Houses are lost sooner

[AmalonStar]

Ok let's set this straight OP, housing gets demo'd at the 45 day mark. I thing it's at the 30 mark they get an email telling them they have 15 days to log in and use their personal house before it's demo'd.

As for FC housing the FC leader can not log on in months and not loose thier house, after x number of days the game will automatically transfer leadership to the first person in the next highest rank that is active. Secondly so long as FC members are using the house it does not get marked for demolition.

You actually get SE to lower the amount of days a house gets demo'd just means that ppl will still only log in once a month to keep their personal house. Also paying to have a house on the mog station is just plain stupid unless there is going to be more storage options included with it, for that $8.99 you're proposing is the equivalent of getting an extra 4 and a half retainers.

[AmalonStar]

After reading more of the posts.......

I think Yoshi and his team had realized that there had been plots for housing that haven't been used since the launch of the game because some of those players just don't play anymore and due to the limited housing wasn't fair to active players to not get a house cause of ppl that don't play anymore at all or even log in emails would have been sent out to those players and lots of houses still got demo'd opening up plots for active ppl.

Others do sit on plots to sell them so you end up having to pay them how ever mil they want PLUS what the cost of the plot is after the person you just paid to 'buy' the house from relinquishes the house from their name. So for a 3mil small house you actually end up payin like 6-8 mil to buy it from someone in game, and that is IF they actually relinquish the plot instead of just taking you Gil and moving on to the next sucker.

Adding housing in a new city will create more plots for housing.

[Belhi]

So what if a person has to take a month off for work or RL issues and cant make it back in time to log on before the 35 days run out? They loose there 3-60 million gil investment? That seems kind of unfair. 45 days can be pretty tough for people.

[Stormrider]

Also remember legacy players may keep accounts active for reduce rate. So when they give up a house they are probably done the game. So they are already paying each month anyways. A few people have discussed the idea of removing inventory from retainers and adding it to house if housing were instanced. It might equal close enough to the same cash flow for them to discuss it.

To the person from Zodiark unofficial data says your server has over 4k active subs at least. That if the new zone had as many houses as all the wards combined right now. You still wouldn't have enough houses for everyone on your server not even counting FC's.

Currently they get some refund of investment. Not sure how furniture works though?

[AmalonStar]

So what if a person has to take a month off for work or RL issues and cant make it back in time to log on before the 35 days run out? They loose there 3-60 million gil investment? That seems kind of unfair. 45 days can be pretty tough for people.

When you loose a house to demolition due to not logging on in the 45 days all your furniture that can get removed without them being destroyed and % of what you spent on the plot itself you get back, you can claim those from one of the housing npc's in the shop area of the residential areas but there is something like a 30 day timer to claim those too.

[Shougun]

;( , I think we need more houses and its good if someone was gone for so long (more than 45 days, I think a few months at least) but I feel bad that this needs to even be a thing considered. It'd be like you working really hard to get that awesome raid gear but SE needs to take it away from you cause they can't afford the memory and need to give it to someone else now. XD, sucks lol.

I understand some people like the limited land thing, cause community but.. every issue we face is because of not being instanced, and all their solutions that dont move towards instancing are half solutions - more wards, just 2 hours of actually solving the issue, apartments not even half the power of an actual house, new area 5 hours of issue fixed and a whole bunch of people reminded they'll never get a house, SE being unable to make housing more powerful because not everyone can partake..

Perhaps they can create special community terrains/void rooms in the instanced system (like other MMOs) so even then people who liked community dont lose out (for example the community FC island idea in the housing area), but.. every time I listen about housing system I hear "only solution is to make a new system". I suppose even if you look at similar competition system, like LotR - they at least auto generated wards (but except for a few were commonly quiet, so unless you're luckily the whole "community" thing is still pretty meh, imo).

[Nicodemus_Mercy]

My opinion is that if a player is paying for a sub and enters their home every 45 days to keep it active, then there is nothing wrong with that, even if they don't play the rest of the time. They are a paying customer and how much or how little they use what they are paying for is irrelevant as far as I'm concerned.

What I feel IS relevant however, is that housing should be limited to one private house and one FC house (so FC owners can own a private house) per account per server. There is little justification for one player to hog up multiple limited resources (housing) while other players have to go without any private housing. While limiting players to one private house (and one FC house if applicable) won't fully address the availability of housing on high pop servers like Balmung, it would at least make it more fair.

If someone is ambitious enough to level alts and they feel those alts need their own housing for RP reasons, they can get an apartment. But denying another player with no private housing an opportunity to acquire it, just so you can have a house in each residential area (or one for every alt) is just plain selfish in my opinion.

[AmalonStar]

Personally I love how the housing is set up in the wards because of how you can see your neighbours houses and such, it just gives it more of a community feel.

Although with the apartments they've got a start to an idea there. Those are more of an instanced housing, now if they were to add another floor or 2 to those it would give more room to create more of an apartment feel. Another thing they could add would be an outside 'garden area' that you can exit to that would be similar to your apartment except looking like a balcony where you can place a garden patch and some other outdoor furnishings.

[Dustytome]

Another thing they could add would be an outside 'garden area' that you can exit to that would be similar to your apartment except looking like a balcony where you can place a garden patch and some other outdoor furnishings.

They were going to revisit apartments after 4.0 launches at some point and look into that sort of thing (a balcony in general, what their take on that is may be completely different from what we imagine).

[AmalonStar]

What I feel IS relevant however, is that housing should be limited to one private house and one FC house (so FC owners can own a private house) per account per server. There is little justification for one player to hog up multiple limited resources (housing) while other players have to go without any private housing. While limiting players to one private house (and one FC house if applicable)

One thing I have noticed in the past I don't know if anything has changed with that but I have seen multiple housing plots that were all owned by the same FC or at least like 5 fc's all with the same <tag> But yes ppl owning multiple houses is unfair, I would support only having 1 house per account only down side to that would be in cases where you have a character and then someone else in your household has their own character thus there being 2 ppl that play on the same account rather than someone having alt characters they play on.