Please more housing wards soon. And no more FC/Private Hybrid.

[Sindele]

Sure, lock it to one bid per FC. Then, when your active FC loses to a solo FC, you can come back here and complain about all solo FCs being sub farms and RMT and that you never see your neighbors in the wards! Infinite complaining generator!

There's no real good justification for active FCs being equally weighted. You could certainly argue that they should lose some proportion of their bid money, but ultimately it's clear that SE's goal was to maximize the amount of people who have access to A House, one way or another.

[Antoine_Lenheim]

Sure, lock it to one bid per FC. Then, when your active FC loses to a solo FC, you can come back here and complain about all solo FCs being sub farms and RMT and that you never see your neighbors in the wards! Infinite complaining generator!

There's no real good justification for active FCs being equally weighted. You could certainly argue that they should lose some proportion of their bid money, but ultimately it's clear that SE's goal was to maximize the amount of people who have access to A House, one way or another.

Active FC which loses to a solo FC is the only way to make the lottery system FAIR. You're wrong if you think it should cater to the needs of the other party simply because it's bigger. If it does, it either needs to penalize them by having an established entry fee so if 56 man FC wants to bid with all their members, they need to pay that fee which will not be refunded even if they win the plot. Or they simply shouldn't allow multiple entrants from one FC.

You can't make everyone happy anyway so AT LEAST try and make the current system fair for every and each one of the entrants by giving them equal chances of getting the house.

[PredatoryCatgirl]

FAIR

[Sindele]

Active FC which loses to a solo FC is the only way to make the lottery system FAIR. You're wrong if you think it should cater to the needs of the other party simply because it's bigger. If it does, it either needs to penalize them by having an established entry fee so if 56 man FC wants to bid with all their members, they need to pay that fee which will not be refunded even if they win the plot. Or they simply shouldn't allow multiple entrants from one FC.

You can't make everyone happy anyway so AT LEAST try and make the current system fair for every and each one of the entrants by giving them equal chances of getting the house.

What you are proposing is not necessarily 'fair' - it is 'equal'. But the thing about equal treatment is that its relation to fairness is highly contextual. Here, you're proposing that an FC with four people should have the same shot as one with a hundred. This is equal. 'Fair', though, asks for a slightly higher burden of proof here because we can look at the context: four people gaining access to a house versus a hundred people gaining access to a house. If you think it sounds 'fair' in that framing, I'm going to politely question if your definition of 'fair' is actually based on the concept of fairness or just the concept of whatever most benefits me at the current time.

[ZiraZ]

Active FC which loses to a solo FC is the only way to make the lottery system FAIR. You're wrong if you think it should cater to the needs of the other party simply because it's bigger. If it does, it either needs to penalize them by having an established entry fee so if 56 man FC wants to bid with all their members, they need to pay that fee which will not be refunded even if they win the plot. Or they simply shouldn't allow multiple entrants from one FC.

You can't make everyone happy anyway so AT LEAST try and make the current system fair for every and each one of the entrants by giving them equal chances of getting the house.

I never understood why they never did the no refund if win method for FCs, it makes perfect sense and is the most fair method.
An FC with a large amount of active members determined to get a house will easily come up with the funds to dominate the bids but it will cost them to secure it, but at the same time it also allows a committed and active small FC to get a decent chance at winning vs a mostly inactive large FC.
it also moderately keeps house flippers and sub farmers away from larger houses due to lower return of investment.

[Antoine_Lenheim]

I never understood why they never did the no refund if win method for FCs, it makes perfect sense and is the most fair method.
An FC with a large amount of active members determined to get a house will easily come up with the funds to dominate the bids but it will cost them to secure it, but at the same time it also allows a committed and active small FC to get a decent chance at winning vs a mostly inactive large FC.
it also moderately keeps house flippers and sub farmers away from larger houses due to lower return of investment.

That's the point debaters here seemed to successfully ignore. Yeah, okay, I get it. You want bigger FCs to win so more people get access to housing, yada yada. Fine. Make them pay for it as much as they need to muster up dozens of entrants. It is loophole'ing the system, after all. Why it's not penalized in any way? I'm bringing this point up again but even in RL lotteries you do pay the symbolic price for the ticket and if you're buying ten tickets, you pay ten times the symbolic price. Why it's not present here?

[Reinha]

That's the point debaters here seemed to successfully ignore. Yeah, okay, I get it. You want bigger FCs to win so more people get access to housing, yada yada. Fine. Make them pay for it as much as they need to muster up dozens of entrants. It is loophole'ing the system, after all. Why it's not penalized in any way? I'm bringing this point up again but even in RL lotteries you do pay the symbolic price for the ticket and if you're buying ten tickets, you pay ten times the symbolic price. Why it's not present here?

They are paying for every ticket up front. A relocating 4-man fc can make alts and bid 31 times (8+8+8+7) if they have the Gil. That's not a zero chance.

[Antoine_Lenheim]

They are paying for every ticket up front.

...Which is refunded right after lottery ends, if you didn't get the plot.

[Reinha]

...Which is refunded right after lottery ends, if you didn't get the plot.

Not getting a refund would make it worse for small fcs with only a few members. They'd blow up their chances for a large house in one cycle by losing all their money while the big fcs with a decade of submarine money can keep on bidding. Not to mention the rage from private bidders who not only lost the lottery but also the 50 mil they spent a year collecting. Any more dumb ideas?