The solution is honestly not as complicated as some think it is

[Reinha]

I see. I assume NA will get turned off due to those hurricanes or whatever going on now.

Do you mean the Mississippi tornadoes? I don't think it will have any effect on auto-demolition. From what I read there were under 30 fatalities as opposed to the 50000+ deaths, 100000 injured and 300000 destroyed apartments caused by the Turkey-Syria earthquake.

[UkcsAlias]

most people do not understand the complex ways servers and more are run for this, it is too easy to say the solution is easy, because the work in need to be put behind, other than the basics of course...

Thats because if it was designed in a better way, this actualy would have been easy since its a matter of scaling things. Only when things scale up to a diffirent magnitude it becomes difficult as that requires a design change and further optimizations.

A house isnt that diffirent to a dungeon to a client, as both are just an instance. The random objects for the house arent too diffirent from the inventories of other players in regards to data that needs to be loaded, as both are still quite plain a list of items with some position values (or for items stack size and probably inventory slot). So on that part, the struggle shouldnt be too hard.

But because this was coded a long time ago without an intention of scaling it up further, it has a very poor base design that complicates everything. And this was already a result of a complete rework. But the issue here is, for a game that is this old, the base game actualy has very poor code as it never was made to scale. They most likely never expected this popularity and just wanted dirty fixes everywhere. Which now backfire as you cant easily change these things anymore.

But investing time in those things (which again is an easy statement to make) is the only way to truly fix these things. But that will go with some heavy bugs which i think they currently just dont want to happen. Bugs can turn people away. Housing is still secondary to the main game, and yet fixes here will guaranteed cause bugs in MSQ etc.

So this makes the only solution a very slow one, improving steps 1 by 1. Which sadly avoids the major reworks as this cannot be performed at such pace.

Managing a game and keeping it profitable isnt easy. There is a reason why devs like EA and activision ditch games quickly and make a new game, its simply easier to do, yet for an MMO simply not done.

[Sotaris]

Do you mean the Mississippi tornadoes? I don't think it will have any effect on auto-demolition. From what I read there were under 30 fatalities as opposed to the 50000+ deaths, 100000 injured and 300000 destroyed apartments caused by the Turkey-Syria earthquake.

I have no idea, it was all over the news so I assumed it was a big disaster, based on your reaction I'm guessing not.

[Kaiproberts]

You are right, the answer is simple; the answer is just dynamically adding wards when the desirable houses fill or when filling slows. SE is just stubborn. They won't add more wards until EVERYTHING fills because that's how they measure it. Scaling apartments is a new system. New systems are harder to implement. They could, ironically, completely scrap island sanctuaries and just a TON more housing wards so we can all have the house we want instead of a bandaid instanced housing apartment fix.

[Oizen]

um actually housing works perfectly as I have a house and that means the system has no flaws

[Kailea_Nagisa]

That's basically it really, it actually isnt as easy as op makes it seem like.

Lets say player A has a few venues, just a random number, 3-4 on their account, 1 house for submarines, 1 personal fc.

You are going to force that player to choose between their venues, their submarines or their personal fc, I'm not sure how that's fair, as I mentioned it earlier in this thread, that rule is fine, but it cant happen for past plot purchases, only in the future, and even then, its a stupid rule in itself, removing houses from multiowners wont all of a sudden give houses to everyone, that's ridiculous, the houses that will free up will be taken in a round or two at most, and then what ? Who do we hunt next ? People that dont decorate their houses ? Should they lose their houses too ? Or maybe those that dont log in daily, maybe if they dont log in a 3 days time limit their house should auto demolish ? Or maybe even people that dont do content, maybe if they dont complete savage they'll lose their houses too ?

The point is that, this constant hunt to try and take stuff away from people because some people think they are owed a house, simply because they play the game, and that it's their "right" to have one, is getting ridiculous.

That is honestly just being selfish.

[True-to-Caesar]

Entitlement is the worst thing there is, and the ones saying that they should remove all the houses from multiowners are entitled, they think they deserve it more than the multiowner that has worked on getting those houses for god knows how many months or years, but no, dont deserve it anymore than the multiowner.

I have said it a million times, on EU, there is more than enough housing, and as for NA, if you really want housing that bad, Dynamis exists, that's what I did on my NA character, I moved from Aether to Dynamis, and got a house in the first round in Shirogane.

They can expect a house, yes, but it doesnt say anywhere that they should expect a house on the biggest world in the game, obviously there will be scarcity as its limited.

Yea… ward owners are totally fine yup.
Said nobody ever except the owners themselves.

1 personal and 1 FC is fair, beyond that it’s just nonsense as long as the resource is limited.

Doesn’t matter in the end, just need a better game with actual proper housing (bonus if it’s not tied to a sub). Then poof, gone are those people you disagree with because they dare want 1 good house, I’m not sure SE would appreciate but judging how they treat the matter it’ll be way to late when they do anything at all.

[Sotaris]

You are right, the answer is simple; the answer is just dynamically adding wards when the desirable houses fill or when filling slows. SE is just stubborn. They won't add more wards until EVERYTHING fills because that's how they measure it. Scaling apartments is a new system. New systems are harder to implement. They could, ironically, completely scrap island sanctuaries and just a TON more housing wards so we can all have the house we want instead of a bandaid instanced housing apartment fix.

We don't know how their infrastructure is like though. From a software POV, it might be possible to have it automatically scalable (adding more wards as an if/else statement), it's possible they still use physical hardware or are maxed out in their data center that holds housing data.

We actually are in a similar issue at work where all our virtual environments are "maxed" and we can't add more RAM or CPU cores cause we'd need to replace the hardware in our data center or move to a 3rd party like Amazon AWS.

[Stormpeaks]

That is honestly just being selfish.

Way to miss the entire point of my post, well done. That's not how reading works, you cant just read what you want and ignore the entire rest of the post.

Yea… ward owners are totally fine yup.
Said nobody ever except the owners themselves.

1 personal and 1 FC is fair, beyond that it’s just nonsense as long as the resource is limited.

Doesn’t matter in the end, just need a better game with actual proper housing (bonus if it’s not tied to a sub). Then poof, gone are those people you disagree with because they dare want 1 good house, I’m not sure SE would appreciate but judging how they treat the matter it’ll be way to late when they do anything at all.

I mean ward owners are fine yes, there is nothing wrong with ward housing, however as was suggested in this forum, they could add bigger apartments in the size of medium and large, with 1 or 2 floors as a solution to the scarcity on extremely high populated worlds.

[UkcsAlias]

It's possible they still use physical hardware or are maxed out in their data center that holds housing data.

If thats the case, then their backend is extremely bad. I cant imagine them running hundreds of physical servers all dedicated towards a single dungeon instance. They most likely already instance the servers on physical servers. But that doesnt mean they cannot scale up things (yes, during corona this was an issue they faced, but that is most likely already resolved now). They most likely have plenty of spare capacity on the servers these days, but run into limitations elsewhere that cause issues. And usualy this has to do with bandwidth. While you can store a huge amount of data, transferring this will quickly run into limitations even on servers. Having more data therefor doesnt mean that all that data is easily used. And as housing can quickly demand a lot of data (compared to a dungeon, inventories of 4 players vs a fully decorated house can be a diffirence), they very likely limit the housing based on this.

Add to that an outdated storage method that has its quirks, and it can add even more overhead (imagine that each time you visit the house, it has to gather the entire housing information instead of caching it, where this housing info is an uncompressed data format). All on a single DC server that stores all player information. That single server can very quickly reach limitations. They most likely mitigated the housing towards dedicated housing servers for this purpose already. But that doesnt mean that they instantly can do everything at max speed either. More houses means more players connecting, therefor requiring player information to be sent over to that housing server (for example things like retainer info and glam data and very likely other things im not aware of).

This is where is suspect the real problems lie. Even if everything is in a local network, bandwidth limitations are still a thing. And this also counts for internal RAM! Copying data over within RAM faces an internal bandwith