housing conundrum: there needs to be a better way.

[Ravenblade1979]

Are we referring to private or fc here? Private I can understand being scarce to an extent but you can still only own one house per server per account. I know some people are extreme but I doubt there's someone holding that many accounts to own a lot of privates since theres no benefit to it compared to FCs. You also cant sell them. Even still though, just taking Balmung as a example, there are still 24 plots up right now.

FCs aren't scare on most servers (again, Balmung has 30 right now and on the polar opposite side of the spectrum Dyna still has hundreds if not thousands).

People just want sizes that aren't available and turn it into a scarcity issue rather than saying what it actually is: they just don't want anything that's available. Could just get a house in general and scale up overtime instead of keeping yourself from having one at all, but that's just me.

You can own multiple fcs. There's a workaround to it. If your main on your server has a fc then make an alt and buy one. Gotta be in fc 30 days to take over ownership. So a person could have 8 per world. If they have multiple paid accounts then that number goes up.

I also wish people went after smalls for fc plots. It's a stepping stone but everyone want a medium or large cause of size difference.

They best off axing smalls for fc plots and doing more medium and larges. Although instanced still the way to go

[LianaThorne]

You can own multiple fcs. There's a workaround to it. If your main on your server has a fc then make an alt and buy one. Gotta be in fc 30 days to take over ownership. So a person could have 8 per world. If they have multiple paid accounts then that number goes up.

I also wish people went after smalls for fc plots. It's a stepping stone but everyone want a medium or large cause of size difference.

They best off axing smalls for fc plots and doing more medium and larges. Although instanced still the way to go

I acknowledged that multi-owning FCs exists in my statement about how there's no benefit for multi-private owning in the same way FCs have multiple benefits. If people are multi-owning it's for the sake of FCs since those are sellable and if you look at wards that are owned by one person, it's usually 10-20 FCs under the same tag/under a similar name.

And as I said before, if they were going to revamp housing they would have done it already instead of putting bandaids on things. They want the housing set up we have or can't fix it at this point.

[Ravenblade1979]

Yes clearly there are so many multiowners on NA, it has to be them right, there's like what, 20 houses per world that belong to multiowners ? Surely they are creating the scarcity by themselves

if you have no clue, it's okay, but at least dont talk nonsense

Balmung literally has 1 or 2 multiowners if even that, and those people with a few houses are causing the scarcity ? stop trolling

Can you show me your numbers where you can prove only X amount of people are multi owners on NA because I know one person who owns about 10 different fcs spread out on the different servers. That's amongst medium and larges too. Plus they are part of a group of people who deal in housing in game.

Not to mention the group on NA who buys them up to rmt sell them. Plus the people here and there who advertise in pf looking to buy. Then let's add in the ffxiv housing discord that has a long list of owners.

Come on...proof or walk away because you probably are a multi fc owner mad that I agree about instanced housing

[SophiaDL]

Can you show me your numbers where you can prove only X amount of people are multi owners on NA because I know one person who owns about 10 different fcs spread out on the different servers. That's amongst medium and larges too. Plus they are part of a group of people who deal in housing in game.

Not to mention the group on NA who buys them up to rmt sell them. Plus the people here and there who advertise in pf looking to buy. Then let's add in the ffxiv housing discord that has a long list of owners.

Come on...proof or walk away because you probably are a multi fc owner mad that I agree about instanced housing

The people who are multiowners on NA are grandfathered, which was done a very long time ago, in today's world, on NA (except dynamis, but dynamis doesnt matter in this case bc there's thousand of houses open), it's basically impossible to multiown to an extent that it would reduce the housing supply by a significant margin, thanks to lottery. Getting a few houses there and there, and you mentioned it yourself, 10 different fcs spread out on different servers, doesnt do anything to the housing supply, its a few houses less, sure, but that is not what creates scarcity.

[LianaThorne]

The people who are multiowners on NA are grandfathered, which was done a very long time ago, in today's world, on NA (except dynamis, but dynamis doesnt matter in this case bc there's thousand of houses open), it's basically impossible to multiown to an extent that it would reduce the housing supply by a significant margin, thanks to lottery. Getting a few houses there and there, and you mentioned it yourself, 10 different fcs spread out on different servers, doesnt do anything to the housing supply, its a few houses less, sure, but that is not what creates scarcity.

Piggybacking off this, even with 1 person owning a ward of FCs, there are still thousands left to purchase. That's barely a dent in the water. Dynamis has a few multi-owners and there are still 2700 FCs available on Hali alone.

Scarcity isn't coming from just multi-owners, it's that there are more people playing this game then housing available in general. Even if multi-owners were taken out of the equation, not everyone would have a house and we'd still be having the same argument about how there's not enough.

Hell, 2700 people could have an FC right now but don't want em. More fodder for multi-owners i guess.

[SophiaDL]

Piggybacking off this, even with 1 person owning a ward of FCs, there are still thousands left to purchase. That's barely a dent in the water. Dynamis has a few multi-owners and there are still 2700 FCs available on Hali alone.

Scarcity isn't coming from just multi-owners, it's that there are more people playing this game then housing available in general. Even if multi-owners were taken out of the equation, not everyone would have a house and we'd still be having the same argument about how there's not enough.

Hell, 2700 people could have an FC right now but don't want em. More fodder for multi-owners i guess.

It's just the good old argument of "multiowners bad" no matter how many houses are available, I remember having this exact same argument a few months back, with a friend actually, talking about how multiowners are taking all the houses while some people are "unable" to get one, mind you, this is on EU, I responded to them by showing them the Paissa site that shows the current housing situation, with hundreds of houses available all across EU, not even only on sagi/phan but also on other worlds, and the response was just "yeah but some of those are goblet houses or empy houses no one wants those the area sucks!" followed by the usual "doesnt change the fact multiowners are taking houses from people", because somehow those houses already belong to someone (?)

The point is, people would rather those houses stay empty for months on end, than for a multiowner to take them, it's purely out of jealousy, and it's very cringe.

[VerdeLuck]

Piggybacking off this, even with 1 person owning a ward of FCs, there are still thousands left to purchase. That's barely a dent in the water. Dynamis has a few multi-owners and there are still 2700 FCs available on Hali alone.

Scarcity isn't coming from just multi-owners, it's that there are more people playing this game then housing available in general. Even if multi-owners were taken out of the equation, not everyone would have a house and we'd still be having the same argument about how there's not enough.

Hell, 2700 people could have an FC right now but don't want em. More fodder for multi-owners i guess.

It's not just multi owners, but when someone owns half a ward to themselves and housing is scarce, it really is wild how that's not the first thing that comes to mind is to have them follow the rules everyone else has to.
You just said Balmung has 20 houses available as if that's a huge number, well, when that's a decent chunk, imagine freeing up a few dozen on every world by eliminating multi owners.
Yeah, Dynamis also has free houses, but you never get ot use it because roulette queues are 5+ hours each on dynamis because of DC travel, so you're never going to be on-world ever even if you manage to win a house over there.

I'm just not buying into this about instanced housing because it seems to exclusively come from people who already own multiple houses, and their solution always seems to include tacking an extra +1 free house onto each of their characters. Isn't that wild?

[SophiaDL]

It's not just multi owners, but when someone owns half a ward to themselves and housing is scarce, it really is wild how that's not the first thing that comes to mind is to have them follow the rules everyone else has to.
You just said Balmung has 20 houses available as if that's a huge number, well, when that's a decent chunk, imagine freeing up a few dozen on every world by eliminating multi owners.
Yeah, Dynamis also has free houses, but you never get ot use it because roulette queues are 5+ hours each on dynamis because of DC travel, so you're never going to be on-world ever even if you manage to win a house over there.

I'm just not buying into this about instanced housing because it seems to exclusively come from people who already own multiple houses, and their solution always seems to include tacking an extra +1 free house onto each of their characters. Isn't that wild?

What multiowners are there on Balmung ? Maybe one or two ? And they are grandfathered, they have had their houses for many many years, why should their houses be demolished because the server has gotten overly populated over the years ? I want one good reason as to why, after this many years that should happen, why are they responsible for the housing scarcity ? There are other NA worlds with more houses, if they want to stay on balmung, that's on them, also lol @ a few dozens, and then what ? Let's say you free 30 houses, and then what ? Who do you hunt next ? People that dont decorate their houses ? People that dont log in every day? Because 30 houses will do nothing

[Reinha]

It's not just multi owners, but when someone owns half a ward to themselves and housing is scarce, it really is wild how that's not the first thing that comes to mind is to have them follow the rules everyone else has to.

Not going to bother with the biweekly NA tantrum about housing scarcity but I'd like to point out that everyone who has finalized a house purchase at a placard in game has done so without breaking the rules. It isn't possible to bypass the game mechanics set by the developers.

So your idea has nothing to do with the rules, it's about forcefully taking away what people have earned and distributing it to people who didn't earn it. I will say that is not what I expected to hear from someone on an NA server who is likely from the US.

[UkcsAlias]

Piggybacking off this, even with 1 person owning a ward of FCs, there are still thousands left to purchase.

But its usualy not just 1 person. And they also include mediums and larges which are highly demanded and lack supply. 1 large easily collects 100+ bids. Mediums a bit less extreme, but still arent easy to obtain. Sure, you can get the S to at least start getting into housing and slowly working your way upward. And this is recommended to do anyway since ward take overs on this barely make a diffirence.

But even if S's dont suffer, those ward takeovers are still a problem that should be handled asap. That a house is free doesnt mean someone just has to go multi owning, as that over time just repeats the same issue over and over again. To me at the current state of the game, that should be a bannable offense (grandfathered can be the exception here), just to avoid the issue showing up in the future. To be even more graceful, they can even decide to make it possible for now, but with a statement that when housing becomes an issue again, they can lose their house if they own multiple (forcing them to either release them themselves, or its random, and with a risk of losing an M while only keeping an S).