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

[Almagnus1]

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)

And all of this is completely irrelevant to shell FCs. If you're going to cite population, at least use https://ffxivcensus.com/

Then again, this is coming from the same person that wrote a guide on how to get a shell FC to the point that it can buy a house ( https://www.xivhousing.com/free-company-leveling ) which is making this entire situation worse. So it's no surprise you're going to overzealously defend shell FCs.

Average characters per FC with a house:

NA: 23.4
EU: 17.01
JP: 10.4

Again, irrelevant to the discussion of shell FCs as I already pointed out 80% of the FC housing have at least 4+ members.

FCs with a house and less than 4 members:

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

Yes, I'm aware of this as I had previously said:

Your data shows that NA has 38,772 FC houses, 6053 of which have less than 4 members to them (which is 15.61%), while EU has 18,342 FC houses and roughly 3,519 have less than 4 members, which is 19.19%. So the 20% worldwide is actually higher because the problem is worse in JP than it is in the other regions.

So you're saying that of the 62,681 FC houses in Japan, 48,527 of them which are for FCs that are 4+ members (which is what I consider to be a legitimate FC in the scope of this post) don't care about small FCs?

I'm not talking about them, only the 14,154 FC houses for FCs that have 1-3 members, which comprise 22.58% of the FC houses in JP.

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

Problem isn't on when they were added, it's that they exist to begin with.

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%

When the purchase happenned is irrelevant when the problem is they exist to begin with.

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%

And look! You're even going so far as to leverage the fact that FCs take up about a third of all the FFXIV housing to make the problem appear as if it's nonexistant!

Such an intellectually honest response /s

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.

As stated previously, personal housing is completely irrelevant to the shell FC issue. Shell FC housing is done explicitly to bypass the personal housing requirements and let one person acquire more houses than what SE intendes.

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.

Going by https://na.finalfantasyxiv.com/lodes.../housing_land/ the requirement to buy an FC house is four characters. It seems reasonable that the FC should stay at alest four members (which roughly 80% of the FCs do worldwide) to retain their house. There definitely needs to be a discussion around removing the FCs that fall below four (and where that threshold should be) because the data from SE with respect to the FCs isn't the cleanest (especially since there's 0 member FCs in that data).

*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%

And here we go with using all the houses instead of specifically talking about the FC housing just to water down the stats.

Here's what those stats are if you only look at the FC housing:

NA: 7.94%
EU: 4.66%
JP 13.30%

EU's low percentage is due to EU having generally less FC housing overall than the other two regions.

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%

As stated previously when the purchase occurred doesn't matter, the problem is that they exist because the shell FCs are making this entire housing situation worse.

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!!!

Yes, because writing a more indepth response is more important than getting to the gym so I stay sexy! =D

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

From having worked with PowerBI, I know that whatever you set the query the database uses to pull the data will define the dataset displayed, and as you have shown a pattern of using the data to represent the issue as not as significant as it is, I fully expect all views coming from you to be tailored to best fit your narrative regardless of what the data actually says. As your site hosts a guide on how to cheese the FC system to quickly spin up a shell FC (and yes, that's what your guide facilitates whethere you want to acknowledge it or not), I fully expect you to defend this flaw in the housing system and provide manicured data slices instead of the actual DB of data.

[NanaWiloh]

This is one topic I will not touch with a 20 ft flaming pole. Have Fun!!!!

[Big_Bap]

And all of this is completely irrelevant to shell FCs. If you're going to cite population, at least use https://ffxivcensus.com/

Congrats on your failed attempt at diverting. The point is that FC housing can accommodate way more people than personal housing. Hence why personal housing is much more problematic, granted it takes up the majority of the plots for a lot less players.

Then again, this is coming from the same person that wrote a guide on how to get a shell FC to the point that it can buy a house ( https://www.xivhousing.com/free-company-leveling ) which is making this entire situation worse. So it's no surprise you're going to overzealously defend shell FCs.

Setting the record straight darling. You think a couple of thousand house owners are a problem but ironically, personal housing has no issues. What a joke you are.

Again, irrelevant to the discussion of shell FCs as I already pointed out 80% of the FC housing have at least 4+ members.

Irrelevant for someone who's dead focused on being deceitful. Let me remind you that you are the one who chose to use the word "we" when JP players don't come around here. Btw, you have yet to address that. Who do you speak for? Who's "we".

Yes, I'm aware of this as I had previously said:

I don't think you are aware of anything really. Again, you are being deceitful by combining everything together. Don't be surprised that you're getting called out on it.

Problem isn't on when they were added, it's that they exist to begin with.

When the purchase happenned is irrelevant when the problem is they exist to begin with.

Not only is that your opinion, but SE has stated that temporary restrictions were not retroactive. You are a literal who, take a seat.

And look! You're even going so far as to leverage the fact that FCs take up about a third of all the FFXIV housing to make the problem appear as if it's nonexistant!

Yes, FC housing is a minority and here you are crying about the minority of a minority. You understand that right (wishful thinking).

As stated previously, personal housing is completely irrelevant to the shell FC issue. Shell FC housing is done explicitly to bypass the personal housing requirements and let one person acquire more houses than what SE intendes.

1: It's not irrelevant when personal housing brings in way more issues.
2: The temporary restriction on FC housing doesn't even work, but you don't know that because you have no experience with FC housing.
3: That's a big assumption for someone so inexperienced on the subject.
4: Funny how you bring in SE's intent when you've previously stated that you believe any FC with less than 4 members shouldn't exist (something they obviously disagree with). The game allows you to own as many FC houses until you cap an account. Don't even need a "loophole", but as I said before, you are unaware.

Going by https://na.finalfantasyxiv.com/lodes.../housing_land/ the requirement to buy an FC house is four characters. It seems reasonable that the FC should stay at alest four members (which roughly 80% of the FCs do worldwide) to retain their house. There definitely needs to be a discussion around removing the FCs that fall below four (and where that threshold should be) because the data from SE with respect to the FCs isn't the cleanest (especially since there's 0 member FCs in that data).

1: As said previously, the temporary restriction on FC housing doesn't even work.
2: Reasonable to you only. You sound like Napoleon.
3: FCs with 0 members exist because of character recovery. Thanks for displaying your ignorance.

And here we go with using all the houses instead of specifically talking about the FC housing just to water down the stats.

Apple to apple
House for house

You're the one being deceiving by choosing what you want to talk about or even what others talk about.

Here's what those stats are if you only look at the FC housing:

NA: 7.94%
EU: 4.66%
JP 13.30%

EU's low percentage is due to EU having generally less FC housing overall than the other two regions.

Yes, you are crying yet again about the minority of a minority. Congrats.

As stated previously when the purchase occurred doesn't matter, the problem is that they exist because the shell FCs are making this entire housing situation worse.

It doesn't matter to you because it makes you look bad. Not that it's a difficult thing to do.

Yes, because writing a more indepth response is more important than getting to the gym so I stay sexy! =D

In-depth? You are one most uninformed people I've come across on this forum. Try reading books or something... at least that will get you somewhere.

From having worked with PowerBI, I know that whatever you set the query the database uses to pull the data will define the dataset displayed, and as you have shown a pattern of using the data to represent the issue as not as significant as it is, I fully expect all views coming from you to be tailored to best fit your narrative regardless of what the data actually says. As your site hosts a guide on how to cheese the FC system to quickly spin up a shell FC (and yes, that's what your guide facilitates whethere you want to acknowledge it or not), I fully expect you to defend this flaw in the housing system and provide manicured data slices instead of the actual DB of data.

It's not as significant as you claim it is, because well... it isn't darling. The very reason why this website exists is because of people like you who have no knowledge. If you believe I'm tampering with the data, go ahead, prove it.

You need to stop crying about 3% of the house owners when personal housing brings in a lot more issues. Issues you refuse to discuss by the way. Knowing your history on here, this is just another hill for you to die on.

Help does exist if the only thing you enjoy doing is ridicule yourself and play the victim card on a video game forum.

[Jojoya]

The point is that FC housing can accommodate way more people than personal housing. Hence why personal housing is much more problematic, granted it takes up the majority of the plots for a lot less players.

Trying to stay out of most of this argument but I do want to touch on this point.

Why do most players want a personal house? They want a chance to decorate a house to their liking along with access to gardening.

What do most FCs not grant the majority of their members? A chance to decorate and garden at the FC house. The house tends to end up the plaything of the leader and sometimes the officers. That's also tends to be true of the workshop airships and submersibles. Some don't even give members access to the Fabrication Station when there are no downsides to allowing it unless the officers like leaving projects sitting on the station half finished.

There's little point in saying that FC houses accommodate more players if most FC members aren't getting what they want from housing out of it.

[Sotaris]

You need to stop crying about 3% of the house owners when personal housing brings in a lot more issues. Issues you refuse to discuss by the way. Knowing your history on here, this is just another hill for you to die on.

Help does exist if the only thing you enjoy doing is ridicule yourself and play the victim card on a video game forum.

Couldn't agree more. Wish I could like this post more than once.

[Alien_Gamer]

There's little point in saying that FC houses accommodate more players if most FC members aren't getting what they want from housing out of it.

you are correct which is why a lot of people want gardening and airship either separated from fcs or access added through other means. there are more pertinent threads for that issue floating around.

as to the main thread, shell fcs aren't an issue. there's so few trying to game the system in the way the op claims, the number comes out to a rounding error.

small fcs deserve housing as much as large ones do. if SE cared how small fcs could be they'd have put limits on it.

[MrMagic]

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

It's as if SE considers 4 the minimum number to create a FC or buy a plot. You're the one that wants to change the requirements to maintaining at least 4 members at all times. I'm sure SE realises that a FC may lose a member before they grow and isn't looking be as over the top as you are, thankfully.

Why should the initial requirement and the maintenance requirement of member numbers be the same. Seems pointless to only buy a plot with a FC with 4 members if dropping 1 member means you all lose the house you worked towards. I'm genuinely fascinated you can't figure that out.

[Nepentha]

Trying to stay out of most of this argument but I do want to touch on this point.

Why do most players want a personal house? They want a chance to decorate a house to their liking along with access to gardening.

What do most FCs not grant the majority of their members? A chance to decorate and garden at the FC house. The house tends to end up the plaything of the leader and sometimes the officers. That's also tends to be true of the workshop airships and submersibles. Some don't even give members access to the Fabrication Station when there are no downsides to allowing it unless the officers like leaving projects sitting on the station half finished.

There's little point in saying that FC houses accommodate more players if most FC members aren't getting what they want from housing out of it.

I get what you're saying but I think he's just trying to drive home a point, that's all. Worrying over FCs with less than 4 members having housing, over personal houses who can only ever have a set number of people using them at max.

[Nepentha]

It's as if SE considers 4 the minimum number to create a FC or buy a plot. You're the one that wants to change the requirements to maintaining at least 4 members at all times. I'm sure SE realises that a FC may lose a member before they grow and isn't looking be as over the top as you are, thankfully.

Why should the initial requirement and the maintenance requirement of member numbers be the same. Seems pointless to only buy a plot with a FC with 4 members if dropping 1 member means you all lose the house you worked towards. I'm genuinely fascinated you can't figure that out.

Because the point isn't that they want to change things for the better. The point is they want to punish players they feel are committing wrongs. Seriously that is the only thing they fixate on in these forums. Finding a way to get to and force people who don't follow the rules in their head to give up their houses. If it means making the whole system untenable for the rest of the playerbase, so be it. We're all collateral damage in their war on the 1%.

[Big_Bap]

Why do most players want a personal house? They want a chance to decorate a house to their liking along with access to gardening.

Sure, but thats a bit narrow-minded. People want things they don't even need, hence why so many personal houses are barren.

I would add that there's hardly anything to spend gil on and that some people end up buying a house as a status symbol.

What do most FCs not grant the majority of their members? A chance to decorate and garden at the FC house. The house tends to end up the plaything of the leader and sometimes the officers.

That's also tends to be true of the workshop airships and submersibles. Some don't even give members access to the Fabrication Station when there are no downsides to allowing it unless the officers like leaving projects sitting on the station half finished.

There's little point in saying that FC houses accommodate more players if most FC members aren't getting what they want from housing out of it.

I briefly touched on the subject.

Ask yourself why the average FC with a house on the NA servers has twice as many members as on the JP servers. Is it "cultural differences" or is it because conditions are more than favorable for an environment where FC housing ressources have better chances of being redistributed or accessible down the chain.

Another important question is why do players, who are unsatisfied by the FC permissions they are granted, are not leaving their FC to make their own? Workshops are a big commitment and just like Fc chest permissions or good old Fc permissions, its better to be safe than sorry. Given that SE won't do anything if a FC members decides to cause trouble, I don't think it's unreasonable for FC leaders/officers to limit access to those facilities.

Finally, your same point about permissions can be applied to personal housing. How many have tenants to begin with? How many let their tenants do whatever with a house that isn't theirs?

As demonstrated, even in a fairy tale scenario where all the existing personal houses have 3 tenants, it's impossible for personal housing to grant the housing experience (limited or not) to as many players as FC housing.


EDIT: It's also worth noting that everything you've said is only available for FC houses. Personal housing is awfully inferior and further locks players out of content that is only available in FC housing.