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

[Freyt]

I'd be fine with one service account own one house per server.

Raising prices is a fake suggestion. It's not only impractically to say the least, but it only enhances the problem if actually implemented. Selling houses isn't done with a markup of an X amount of gil, it's done with a 2X or 3X times amount of gil or similar. It's a suggestion made to enhance the profits of those who are abusing the system currently. Same with the suggestion for a 5 day auto demolition timer, it merely gives these people more opportunity to acquire more real estate.

These suggestions should be taken as the opposite of seriously. They are designed to exploit the player base.

The specific problem we run into with limited player housing is with FC housing. If the FC lead drops and your character is forced into the leadership position, you effectively own the house. What needs to be addressed here is this specific situation. If we can knock this out of the way with some sort of change or compromise, then SE should theoretically be able to impose limitations without much negative feedback, aside from those few players who are currently exploiting the system.

[AriesMouse]

The specific problem we run into with limited player housing is with FC housing. If the FC lead drops and your character is forced into the leadership position, you effectively own the house. What needs to be addressed here is this specific situation. If we can knock this out of the way with some sort of change or compromise, then SE should theoretically be able to impose limitations without much negative feedback, aside from those few players who are currently exploiting the system.

I think one way, going forward, to combat the issue with fc housing, is to tether more than one person as the owner. So, like buying a house, an FC needs 4 people to have a house, and it should require that many people to keep it (change up the numbers a little based on house size possibly?). All people required must also be leveled and GC ranked to be able to purchase and own a house, and it takes that many people stepping into the house every 45days to keep it. It doesn't have to be 4 specific people in the FC, so if your fc is sizable, just your basic fc population will likely have it covered no issue, but it would remove the option for people to make shell fcs to keep houses anymore. Grandfather in those already in place just for PR and the like, and because there are some fcs out there that are just intentionally small and want to stay that way, but going forward, make a change. Or, you know, instanced housing already.

[Freyt]

I think one way, going forward, to combat the issue with fc housing, is to tether more than one person as the owner. So, like buying a house, an FC needs 4 people to have a house, and it should require that many people to keep it (change up the numbers a little based on house size possibly?). All people required must also be leveled and GC ranked to be able to purchase and own a house, and it takes that many people stepping into the house every 45days to keep it. It doesn't have to be 4 specific people in the FC, so if your fc is sizable, just your basic fc population will likely have it covered no issue, but it would remove the option for people to make shell fcs to keep houses anymore. Grandfather in those already in place just for PR and the like, and because there are some fcs out there that are just intentionally small and want to stay that way, but going forward, make a change. Or, you know, instanced housing already.

My thinking is somewhat along the same lines.

The issue is mostly with inheritance. There's no need to increase the number of people that have to enter the FC house. Here are the changes I'd make:

• A person who already leads an FC that owns a house may not lead another FC that owns a house.
• In the event that a person that already owns an FC that owns a house does inherit another FC that owns a house, ownership will be transferred immediately to the next member to login, as if the player in question was inactive.
• In the event that the above is not possible due to lack of members, the house will become forfeit within 45 days.
• The timer of 45 days will not reset in the event that a new owner falls under the same restrictions as noted above.
• If a total of 45 days pass under the ownership of such a player within 90 days, the house will be forfeit. This means that you cannot play "hot potato" with FC ownership to avoid the penalty.