A Better Way for Houses Up For Grabs

[Maeka]

Bruh, I can't see how this is toxic, or do you just equate "thing I don't like" as toxic? How exactly are they interacting with you negatively? Are they calling you names while farming sub mats or something?

The people are just playing the game, dog. Your blood pressure will be at a much healthier level if you stop worrying about what other people are doing if it doesn't affect you.q

When there's not enough houses to go around, when there's 20,000 players wanting 4,000 houses, you don't understand why 1 player holding onto 10+ houses is toxic behavior? It's lacking in empathy, it's a complete non-caring about their fellow players who want those houses, they're just gonna hold onto the houses because they can, because SE won't take houses away from people who had multiple houses before the 1 per account rule was put into place.

And it does affect other people. It affects everybody who wants a house, but can't get one.

[Mavrias]

When there's not enough houses to go around, when there's 20,000 players wanting 4,000 houses, you don't understand why 1 player holding onto 10+ houses is toxic behavior? It's lacking in empathy, it's a complete non-caring about their fellow players who want those houses, they're just gonna hold onto the houses because they can, because SE won't take houses away from people who had multiple houses before the 1 per account rule was put into place.

And it does affect other people. It affects everybody who wants a house, but can't get one.

So say that one person gives up their ten or so houses. So now maybe ten people get a house. 16,000+ people are still without a house, so in the long run what really has changed?

[Sauteed]

Here's your entire post. You didn't say the same thing I was saying. You just started listing your own ideas that again don't solve the problem.

No, I mention no one seems to mention any idea of their own, while shooting down every proposed idea, as well as mentioning the lottery system won't fix the issue of limited housing.
Additionally, my idea of generating an instanced version of a house would fix a lot of problems that people tend to bring up. Outside of releasing sufficient wards to address the issue of greatly limited housing, what do you propose? Rather be incapable of reasoning and cut off posts or prefer I quote verbatim every single line of back of forth over the last several years?

In the context of the discussion, what do you offer tho? Any suggestion? Just here to stir the pot some?

[Jojoya]

Behind them, sure. So workshop farmers would be sitting pretty, as they are now. SE changes things moving forward, not retroactively, so workshop farmers are golden gods till the reward pools get nerfed.

But the barrier to entry means 10 smalls with workshops that costs 42,500,000 now will cost 412,500,000. Which means that new workshop farmers aren't joining the ranks daily and shopping for cheap houses to expand. Those that continue to expand will pay out 85 days of one workshops income for a new workshop, instead of 8 and a half days.

tldr: no one loses anything they have, but future house hunters no longer need to compete with workshop farmers.

I thought the repeated argument around here is that the shell FCs owning houses is too small a percentage of the total to be worth doing something about?

Considering I've made over 150 million gil for my FC this year off our workshop (and I don't even focus solely on the lucrative routes), I don't think a 40 million gil price tag is going to be much of a deterrent to the workshop farmers. At best it slows down the number of houses they start with but it won't take long to have plenty of gil to buy even more.

No, I mention no one seems to mention any idea of their own, while shooting down every proposed idea, as well as mentioning the lottery system won't fix the issue of limited housing.
Additionally, my idea of generating an instanced version of a house would fix a lot of problems that people tend to bring up. Outside of releasing sufficient wards to address the issue of greatly limited housing, what do you propose? Rather be incapable of reasoning and cut off posts or prefer I quote verbatim every single line of back of forth over the last several years?

In the context of the discussion, what do you offer tho? Any suggestion? Just here to stir the pot some?

Plenty of ideas have been mentioned in these forums over the past few years on how to fix the system. How many times must they be repeated?

Those ideas have been discussed in detail, both pros and cons. How many times must the same arguments be repeated over and over?

I've been arguing for instanced house plots for over 2 years. Feel free to check my post history. It's not a new idea.

If SE is not willing/able to change to an instanced house plot system, then I want to see monthly gil fees added to house ownership. That at least would cut down a bit on those who own houses and don't use them. People dislike having to continuously pay for things and if it's something they aren't actively using, they'll usually get rid of it so they're not losing money, or gil in this case.

[Sauteed]

I thought the repeated argument around here is that the shell FCs owning houses is too small a percentage of the total to be worth doing something about?

Considering I've made over 150 million gil for my FC this year off our workshop (and I don't even focus solely on the lucrative routes), I don't think a 40 million gil price tag is going to be much of a deterrent to the workshop farmers. At best it slows down the number of houses they start with but it won't take long to have plenty of gil to buy even more.


Plenty of ideas have been mentioned in these forums over the past few years on how to fix the system. How many times must they be repeated?

Those ideas have been discussed in detail, both pros and cons. How many times must the same arguments be repeated over and over?

I've been arguing for instanced house plots for over 2 years. Feel free to check my post history. It's not a new idea.

If SE is not willing/able to change to an instanced house plot system, then I want to see monthly gil fees added to house ownership. That at least would cut down a bit on those who own houses and don't use them. People dislike having to continuously pay for things and if it's something they aren't actively using, they'll usually get rid of it so they're not losing money, or gil in this case.

I did not say instanced housing is a new idea. I have said in the past I didn't feel adding a recurring payment to owning a property is a good idea (in terms of video game). I do think the producer of the game mentioned they didn't want that system, I'm not sure why they said that, but I'm glad it isn't like that. If they aren't going to improve this aspect of the game to accommodate the population well, sure we can play the landlord simulator and kick out the tenants if they don't want to pay the gil. Most people I know with houses wouldn't be too put back to have a nominal fee charged them for owning a property, and unless they quit playing the game for a longer period of time than is required to actually keep their house from auto-demo'ing (nulifying the need to enforce the rent in the first place), I don't think they'd be worried about losing their house. Now I'm basing this off the "most of the people I know with a house" view point in mind. I may be that one weird dude that just happens to know people who aren't barely scraping by to get their plot , but I doubt that sincerely. Also, I'm the kind of person that would without hesitation give my friend gil if they needed it for whatever reason, and have helped friends pay for and get houses, also kept them company while they clicked away for their house on multiple occasions because I knew it was something that person was passionate about and wanted to see them live their XIV dream and own a house in game. This on top of having enough gil to have multiple houses of my own, and not slightly worried about the idea of a "reasonable" montly charge. When it comes to needing to pay like 10 gillion a month or else you lose house, they lose a paying customer tho. And I'm pretty sure they are aware I'd not be alone in that sentiment either. So your idea of recurring payment is not new either, it was shot down years ago by the producer himself. Is it a bad idea? No. Definitely not the worst I've seen in game.. definitely not on the same level as people saying we need to strip people of their grandfathered houses etc. But is it a good idea? No not by any means either.

furthermore, I could do a you tactic and chop of a large portion of your post and say whatever I wanted to say to make someone who hasn't been actively posting for years look like some upstart that has no place on the forum or whatever you do for whatever reason you do, but I don't. No you don't need to quote every single 'idea' that's been going around for years. No you don't need to like any ideas either. But offering constructive ideas to address the situation helps. I've actually read on this forum for years (sad I know I should get a life right?) but I actually started posting on the forum because of the housing situation and to a lesser extent the pvp situation.. and here lately, making probably highly unpopular proposals to chop the MSQ (imo definitely takes precedence over housing and pvp issues if it's the main draw for the game). But in all of this, I try to be a bit more tactful than grabbing 1 little line in a full post and trying to make it seem like the world needs to stop because this one guy said this one thing while taking it completely out of the context of an ongoing thread. But you do you.

[Maeka]

So say that one person gives up their ten or so houses. So now maybe ten people get a house. 16,000+ people are still without a house, so in the long run what really has changed?

There's 10 fewer people wanting houses but not getting houses and things are more fair across the board and there's less anger towards that one guy hoarding 10+ houses, refusing to give them up.

And I'm quite sure the 10 people who manage to win those houses the guy is forced to give up would be happy to win their houses, and maybe the rest of the people who tried to get them too, would at least appreciate the chance to win one of those houses.

Don't get me wrong though, this isn't the only solution. We definitely need a way to get more houses out there, but drip-feeding 100 houses in a ward here, 100 there... is going to take absolutely forever. We need a better way.

We need instanced housing.

There's no other way to satisfy 16,000+ players on a server. Yeah sure it's nice to have others walk by and see your house, and that's all well and good. Me? I don't care who sees my house. I'd be fine with some instanced cottage in the woods or something that only I, and those I personally invite, see. I'm perfectly fine with that and I bet there are thousands more who are also perfectly fine with that and/or the thousands of players who would potentially think that Instanced House > No House.

And the "get an apartment or FC house" doesn't work because,

1). No outdoor area
2). Way smaller, even smaller than a small house
3). FC can boot you out then you lose everything

[tdb]

No, I mention no one seems to mention any idea of their own, while shooting down every proposed idea, as well as mentioning the lottery system won't fix the issue of limited housing.

I can't speak of others, but I at least did not propose lottery as a way to fix limited housing. Rather, I proposed it as a method of distributing said limited housing which is more fair than the current timer system, while solving the same problems that the timer solves. Instanced housing would be the ultimate solution, but it likely requires a large amount of effort to solve. For one, I have no idea of how much server capacity it would require compared to current. And it seems like SE might have some philosophical issues with removing neighborhoods from housing. Changing the distribution method is realistically doable and only requires a small or moderate amount of effort.

[ramsesh]

When there's not enough houses to go around, when there's 20,000 players wanting 4,000 houses, you don't understand why 1 player holding onto 10+ houses is toxic behavior? It's lacking in empathy, it's a complete non-caring about their fellow players who want those houses, they're just gonna hold onto the houses because they can, because SE won't take houses away from people who had multiple houses before the 1 per account rule was put into place.

And it does affect other people. It affects everybody who wants a house, but can't get one.

Just because you don’t like something doesn’t mean it’s toxic.

[Themarvin]

The current system is best, due to everyone get a shot of it... maybe they should ad an entirely different system... a number from 000 to a 999 has to be selected, you can do those 3 times a day, if you guess the right number eg. 000, 143, 876 and one of them is the random combination, you get to buy the plot, given you can only press 3 numbers per day after soft reset, then you can not just sit there and spam it all along.

[blu789]

Just because you don’t like something doesn’t mean it’s toxic.

it may not be toxic, but it's morale breaking at the least. I personally feel it's borderline toxic -- allowing someone to have 10x of something while other people who are playing hardcore and still have near zero chance of getting it seems a bit morally bankrupt.