Shell FCs are a bigger problem than we think...

[SweetPete]

Why does it matter? My husband and I have our FC alone and we are happy. We log in daily and use our company workshop allot. How can you call it shell? Some people just don’t want to be in large FCs because most of the time drama follows. Since we’ve had our own to ourselves we’ve been very happy. It’s not fair to say FCs with less than 3 people are shell failed ones.

[LaylaTsarra]

Why does it matter? My husband and I have our FC alone and we are happy. We log in daily and use our company workshop allot. How can you call it shell? Some people just don’t want to be in large FCs because most of the time drama follows. Since we’ve had our own to ourselves we’ve been very happy. It’s not fair to say FCs with less than 3 people are shell failed ones.

Enjoy your FC with your husband. Nothing says you can't have one with less than 4 only that you need 4 to make one. It's not the number in the FC but the number owned by one account that is the issue. That needs to be fixed. They also need to decouple gardening and airship/subs/workshops from FC to reduce the motivation for owning more than one.

[ItMe]

If an individual can own a house, I have no issue with a group of 2 individuals owning a house. Have fun.

If the data can't tell the difference between a small FC and a shell FC then I can't condemn them all.

[Besame]

Why does it matter? My husband and I have our FC alone and we are happy. We log in daily and use our company workshop allot. How can you call it shell? Some people just don’t want to be in large FCs because most of the time drama follows. Since we’ve had our own to ourselves we’ve been very happy. It’s not fair to say FCs with less than 3 people are shell failed ones.

Absolutely and well said!

[Big_Bap]

I see you have reading difficulties. Let's start from the beginning again.


You say "Shell FCs are a bigger problem than we think...".

First off, who's "we"?

You?
The players who post on this forum?
If so, why do you include Japanese players who don't even write in this section? I can't help but notice you made no effort in asking them why they favor smaller FCs. Or better yet, find me extensive posts from Japanese players who show as much disdain for small FCs as you do. The very reason why you can filter servers by Data Center or Region is to provide fair comparisons. You chose to bundle everything together to make it seem like this is a bigger problem than it actually is, when it's hardly a problem in the first place.

I know you like to cry about people who criticize you and how they "put words in your mouth", but you chose the word "we" while also including players that quite simply do not belong or even wish to post here.

Anyhow, let's go back to this "problem"... have some proper stats as of March:

Characters with access to FC housing: 1,848,832
Characters with access to personal housing (with all 3 tenants): 271,885 (1,087,540)

Average characters per FC with a house:

NA: 23.4
EU: 17.01
JP: 10.4


FCs with a house and less than 4 members:

NA: 6,053
EU: 3,519
JP: 14,154

FCs with a house and less than 4 members created since the temporary restrictions have been added:

NA: 3,217
EU: 2,257
JP: 6,522

If you still want to run with a global stat that suits your pseudo agenda, despite the clear differences between the 3 regions, then go ahead, embarrass yourself even more!

Are you still reading or are you gonna flee as you did in your thread about apartments?

Back on topic, you voluntarily decided to include FCs that have been purchased before the "temporary restrictions" were added. Why? Actually, you don't need to answer, the readers know why you would.

Let's compare the amount of FC houses with less than 4 members that have been purchased after those restrictions against all the FC houses:

NA: 3,217 out of 38,772 or 8.3%
EU: 2,257 out of 18,342 or 12.3%
JP: 6,522 out of 62,681 or 10.4%

Now let's compare your so-called "shell FCs" against all the available plots:

NA: 3,528 out of 138,240 or 2.5%
EU: 2,378 out of 69,120 or 3.4%
JP: 7,185 out of 184,320 or 3.9%

So there you go. If these % are such a big problem for you, you might want to seek help from a professional. But as stated by others, you are unqualified to decide what a proper FC is.

While you are here, what are your thoughts on removing personal housing from players who are not consistently capped when it comes to tenants? If you want to take away FC houses that are below the initial members requirement, why not advocate for the same thing for personal housing? After all, as shown above, personal housing cannot accommodate nearly as many players as FC housing.

Bonus question... should every single Free Company that falls below 4 members be terminated? Again, the initial requirement to submit a petition is 4 members.


*For the record, the % of "shell FCs" is even lower if you start adding filters like FC rank/GC status, but I had to give them a chance*

Rank 6-8 FCs with a house and 3 members or less:

NA: 3,080 out of 138,240 or 2.2%
EU: 1,807 out of 69,120 or 2.6%
JP: 5,155 out of 184,320 or 2.8%

Rank 6-8 FCs with a house and 3 members or less created since patch 4.2.

NA: 2,411 out of 138,240 or 1.7%
EU: 1,699out of 69,120 or 2.5%
JP: 1,209 out of 184,320 or 0.6%

[Big_Bap]

For good measures, here's a report specifically for this discussion.

FCs with a house + 3 members or less and a nice breakdown by FC rank. Assume that anything in purple is not a so-called "shell FC". Feel free to use Patch 4.2's release date to filter even more (01/29/2018).

https://datastudio.google.com/report...0f1/page/Wz06B

[Arielen]

every day I pray that blocking on the forums was possible

[Almagnus1]

As for why I'm making the four member distinction, please go read https://na.finalfantasyxiv.com/lodes.../housing_land/ . That page lists a requirement of at least four members to buy an FC house, it should also require at least four members to keep the FC house. That also follows with how many people are required to create the FC in the first place (four total signatures). It's as if SE considers four the minimum number of people for an FC.

With the exception of the number of personal houses that exist, personally houses are otherwise completely irrelevant to this discussion.

FCs with less than four members should have never been allowed to have housing in the first place (and arguably should have been deleted once they fell below that threshold). All of this is (yet another) example of SE not putting in restrictions where they should have and end up causing more pain and suffering with housing in the long run.

Oh, and do us all a favor and release the actual data, not data slices that have been manicured to fit your argument.

Edit:
I'll do a more indepth response once I have the time to do so.

[MilkieTea]

I see you have reading difficulties. Let's start from the beginning again.

This is such a well crafted response! I think it perfectly encapsulates what everyone is trying to say with hard data.

[Big_Bap]

As for why I'm making the four member distinction, please go read https://na.finalfantasyxiv.com/lodes.../housing_land/ . That page lists a requirement of at least four members to buy an FC house, it should also require at least four members to keep the FC house. That also follows with how many people are required to create the FC in the first place (four total signatures). It's as if SE considers four the minimum number of people for an FC.

With the exception of the number of personal houses that exist, personally houses are otherwise completely irrelevant to this discussion.

FCs with less than four members should have never been allowed to have housing in the first place (and arguably should have been deleted once they fell below that threshold). All of this is (yet another) example of SE not putting in restrictions where they should have and end up causing more pain and suffering with housing in the long run.

Oh, and do us all a favor and release the actual data, not data slices that have been manicured to fit your argument.

Edit:
I'll do a more indepth response once I have the time to do so.

I love how you dismiss or straight up don't answer anything that destroys your posts. Part of me wishes you had the capability to properly defend the insanity you type on this board, but I guess you can't have it all!!!

Btw, all the data is on the website. Stop crying.