So considering the size of the servers....

[Barboron]

As for how many players are on... At any given time, you can have as many as 100 active players on a hunt from personal experience, then looking at my linkshells and fc, I can see likely over a thousand unique players all reasonably high level, many of which are on daily.

That being said, very likely we do have about 2000-4000 players per server that are somewhat active and reasonably high level. Out of that, we can assume about half of them want houses.

That means that to reasonably expect to provide enough housing for everyone that wants a house, we'd likely need about 1000-2000 houses. This is assuming a reasonably small server like Famfrit.

On a larger server with more people, we'd likely need to double that number or even triple it so indeed, even doubling the size of the wards and doubling the number of wards won't be a perfect solution. Really, we'd need about 30 to 50 double sized wards to reasonably expect to accommodate everyone.

You can't just pull numbers out of nowhere and expect it to be considered a reasonable argument.

[ariaandkia]

You can't just pull numbers out of nowhere and expect it to be considered a reasonable argument.

I'm basing it off of the players that I've seen doing end game content (anything past 50 in this case) on my server as well as information provided during the latest patch.

My point was more of that out of the players I've seen, it is likely only a fraction of the total player base that can get houses, but out of all the players, there are only so many that really want houses.

Again, the numbers I'm using are purely based on personal observation based on factors like party finder, players in FCs with houses, people that are on during random player searches, etc.

I am not counting anyone who is an obvious bot or who is low level+new adventurer in this thought process.

And that we really need a lot more housing to accommodate everyone.

[Adler]

Going by your (OP) logic and judging by "the server size" it would be a piece of cake to implement everything you want. I take it you haven't had to go to work yet and parents are paying for everything so stuff just are made somewhere when you want it.

[ariaandkia]

Going by your (OP) logic and judging by "the server size" it would be a piece of cake to implement everything you want. I take it you haven't had to go to work yet and parents are paying for everything so stuff just are made somewhere when you want it.

I'm not even saying to reduce the prices, just to increase the number of wards. I already have my house, but I know plenty of people that want one but can't get one.

By your logic, if someone wanted more accessible resources like wheelchair ramps, they must be handicapped themselves.


=====

Actually at 100 wards, you might start to have lonely houses, because not every player is going to have time, gil, or desire to get a house. You don't need housing lot waiting for every green sprout. There should be a some level over-subscription for housing lots, so the housing lots have value, and housing lots do not go to waste.

And it took two weeks at least, for all the small lots to be sold out. Still all the medium and large lots are just sitting there open.

First part, I agree. People don't necessarily want houses or want to put in the effort to get a house. I think only the players and FCs able to get a house should be counted here, plus a certain amount extra to consider in new players that plan to get a house.

Second part, it depends on the server. Some servers, houses were bought up pretty much right away.

On my server, I had everything ready for my house beforehand. I logged on before the server statuses updated and an empty search (searches for anyone online but you (and the staff)) turned up empty. Why? Because I knew exactly which house I wanted and wasn't about to let anyone else have it.

(The number has some significance to me AND the location was nice, hence why I wanted it.)

[Barboron]

I'm basing it off of the players that I've seen doing end game content (anything past 50 in this case) on my server as well as information provided during the latest patch.

My point was more of that out of the players I've seen, it is likely only a fraction of the total player base that can get houses, but out of all the players, there are only so many that really want houses.

Again, the numbers I'm using are purely based on personal observation based on factors like party finder, players in FCs with houses, people that are on during random player searches, etc.

I am not counting anyone who is an obvious bot or who is low level+new adventurer in this thought process.

And that we really need a lot more housing to accommodate everyone.

A visual representation is not enough to make such a decision on. Also, the servers may or may not support what you want right now. This is not to say I am against the expansion of wards, just don't assume the servers are big enough. Consider also what takes priority, there of course will have to be new instances for the new content coming up. While I don't know exactly how things are instanced, if a server gets a specific piece of content or if there are X amount of instances and the instance plays content based on the party in it, I don't know but I trust SE to do what they are doing.
You also tried to assume that half the players in the game would even want housing, that's just ridiculous to assume without any sort of evidence be it a survey of some sorts. Even if you did perform a survey, it would have to take some time because you need a very large sample across many servers.

Out of that, we can assume about half of them want houses.

No, no we can't assume that. That's just ridiculous. Therefore I could say, considering there are still empty houses left, everyone who really wants a house, has one and thus, we need no more instances.

[ariaandkia]

No, no we can't assume that. That's just ridiculous. Therefore I could say, considering there are still empty houses left, everyone who really wants a house, has one and thus, we need no more instances.

Maybe on your server there are lots open, but don't assume that all servers have lots open. In famfrit, only the newest wards have medium/large houses open last I checked and that is only because people are waiting for the prices to go down. Once it goes down enough, people already have the gil prepared to buy them.

And I did do a mini survey of a few people I knew (FC, Friends list, link shells mainly and a few people I did a lot of duty runs with (not necessarily the same server)). Again, not conclusive evidence, but my point is more of that there are people that want housing but either can't get them because the houses already got bought up, or they are waiting for the prices to go down, but it is a game of: What is the price that I'll pay, what is the price that others will pay?

Also, I see no reason why their servers can't handle housing. There are other games with larger non-instanced housing areas that are fine and they aren't even from a big company like SE. So the only reason that their servers wouldn't be able to handle housing would be if they didn't set up their servers to be expandable. In which case, I'd have to say that is poor design.

[Barboron]

Maybe on your server there are lots open, but don't assume that all servers have lots open.

Don't assume? Now you're getting the point! That's it, don't assume.

And I did do a mini survey of a few people I knew (FC, Friends list, link shells mainly and a few people I did a lot of duty runs with (not necessarily the same server)). Again, not conclusive evidence, but my point is more of that there are people that want housing but either can't get them because the houses already got bought up, or they are waiting for the prices to go down, but it is a game of: What is the price that I'll pay, what is the price that others will pay?

Of course it won't be conclusive evidence, that sort of sample would be far too small and you still made the assumption that half of the high level players of a number you made by a small observation would want housing.

Also, I see no reason why their servers can't handle housing. There are other games with larger non-instanced housing areas that are fine and they aren't even from a big company like SE. So the only reason that their servers wouldn't be able to handle housing would be if they didn't set up their servers to be expandable. In which case, I'd have to say that is poor design.

Of course you can't see why. It's because you haven't got a clue, like the rest of us, how the game is designed nor do you know how the servers are setup. You can't simple take content from one game and assume it will work in another just because it's there.


To finish off, OP, you constructed an ill-informed case for your thoughts against housing. You are using numbers that you simply can not back up in any way. On top of that, you are making assumptions on the system used to run the game without, what seems, any prior knowledge to how it is setup. Be that how their servers are setup, the actual equipment used, the programming done etc.

Ah, that's my point!

Congratulations, you have solved SE's problem! Now if YoshiP could just see this post...

That's not SE's problem, that's your problem. Who is to say that this housing system does not benefit SE? Afterall, it was stated in a Live Letter that it would be difficult to create housing like that in FFXI since it would require making several instances. So rather, the problem is that you don't like the feature and how it was implemented. Don't pawn it off as SE's problem.

[ariaandkia]

Snip

Ok, let us put it this way, my point was that even if my numbers were fairly far off, we still don't have enough housing for everyone. Just considering in my sample, I already have people that can't get housing because it is already bought out. Just from the numbers I already have, we don't have enough housing.

It is called a hypothetical situation/scenario for a reason. If it is already like this, then this is the issue. Assuming that on a larger scale it is also somewhat similar, then this is the issue. If both are the same issue, then assuming a larger case, this is the proposed idea.

My point also being that SE could have designed their housing system to be more adaptable, but they didn't. Now, I wouldn't mind them redoing housing completely, but there would be plenty of people upset if the changes messes with their houses too much.

===

Took me a bit to find a reasonable scenario but here is an example:

I see that there are people who are hungry. I go: Hey, we should find a way to feed more people. Assuming this much of the population I can see is hungry, we need to find a way to get this much food. Now, assuming then that the rest of the state is like that, we need this much food. Assuming that the nation is like that, we need this much food.

Even if we don't need that much food or if we need more than that much, point is still that we need more food.

[Barboron]

It is called a hypothetical situation/scenario for a reason.

So now you are trying to take everything you said and claim it to be a hypothetical situation?

Either way, it is evident that the biggest concern is gardening when it comes to housing, there have been threads on it before. Very few pertaining to peoples' urge to have housing for RP or vanity, that's not to say those reasons do not exist. So, the simple solution to this? Focus on personal room plant pots. That would take a huge weight off the housing debate.