Cities And Housing Archive
Thread: Suspend House Maintenance on Packed Up Houses
It's not exactly the most gosher reason but its better than houses sitting around, cluttering up the landscape, waiting for players who won't be logging in for quite awhile. And since they are Station Pass customers and thus still show as active, paying accounts, those houses will survive the character/house purge. Right now, there's no incentive for such players to pack up their houses and free up the landscape. But suspend the structure maintenance and they might be motivated just enough to do it. And its really the landscape clutter that the majority of more active players are complaining about, isn't it?
...
Message Edited by ArdenStarmariner on 09-01-2005 10:52 AM
Well... You seem to be mashing a couple of issues. We (mayors and other pro-citytypes) have been yelling or a purge of some sort. While the pack up thing is seen by many as a precursor to this, it is not inherently related. On the surface, the pack-up feature is intended to A) make it easy for players to move and (possibly) free up space in so-called 'ghost towns' by having players move themselves to more active cities and B) allow interior decorators to sell fully decorated houses.
While it's true that the Station Pass subscribers will still be paying the monthly fee, what about the rest of the people. SOE certainly doesn't want to encourage people to let their accounts lapse. And honestly, is it THAT much of an economic burden? A large house runs 30K per month maintenance. Even if you are gone for, say, six months, that is only 180K. Most people with experience enough to have "exhausted the content" would likely be able to make that much in a few hours.
Jhett wrote:
Well... You seem to be mashing a couple of issues. We (mayors and other pro-city types) have been yelling or a purge of some sort. While the pack up thing is seen by many as a precursor to this, it is not inherently related. On the surface, the pack-up feature is intended to A) make it easy for players to move and (possibly) free up space in so-called 'ghost towns' by having players move themselves to more active cities and B) allow interior decorators to sell fully decorated houses.
While it's true that the Station Pass subscribers will still be paying the monthly fee, what about the rest of the people. SOE certainly doesn't want to encourage people to let their accounts lapse. And honestly, is it THAT much of an economic burden? A large house runs 30K per month maintenance. Even if you are gone for, say, six months, that is only 180K. Most people with experience enough to have "exhausted the content" would likely be able to make that much in a few hours.
Yep. I could easily pack enough maintenance in my houses to let them sit for 6 months. I have millions so it would be no sweat. And the whole time I'm gone, my houses are holding spots on the landscape that could be used by more active players. Is there any incentive in this new feature that encourages me to use it and make room for new players? Nope.
I disagree with this. You already have a means to stop paying maintenance, and that is to redeed the house.
As it stands you can run around with a small house, packed and it = a 250 item backpack. That should cost you something.
No, no more mucking with houses. This is fine the way it is.,
Kinshi wrote:I disagree with this. You already have a means to stop paying maintenance, and that is to redeed the house.
As it stands you can run around with a small house, packed and it = a 250 item backpack. That should cost you something.
No, no more mucking with houses. This is fine the way it is.,
Yep. Or I could just put a few hundred K in the maintenance pools and leave them sitting right were they are at. You don't really believe anyone is just gonna sacrific all the items in their houses, do you? Expecially when they figure they will return sometime in the future. Of course that means, nobody else can use those spots while I'm off playing Everquest2, Planetside, or Matrix Online. Oh well, too bad, so sorry...
Well, I suppose it would be based on how you want to treat your fellow players.
As a member of a friendly guild and a ghost town with the active players few and far between if I planned to stay away for more than 30 days I would sort out the vendors and uplift the house no questions asked. I can always place it down later wheneverI want.
Why would I do this ? Because someone else might want to move into the town. Why should I take up the only residential area because 'I couldnt be asked to pack it up'.
When the purge 'does' take place it would be good for our town. And we as a town look forward to it.
ArdenStarmariner wrote:
Kinshi wrote:
I disagree with this. You already have a means to stop paying maintenance, and that is to redeed the house.
As it stands you can run around with a small house, packed and it = a 250 item backpack. That should cost you something.
No, no more mucking with houses. This is fine the way it is.,
Yep. Or I could just put a few hundred K in the maintenance pools and leave them sitting right were they are at. You don't really believe anyone is just gonna sacrific all the items in their houses, do you? Expecially when they figure they will return sometime in the future. Of course that means, nobody else can use those spots while I'm off playing Everquest2, Planetside, or Matrix Online. Oh well, too bad, so sorry...
You miss one thing; SOE, for better or worse, make these developments for the benefit of people who are actually playing the game and, by definition, paying a subscription. They should not be making changes to the game simply to benefit people who are no longer player, but may decide to return one day, or not....
There is no 'land shortage' in the game, at least on the servers I play on, therefore if you chose to not pack up your house before you leave then no one is really gonna give it much of a thought.
I left the game for 10 months, when I returned my house was still there and I paid the outstanding maintainance on it, no biggie and there certainly was not anyone desperate to get my lot either...
Fortunately for me I was not in a city, just in a plot outside of Coronet. If I had been part of a city then I may well have packed up, but knowing I might return I loaded up my bhouse with money before leaving.
Message Edited by ItsaCatch22 on 09-02-2005 09:47 AM
ArdenStarmariner wrote:
Kinshi wrote:
I disagree with this. You already have a means to stop paying maintenance, and that is to redeed the house.
As it stands you can run around with a small house, packed and it = a 250 item backpack. That should cost you something.
No, no more mucking with houses. This is fine the way it is.,
Yep. Or I could just put a few hundred K in the maintenance pools and leave them sitting right were they are at. You don't really believe anyone is just gonna sacrific all the items in their houses, do you? Expecially when they figure they will return sometime in the future. Of course that means, nobody else can use those spots while I'm off playing Everquest2, Planetside, or Matrix Online. Oh well, too bad, so sorry...
That really is quite the ignorant response. This is the type of attitude that many Mayors definately do not want floating around their cities. In general my citizens have ALWAYS been very cooperative about Packing Up anything - regardless if it would still cost them credits to do so or not. And that was even when we didn't have the "House Packup"... beggers can't be choosers people. I bet 99% of the existing player base WANTED to be able to move their houses from Point A to Point B without having to remove everything first - it certainly speeds things up and houses DO NOT cost that much to maintain. I never thought i'd see the day where people were complaining that they don't wanna "pay" to keep their items in a game they probably will not be playing and if they do they will be here off and on. Would you rather go back to the old system where everything was destroyed once you hit 0 maint?
I for one am very happy with the changes (minus the few bugs it did introduce) and can live with knowing that I still have to pay to maintain the house and its items while its in my datapad.
josslyn wrote:
ArdenStarmariner wrote:
Kinshi wrote:
I disagree with this. You already have a means to stop paying maintenance, and that is to redeed the house.
As it stands you can run around with a small house, packed and it = a 250 item backpack. That should cost you something.
No, no more mucking with houses. This is fine the way it is.,
Yep. Or I could just put a few hundred K in the maintenance pools and leave them sitting right were they are at. You don't really believe anyone is just gonna sacrific all the items in their houses, do you? Expecially when they figure they will return sometime in the future. Of course that means, nobody else can use those spots while I'm off playing Everquest2, Planetside, or Matrix Online. Oh well, too bad, so sorry...
That really is quite the ignorant response. This is the type of attitude that many Mayors definately do not want floating around their cities. In general my citizens have ALWAYS been very cooperative about Packing Up anything - regardless if it would still cost them credits to do so or not. And that was even when we didn't have the "House Packup"... beggers can't be choosers people. I bet 99% of the existing player base WANTED to be able to move their houses from Point A to Point B without having to remove everything first - it certainly speeds things up and houses DO NOT cost that much to maintain. I never thought i'd see the day where people were complaining that they don't wanna "pay" to keep their items in a game they probably will not be playing and if they do they will be here off and on. Would you rather go back to the old system where everything was destroyed once you hit 0 maint?I for one am very happy with the changes (minus the few bugs it did introduce) and can live with knowing that I still have to pay to maintain the house and its items while its in my datapad.
What planet do you live on were all the players is nice and considerate of others? You might find 1 in 100 players nice and considerate enough to pack up their houses for the sake of others. The other 99 have to be given something to motivate them. No, the ignorance is yours in your completely mistaken believe that the player population in general will do the right thing when there's nothing in it for them. Sounds like someone has live a bit of a sheltered life.