This dataset is from previous roulette cycle, it's outdated now. Use Paissa to look for available plots, it's more convenient too.
Determining competition is very hard. Basically, Paissa works by players just quickly viewing all wards at the aetheryte, so getting data on all 30 wards takes like 20 seconds. It gathers all available plots, but it doesn't know how many bids there are on each plot. For that, player with plugin needs to go to the specific plot, view it's placard and it will get updated on the website. Because this is so lengthy and inconvenient, you end up with tons of plots where you don't know how many entries there are. On the flip side, if placard is missing info, it likely doesn't have many bids.
I recommend checking Paissa few hours before roulette cycle ends. There will be much more updated plots on Paissa. Looking at your server, in this cycle, there are 51 plots for private buyers, unfortunately, all of them are small.
When you deal with human beings, never count on logic or consistency.
Fluid like water. Smooth like silk. Pepperoni like pizza.
NA/EU FC wise is mostly the owner that get to use the features in most cases as it is rather than shared with the FC vs as how JP seem like more to share.
It has something to do with mentality and it show western mentality is horrible in the ways of housing, especially NA.
What do you guys suggest is done about it, as the solution would at current point NOT be around just making more wards.
Nice data.
Goblet is so underappreciated - It has some of the best smalls IMO and one of the best mediums (Plot 19/49)
I mean, there are really only two viable solutions if you want to minimize the development time spent on the problem - 1) add servers to the most densely packed DCs and drastically up the incentives for transferal, 2) add wards to packed servers without the ridiculous insistence on complete parity.
Being honest, I think adding wards to packed servers is legitimately the only realistic near-future solution. You're going to struggle to ever get a significant amount of people off of Balmung, for instance, no matter what you offer - not even if it becomes nearly unplayable. Only answer to a supply crisis where you can't stem demand is to add more supply.
Of course, in a perfect world data is free and instances add no overhead and are infinitely scalable so you could infinitely expand availability forever. It's also abundantly clear that we don't live in a perfect world and this game doesn't easily support that just yet, or it would have been done years ago. It's a huge systems engineering task, big enough that there are no practical limits on what the solution could be and big enough that you can't really pin all your hopes on it. It's almost certainly in the cards for the future, and I fully believe Island Sanctuary has been a grand data collection experiment towards it... but there's just not a magic "Add Instanced Housing" checkbox that they've been refusing to click.
the incentives are there for transferring the issue is SE should have add those new servers on dynamis to the existing DCs instead of creating a new DC.I mean, there are really only two viable solutions if you want to minimize the development time spent on the problem - 1) add servers to the most densely packed DCs and drastically up the incentives for transferal, 2) add wards to packed servers without the ridiculous insistence on complete parity.
Being honest, I think adding wards to packed servers is legitimately the only realistic near-future solution. You're going to struggle to ever get a significant amount of people off of Balmung, for instance, no matter what you offer - not even if it becomes nearly unplayable. Only answer to a supply crisis where you can't stem demand is to add more supply.
Of course, in a perfect world data is free and instances add no overhead and are infinitely scalable so you could infinitely expand availability forever. It's also abundantly clear that we don't live in a perfect world and this game doesn't easily support that just yet, or it would have been done years ago. It's a huge systems engineering task, big enough that there are no practical limits on what the solution could be and big enough that you can't really pin all your hopes on it. It's almost certainly in the cards for the future, and I fully believe Island Sanctuary has been a grand data collection experiment towards it... but there's just not a magic "Add Instanced Housing" checkbox that they've been refusing to click.
Personally i would like them to give plot owners the option to upgrade their homes to something larger on existing plots. and do away the limit garden bs. The same goes for apartments.
Incentives exist. They're just not good enough, certainly not for established players. 10 gold feathers and at-cost + 3m furniture reimbursement for housing might as well be nothing. If you want people to actually take up the offer from heavily established worlds, you need to really up the ante.
I'm glad to see someone doing research on it and actually using the research accurately instead of twisting it for their own bias.
Housing in its current state was a mistake.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
Cookie Policy
This website uses cookies. If you do not wish us to set cookies on your device, please do not use the website. Please read the Square Enix cookies policy for more information. Your use of the website is also subject to the terms in the Square Enix website terms of use and privacy policy and by using the website you are accepting those terms. The Square Enix terms of use, privacy policy and cookies policy can also be found through links at the bottom of the page.