Why is this not the solution?

[Juun]

Instanced housing is not a solution, so we dont have to assume. The whole point of not having instanced housing means you get to walk through a ward and see peoples creative minds at work making their homes. Without it the appeal to housing drops 10 fold. If you want instanced housing get an apartment.

[PredatoryCatgirl]

Instanced housing is not a solution, so we dont have to assume. The whole point of not having instanced housing means you get to walk through a ward and see peoples creative minds at work making their homes. Without it the appeal to housing drops 10 fold. If you want instanced housing get an apartment.

This was the intent. The intent has failed.

[Almagnus1]

This was the intent. The intent has failed.

It worked... until personal housing was allowed... that screwed everything up, and it's been a disaster since then.

[PredatoryCatgirl]

It worked... until personal housing was allowed... that screwed everything up, and it's been a disaster since then.

Absolutely correct. Honestly the best thing to do at this point would be to allow personal instanced housing and make the wards FC only. Grandfather anyone who has a personal ward house, but disallow relocation.

But SE won't make instanced housing, because potato.

[ForteNightshade]

Instanced housing is not a solution, so we dont have to assume. The whole point of not having instanced housing means you get to walk through a ward and see peoples creative minds at work making their homes. Without it the appeal to housing drops 10 fold. If you want instanced housing get an apartment.

Being able to own and decorate your own house increases the appeal 100 times over. People are more concerned with actually owning a house than they are showing off the outside of it, especially since Instanced Housing would likely allowing visiting. So you could still show off your house to your friends. It also wouldn't force people to stay subbed.

It worked... until personal housing was allowed... that screwed everything up, and it's been a disaster since then.

It still failed even before because housing was so prohibitively nobody could afford them. Even if they only lowered the prices but never allowed Personals, people would just create dummy FCs like they do already. The neighborhood system was doomed to fail from the moment of its inception.

[Almagnus1]

It still failed even before because housing was so prohibitively nobody could afford them. Even if they only lowered the prices but never allowed Personals, people would just create dummy FCs like they do already. The neighborhood system was doomed to fail from the moment of its inception.

At the time, yes, but not so much these days.

That's also why the FC system needs to be locked down so it's harder to make the false FCs yet doesn't punish the legitimate ones - and that's been a very long running issue as it's got a bunch of RMT stuff tied into it (whether people want to admit it or not). Part of the problem here is that there's no auto-deletion failure state for the FC, among other things like a continual ownership check to see if the company is allowed to retain their house or if the FC house gets deleted.

[Dewslam]

At the time, yes, but not so much these days.

That's also why the FC system needs to be locked down so it's harder to make the false FCs yet doesn't punish the legitimate ones - and that's been a very long running issue as it's got a bunch of RMT stuff tied into it (whether people want to admit it or not). Part of the problem here is that there's no auto-deletion failure state for the FC, among other things like a continual ownership check to see if the company is allowed to retain their house or if the FC house gets deleted.

The only solutions I could think of that would really stop fakey-FCs for alts and RMT shenanigans would be to have a time delay, mandatory member minimums or increase the rank needed to get plots; but even that is barely a bandaid fix honestly. A plot was bought the other night by an FC that was three days old with less than ten members and was already rank nine or ten. If you put a hard limit on how old an FC has to be to buy a plot, then people are just going to squat on FCs until it's old enough and cycle them out via transferring leadership. If you increase the amount of points needed to get ranks then that's punishing smaller FCs for the abuses of specific people. If you make it mandatory to have X number of members to purchase a plot then people are just going to fill it with alts. Again and again the core problem largely seems to be that they just need to allow for individual instanced housing or stop tying housing to mechanics that lock people out of content and rewards.

[Almagnus1]

The only solutions I could think of that would really stop fakey-FCs for alts and RMT shenanigans would be to have a time delay, mandatory member minimums or increase the rank needed to get plots; but even that is barely a bandaid fix honestly. A plot was bought the other night by an FC that was three days old with less than ten members and was already rank nine or ten. If you put a hard limit on how old an FC has to be to buy a plot, then people are just going to squat on FCs until it's old enough and cycle them out via transferring leadership. If you increase the amount of points needed to get ranks then that's punishing smaller FCs for the abuses of specific people. If you make it mandatory to have X number of members to purchase a plot then people are just going to fill it with alts. Again and again the core problem largely seems to be that they just need to allow for individual instanced housing or stop tying housing to mechanics that lock people out of content and rewards.

IMO it would be easiest to force FCs to pass a nightly check of all FCs concurrently on the same server where the FCs must have four active subscriptions with at least 91 days of subscribed time - as you need four players to create the FC, you should also need that many to hold land.

At this point, SE has to either accept that they've got to screw over someone to fix holes in the system that should have never been there in the first place, or acknowledge that they're going to have inefficient usage of housing requiring more hardware resources because of player greed.

[zoranreyes]

IMO it would be easiest to force FCs to pass a nightly check of all FCs concurrently on the same server where the FCs must have four active subscriptions with at least 91 days of subscribed time - as you need four players to create the FC, you should also need that many to hold land.

At this point, SE has to either accept that they've got to screw over someone to fix holes in the system that should have never been there in the first place, or acknowledge that they're going to have inefficient usage of housing requiring more hardware resources because of player greed.

I have learned that if it really gets stressed you out so much, it's time to take rest and play other games.
It is what I believe I have to do after many days of camping... While my anxiety attacks with what if I am still unable to get a house for my FC in 6.1. OTL