Condemned housing poll.

probably gonna think im nuts but each account should own no more than one house the size of a tower or bigger 2 the size of a L shape or 4 small houses per account, would kind of spread out the secures kinda evenly unless you owned a keep or bigger. Im not voting but i dont think people should be able to own 15- 500 houses either (exaggeration)

I'd like to see condemned houses activated.

Anything over 45 days is fair.

Let's face it...some of us promise to take care of our friends and won't go back on our words. It's well overdue to force the issue, I believe. If they aren't playing anymore, life will go on. It's a game.

If you change nothing nothing will change

maybe a limit of 2 players friended that can refresh a house? im sure thats something that would have to be coded in and a pain in the butt , just a thought.

@Lord Sky http://uorforum.com/threads/official-faction-discussion-planned-changes-thread.33248/

There are still many small and even a few medium spots open right now, unlike any of the shards during the actual Renaissance era. There's no reason to change anything like this.

If you want a large or massive house, pay for it like everyone else.

I'd like to see houses of players that are long gone enter condemned status. Its actually shocking that this has been allowed to be a thing for so long. The only benefit I can imagine is a world that looks more full due to placed houses. But a bunch of empty houses actually creates a worse contrast. You run around expecting to see all these people out and about and you dont find them.

To the above comment that some have made promises that they dont want to break. Maybe it's time to initiate a dialogue with those individuals and tell it like it is. If you dont want to do it anymore, and you can see that they arent coming back, time to move on. It's not wrong on your part to leave the past where it is. Especially if you reach out and tell them first.

There is another benefit to this although it's a bit harder to see: Economics. With all the great big castle and fortress spots taken and refreshed into oblivion it creates a demand for the market. The price on those spots stays pretty high and the land barons that own the active ones make a tidy sum in trade.

Now if all those ancient castles and fortresses crumbled history (perfected) would repeat itself. The land barons and their proxies would gobble up all the best spots (they would know it was coming after all) and then buy out all the other good spots at the now ludicrously low prices those places would be up for sale (because of market saturation).

Here's the thing tho. I foresee that only a small number of those castles and fortresses would fall. You can bet the IDOC guilds would be all over every one of them too. A much larger number of medium and small houses would fall and unless they had serious rares on display most of them would fall without anyone there to see it.

Now the world would look much more empty. It would not have the illusion of being full that it does now. Instead of new players being excited about the illusion of it being full and being disappointed, they get to be disappointed immediately that the world is indeed empty except for bank sitters and the occasional players like us. lose either way.

Now if we could just get all the players on the other free-shards to come over this shard would be amazing! It would be much more like the old OSI days but "perfected." I wonder how many of our bank sitters are actually playing the multi-shard game tho? Keeping plat sitters here collecting welfare while playing on other shards like Forever, T2A or Evolution. Just waiting for the shard to start having the promised patches and upgrades so they can come back and play. Multi-shard playing like that would inflate the numbers from the "players-online" lists. It begs the question of how many people actually still play this game. I'm beginning to think far fewer than the "players-online" suggest for all shards.

This is backwards thinking

And yet you don't say why.

I'm with @Cynic on this one - cool idea, but it would have a surprisingly small effect. I don't have a huge housing empire, but I refresh everything myself as well.

If we're looking to decrease the amount of houses out there, let's limit it to one house per account. I'm ready!

What is the point in reducing the amount of houses if there are not any players to place new ones?? This shard is so awesome and has so many cool features and additions, but they are majorly focused on the PvM side of things. If PvP could get just a little bit of love I feel like players would be coming back or joining up in droves. Even just a scheduled weekly or bi-weekly running of CTF would be an awesome start. Have set times maybe twice a week and run a few rounds?? I don't know these are just my thoughts.

Even though I am not into PvP as much as I have been on past shards and live. I do think that weekly, bi-weekly, or even monthly, PvP events would bring back/new players. The one thing that kills ANY MMO is stagnant gameplay. This game is already 20+ years old and the things Chris has done to keep it thriving are amazing but they do become stagnant to players that have done them over and over and over. Constant change is needed to keep players and bring in new.

As for housing we can go on all day about what needs to be done but players will always find ways around it. I'm a firm believer of 1 house per account, even though I'm rocking 11-12 small/medium and a tower currently. Everyone is going to have different opinions and no decision will make everyone happy.

Truth.

I remember when OSI went 1 house per account. I seem to recall it was before Ren but after T2A. My 2 houses were grandfathered but I couldn't place any new ones or transfer a house to my account. My guildmaster and I set up and shared a few house accounts to keep his real estate business going.

Well take the idea and reverse it. Thought it was straight forward, as I said backwards..

We will never know the effectiveness of it until it’s implemented. If it does nothing then no harm, if it helps, great, if it fucks things up, change it back and there will be a lot of open space for a fun land rush.

I would said... not only 1 house per account... 1 char per account -> Siege Perilous style.

No, it's old-school, responsible thinking. If I want something, I'll go get it. I don't complain to admins to get my way. I sure as hell don't bitch about the things that other people have.

Average players will have average housing. If that's not good enough for you, then stop being average.

I know you’re happy in your fort, or whatever huge house you have and that’s fine. I get that you don’t want to devalue your property. However it’s not going to be worth much when theres 8 people here.

If someone walked into this game and saw every large/unique house spot taken with decorations and active players.... your point is acceptable. However when you have players who have literally been away from the game for YEARS with no intention of coming back, only to have someone who isn’t even a co-owner or has access to the house, run by and click the sign just to keep it alive for another 14 days.... is absurd.

If you can’t see that as a hinderance to a server which has a stagnant population then you should exit this thread post haste.

I’m not saying this is a fix but it sure wouldn’t hurt.

I am 99.999% sure this concept would never happen but I'll throw it out just for fun.

One house per account by default
+1 house ownership platinum deed can be bought with 150 plat at any rewards vendor (limited to one purchase per account)
+1 house ownership copper deed can be bought using an appropriate amount of copper (limited to one purchase per account)

Adds plat and copper sinks while allowing you to be a house trader or have your guild town. Would still be a few people who horde empty houses, but they would have to pay a high price for it.