In game this morning someone mentioned that the server housing rules are changing from 1 house per character to 1 house per account, 3 houses max per IP. I haven't seen anything officially posted about it, so not sure if is true, or a troll? I'm for all for it, and also feel the decay rate should be sped up as well.
Why not? Because there's prime real estate being wasted by people who aren't even playing anymore. They just log on to refresh a house and log off. ALOT of houses are just place holders and not being used at all and are completely empty. For active players/new players that's really fucking annoying. Since we don't pay to play here there should be some kind of a penalty to not being active vs on OSI you had to pay $15 a month to keep your account active on top of logging on to refresh.
Sounds like a scam to me. "Hey, sell me your house cheap, you won't be able to keep it after the next patch anways..."
I havent heard of this, and if its not coming right from the dev or admin, most likely just random speculation. I can see your points about those who just have land here and only come on to refresh their stuff, which can be for a number of different reasons that are legit and, as we all know, for some that are simply not legit. But I think a rule like this would inhibit the majority of the players who do, in fact, use their 3+ properties on a regular basis. One might say "No one really needs more than 3 houses though, right?". For the sake of personal space/usage, I will agree to that, but for things like new player housing, role playing quests, training houses and other scenarios I am sure others can think up, having more than 3 properties enhances game play. Just my personal examples: 1. I own 1 tower, and 3 properties used to give to new players who need a house. 2. I have, a few times, dropped a new house for the sake of role playing or a quick training/raiding session, and then removed it to clear up space soon after its use was done. Anyway, just my thoughts. I hope the policy doesnt change. That would cause waaaaay more drama than the current situation of some players logging in only to refresh. Thanks for bringing up and interesting topic Gozinya!
I agree with you, BUT... those houses are being USED for the most part, where as the others I was talking about aren't =P I don't know, I guess it what it is and we just have to deal. Thanks for replying =)
From what I understand based on past conversations from Telamon (because for a while I was pushing for limits) is that he doesn't feel that limited houses helps players as much as it removes an aspect of the game that a lot of folks enjoy (house owning) so even though there are a few hoarders (you suck, esp if you're holding on to something here for years to profit from) that the ability to own the houses you want for various purposes from storage, deco, you like the spot, etc is a boon to the players that he doesn't want to remove (and I think he said that servers that limit housing have a lower pop overall) So it was presented to me in a way that made me agree with him. The hoarders have serious problems sometimes (why hold 15 houses in a game you haven't played in over a year or two is silly) but with rl issues and etc it's just a bad solution to that problem. I'm guessing the best bet is to try to make an offer they can't refuse or wait until they fuck up and accidentally let the houses fall. hope that's accurate.
It's not happening, yet, and never to that degree. The only stated intention I've ever seen by administration is a potential 10 homes per IP/Household ruling. This would still leave those with 15 homes (or more for families who game together) grandfathered in, until such time as they sold/transferred homes. However, this is all dependent on Telamon implementing a 'household' system that will tie into various other aspects of the shard, not just housing. In short, don't sweat it right now but don't be shocked when it happens down the road. Before anyone jumps to conclusions about my kids' accounts and the potential for me to have 30 homes (my son has two accounts) on my IP, I only have 5 homes on the shard and only want fewer, not more.
There aren't any spots that I know of that will hold any of the largest 3, fort/castle/keep. On the other hand, there are spots for towers/large marbles/patios/bricks/2 story/villa/logs have I missed one? For about 2 months, I placed 3 large marbles all in the same area [you could see some part of all 3 on same screen]. Played there a bit, dropped one, then dropped rest, area was nice, but a spot I had wanted opened up close to same area, I placed 2 patios side by side. Since removing the 3, someone has filled one of those spots with a large marble. Point being, there are many spots for nice size houses and mass smalls. Why is anyone complaining about how many houses someone has that are just being refreshed. If I just started here today, this shard being live for 2+ yrs, I wouldn't think that any spots for the big 3 would be just wide open waiting for me to go make the gold needed to buy the deed. Play the game, make the gold, buy the big house, but you may have to buy it for more than just the deed. A housing limit wouldn't effect me, as I have all but 2 spots I want.
True there are many spots available. I did not say there wasn't spots open. I was talking about PRIME spots, such as the big 3, by moongates, near towns, right outside dungeons, ect. I don't care if it happens either way. If it does, cool, If not, oh well. The game will carry on. I just feel it is really greedy and dickheadish to hold properties while being inactive in game.
I'd support 1 house per account, or even 2 per account. There's no need to hoard unoccupied homes, period. Granted, there are still spots available for large homes, there are more than a fair share of empty houses sitting around. I know for a fact that things like house hoarding, and not being able to stable an animal because everyone has 15 zillion dragons, is enough to drive people away. The later isn't happening here, however, we all know exactly what I mean.
Instead of reading every post, Ill share my opinions. At one point I had 15 houses then liquidated. I had a few nice places thanks to some, others I placed. Currently, I control a peninsula with 5 houses and wont drop any of them since I don't want neighbors. I have one next to town to run BODs (my crafter loves that one)... and the first house I placed during the Land Rush which I'll always keep perhaps for a potential PK hideout. So that's 7. Even though I could do SO much more with them in terms of organizing and décor I haven't and perhaps that will come in time. As Blaise said, if the housing rules change, I'm sure those in place would be grandfathered. While I do believe sitting on unused houses diminishes opportunities for others, there is nothing wrong with sitting on them for potential future earnings. Money Gold talks and bullshit walks.
I have no issues with lowering it to 1 or 2 houses per account. As someone who actually owns very little in regards to others, I will be quite happy to accommodate my house ownership in my allowable accounts.
I have one house and lock down and secure expand the shit out of it. That way I dont need schfifteen teen houses. Also It will soon be open to the public and store all of my worldly possessions. Imagine that?
If 5 is too many check your messages, there's two that I would love to trade for. I'll throw in my precious cat, maybe a kid or two as well!
