Why Removing Houses from inactive is NOT a solution.

[Kinseykinz]

Keep trying to justify a horribly sub-par system. I will never agree that what we have is acceptable for the level of quality in gaming FFXIV purports. There's a lot of great things about this game. It would be really damn nice if SE treated their fluff content with the same care to providing a quality product available to all of their subscribers.

It's not broken everywhere. After the next major housing update/change, I urge you to create an alt on a mid and/or low pop server and just use it to occasionally check out the housing scene on a server less populated/gil bloated than yours. You'll see, it's not as broken as you think. Is it 'fair' that this is the case? No. But SE has other tools they could use to make the situation on your world more acceptable...why they haven't used them yet, I do not know. But overall, for most servers, the supply about meets the demand as long as they either: 1. implement home foreclosures and/or 2. Add more wards every so often to account for player population growth. The only way to fix the problem on servers like yours though is to encourage a chunk of the population to transfer to other servers lessening your servers load. (Free server transfers would go a long way in this department). 3. House sharing w/ friends will also help because many friends/couples actually would prefer to share than each own their own.

I'd also personally like to see them add wards to Legacy worlds (and other high pop worlds), without necessarily adding more wards to other lower pop worlds at the same time (but for some reason, this seems difficult and/or impossible for them to do within their coding system).

But I DO get how broken it can be on legacy worlds. As I've said previously, I use to live on one and I KNOW a fair amount of FC's/individual players who wanted homes simply couldn't get them because they sold out so fast. And so I get from your perspective how broken it seems because I use to only see it from the same perspective. It was moving, and seeing how a 'normal' server operates and actually uses the games resources that made me go 'okay, so this system actually will work with some tweaks.' Because you're correct, on your world, at ALL times, it's a failed have/have not system. And that does suck.

SE screwed over the legacy worlds when they only released so few at launch...I knew it back when we all had to fight population surges etc just to get on the same desired worlds w/ all our friends during that transfer period. ZI believe there were only 10 worlds for us...andI believe SE planned those 10 based on the legacy population with little to no foresight into how many people just starting the game would want to join these same worlds/established communities either to play with Real Life friends, or for the stable playerbase etc, they likely presented. Really, they should have given us at least 4 more worlds per data center to spread out across+limited how many people could originally make new characters on them at launch more than they did (or use a system like FFXI had to get friends of players on these servers but lock them to general base until their populations settled better).

It really is your worlds population, more than the housing system that is screwing you all over (that was my point). And if SE planned housing zones based on what the high-end pop. servers needed...everyone else would have wards that never fill, and remain lifeless...which would be an even greater waste of game resources. So they need to do things that free up the resources they currently have (foreclosures), allow less strain on high pop servers (free server transfers/allow players to share properties), and then when/if that all still doesn't meet demand, either come up with a new system (maybe instanced) for the new zones of housing, and/or figure out a way to release housing wards on an 'as needed' server by server basis.

No one disagrees with you that Balmung doesn't have a HUGE housing problem. It Does. I'm just trying to explain to you this is not a gamewide 'everyone' problem.

[Kaiser-Ace]

Keep trying to justify a horribly sub-par system. I will never agree that what we have is acceptable for the level of quality in gaming FFXIV purports. There's a lot of great things about this game. It would be really damn nice if SE treated their fluff content with the same care to providing a quality product available to all of their subscribers.

No one is saying it isn't flawed, SE just decided that they're going to keep going this route till it's how they invisioned it. (Ya know, instead of crashing moons into the housing areas) and most of us have accepted that what they've decided is final.

I myself, as I've said before, don't likebthe idea either. But I'm just a player so I'm in no position to tell them how to run the game.

[Neira]

I can't deny that what you're saying has some truth to it Kinseykinz, but as you yourself pointed out, they're not going to address specific servers with extra wards. And since there is an issue with higher population worlds, something does need to be done to address it. While I think giving incentives for world transfers is a good idea, it's also something that would probably have very little effect, as few people are willing to lose their friends and FC just to gain a house. Not to mention many people tend to prefer being on high population worlds in the first place for the end game benefits, and the more casual players who care little for that tend to be more involved with other players on their current server. All Naunet is saying, quite accurately at that, is that the design of the system can't support the weight of the community. We only have the number of total subscribers to go by, and that number demonstrates that the housing system as-is, overall, can not house even 2% of players, much less FCs.

I am also very skeptical of a system being implemented that punishes players for not paying their subscription, and it's even worse given that they once claimed they wouldn't resort to such a system. If it's implemented in a way that room mates can also refresh the repossession timer, giving some credit to the intended design of the system, then it will be harder to argue against. But if they put the system in place and make it so only the active home owner can refresh the timer, and I can see it now, "Due to the system design we can not configure the servers to recognize anyone other than the owner. We apologize for any inconvenience this might cause," then I hope that every subscriber voices their outrage at such a shady practice.