An extremely unpopular reality

Yes, but at what cost? Who is going to buy an add-on store house from another player for more than what it would cost them to buy it in the add-on store?

Think of it like this...if there are limited lots (which there are) and there will be far more people that want a lot than actually have one (which there will be), then HOUSES will be a commodity that has been over sold to the public. There must be a sink to keep the price of houses from falling to almost nothing.

 

well how about this scenario. let's say some guy is a baron with a city lot, but what he really wants is the duke castle but doesn't want to pay for the pledge. then this guy will be willing to pay a duke 400 dollars for his benefactor version of his house maybe. or some guy paid 900 for a city lot and is happy to pay a player hundreds for his baron style house or duke castle etc.


the truth is we don't know how it will all play out and this will be decided by supply and demand.


but if it is the case that it ends up devaluing them as you predict then it seems best to wait to see if this occurs and then come up with a solution. otherwise it may be a waste of effort.


in fact if this problem occurs the way you describe then a perfect solution would be to allow the excess deeds to be turned into the game for rewards of some kind, like a rare item or something. they did this back in uo in this thing called the "clean up britannia project" to get rid of excess items and you could get cool items like rare hair dyes or crystal balls that would play a random sound in the game when someone went by.


http://www.uoguide.com/Clean_Up_Britannia_(1999)

 

The mistake was on my part in terms of understanding. I don't think this is a great design. My point was not to get them to confirm it but rather to fix it.

 

@Toby...There will definitely be situations where people will want to trade and buy houses that are limited. But how many people will want the Village Benefactor house? I don't know, my guess would be not many as it will be extremely common.

The point I'm trying to make about giving people an out and letting them convert their houses to raw materials is that by allowing this you immediately increase the value of all houses to a minimum level of whatever someone would buy the raw materials. Whereas I think many of the houses will become like the common trading card you get in a magic deck, no one wants them because they're everywhere.

 

i see your point but that solution doesn't sound fun, hehe. how about my idea of turning them in for something else? i mean, why resources? check out that clean up britannia link i posted. it was pretty cool.

 

If you give something else to people in place of houses then you create the same problem over again. For example, lets say that the dev team creates an AWESOME sword of fire awesomeness. Now that sword becomes rare and tradeable but the value is based entirely on how easy it is for people to obtain (just like the houses).

Where as if you give them raw materials, players will create what they want and need and this will inherently fit into the economy without screwing anything up.

 

my idea wouldn't be one to one ratio. imagine an amazing rare item and it cost 30 pledge house deeds, etc. you can scale it based on the problem.

 

That idea I like.

 

I do hope that I'll be able to sell a fully decorated house. While the value of all these extra houses won't be determined until things get rolling, the add-on value of a well decorated home is indubitable.

EDIT
In addition, I'd like to be able to plop down house after house for my prospective buyers to peruse.

 

My naive assumption was that you'd have two deeds, one for the plot and one for the house. Both were pieces of paper in the inventory.

First you would go to an open plot, and assuming you had a free plot deed, then you could buy it. Once the plot was "bought" then the plot deed in your inventory either disappeared or was counter-signed to say that it currently reserved a plot. Naturally, one you move out then a plot deed would reappear in your inventory or become un-counter-signed.

With regards to the house deed it would grant you any property that your pledge level granted. If you a Founder Baron then you could turn that deed into a single house up to the level of a Founder Baron. The deed disappeared, or counter-signed as before, and you'd have a house. Likewise, if you decide to pick up a house for whatever reason the deed would return to your inventory. This house deed could then be used to place a different type of house. The houses are transient but the deed itself is just a single item that can be transformed. The house could still keep all the items inside, no requirement to remove them (unless you choose to transform it into another type of house).

This was my working assumption because it made sense to me. You could try reserve a lot without placing a house and you could trade either independently. There is no requirement to have every house possible appear in your inventory. Just seemed like a better way of doing things. :-/

 

In the start we are going to have many more houses deeds that players with land lots. I was thinking in the KS that we should choose one house, but we will have a rain of deeds. I like the idea of echange peldge house deeds per any are or something...

 

I agree, that would be good functionality. However, I don't believe this has been asked or answered yet. That would be a very good question for the weekly QA thread.

 

"The Slum Lords of New Britannia Must Be Heard!"

Let us join our voices in only the truest of real estate ventures!
"Slum Lords Unite!" !
~Time Lord~

 

I would like all decorations to stay in the house I put in inventory when I switch to another house. That way I can have different designs for Halloween, Christmas, Saint Patrick, etc. I think that's how it'll work but we'll have to see.

 

Where is this extremely unpopular reality? Having a bunch of unique houses that will never be acquired again after release is a problem? It's a great problem to have.

 

I personally am happy about the extra homes, will not sell them, and and to keep them all

I could see having some from family or extra personal accounts to sell.

Im against an option to destroy for any type of resources, because that will give pledgers that are crafters a financial resource bump in game. Not a good model. Otherwise id say sure, why not?

I think it is a non issue. In time as more people sign up for the game those extra houses will dwindle in supply based on the population. For a short term there will probally be a bit of a flood, but i also think there will be people like me that will wish to keep them as well as people that will wait a ling time to sell in the hopes in a year or two the value will go up.

The bottom line is that there wont be a to of lots. So there will be a small market for the extra houses once the inital land rush settles in a few months. The fact your extra houses are then not worth much is as it should be.. Its not supposed to be valuable. Its just supposed to be a cosmetical pledge perk based on your level. In a few years if you can bank some good gold or cash off them, then at that point its just wise investing and waiting.

 

They are going to have to make sure that there are more lots than pre-purchase to meet a portion of the FTP population, or post-launch new players. The houses portion of the market is pretty irrelevant to anyone that knows they must have land o put it on. Also, I believe pre-purchasing is more about choice of lot, rather than whether you will have one or not.

 

I doubt this in the short term. The numbers that have been mentioned so far have been something along the lines of 30-50% additional lots compared to what are sold through pledges and the addon store. Combine this with the fact that players who receive lots with their pledges will be perfectly able to buy as many lots as they please with in-game gold and you've got yourself a problem. 50% more lots available to 100% of the player base all the sudden doesn't look like much, especially when a few of the higher backers in the game seem hell bent on profiteering as much as they possibly can.

You should probably expect all lots to sell out rather quickly, then a real money market to form around virtual real estate. That seems to be the goal of some of those profiteers and the most likely outcome for it, unless a way to include a greater number of lots is found.

 

At over $150 per lot, I am not so sure people pre-buying lots are going to dominate as much as people are worried about. Its different with a game is is already established. If the land is dominated so much, you will find that it will turn away way too many people. If the scenario described here becomes true, I think a lot of people are about to lose a lot of money.

 

I'm with you. I think they should revise their stance on the homes. I don't think we should be able to trade the citizen+ housing. They should be account bound.

I'm a royal founder Lord. So I'll be using that house(or possibly the benefactor)

I'll have for sale: 1 lord home, 1 boat, 2 Knight towers, 1 light house, 2 edelman homes, 1 cabana, 2 citizen homes.(10) You'll have all that plus 1 lord home, 2 baron homes, 1 frigate. (14)

I know a lot of people have upgraded to Lord+ since kickstarter ended so there will be quite a few of these homes floating around. I'd like to keep them exclusive. The only way I know of to do that is to make it so you can't trade them.

Turning them in for raw materials could be an option, but I think the best we can hope for is that it means it increases the value. If a lords home is worth 9,000 gold in raw materials, people will pay 10,000 for it. That sort of situation.

I will say this though. If I can sell my extra homes I wont be doing it till much later on. -Likely episode 3-5. Once we have far more players and these become the "old school" collectibles.