Apartments need Rent

[Imora]

That's not necessarily a bad way to live. People clutter up their lives with so much unnecessary junk.

Also, I'm paying way more than that on taxes. It would be even worse if taxes weren't based on assessed value at time of purchase instead of estimated current market value. HOA fees are almost double what I pay for taxes.

Yeah house value (mostly due to location) is less than 10k. It's a four room house(not bedrooms, actual, useable rooms) on a sizeable plot, but even the school got shut down.

It's not somewhere people want to live. That's why it's so cheap.

Back on topic, i still don't think we need a recurring monetary cost. You want to remove gil from the super rich, the only surefire way to do it is just outright deleting it. And we all know how well that'll go

[Jojoya]

Back on topic, i still don't think we need a recurring monetary cost. You want to remove gil from the super rich, the only surefire way to do it is just outright deleting it. And we all know how well that'll go

I semi-agree. Rent on an apartment is definitely unnecessary. But if houses will continue to be a limited supply with some players always left wanting, I'd rather see rent added as a deterrent for those who buy because they can but don't actually use their house.

(For those who complain they aren't rich enough to afford rent, there's a simple solution: start using the garden that they have but that players without a house don't.)

Even then, it's not enough by itself. For rent to be an effective deterrent, there need to be other items players want to buy. If gil doesn't have enough other uses, it goes right back to "might as well have a house, I make a lot more than I'd have to pay as rent".

Or the other option is for SE to reduce the gil earned from repeatable content. Gil wouldn't need to be reduced for MSQ or one time only quests, and challenge log is probably fine to leave alone since that's weekly. Very low level repeatable content could be left alone as well since the values tend to be very small. But anything the player can repeat multiple times a week (especially treasure map dungeons) could use some adjustment.

I know some feel that would give an advantage to crafters but crafters get rich because other players have lots of gil with nothing else to spend it on. If they have less gil, crafters will make less as well.

[Almagnus1]

But if houses will continue to be a limited supply with some players always left wanting, I'd rather see rent added as a deterrent for those who buy because they can but don't actually use their house.

That's probably the best way to approach rent with the gil sink being a very nice bonus to all of this.

Or the other option is for SE to reduce the gil earned from repeatable content. Gil wouldn't need to be reduced for MSQ or one time only quests, and challenge log is probably fine to leave alone since that's weekly. Very low level repeatable content could be left alone as well since the values tend to be very small. But anything the player can repeat multiple times a week (especially treasure map dungeons) could use some adjustment.

That's been needing to change for a while.

I know some feel that would give an advantage to crafters but crafters get rich because other players have lots of gil with nothing else to spend it on. If they have less gil, crafters will make less as well.

With as easy as it is to get desynthing open, and how good of a money stream that is, some of this is people being lazy. Once you have desynthing across all the DoH classes (except CUL) then just roll greed on all the loot, desynth what you don't use, and put it on the market for -1 gil of whatever's the low for the item. After that point, you never have to touch the DoH classes again.

I know you can do far better with other crafted items, but it's still easy enough to turn on that cashflow that it's something worth doing regardless.

[Besame]

I semi-agree. Rent on an apartment is definitely unnecessary. But if houses will continue to be a limited supply with some players always left wanting, I'd rather see rent added as a deterrent for those who buy because they can but don't actually use their house.

(For those who complain they aren't rich enough to afford rent, there's a simple solution: start using the garden that they have but that players without a house don't.)

Even then, it's not enough by itself. For rent to be an effective deterrent, there need to be other items players want to buy. If gil doesn't have enough other uses, it goes right back to "might as well have a house, I make a lot more than I'd have to pay as rent".

Or the other option is for SE to reduce the gil earned from repeatable content. Gil wouldn't need to be reduced for MSQ or one time only quests, and challenge log is probably fine to leave alone since that's weekly. Very low level repeatable content could be left alone as well since the values tend to be very small. But anything the player can repeat multiple times a week (especially treasure map dungeons) could use some adjustment.

I know some feel that would give an advantage to crafters but crafters get rich because other players have lots of gil with nothing else to spend it on. If they have less gil, crafters will make less as well.

Fine by me, I make zero gil from repeatable content because I don't do any dungeon-like gameplay sans MSQ. I have other ways.

[Nepentha]

A friend pointed out to me that one of the few MMOs that do charge rent, EQ2, also have furniture you can purchase to lower the amount of rent you pay. She has something like 25 houses in EQ2, and is not currently subscribed to the game. But as she has those housing items now, they will still be there if she decides to return.

So if we had some sort of furniture you could purchase for apartments that would reduce or eliminate that rent fee-- what am I saying, rent is still a god awful idea for apartments.

[TaleraRistain]

A friend pointed out to me that one of the few MMOs that do charge rent, EQ2, also have furniture you can purchase to lower the amount of rent you pay. She has something like 25 houses in EQ2, and is not currently subscribed to the game. But as she has those housing items now, they will still be there if she decides to return.

So if we had some sort of furniture you could purchase for apartments that would reduce or eliminate that rent fee-- what am I saying, rent is still a god awful idea for apartments.

Yep. You just need to pay the rent back up when you come back, because EQII's housing is all instanced. There's no reason to have any sort of demolition.

But rent here, especially tied to demolition, defeats the entire purpose of apartments.

[Nepentha]

Yep. You just need to pay the rent back up when you come back, because EQII's housing is all instanced. There's no reason to have any sort of demolition.

But rent here, especially tied to demolition, defeats the entire purpose of apartments.

Ah thank you for the additional clarification. 1000% agree here, rent for apartments = bad idea.

[NanaWiloh]

A friend pointed out to me that one of the few MMOs that do charge rent, EQ2, also have furniture you can purchase to lower the amount of rent you pay. She has something like 25 houses in EQ2, and is not currently subscribed to the game. But as she has those housing items now, they will still be there if she decides to return.

So if we had some sort of furniture you could purchase for apartments that would reduce or eliminate that rent fee-- what am I saying, rent is still a god awful idea for apartments.

Three things kill the rent idea.
1. SE would make it affordable to the general player base.
2. Players can and still would generate vastly more gil then rent would ever take away.

3. Allowing people to pay in advance..might as well throw the idea in the trash can. Cause with that your just cutting its legs off.