Housing Lottery Disadvantage with possible solution

[Mysnih4]

Although the current housing lottery system is keeping the bots down, it still is a bit of an unfair lotting system concerning Free Companies.

As it stands now, a single free company can place multiple lots on a single plot if membership has permissions to do so.

This makes it a bit unfair to those who may not have as many members capable of using their own gil to purchase the plot.

To explain further:
Free Company A has a membership base of 200 which all can place a bid. However, Free Company B has a 100 membership base that only 3 have the funds to lot. Both can use a large house due to membership numbers. The difference being, 200 lots for one free company vs 1 lot for another. I consider this an unfair advantage.

I do suggest, however, that only 1 (one) entry per Free Company Per lot and only one person should have said permission, and that person should be the Free Company Leader.

While talking about housing, as large houses seem to be in demand, why not add more larges to the next round of added wards? OR, split the next set of wards evenly with Smalls, Mediums, and Larges? OR, again with new wards, replace the regular and sub wards with sections and make 3 sections: Section 1 - Larges, Section 2 - Mediums, Section 3 - Smalls.

Again, grateful for the lottery system, just feel it needs tweaking.

(Just a little additional info, My FC has a membership base of a little over 200 members. Wanted to add that so everyone knew I wasn't complaining due to personal membership numbers. I like to be fair all the way around.)

[Azuri]

That is the point. By Yoshida's own admission large FCs deserve a house more than smaller ones.

[Nulstat]

As one of the FC's that put in several bids - something we would not have been able to do if it were not for some very kind donators who know we've been trying for several years - the only thing I genuinely want is an additional sub-ward tacked on to every ward that has a new layout and just mediums and larges.

I would be perfectly happy to stay in our medium if I could upgrade the interior to a large. Large interior, large item count and - most importantly - large player capacity. We're an event venue, we have to battle the literal 'this many players are allowed in your house' permissions - which is a thing that most folks aren't even aware of and is my honest top annoyance when I see a large go to a single person.

Had I the control, I probably would have executed a FCFS relo-period for FC's and another for personals when Ishgard opened up, which might have encouraged a little more spread from the old wards. With no interest in Ishgard ourselves, we are relying on folks moving out of the FC wards of one district - and if I have to wait on that, then yeah... I'm going to hedge my bets and bid as much as I can, especially since every time I bid on the FC plot, I'm not able to bid on a personal, and neither is anyone who is bidding with me.

FC's are a team effort. No matter how many tickets you put in, it's still just a 50/50 shot - you win or you lose. We lost this time to an FC that had less members on roster than we had bids. It's okay, we'll try again when we can - and yeah, we know that the gap is closing for us to get a solid chance before we're right back into the fray with the personals, which is the reason we don't have a large already.

I get where you're coming from and I do understand the frustration, but a chance is still just a chance.

[Archaell]

A large free company can provide space for more players than a single player FC crafting shell so it's absolutely fine they have a chance to improve their odds. You could always merge your FC with larger company or get more members to bid. Housing in large FCs is the best housing experience, because people actually visit the place.

[LessaDragonfire]

The problem with this is when you give someone permission to purchase/relo.. you are also risking them relinquishing... so you really have to trust the people that you are giving perms to....

[ameliaw]

That's... kind of fair, though. A FC with 200 members deserve a large/medium house way more than a FC with 10(which is the situation of most people who complain about this, even if it isn't your case). Small houses have no competition if these small FCs feel they can't compete with big ones.

[Mysnih4]

That's... kind of fair, though. A FC with 200 members deserve a large/medium house way more than a FC with 10(which is the situation of most people who complain about this, even if it isn't your case). Small houses have no competition if these small FCs feel they can't compete with big ones.

Lets make membership even like say both have a membership base of 600. FC A all members can afford to lot. But, FC B only 1 has enough funds to lot. FC B has little to no chance of winning. That number is extreme, but I believe if only 1 entry per FC is made, it levels it and makes it bit more fair across the board. That's what I was trying to say. Sorry if how I originally posted it sounded like the one with the lower number should have won or that it sounds like I was complaining. It wasn't what I meant. I also made this post due to observation from start of lotting all the way to final results. Just would like to see it even across the board^^

[Lordes]

Naoki Yoshida is as successful with the housing as the last producer was with 1.0

[DrWho2010]

Lets make membership even like say both have a membership base of 600. FC A all members can afford to lot. But, FC B only 1 has enough funds to lot. FC B has little to no chance of winning. That number is extreme, but I believe if only 1 entry per FC is made, it levels it and makes it bit more fair across the board. That's what I was trying to say. Sorry if how I originally posted it sounded like the one with the lower number should have won or that it sounds like I was complaining. It wasn't what I meant. I also made this post due to observation from start of lotting all the way to final results. Just would like to see it even across the board^^

That's just it tho it's not supposed to be even chance. Larger FC has more capability of giving more players "housing" than a smaller FC.

[Themarvin]

Although the current housing lottery system is keeping the bots down, it still is a bit of an unfair lotting system concerning Free Companies.

As it stands now, a single free company can place multiple lots on a single plot if membership has permissions to do so.

This makes it a bit unfair to those who may not have as many members capable of using their own gil to purchase the plot.

To explain further:
Free Company A has a membership base of 200 which all can place a bid. However, Free Company B has a 100 membership base that only 3 have the funds to lot. Both can use a large house due to membership numbers. The difference being, 200 lots for one free company vs 1 lot for another. I consider this an unfair advantage.

I do suggest, however, that only 1 (one) entry per Free Company Per lot and only one person should have said permission, and that person should be the Free Company Leader.

While talking about housing, as large houses seem to be in demand, why not add more larges to the next round of added wards? OR, split the next set of wards evenly with Smalls, Mediums, and Larges? OR, again with new wards, replace the regular and sub wards with sections and make 3 sections: Section 1 - Larges, Section 2 - Mediums, Section 3 - Smalls.

Again, grateful for the lottery system, just feel it needs tweaking.

(Just a little additional info, My FC has a membership base of a little over 200 members. Wanted to add that so everyone knew I wasn't complaining due to personal membership numbers. I like to be fair all the way around.)

You can't have 4 alts in your FC bidding on a house, it is one lottery ticket per account.

Maneged getting an upgrade from a small to a medium with 1 ticket, for my FC.