housing conundrum: there needs to be a better way.

[LianaThorne]

The people who are multiowners on NA are grandfathered, which was done a very long time ago, in today's world, on NA (except dynamis, but dynamis doesnt matter in this case bc there's thousand of houses open), it's basically impossible to multiown to an extent that it would reduce the housing supply by a significant margin, thanks to lottery. Getting a few houses there and there, and you mentioned it yourself, 10 different fcs spread out on different servers, doesnt do anything to the housing supply, its a few houses less, sure, but that is not what creates scarcity.

Piggybacking off this, even with 1 person owning a ward of FCs, there are still thousands left to purchase. That's barely a dent in the water. Dynamis has a few multi-owners and there are still 2700 FCs available on Hali alone.

Scarcity isn't coming from just multi-owners, it's that there are more people playing this game then housing available in general. Even if multi-owners were taken out of the equation, not everyone would have a house and we'd still be having the same argument about how there's not enough.

Hell, 2700 people could have an FC right now but don't want em. More fodder for multi-owners i guess.

[SophiaDL]

Piggybacking off this, even with 1 person owning a ward of FCs, there are still thousands left to purchase. That's barely a dent in the water. Dynamis has a few multi-owners and there are still 2700 FCs available on Hali alone.

Scarcity isn't coming from just multi-owners, it's that there are more people playing this game then housing available in general. Even if multi-owners were taken out of the equation, not everyone would have a house and we'd still be having the same argument about how there's not enough.

Hell, 2700 people could have an FC right now but don't want em. More fodder for multi-owners i guess.

It's just the good old argument of "multiowners bad" no matter how many houses are available, I remember having this exact same argument a few months back, with a friend actually, talking about how multiowners are taking all the houses while some people are "unable" to get one, mind you, this is on EU, I responded to them by showing them the Paissa site that shows the current housing situation, with hundreds of houses available all across EU, not even only on sagi/phan but also on other worlds, and the response was just "yeah but some of those are goblet houses or empy houses no one wants those the area sucks!" followed by the usual "doesnt change the fact multiowners are taking houses from people", because somehow those houses already belong to someone (?)

The point is, people would rather those houses stay empty for months on end, than for a multiowner to take them, it's purely out of jealousy, and it's very cringe.

[VerdeLuck]

Piggybacking off this, even with 1 person owning a ward of FCs, there are still thousands left to purchase. That's barely a dent in the water. Dynamis has a few multi-owners and there are still 2700 FCs available on Hali alone.

Scarcity isn't coming from just multi-owners, it's that there are more people playing this game then housing available in general. Even if multi-owners were taken out of the equation, not everyone would have a house and we'd still be having the same argument about how there's not enough.

Hell, 2700 people could have an FC right now but don't want em. More fodder for multi-owners i guess.

It's not just multi owners, but when someone owns half a ward to themselves and housing is scarce, it really is wild how that's not the first thing that comes to mind is to have them follow the rules everyone else has to.
You just said Balmung has 20 houses available as if that's a huge number, well, when that's a decent chunk, imagine freeing up a few dozen on every world by eliminating multi owners.
Yeah, Dynamis also has free houses, but you never get ot use it because roulette queues are 5+ hours each on dynamis because of DC travel, so you're never going to be on-world ever even if you manage to win a house over there.

I'm just not buying into this about instanced housing because it seems to exclusively come from people who already own multiple houses, and their solution always seems to include tacking an extra +1 free house onto each of their characters. Isn't that wild?

[SophiaDL]

It's not just multi owners, but when someone owns half a ward to themselves and housing is scarce, it really is wild how that's not the first thing that comes to mind is to have them follow the rules everyone else has to.
You just said Balmung has 20 houses available as if that's a huge number, well, when that's a decent chunk, imagine freeing up a few dozen on every world by eliminating multi owners.
Yeah, Dynamis also has free houses, but you never get ot use it because roulette queues are 5+ hours each on dynamis because of DC travel, so you're never going to be on-world ever even if you manage to win a house over there.

I'm just not buying into this about instanced housing because it seems to exclusively come from people who already own multiple houses, and their solution always seems to include tacking an extra +1 free house onto each of their characters. Isn't that wild?

What multiowners are there on Balmung ? Maybe one or two ? And they are grandfathered, they have had their houses for many many years, why should their houses be demolished because the server has gotten overly populated over the years ? I want one good reason as to why, after this many years that should happen, why are they responsible for the housing scarcity ? There are other NA worlds with more houses, if they want to stay on balmung, that's on them, also lol @ a few dozens, and then what ? Let's say you free 30 houses, and then what ? Who do you hunt next ? People that dont decorate their houses ? People that dont log in every day? Because 30 houses will do nothing

[VerdeLuck]

And they are grandfathered, they have had their houses, why should their houses be demolished because the server has gotten overly populated over the years

Yes, the grandfathered owners should be forced to pick one and sitck to that one, like everyone else. At this point everyone who has been grandfathered in has had this situation for at least 4-5 years. How long are they expected to be able to keep these wards? They've already owned in most cases a significant portion of a ward if not private wards for half a decade, how long are they expected to have this situation honored? How long does the system have to cater to them specifically while everyone else gets screwed on housing and has an incredibly hard time finding anything?
Those people on Mateus, who are probably the most visible and egregious of this, have had their private ward for at least 5 years now. Does SE intend to let them just lock down a private ward on a populated server for the entire life of the game?

[SophiaDL]

Yes, the grandfathered owners should be forced to pick one and sitck to that one, like everyone else. At this point everyone who has been grandfathered in has had this situation for at least 4-5 years. How long are they expected to be able to keep these wards? They've already owned in most cases a significant portion of a ward if not private wards for half a decade, how long are they expected to have this situation honored? How long does the system have to cater to them specifically while everyone else gets screwed on housing and has an incredibly hard time finding anything?
Those people on Mateus, who are probably the most visible and egregious of this, have had their private ward for at least 5 years now. Does SE intend to let them just lock down a private ward on a populated server for the entire life of the game?

And I asked you a question myself

once you are done "hunting" these big bad multiowners, who is next ? Because it will fix absolutely nothing, so who is next ? Also FYI multiowning is multiple accounts worth of subscriptions, so money for SE.

But the most important question is : Once it fixes absolutely nothing, and all those houses are taken in a single round, who is going to be next ? Those that dont log in daily ? Those that dont decorate ? Maybe those not doing any content in the game ?

[VerdeLuck]

And I asked you a question myself

once you are done "hunting" these big bad multiowners, who is next ? Because it will fix absolutely nothing, so who is next ? Also FYI multiowning is multiple accounts worth of subscriptions, so money for SE.

But the most important question is : Once it fixes absolutely nothing, and all those houses are taken in a single round, who is going to be next ? Those that dont log in daily ? Those that dont decorate ? Maybe those not doing any content in the game ?

Then you go after the next low hanging solution, which would probably be solo FCs and shell FCs. Though your argument makes it seem like you're going to protest that one. The whole "I pay extra subs so I DESERVE to have these houses more than you" just absolutely drips of entitlement.

[SophiaDL]

Then you go after the next low hanging solution, which would probably be solo FCs and shell FCs

So people dont have the right to have a house of their own in their solo FC ? Based on what ?

[VerdeLuck]

So people dont have the right to have a house of their own in their solo FC ? Based on what ?

Based on the fact that it eats into the housing for real FCs that aren't just a shell to get cheap and easy Personal housing and access to airships and subs. You seem to be pretty offended by the idea of closing loopholes and exploits in the system, I take it you use quite a few of these?

[RosaliaDLB]

Based on the fact that it eats into the housing for real FCs that aren't just a shell to get cheap and easy Personal housing and access to airships and subs. You seem to be pretty offended by the idea of closing loopholes and exploits in the system, I take it you use quite a few of these?

Except there is no loophole to close, because its not agaisnt ToS.

I've already said it a time or two, if one day, a multiowner actually woke up, decided to take the entire house supply on a new world for an entire area like Shirogane, on 100 accounts, they would be able to, it's not agaisnt ToS in any way.

(thanks to this forum for its amazing daily quota of posts, cant even have a proper discussion)

There is absolutely nothing to "close down" on, multiowning is done within the ToS (except if you buy houses via RMT, but that's a different ballpark and that is 100% agaisnt the ToS)