House reduction

[Murugan]

Is it not era accurate to only allow one house per account? It is my understanding that you are allowed one house per character right now. This might help with the housing crisis and allow for anyone new starting up and joining to still place a house for the deed, and not deed plus 50 - 200K

Just a thought!

[sMASH]

wow i thought it was just 1 per account, well, guess i gotta jump out of macros and start farming again

[Mikel123]

Well, we went... what... 4 days without one of these?

[BlackFoot]

hardly a crisis

[Hicha]

Housing crisis? lol...

There is plenty of room for 7x7 homes, and room for several dozen larger homes. I've had several houses in decent and not-so-decent houses up for sale, couldn't even get an offer on any of them because people can easily spend 10 or 20 minutes running around and find a spot.

The people who are buying houses at 50-200k? are the ones who have the money to spend and just don't feel like looking, or the house is in a prime vendor location.

[Murugan]

Well, we went... what... 4 days without one of these?

Well I didn't see anything with it . . as I check out a page of post before posting a "new" topic. So I am sorry that this issue was brought up again, however If it is such a concern to other (whom I guess post weekly about it) then perhaps it is something worth looking into.

Blackfoot, we are a server of 400 online clients, which equates to less then 200 people, and you can not place anything larger then a Large brick anywhere but Ice island. You do not think that we have issues with housing?

Im just saying, To open the doors to having more people on this server, we need to think globally what others will look for. If people are looking for a shard and see that towers are going for deed +50K and Keeps are deed + 200K, and castles are twice the price, they might think twice about settling here.

And well, if no one is interested in making the shard bigger, well they are greedy and selfish, the only reason people would hate to have others on a shard is because it makes the market more compeditive.

*edit to another poster*
placing small houses does not determine that we do not have a housing crisis. If you look at actual players (not clients) we should have a shit ton of room still. I started in fall of 2008 (when the server was still young) and I placed 3 keeps since then . .. I can not believe the map has been so swormed with housing since.

[Gicod]

The one-per-account rule went in with the UO:R release, T2A was one per character. I had 3 smalls at the launch of UO:R and I remember well trying to decide to keep my 3 and be grandfathered as such or take a shot at a big place in Tram and dump the old houses.

[BlackFoot]

[quote="Murugan"]
Blackfoot, we are a server of 400 online clients, which equates to less then 200 people, and you can not place anything larger then a Large brick anywhere but Ice island. You do not think that we have issues with housing?
[/quote="Murugan"]

400 clients on at the same time has nothing to do with how many clients there are that own houses..... as derrick said theres over 25,000 accounts....
I placed a large house like a weekish ago without too much effort

[Hicha]

lackfoot, we are a server of 400 online clients, which equates to less then 200 people, and you can not place anything larger then a Large brick anywhere but Ice island. You do not think that we have issues with housing?

Not everyone needs a big house, much less a keep or castle. Plenty of people are completely satisfied with bricks, patios and 2 stories. Plenty of room still for these, you just need to know how to look.

[nickhimself]

If anyone posts an "i'm quitting" thread and later starts talking about buying up property then starts complaining that there aren't enough spots to place big houses... they should be banned.

[Murugan]

If anyone posts an "i'm quitting" thread and later starts talking about buying up property then starts complaining that there aren't enough spots to place big houses... they should be banned.

"okay" WTF does that have to do with anything? People take "breaks" all the time. My break is due to a baby on the way, and the fact that I was tired of playing with the same morons each day! It does not mean that I need to stop reading the forums, and stop trying to come up with ideas and ways to bring new people in. I believe that the majority of people who are "idle" would come back to play if there was fresh players!

[Biohazard]

"okay" WTF does that have to do with anything? People take "breaks" all the time. My break is due to a baby on the way, and the fact that I was tired of playing with the same morons each day! It does not mean that I need to stop reading the forums, and stop trying to come up with ideas and ways to bring new people in. I believe that the majority of people who are "idle" would come back to play if there was fresh players!

brace yourself sir, most are ignorant and wont even bat an eye at the fact that everyone has 3 (or more) accounts to themselves.. thus equating to many houses that are barely being used.. or perhaps not at all. you are right they are greedy and think that new people only want small houses. might i suggest a little bit of reading to bide your time while you wait for nothing to happen on the issue since nothing is going to be done anyway because no one really cares if a noob can ever get a larger than small house. It's ok.. at least blackfoot and hiicha are happy with their 30 houses that im sure they will gladly sell you one of for "near deed price" what a couple of great guys.

http://forum.uosecondage.com/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=8700

lets not ignore the true evil though... multi-clienting..

at least we have a great legit housing market LOL RIGHT DRFAUSTUS LOL

sorry boys.. i had to chime in


P.S. welcome back

[mrbojangles]

I don't think the housing issue lies with people owning up to 15 houses, I think the issue comes from people who do not play this shard owning 15 houses.

If active players are buying up real-estate, thats fine. It creates a demand for housing, and helps the economy.

The problem is when someone logs on once every 14 days just to refresh their empty houses, or when they have friends who refresh their houses. They are not trying to sell the houses or use them at all, it is just a waste of space.

I typically make a run around the map looking for IDOCS once a week. What I've noticed is that roughly 1/3-1/2 of houses are either completely unused, or the owner no longer plays here. Castles seem to show this fact more than any other house, I'd be surprised if half the castles here had owners who actively play this shard.

The problem lies in how do we remedy this while staying era accurate. I think it's a legitimate issue that deserves some analysis.

Here is my idea:

We implement the 'condemned building' policy that OSI used in regards to inactive/cancelled accounts. If an account is not active within X days(30?), then the house should be condemned and should only be able to be refreshed by the actual owner. While this wouldn't solve the problem, I think it would help alleviate it, while remaining era accurate.

[Murugan]

I do not see a major problem with inactive players refreshing a house every 14 days. First off, if they ever slip off that schedual the chances of the house decaying increases a TON. Second, MOST in active players log on to keep their keeps, towers or castles refreshed and are not running around to a realistate empire to keep up on.

It does make me laugh at how anyone can use the comment of 25,000 accounts, as a means for justifying how many players there are. I mean I have access to over 20 accounts myself, and NONE of the other 6 players even log on anymore. This shard has NEVER seen a account wipe, and never talks about one. So that simply means 25,000 people have at ONE TIME since Spring 2008, logged on and created 1 - 3 accounts, with the majority creating 3. So with 8000 or so different players throughout the life of the shard, and we STILL can only get a log-on high of 550? was that the record? Its funny, cause there truly is only like 200 people who play this game, and probably only 50 active players. Just look at the forums and IRC, tell me that its not the same names, players, account logged in all the time.

Then we talk about VOTE, VOTE, Don't forget to VOTE, click here to VOTE, remember players VOTE . . . like it is the top priority to increase the playerbase of the shard, when in reality, no one seems to care. Voting only puts you at the top of the charts . . . the other half of getting new players is having active forums, a good economy, and players who are not pricks.

Look at the top uo shards, the top few are stupid ass total wacko shards in which its not even UO, but a spin-off of a game that has easy open source code, and the ability to create what ever you mind thinks of. If anyone is looking for this era of a shard we ARE number one, So the voting has made us high on the list, yet, im sure that once they LOG ON (thus bumping up the accounts BF) and play with some of the morons on here, they are quick to log off, and possibly never touch the shard again!

I have played on a BUNCH of these shards, Crystal Gate, Defiance, Sixfeet, and others to name a few, yet they all lack what this shard has. But no one wants to come play on a shard that is already bunched for houses, and only has 100 - 200 players at which 80% are assholes.

[Murugan]

Good post BIO

i own a large number of house, not one of them i own for purposes of resale for profit,
All are used to live in or help new players
I earned those houses fair and square!

Blackfoot, you sound like your part of the problem. and if anyone does not THINK That we have a house problem, or "oh no not another one of these posts" then why did Bios poll yield 112 to 65 votes for STRONGER house restrictions?

Blackfoot, I am sure Derrick would grant your account the right to place an EXTRA house for the museum purpose, but even if he didn't, your telling me that a Keep / castle for yourself, the museum, and a guild or to "help new players" is not enough?

I mean, I totally understand players who would run a vendor house, have a private home, and run a guild would have the need for such housing. But its crazy to claim anyone needs 15 houses, and since I have never seen a SINGLE post for you Blackfoot offering your housing to new players, I highly doubt that the shard would go bust because of the LACK of free and open houses to macro in.

There was just a post a week or so ago "HANDOUTS" in which some kid was asking for items, gold, housing, shelter etc, and I didn't see the KIND BLACKFOOT, offer a single post about a place to stay, or be friended to, or even tips and tricks for the young player. So stop acting like your a fucking king kong around here, and start being one. You do not care if the entire map has no room to even hunt on, because chances are you have more then 3 accounts, and have more then 15 houses.

Derrick limited the CREATION of accounts based on IP, not the ability to log into them. So anyone who WORKS with computers, or has moved, or has friends who do or do not play, can create 3 accounts per IP and without a problem have 15 accounts created. AND you can even log into more then 3 accounts when you get back home. So stop thinking 3 accounts is even the "boss" here, cause i KNOW you KNOW its not!

I placed a Tower a week ago myself, but the fact that I ran the entire map, just to place a tower (not on ice) is crazy. When does it become a house crisis? When Blackfoot can no longer place a house? IS it THEN that the shard needs help? UO has never been shy of people trying to buy 7x7 to deed them to drop a keep or castle, thats the game. But No new player is going to want to start making that money to pay 100K more then they should have to. I say 1 house per account, and BL im sure youd still be fine with the houses wouldn't ya!