by that logic, I shouldn't have the houses that I've spent time decorating and making into what they are now.

[Seraphor]

Instanced housing can be so much more than just the inside of a house (like our apartments). You can have a large property all to yourself, including an outdoor area as well as the house itself. Wildstar (RIP) even had the option to have an island instance with several of your friends. Everyone still got their own personal section of land to design, but your friend's plots were just a short distance away for visiting. I would absolutely take that in a heartbeat over our ward system.

You've literally just described the ward system. Only with a way to curate your neighbours, and then what if your "friends" want different "friends" as their neighbours?

What I was getting at is, if instanced housing is isolated zones anyway, with an 'external/garden' zone that is also isolated. How is that not just apartments?
Wherever you enter this instance, is going to be crowded, just like Island Sanctuary's NPC in Moraby Drydocks. Would it make sense for this to happen outside the entrance to the apartment block? Or Do you really want it to be this kind of generic house that supposedly represents "your" house, with a crowd of random and mostly AFK players stood on "your" doorstep?

We have the infrastructure for this form of instanced housing. It is apartments. They need expanding. Options to increase interior size, and options for an additional external zone for garden furniture.

Now from a technical standpoint, they still take up the same server space as ward housing currently does, they would still be finite. But, without needing to keep an external constantly loaded, they will be more economical on that server space, allowing for more apartments to be implemented than houses in the same 'space'.

[Kaurhz]

Snip.

-To own a house your FC should be 3 months old with x amount of active players in your FC (new players/members doesn't count so we can avoid having mass recruiters)

This is a good idea and reasonable for any FC that should realistically own a house.

-Be level 90 and finish current expansion.

This locks housing to those that exclusively finish the game. I don’t think this should be the case. Granted, it would help filter players that buy en-masse, but beyond that, it’s just an unnecessary requirement.

-Have x number of commendations (bots don't queue so it could be a nice filter)

This is housing, not a goal for mentorship. There is no reason why commendations should be tied to a system where it has no influence, even on a surface level. If anything, I would just have it, so FC-related matters directly cost company credits to even send them out, rather than using company credits to obtain a tradeable item to then send them out. If you have an active FC you’ll never need to be concerned about this. If you run a farm of accounts, then you’ll have greater concerns since you then cannot send subs en-masse.

-Have the money required.

Of course, I think they should one up this and have it so players are then required to pay taxation on this. 500K – 1M per month.

-Clear 1 savage fight of current patch (so you can't unsync Shb for example)

Of all suggestions, this is absolutely the worst as it filters out a significant number of players already, and for a very unnecessary reason. People will view this as: can’t raid? You don’t deserve a house – I get the objective is filtering, but this will have far more backlash than is worth. Housing should be tied to currency, not content, really. At the very worst I would say housing should be unlocked behind a higher Grand Company rank, and even then I don’t see it as reasonable.

[ameliaw]

I do not know why you spend energy with this. It isn't going to happen. They can't limit 1 FC per service account because it would cause issues with FC sucession rules, unless you want them to disable that - and even if they do, there would still be ways to own multiple homes. Waste your time demanding something that is both realistic and more beneficial, because the amount of people with multiple houses is so small comparatively that it would barely make a difference in the system.

[Avoidy]

"I deserve a house because I've been subbed for years."

"I deserve it more because I'm homeless."

"I deserve better odds because I'm unlucky."

None of that is fair. Fair is when the game doesn't favor someone at the expense of another. You're not special or more deserving of a desirable plot just because you don't have one yet. Goblet has bad plots with zero bids and if your server is an exception, move. It's free.

2 of those things weren't even in my original post, so we're already strawmanning and off to a great start.
But yes, absolutely, if you already own a home it's fair to ask you to sit out on relocation for a single round so people who don't own anything yet can have a better shot at getting something. You're free to think that a basic priority system that ensures maximum happiness in a shortage isn't fair, but you're wrong.

But this wouldn't be fair to those who already have a house.
What if you had a plot in the Gobletn and they release I don't know... Sharlayan housing district.
You're not allowed to bid for them because you already have a house in the Goblet. By the time you are allowedn they're all taken.

My initial post asked that relocators wait a single (1) bidding cycle.

[Seraphor]

2 of those things weren't even in my original post, so we're already strawmanning and off to a great start.
But yes, absolutely, if you already own a home it's fair to ask you to sit out on relocation for a single round so people who don't own anything yet can have a better shot at getting something. You're welcome to not think that a basic priority system that ensures maximum happiness isn't fair, but you're wrong.



My initial post asked that relocators wait a single (1) bidding cycle.

Don't 99% of plots get claimed in the first bidding cycle? Isn't this the whole complaint?

So why should those who already own a house on Goblet, have to miss out on the first round of bids in Sharlayan?
You're forcing players to relinquish their house in order to get a shot at the new ones, even though it's not guaranteed they'll get a new house, despite the fact that this would happen anyway IF they did win a plot in the new district.

If you think it's unfair that "too many people are bidding in the first cycle making it harder for me to get a house", if you're not content with "waiting for the second round of bidding", then why should relocators be?

[Amarande]

What about;
-To own a house your FC should be 3 months old with x amount of active players in your FC (new players/members doesn't count so we can avoid having mass recruiters)
-Be level 90 and finish current expansion.
-Have x number of commendations (bots don't queue so it could be a nice filter)
-Have the money required.
-Clear 1 savage fight of current patch (so you can't unsync Shb for example)

Honestly, I find this actually a well intentioned suggestion, although there's a few issues with that.

* #1 seems actually very reasonable. To encourage FCs to have to actually be active to earn a house is a pretty nice idea.

Again, if there's one thing that FFXIV has consistently suffered with, it's that groups of otherwise happy people have a tendency to split up, resulting in a buncha disjointed foursomes because of how easy FC property is to get. I've had it suggested that this is a social issue, but it doesn't happen with nearly such frequency in games that either do not have guild property (eg., WoW) or ones where personal property can be taken for granted (eg., SWTOR).

* #2 is probably something that should be looked into - it was clear from the original requirements that houses were meant to be something you had to be at endgame to own, yet the requirement has not been updated in several expansions (save the need to reach Kugane in MSQ to own Shirogane land).

* #3 might work as a bot filter if the requirement is low. Problem here if anything is the poor granularity due to having to filter through Achievements (as was also noted with the increase of requirement for the Mentor system).

* #4 is obvious.

* #5 seems reasonable at the outset, I've sometimes mulled over the same suggestion (largely because of the thought that unless you are a Savage raider there is not a lot to keep you otherwise occupied with the game after the first few days of a patch, and thus, having a house means having to keep active with little to actually do, which can lead easily to negativity).

I found the thought flawed though, because there's other things you could be doing (Hunts, trying to get Orchestrion rolls from Normal/Alliance raids, EX farms for obstinate mounts, Deep/Variant Dungeons, Eureka etc.) to occupy your time.

Worse: it was considered toxic enough to have to rush to be online for the first day of patches just to get a house (which is a big reason why we have the lottery now: I have a feeling the real tipping point was the server dogpiling FCFS housing rollouts entailed). Imagine having to do it every even patch (since unless you have a static, our dysfunctional PUG player culture means that for things like EX and 1st savage turns, you more or less need to be there or be square) ...