House Payments

[LusterlessNova]

Plus the sellers will just factor any of these repair/rent payments into their sale.

Making the prices rise to so absurd levels that no one buys them, which when given enough time, will likely make this kind of trade collapse.
I'm just thinking that if I were a seller, and this would come into effect, yes. I would raise the price probably with each month, or to a tenfold. Two things are likely to happen. Either I have luck and find someone dumb enough to pay outrageous prices. Or the upkeep costs make the price rise to so high levels that no one will buy the houses off my hands, which leaves me with the choice to either keep trying while costs keep coming, or look for other ways to make big money. A collapse to to speak.

But look. That's just my opinion and thought about it. You keep yours, and I keep mine.

[Abelfei]

Making the prices rise to so absurd levels that no one buys them, which when given enough time, will likely make this kind of trade collapse.

Right now on certain servers there is no such thing as an absurd price. I think you are underestimating people's wallets as well as how much they are willing to pay.

[MeridaQ]

Making the prices rise to so absurd levels that no one buys them, which when given enough time, will likely make this kind of trade collapse.

By doing so would literally promote RMT, people have paid over 500 million for a housing plot. I don’t know about you but everyone I know that made their money legitimately would never pay those prices. This system would make house flippers just charge more. If you say that means less people will by it. You are wrong, it just means people will buy more RMT Gil. I have a friend who sells O4S clears for 500 mil each. He has sold 15 of them. He knows some of them buy Gil. How does this “solution” help the active players? It just gives more reasons to buy Gil. You are right though less people will buy house, those buying legitimately because many active players wouldn’t be able to pay.

[Siniztor]

Making the prices rise to so absurd levels that no one buys them, which when given enough time, will likely make this kind of trade collapse.
I'm just thinking that if I were a seller, and this would come into effect, yes. I would raise the price probably with each month, or to a tenfold. Two things are likely to happen. Either I have luck and find someone dumb enough to pay outrageous prices. Or the upkeep costs make the price rise to so high levels that no one will buy the houses off my hands, which leaves me with the choice to either keep trying while costs keep coming, or look for other ways to make big money. A collapse to to speak.

But look. That's just my opinion and thought about it. You keep yours, and I keep mine.

please define a "so absurd " price...cause im gonna guess we have a huge diffence in what we think.. I'm closing in on blillion gil just off selling hq 320 gear..thats not counting any prior gil i have made off iron works or any items.. Ive said it many times you wanna kill house sellers its so easy its stupid

1- A player releases land that land go ones a Random timer before its put back up for sale.. any where from 24 hours to 1 week 100% random

If the seller can not quarantine the land to a buyer...there is no buyer lol
who is gonna pay a seller 100 mil for the chance to camp a plot waiting to see when it becomes buyable

[Solarra]

Making the prices rise to so absurd levels that no one buys them, which when given enough time, will likely make this kind of trade collapse.

As I said above, RMT will have a field day. People who would never normally consider it will be knocking at their door. And Abelfei is right, with supply so limited, there is no such thing as an absurd price.

We already have a situation where people paying a sub can lose their virtual property. If that had been implemented for anything other than housing there would have been an outcry, and I still think it was a bad decision (in it's present form), made even worse due to the fact that furniture from demolished properties isn't stored permanently.
Individuals have lost their houses due to illness, accident or being posted abroad for work/study. And the saddest thing of all? It hasn't made a dent in the real problem.

I assume some of the people supporting these increasingly punitive measures for house owners have given up all hope of getting a house and simply want to give a good kick to those of us who got lucky. Others perhaps haven't thought it through; I expect they will be first to the forum complaining if they do get a house and then find the rules they once supported threaten their ability to keep it.

We gain nothing by turning on each other like this. It simply allows Square to apply a few bandaids and leave the main problem of woefully inadequate supply unaddressed.

The most sensible solution seems to be fully instanced housing running alongside the present wards with both houses and yard being instanced (the older wards all have unused exits that could lead to these or they could use the ferries).
Yoshi P's statement on instanced housing was pretty vague. I couldn't work out if there is a technical issue preventing it or if they are so heavily invested in the ward system that they simply cannot think outside the box.

[Claviusnex]

I couldn't work out if there is a technical issue preventing it or if they are so heavily invested in the ward system that they simply cannot think outside the box.

I think it is more of the later.

[Alleo]

My FC is currently owning a large house, and I would support this actually. No matter if playing alone or not, if the numbers are fair, active players won't have trouble paying.

What would be fair prices? If its something like <10.000 Gil a month its small for most yet why even need such a system at all then? If its too much you will just punish the player. Also since a FC has a way to get more money thanks to having more members, how about the rule that you have to multiply the monthly price per member. So if a single privat person has to pay 100k per month, a FC with like 10 members would have to pay 1 million Gil. Sounds bad? Yes it is but would be imo way fairer since FCs are using it way more, have more functions and more people using it. Anyway this whole rental thing would just be bad. This would only take away from those that just want some houses for their own, while not doing anything against those that misuse the system..

Making the prices rise to so absurd levels that no one buys them, which when given enough time, will likely make this kind of trade collapse.

You are only seeing this as way to stop sellers but completely forget what that would mean for the common people that truly just want to have a house..raising the price so much that they are too expensive to sell just means that probably 70% of the housing owners or more would just lose theirs..and all those that want one will probably not buy it either because they could not keep it anyway. I mean its one way to stop the housing problem...but it would be by destroying it for most players..Stopping sellers is quite easier if they simply introduce the rule of one FC and one private house per server/account. At least it would decrease the amount people can sell and they could even include a timer after you reclaimed a plot so that they cant just buy something again that fast. If this is also server wide or account wide you will take away their chance to buy them..I find this a better solution, since this would truly just punish those that want to just buy and sell houses and would not punish the rest of us.

[ChameleonMS]

...how about the rule that you have to multiply the monthly price per member. So if a single privat person has to pay 100k per month, a FC with like 10 members would have to pay 1 million Gil. Sounds bad? Yes it is but would be imo way fairer since FCs are using it way more, have more functions and more people using it.

This would just cause FC leaders to kick people out of the FC to lower the price. If such a system existed, we know that the pay time would be set to for the weekly reset timer. Or 1st of the month kind of thing.
FCs will just coordinate a kick of members the night before, and invite everyone back the next day.
It also punishes FCs that do not kick inactive members during their breaks.


I am against the fee idea in the first place.

[LusterlessNova]

Well I got a lot to reply to, which feels like work, so how about a thought from another angle instead?
So the common opinion is that the prices would rise, right? Let's say as example: To the at least 3-fold value (probably higher, just deal with it for now). I can't help but wonder, but isn't it against the terms of service to sell houses for large profit? Large isn't defined, sure, but wouldn't writing tickets help get houses off profit sellers if the prices go way over a reasonable price? Just wondering.

[Abelfei]

I can't help but wonder, but isn't it against the terms of service to sell houses for large profit? Large isn't defined, sure, but wouldn't writing tickets help get houses off profit sellers if the prices go way over a reasonable price?

The problem here is that most of the people buying don't care and are willing to pay and also everyone's definition of "large" is different, just like you said. You could write tickets, but how do you know it's happening without being related to the deal somehow? And then on top of that, then you'd be screwing over whoever you knew that clued you in on the deal. So in essence you took a deal that had 2 complying parties with no problems, made it your business and then created a problem out of it. House flipping is a problem, but not every sale is actually a "flip", and the buyer is usually excited to buy, which means 2 people are happy, the seller got the gil he wanted, and the buyer got their house. Every house deal I have heard of, albeit small or large money wise, has been a friend in game or aquaintance. So with that being said, odds are thats how most ppl hear of house selling, and then in turn if you report it, you're kind of putting that friend in a bad situation too. I'd say if it's not a deal your directly involved in to stay out.