Thread: 4.2 Housing Update

Originally Posted by Sairys

Simple maths really makes it balance out quite obviously, if there are more unique players in the fc than 1 then they are more important than the 1. Just to point it out... the devs have said who deserves it more with the way they've tilted everything in favour of the FCs now... it's the FCs.

Wow, so the dev's have 'said' who is more important now huh? I don't think the rule changes should be interpreted exactly this way.
Yes, they give the FCs an advantage now which is surely a good and welcomed change, and I also wrote that a few pages ago if I recall correctly.
But I guess it's happening because of the uproar after the Shirogane launch. Not because they think Fc's are more important. This is just your personal interpretation.
And if people should give up their houses now only for the benefit of FCs or rather small FCs with less then 4 people...well... quoting myself:

Originally Posted by Aniise

Edit: Also, with the new system added, it's almost guaranteed that each FC who wants a house will get one. Even the ones with less then 4 people; all they have to do is recruit a few players beforehand which isn't that much work tbh.

If an Fc doesn't use that big advantage then the fault lies with them. Simple. People who've had two houses for like 4 years shouldn't be punished for it now. :/
We can turn in circles speaking about ethics and stuff while from your point of view it's morally right, and from my point of view it's morally wrong. I guess we won't change each others point of view no matter what.

Originally Posted by Aniise

People who've had two houses for like 4 years shouldn't be punished for it now.

I would just like to point out that the word "punished" isn't correct here. Being impacted negatively by something does not necessarily make it a punishment. I agree that players who purchased multiple homes did not break any rules (I'll not go into whether or not it was morally/ethically wrong) that SE had in place for housing, largely because SE totally screwed up housing and there were loopholes all over the place.

It's like owning a home with a big, beautiful front lawn for years. Eventually the traffic in front of your house gets worse and worse and finally the city has to do something to relieve the gridlock. So they decide to add another lane, by widening the street and taking part of your front lawn to do it, maybe even chopping down a tree or two. Does it negatively impact the homeowner? Yes. Is the homeowner being punished? No. But the city needs to infringe on their luxury in order to make the lives of the majority of people better.