Instanced housing, scarcity, and sundry thoughts regarding housing.

I have been looking around at what seems to be one of the most important concepts in SOTA: Housing. I've played a bit of the pre-alpha and it seems that plots are incredibly scarce at the moment, and that makes sense, its pre-alpha. I've also read devs and others say that there will be considerably more plots available at launch and that deeds will not be sold without plots available to them.

These are all good data but I have a couple thoughts on the topic and I'd like to see how others feel about these ideas.

I think it would be a mistake to guarantee that every player could have access to a house plot.


With that said, housing should not be so scarce that only 5% of the population could have one. I'm sure it is on the devs' minds that they should strike a balance in the middle and I have two suggestions to find that balance.

1) Instanced villages that automatically adapt to the demand for houses.

This might be technologically challenging but seems like a really good idea to me. As new players are requesting housing plots, those requests go into a queue. When that queue reaches a certain level, X new plots are created in a new instance. This has the advantage of maintaining a pre-programmed level of scarcity while simultaneously not just shutting new players out of the housing market.

EDIT: A point made by Gracekain that should have been obvious to me but I didn't think of it: empty house plots should be removed by the same algorithm to maintain the desired scarcity ratio.

2) Permit players to clear trees to make new plots (but make it a major challenge to do so).

Thoughts?

 

No.

This leads ultimately to the same urban blight that was found in Ultima Online and Star Wars Galaxies.

(both games designed by the same person)

 

No. Next?

 

Interesting thought. Do empty house plots get removed to also maintain the percentage? Altho i wonder how this will effect current players owning more then one plot. Does this system only include new accounts? I could see this being a reason why players would purchase multiple accounts just for better chance on house availability.

 

I think the housing and plots of land in this game are amazing. Going to instance housing is a step in the wrong direction in IMHO.

 

While I think that the number of plots should be a percentage of the player base, whatever that may be, I also think it should be solely in the hands of the developers to add them, whether as expansions to existing towns or as new villages. With these additions I'd like to see the ability for a village eventually to become a town through the efforts of its inhabitants.

 

Ah, that would be logical, wouldn't it! I think that is a necessary part of my concept, without it scarcity would fall and secondary housing markets would become irrelevant.

I don't think that should be a concern. If people are willing to buy additional accounts just to get a house, let them.

I'll update my suggestion with your feedback. Thanks.

 

technically every hex is an instance and can be adjusted accordingly with very little effect if any on the whole world. At least I think that is what he is talking about.

 

Fair point. I think that some form of player-driven expansion is good. Simply waiting until a content expansion seems bad.

 

What if it turns out that less than 5% of the population has a house?

 

Devs will control that. But they already said that here will be more exclusive to have a house that in UO, but Im sure that will be more than 5%. Actually the dual map makes the control of the land lots very easy.

 

Yes, they could control for that, and I provided one possible route to do so.

 

The guarantee that a plot is available is only relevant to those paid for cash from the add on shop. The deeds available in game paid for by in game gold should be available to every player to buy one with no regard to their being a plot available, lots could become vacant at any time if someone doesn't pay the upkeep in UO if you didn't have a house but wanted one you carried a deed with you to grab a space if you found one.

 

Since we are using a dual scale map system...it shouldn't be an issue to "expand" cities...and it will look less like urban sprawl due to it not effecting more then one hex.

 

EXACTLY.

Forgive me please if this is stating the obvious, but in a very very real sense, housing is already instanced....in that the entire world is instanced! You enter a village hex....thats an instance. No, there isnt more than one instance per village hex, however because the world's hexes are all totally disconnected, there is no 1:1 relation: A village hex could be ENORMOUS compared to say, generic forest hex #22. Or could start small and be expanded....and it has NOTHING to do with anything in any hex surrounding it.

That is both the greatest strength....and greatest weakness of the whole fragmented world they decided to build.

 

I like the idea of the Devs controlling when/how new villages are created with more housing, or expanding areas around existing villages, for three reasons:

1. Newness/Freshness: When another village hex is added as population grows, the Devs could make it a new, modified, or existing hex layout. Imagine a new hex opens up (or one is modified/enlarged) with a big resort lake for fishing and boating. Would people then enjoy moving their houses to such an area (another little land rush)? Then older villages open up spaces too for more people searching for their ideal lot.
2. Chance to create a new Player Town: If people of a community or growing community are currently stuck with their homes spread across several villages and towns, opening a new hex gives them a chance to move their homes and build together.
3. A Quest: New housing areas could be part of a story-line or quest in an Episode. This would give add "meaning" and "scene-setting" for new villages.

So I think creating more housing lots in general can be a "strategic" decision by the Devs as the game and population progresses.

One of the potential future problems is: what happens if the population decreases in 10/15 years (heaven forbid) ... what do do with all those empty lots and villages! But I'm sure another "strategic" decision would be made then too.