The Thread.

Oh blasphemies I can't stop laughing. I'll probably be thinking of this and laughing all weekend. Thanks Kiryana.

My English = Google Translator, So often there are easy collapses with speech speed, but I'm glad that most people here with a good sense of humor and fresh intellect

Know that Tarantino grind house theater flick? Remember the fake movie previews?

I read it in one of those guy's voice.... and I can't stop laughing.

Kiryana don't you dare apologize... you're awesome.

I fixed it for you.

Did someone say Egyptians?

Wow @Vandalin
Nicely put, Treehugger is pretty much a blight to the forums from what I've seen.
Kinda confused as to why he defends the criminals like Broli And conker who moonlight Jhelom PK
If I remember correctly he was a big fan of ole' Uncle Donnie as well

Any how @Vandalin you pretty much WTFPAWNED @TreeHugger pretty nasty here

Haven't read anything he's posted since he said he wouldn't post anymore, to be quite honest.

Played here a bit 2 years ago, didn't have much time. Came back about a month ago, the spot outside vesper where I used to have my house last time is still open. Took a different spot I think is much better. Have room for a 2 story right next door. Plenty of spots, spend more time looking less time bitching on the forums.
@TreeHugger

This thread obviously deformed to something completely unrelated and frankly inappropriate for Ren Discussion.

I will however provide my opinion on the initial intention of the thread.

(1) People cite the current housing situation as a problem for client retention. And yet they continue to splatter the forums with their complaints further giving a bad reputation to the shard thus hurting new player retention.

(2) Do you know who you don't need to bend over backwards to retain? Veteran players. And yet you want to screw with their playstyle to cater to new players who you do not know how long they'll last.

(3) "There is a huge influx of new players" who want housing. If we could see a huge influx it would be great, but just a few more than a year ago is hardly a huge influx.

(4) You're 34, have a family and a job and can't play UOR for 21hrs a week, and yet you expect to be able to afford something that a group of players who can play 40hrs a week buy and sell? Not to mention they make 60k+ gp/hr. Really? Entitled much?

(5) Even so, a CY in 2-3 years playing is a reasonable goal. Let's do a bit of math. Play "casually" 8hrs per week? X 104 weeks. X gold per hour (conservative 20k?) = 16.6mill. That is without taking into account welfare plat and event (aniversary) gifts. A fortress was up for 10mill and didn't sell!! Tell me how housing is broken again?

(6) Condemned status: agree. Let's introduce it.

(7) There's people with certain goals/expectations. I currently own a small compound I wish to decorate/theme. I haven't had a chance due to RL. But it is still a goal of mine. Should I give it up because I'm taking up too much space eventhough I worked my ass for it?

(8) A housing limit will only prompt "determined and greedy vets" to circumvent the 3 account rule and create problems for the shard.

In conclusion, if you're gripe is about players refreshing other's properties, then simply ask for the introduction of condemned status, a change most of us support anyway. A limit on houses per account will not fix this. Also, you cannot expect a socialist state in UO. You have to understand that there are power gamers, and they will ultimately have "more" than the rest. The rich will get richer if they're putting in the time. It's a fact of life, and no different in UO. And finally, it is not hard to buy a massive house if you're willing to stick with the shard, even playing casually.

@TreeHugger
@One
@snap dragon

Any of you played Siege Perilous?


http://www.uoguide.com/Siege_Perilous

.

So outside all the ad hominem attacks and baseless accusations that do less than nothing to advance any type of discussion on an issue we all care about, can we all agree that condemning houses would be a positive change for the server?

And if that is the case, what's the best way to ask @Chris to consider it? Or comment on it? It's his server, so if he has a logical reason why not to do it, I'd love to have that discussion/debate (instead of the one consuming the majority of the text on these pages).

Side note - I'm posting this after One's last post, but that was not the catalyst for my reply here. No issues there.

Again guys like @Cromwell miss the point of the thread.

The point of this thread being you expect a blanket license to shit talk people and then expect something good to come of it.

It's cool. Larloch' killing it. I can't find my copy. I'll have to buy it again for the 20th time.

.

I think @Larloch makes some interesting points.

@One, I never meant to single you out as the only person publicizing "a housing crisis". I think it was a movement that started gathering momentum until some of us started stepping up and trying to demonstrate, more by actual numbers than by mere opinion, that there is indeed no housing crisis in UOR.

I am super glad for the spike of 110 online accounts!! Hopefully we can keep it rolling!! And yes, 15% is not insignificant! Let's keep the numbers >800!!

For me, any time that a government (shard owner) has to intervene so as to limit what some people who through harder work, dedication and skill (available time to play), so that people not willing or able to put forth the same effort (casual, 5hr per week players) can have the same things, sounds awefully socialist. Let's tax the most active, longest tenured players, the real core of the shard; so that the very casual players, who can come and go, can have something easier. So sorry if your definition is diferent than mine, that is pretty much how I see it, and I see a pretty harsh intervention of a free market to benefit the less "privileged".

Thankfully the status quo remains because it is still the best course of action for the shard. In other words, if it ain't broke, don't fix it. And housing is most certainly not broke.

Oh, and I disagree that provo onto players is the same as this. One is clearly broken, the other is not.

What I can agree is broken is the condemned status. Let's focus our energies on that.

My $0.02: I vote for condemned status. That's a great idea.