Separate FC Workshop from Housing

[tank2fish]

I don't know if this has been suggested already, but here goes.

As it stands right now, a single individual across multiple alts and alt accounts can own entire wards, restricting smaller and newer FCs from being able to win a home of their own. With such limited supply for housing, and an unwillingness to punish players who are using a loophole to own multiple houses on one account, I suggest that the dynamic and interesting gameplay system attached to the FC workshop should be uncoupled from the housing system entirely. I think this would be a fair compromise, and perhaps even disincentivize at least some people from buying up entire wards on their own, since they would also no longer require a housing plot in order to utilize the sub/airship system.

As an alternative, please add an NPC, or a door, to every Grand Company HQ to allow free company members to access the FC workshop via the grand company HQ their FC is allied with. That way, smaller FCs with limited resources (who cannot compete against others with far more gil and ability to bid over them) are still able to interact with all the features within the free company workshop.

It's such a dynamic and interesting system, it seems like such a shame to have it completely restricted to a section of the game that is entirely out of reach for the average player, for reasons entirely outside of their own control.

[Jojoya]

Yes, it's been suggested many times by me and by others.

As far as I know, SE has never made a direct response to the suggestion so we don't know if they're not interested in making that change or if there's some sort of code issue that prevents them from doing it. There had been a comment by YoshiP a couple of years back that they were considering making a personal version of the workshop but nothing has been heard about that since.

[tank2fish]

Yes, it's been suggested many times by me and by others.

As far as I know, SE has never made a direct response to the suggestion so we don't know if they're not interested in making that change or if there's some sort of code issue that prevents them from doing it. There had been a comment by YoshiP a couple of years back that they were considering making a personal version of the workshop but nothing has been heard about that since.

That's disappointing to hear, but I'm glad many people have made the suggestion over the years. Ugh lol I guess it can't be helped but to keep asking and hope for the best

[Ayan_Calvesse]

Aye it would go a long way to freeing up space I suspect. I think part of the problem is that to do so they would have to migrate the DB that is always tracking workshops; because workshops are like players with progression in the form of unlocks and each one has multiple constant timers that if they went out of sync might wreak havoc. Not to mention the problem of folks whom have like 50+ workshops and determining how many deployables a person is permitted. The reason its tied to the FC itself at the moment I think has to do with how it is able to be shared - so the FC tracks the timer versus the player that commences it; likewise for projects. Its why sadly I think we cannot have our friends help manage our island sanctuary.

[Jojoya]

Aye it would go a long way to freeing up space I suspect. I think part of the problem is that to do so they would have to migrate the DB that is always tracking workshops; because workshops are like players with progression in the form of unlocks and each one has multiple constant timers that if they went out of sync might wreak havoc. Not to mention the problem of folks whom have like 50+ workshops and determining how many deployables a person is permitted. The reason its tied to the FC itself at the moment I think has to do with how it is able to be shared - so the FC tracks the timer versus the player that commences it; likewise for projects. Its why sadly I think we cannot have our friends help manage our island sanctuary.

I would hope it wouldn't be that difficult since we don't lose workshop progress when we relocate a FC house. The workshop progress seems to be attached to the FC and not to the house.

[Ayan_Calvesse]

I would hope it wouldn't be that difficult since we don't lose workshop progress when we relocate a FC house. The workshop progress seems to be attached to the FC and not to the house.

Aye its tied to the FC itself; the problem with removal of Workshops from the FC Workshop is because the workshop is "part" of the FC and I suspect its tied to the House itself because loss of a FC house due to inactivity (no one going into the home) results in the Workshop also disappearing. Upon my consideration I think if you no longer had a housing requirement you would have a army of singular person workshops far greater then what we see currently.

[JimCasey_RF6]

It's such a dynamic and interesting system, it seems like such a shame to have it completely restricted to a section of the game that is entirely out of reach for the average player, for reasonsentirely outside of their own control.

I agree, it's a fun and unique game system and one of the things I like most about this game. It is not, however, out of reach for the average player at all. Especially not for reasons outside of their own control.

If a player has their heart set on doing company workshop content, then they simply need to find an FC that will allow them to use the workshop. Another option would be to start up their own free company to have a workshop of their own. Housing is still overabundant on the four new Dynamis DC servers ruling out any issues with obtaining a plot.

The company workshop system is functioning very well as it currently is. It can be one of the most rewarding systems in the game for players with the determination to manage one long-term. It is unlikely that this particular system is ever going to receive major changes such as complete removal or an additional method of access.

[Crafoutis]

Instead of implementing a brand new subsystem which would also increase inflation (100% of accounts having access to sub/airship missions), the OP should instead continue to advocate for the remedy of players owning entire wards.

Misplaced energy for what seems like a beg for sub/airship missions.

[NegativeS]

Instead of implementing a brand new subsystem which would also increase inflation (100% of accounts having access to sub/airship missions), the OP should instead continue to advocate for the remedy of players owning entire wards.

Misplaced energy for what seems like a beg for sub/airship missions.

Because the last thing this game needs is RMT farming accounts and shell FCs having less of a stranglehold on one of the best ways to make gil in the game. (which, by the way, barely requires even playing the game)

Oh woe, won't someone PLEASE think of the poor, poor RMTers?

[Ayan_Calvesse]

Because the last thing this game needs is RMT farming accounts and shell FCs having less of a stranglehold on one of the best ways to make gil in the game. (which, by the way, barely requires even playing the game)

Oh woe, won't someone PLEASE think of the poor, poor RMTers?

I think unless you solve the workshop missions generating Gil - removing workshops from houses and making them FC based would actually result in more RMT - as it stands if the RMTer is needing a FC plot to generate funds; then removing that requirement would make it easier to flood the market would it not? I think you might be misunderstanding her suggestion; if you removed the ability for multiple FCs you would likewise remove the multiple workshops and then require RMTs to atleast control many more accounts.