️ Forge of Virtue Land Rush ️

I am of the mind that if we are going to have new housing spots open up (still against the entire concept) that it should not all be PRIME real estate. Do not extend existing cities, do not allow housing inside of cities

Bulldoze flat that "hill" full of orcs outside of Del on your way to COD.... NO TOWERS NO KEEPS NO CASTLES and NO FORTS allowed in T2a. this is not protectionism for current Tower on up owners, this is to allow the max amount of new housing for folks who don't have it now.... isn't that the problem? If the "problem" is that you want to add more Large Home spots, the just add them and them alone, hell go instanced housing if that's the case.

if the 'need' is to open up brand new lands for Forge... to make it more attractive to players old and new, then hire a city planner, don't allow a free for all placement.

*** edited, I got side tracked with housing changes, will write that up separately ***

.

If its just more land I can't see how it does much other than makes people angry they didn't get to place their own mega home. Unless there are some restrictions or changes it will turn into another area that is instantly filled with the large houses that then go for sale or start sitting to be held.

.

This is probably a good solution, the fact is even if it was 1 house per account most players would still not be getting their hands onto a courtyard property just not enough spaces to go around.

New house designs could give players a chance at something with more outdoor space and possibly even entice folks sitting on unused housing to let it go in order to own a new design.

On the other hand it is jarring to me to think someone would start or return to a server and expect to be able to own a courtyard right away. It seems like the main thing that gets people upset isn't that they don't own it or someone that's using it is but that there are so many houses (perceived or not) that are collecting dust. From that view I don't know how a new land rush would do much else than create 100 new houses that are sitting empty.

Why not to consider large keeps/fortress/death-stars/Borg Cubes not as a single home but like 3x? i mean a fortress occupy enought space to place how many? 3/4 small houses? Great, following this logic, your fortress will occupy 3x house slots.
What do you guys think about that?

Saying like a point system where in the house size restricts number you can have on the account? The main issue with that would be that the folks that have 4+ of those type of houses (used or not) will lose millions in value, they could try and sell them off before they were gone but prices would be deflated. Maybe if you did that for the new lands area but I have no idea if that kind of code is feasible.

Personally I think the only way to get used houses out of market is via some sort of reward (as @Samorite was doing with the trophy) such as if you restrict your account to 1 house you get a bonus of XX number of lockdowns/expansions.

.

It would be interesting to see if this was announced would any of those inactives come back to sell or do become active again. I suspect more likely than not if they haven't played in some number of years they are not interested in playing any longer.

I personally think a year is an excessive amount of time and that six months would be more appropriate but that's just me.

.

Anyone who is brand new and shows up expecting a huge house coming out of Occlo has the wrong expectation. Period. It's been noted in here but if you had started on OSI T2A era and hadn't been there from the start your chance of getting even a small house placed was basically zero. You were buying on secondary market for almost every house. With that in mind the land situation is, in my opinion, accurate to what the era would have been. There is no reason everyone should be able to have access to a courtyard. Not sure where someone would get even that expectation, even by modern game standards its a bit much to think you should have the top of the top shortly after starting.

In terms of compromise, condemnation of inactives or new house limits being one extreme and leaving everything the same on the other. I think taking suggestions around a land expansion good step towards a compromise or the movement towards one in the future.

Agree.

We’re also not gonna see any sales of big homes now because we’re all being held ransom by Lutz who fully deathgripped the market with their intention to sell their account minus the characters for 100 mil+

This is the busiest I’ve seen the server in a long time and we’re all at a standstill waiting for that to happen so we can resume regular trading.


A shitty thing to do IMO.

I believe the point system idea has some real merit. It would allow players to workup to having a large plot, or if they prefer multiple smaller plots and limit the overall footprint of houses in total. If it were me, this is how I would do it (just my opinion):

1. First things first, accounts with inactive owners of greater than one year would be wiped. There would need to be a grace period prior to implementation to allow any co-owners or friends to remove items before wipe. Any structures that have historical value (ie. founding guildhalls, rune libraries, museums) that are still actively used by the community can be petitioned for immunity. This would be a case by case basis. Ownership of "immune" properties would be transferred to gm's.
2. Implementation of Housing Point System on a per account basis. Let's keep it 1 to 5 for easy math. so your account can have 5 tiny homes, or 1 massive home.
   1. Active accounts that have more than 5 points at the time this system goes live do NOT loose their current housing or ownership of said houses. However, they are not able to place any more houses. Houses on accounts with more than the maximum number of points per account do not receive the benefits of Section 3.1 until such a time that account is at or below the new max of 5 points.
3. Incentivise owning single homes (really, and this is again just my opinion, do we really need multiple massive castles?).
   1. The lower then total number of houses you have, the more benefit you gain. If you have 5 small houses, you get the default amount of lock downs and secures, if you have 4 houses you get a 10% bump to each house. Three houses 20%. Two at 30%, and if you only have one home, regardless of size, you get 40%. Rounded up.
   2. Note this still allows for the Platinum housing upgrades.
   3. If a player places a secondary, or tertiary house, and the percentage falls, putting them over the max number of secures or lock downs (plus any applicable plat upgrades) they can not lock down any news items until they clean the garage so to speak.
4. Leave current decay rates as they are.
5. Repeat Step 1.

This to me would clear out a fair amount of unused properties, give active players a chance to adjust to the new system, and promote players to use their space more thoughtfully (looking at you, un-lived in house full of stuff I "might need later").

I am relatively new here. I played OSI from the time the game opened, straight through until Trammel. Took a break and played on and off with Trammel until AoS, and then quit. I returned to the game some years ago on the UOSA FreeShard. I've been here for about two months.

I've read this thread, and several other threads regarding the server's frustration with vacant large house plots presumably refreshed by friends and not homeowners.

The largest house I was able to own on OSI was a small house, pre trammel. It sat just outside of Skara Brea on the coast, and it cost me, if memory servers, around 500,000gp. I loved that house.

Just a few days ago, one of the community members here helped me find a spot to put down a large two story house. There are still spots that large floating around as of today. House hoarding, and house flipping, is an aspect of Ultima Online. It always has been. Part of the value of a home in this game is that the space is limited. I'd prefer not to trade that feeling away. I paid roughly 11x deed price for my small on OSI. I see towers, keeps, and larger selling on our forums for far less.

My vote is for no new space for a land rush.

In the spirit of discouraging the type of behavior that @Earsnot mentioned in the UOR housing market of the future I think @Cara Cacciatore 's 5 point system would go a long way. I don't think it would require new space to be effective but if they're done right the two could have great synergy in enhancing the overall UOR experience. Similarly, new housing space is distinct from new types... like how Bungalows would make a T2A land rush exponentially cooler but houses would still go up with just the current templates. The other big thing with opening T2A is the need to do away with @Jill Stihl 's "lumpy puke style" at which point @LanDarr reminds us that "if the 'need' is to open up brand new lands for Forge... to make it more attractive to players old and new, then hire a city planner, don't allow a free for all placement."
And the point Landarr makes is one I wouldn't try to disentangle from any current new space/land rush plans whether they're for underground, Vesper, T2A or Water World style atolls. Whether we get new housing types and zoning rules or a 5 point system, @Samorite , don't just open up a bunch of random space. Create our spaces with some purpose and intention.
So to answer the question

0. Not the Isle of Fire​

1. Vesper
2. Underground
3. T2A

I'd like to see the player hight limitations increased, I have a large tower on a hill that you cannot access above the 2nd floor because the building is on top of a hill and players are not allowed to travel above a certain amount of vertical tiles. However this would also increase the ability to 'build up' with deco tools

This is actually possible with the client updates, but would totally break things for people that tried to login with an original client/install.

Right now, the original client is setup for -127 to +127 z-axis height with the map mostly centered around zero. If the entire map were globally sank to say -80, on average, you'd gain 80 z-axis in height. That would roughly give you 4 more floors to do things. It'd be quite the undertaking, though, and it'd totally screw things up for anyone that didn't use UORs client. Also, if you think people's house deco overhanging the world is bad now....stand by, lol.

.