Suggestion: Do not allow multiple service accounts all own houses.

[LarryButz]

The argument against new wards comes from it both not solving the problem on high pop worlds where demand will continue to outstrip supply and by creating a new problem in its place - mostly empty wards on lower pop worlds when players who want that neighborhood feeling want to be seeing other players with houses in their ward, not a series of empty plots. If SE could expand the wards dynamically on a world by world basis so only worlds that needed more wards would get them, the objection to wards would mostly go away.

Lol that low pop arguement is silly. Don't buy a house on a ward that's empty. Easy. Or don't pick a low-pop server if you want to be around more people? And your argument about not adding wards because of high pop servers is literally solved by adding more wards so..

These suggestions that might add <100 houses max back into the market (not even per server) always amuse me because it's pretty clear that the posters are tunnel-visioning with the idea that they'll get a house, so it doesn't really matter how infeasible the goal is or whether it's actually fixing the system, does it? (Which, here's to hoping you're able to identify the empty houses, get there, and outclick whoever's waiting at the placard.)

I'm not even worried about suggestions like this because not only are they completely unreasonable, but far too much work (especially considering SE would lose money - lots of people with multiple accounts do it solely to get an extra house, so they wouldn't be paying SE for those accounts anymore.) It's just amusing how many complaints on the forums (not just housing, but it's a lot of it) break down into "I want a thing and I don't think someone else deserves their thing, it's not fair, so give me their thing."

Like half of what you said has nothing anything to do with what any of this thread has been about dude. You say it would only clear up <100 but then later say lots of people do it. Okay lol. And who cares it would free up <100 houses? That's not the point. I've very, very clearly stated that yes it's a very niche thing, but it's still stupid and scummy.

Even if it’s the same player, they are literally four separate people in this scenario.
I think this is fair game.

This makes absolutely no sense lol. If you mean four separate characters however, then that doesn't matter to me. Who cares how many characters they have? I'm saying one real person should only be allowed to have the same amount of houses as everyone else no matter what. It's just pay to win otherwise (as in now what these guys are doing). I literally could not care less how much "Work", "Time" or "Money" they spend. It's still basically flat out pay to win nonsense.