"Free Company Houses" should not exist, they only encourage "personal/solo FC's"

[Terin]

Players are always going to look for loopholes to get the things they want. And it's abundantly clear, a LOT of players want Housing.

The issue is that, as the current restrictions stand, YOUR BEST BEST TO ACQUIRING A HOUSE is to have YOUR OWN, PERSONAL FREE COMPANY.

After all, 75% of all houses are now EXCLUSIVE to Free Companies.

Here's the problem:

Players having "their own personal/solo Free Companies" is bad for the game, and bad for business.

Let me explain.

People play MMO's because they offer a multiplayer experience. FFXIV accomplishes particularly well, thanks to consistent community moderation, so that most of the community is actually quite friendly and welcoming.

Being PART of an active Free Company actually makes players MORE invested in the game. There's a lot of content that you can only really run in a static, and while a robust suite of options exist for FINDING groups, the fact is that players will almost always flock to running content with people they actually know.

But right now, there is a pretty awful choice in front of most players:

Would you RATHER be part of a Free Company community?

Or would you rather have a HOUSE?

And if players choose the latter, then it means they cannot participate in the former.

So let's just follow that to its logical conclusion:

A player decides to form their own Free Company, so that they can get a house. Hooray! They manage to win one! But maybe they have a small friends list. And over time, people regular unsub and re-sub to the game. So fewer and fewer of their friends are online, so they're forced to queue for matchmade content.

That still allows them to RUN all of the content, however unless that play is actively TRYING to make new friends, then they're logically going to wind up logging in and not knowing anybody. That makes for a less-fun (if not slightly depressing) experience, making that player much more likely to unsubscribe.

Now of course when they unsub, that house is eventually available to the market once again. But that's also one less subscriber to the game. Moreover, there's less reason for them to return, as oppose to "oh man, I'll get to play with the folks in my FC again!".

Here's the thing:

There's nothing wrong with the IDEA of a "Free Company house". The problem is the execution.

Because the house BELONGS TO the Free Company itself, it ALSO means that players can effective "sell" their Free Company, which of course INCLUDES a House.

And it ALSO means that players at the head of a Free Company can technically own not one, but TWO HOUSES.

I know this, because I AM ONE OF THOSE PEOPLE.

Because why wouildn't I? I LOVE Housing systems, and people able to bid on both Personal AND FC housing gives me far more options.

But while I may benefit from this system, that does NOT mean that it's okay.

I should be forced to choose: which house do I want to keep? And then I lose the other one.

Doing so would actually enhance my own experience with the game. I would probably seek out a social Free Company to join, and if I found a group I really clicked with, I could honestly see getting even MORE invested in the game.

Now, as for "Free Company houses", I still think the CONCEPT is good. So here's what I would do:

As Leader (or Officer, if allowed) of a Free Company, you can choose ANY member of your Free Company, and request to make their Personal house the new "Free Company house". Thus allowing all other members of the Free Company to teleport there.

However, should that player choose to leave the Free Company, they still take their own house with them. They simply lose access to the FC chest and workshop stuff (I actually think the Workshop might be worth revamping, but that's a topic for another time).

As I said, just solves multiple issues:

- It encourages players to actually join a REAL Free Company

- It prevents players from "selling" their Free Company and attached house

- It prevents players from exploiting a loophole to effective own TWO houses

- It potentially opens up some additional plots

Now, as for the INITIAL process of how this might look, my solution is this:

- When you log in, the "Free Company house" is converted to a Personal house and now belongs to the FC leader.

- If the leader already OWNS a house, they can choose which house they wish to KEEP as their Personal house.

- If they elect to keep their previous Personal house, they can opt to transfer ownership of the "Free Company house" to any qualifying Officer or member of the Free Company.

- If nobody chooses to claim the house, the current owner is given one week to collect any items and such. After that week is up, the house is opened up to bidding for the next lottery.

This may sound a bit complicated, but I believe this covers all of the bases. And yes, it actually means I'd be losing one of my own houses, but I believe that is only fair.

Ultimately, the point is this; the current system is certainly an improvement over the old in MANY respects, but it also actively ENCOURAGES players to form their own personal/solo Free Companies. That can only hurt the game's community overall, and I hope we see this addressed.

[Kranel_San]

You have a fair point. Sometimes holding into something is causing an issue, and with personal plots having scarcity, it might be better to let go of FC housing.
In that case, I'd prefer if they also introduced a unified building where every FC can access their own workshop from there. FC-Specific instance if you may call it, but I wonder if the engine allows such.

[Stormpeaks]

This better be a sarcastic post, if anything what should be let go of is personal houses.

[Kaurhz]

No, Free Company housing absolutely should exist. They just need to stop being so damn scared of stepping on a few players' toes and do something about the misuse. I guarantee if they actually started to do something that directly addresses the misuse, instead of skirting around the issue with band aid solutions then a lot less players would feel enticed to go after multiple plots.

They will adjust the ration of FC : Personal plots as time goes by.

[Shibi]

Remove personal housing altogether and make it only an FC resource.

Personal housing clearly causes too much unhappiness in these "let's punish others" thread creators. Remove personal housing completely and they will stop complaining about it.

[SeverianLyonesse]

Also throwing my hat into the "remove personal housing" pile.

Maybe allow commercial licensing system for player-owned housing for those who actually make substantial and regular use of their house with other players. And definitely expand instanced options like apartments and sanctuaries to allow players to do nearly all the same things as a house.

But aside from the players who actually open their home for public/commercial amenities, I think the idea of player housing is antithetical to the core idea of wards which is to create the feeling of neighborhoods--something which is achieved primarily through higher-activity FC housing, and severely diluted by personal housing. I find the entitlement to personal houses masturbatory, honestly--just a lot of server space occupied by players who are obsessed with collecting things that they will hardly use or share with others. I strongly hope Island Sanctuaries solves this need for a lot of the players whining about player housing.

[Avidria]

Personally I think FC housing should've been instanced from the start and wards should've been individual only. They're catering to two entirely different groups, and doing it badly. They should've never been part of the same system.

But the train left the station when they first made that decision, and removing either type of housing at this point would accomplish nothing but pissing more people off. They're at the point where they're just patching up and bandaging the cracks in a poorly thought out and poorly implemented system. Which is unfortunate because housing was one of the things that drew me after 15 years of playing primarily wow(and no, garrisons don't count as housing).

[Seraphor]

Ok, so once you prevent FC leaders from having person houses or you make one of the FC members house the "FC house"... who owns the house?

Is it the FC house that the whole FC get to participate in? Or does it belong to that player?

Seems like this would cause some issues...

[DixieBellOCE]

Better solution.

Make FC houses have a tax.

Surely real players can cough up ~5m/month in taxes for an FC house right?

Think of it as an Airship/Submersible license thats needs to be renewed monthly or those operations are suspended.

[EgilTheStressedMage]

As someone who met their FC mates and leader at PAX and had dinner with them the following night, absolutely not. Punish the ones abusing it, leave the rest of us alone.