Houses are in limited quantity? ? (Dev) Replied

um ok , so they're going to do housing like everquest did huh?..no thanks

I'd like to see houses scattered through the landscape like we had in uo and swg, which is one of the things that kept me playing uo for 7 yrs, just the fact you could use a house to break line of sight in combat to vanish or heal up quickly was great.

 

@Korrigan lol, where did I insult anyone here? I was the guy mentioning that I pledged for a city house BUT want others to have the chance on a house too. When you and the guy called Velner attacked me and said I'm just a rich guy, pay to win, elitist along with all the others blah blah...

So save your explanations, as you can see other were equally offended by your BS. And yes, if you are 45 years old, it's def time to move out of moms basement. Now cry because I just insulted you for real you clown.

And PS: Everybody can read the last few pages, so why you even try to turn it around and put the blame on me, as if I were the one attacking you? Think a little about it ;o)

Awesome how some people attack others with their own foolish assumptions and by being prejudice assholes, and then say "this person insulted me" when they get a reaction for their attack in the first place. Please, have fun Korrigan, enjoy the game, but stop insulting people that pledge more money than you think is "normal".

 

These people like korrigan would have no trouble with people pledging for houses if they themselves could afford one. As with most people with financial issues it is always someone elses fault or it is not fair.

I also know that too much jealousy out there will poison the community as a whole. I hope they do have the inn/camp limited type housing because i think its good for my city house investment.

Some of this reminds me of the world when it comes to taxes. People really think that richish guys like we should pay $3500 for this game but get nothing extra and everyone should be the same in game.

I will stick to my philosophy. You want a big house in sota. Either work hard in real life or work hard in game.

 

<blockquote cite="Korrigan"> I?ve actually canceled my Kickstarter pledge and won?t be funding this game, after having seen what kind of community this ?real money? model breeds. </blockquote>

Wow...just wow Korrigan.

As I pointed out pages ago, you should really be looking at SotA's offline mode. You've made it very clear that you want to be guaranteed to own a house wherever you like (offline mode) without having to purchase it from another player (offline mode) and you simply don't like interacting with this community (offline mode). Offline mode is NOT some second-rate version of the game. You are getting a whole new Ultima-style RPG with a rich robust storyline. If you would pre-order Ultima X by RG for $50 or what have you, SotA is the same thing.

I don't understand why you want a house so bad in multiplayer mode when it doesn't seem like you would enjoy any of the features of multiplayer mode (competitive marketplace, pvp, and community interaction).

 

Good, solid points across the board Marthos

 

Remember to keep things civil folks. *readies fire hose* Don't make me hose down this thread...

 

FireLotus, you just made me remember the scene in UHF where the kid finds the marble in the oatmeal, and his reward is to drink out of the firehose

 

Where did anyone say that its one house per account?
All I can find is the kickstarter goals which give only one house plot but that doesn't mean once your in game you cant acquire another house.

I would hate to think that just because I have a village house rent free for ever that if I some how managed to get a town or city house in game I would have to lose my rent free house for ever so that I could get the new house

 

They have not said anything about one house per account.

 

RG said in a video that they are considering a limit of one house per account. Can't remember which video though. It isn't definite at this stage but I can understand them leaning towards it, I'd prefer otherwise though.

 

If they do I hope they exempt kickstarter houses from it because it would be ok to buy a village house with in game money and then upgrade that to a town house or a city house, that would be fine but to lose the kickstarter house to do it would SUCK

 

Not 100% sure what you mean but it sound similar to something that was discussed earlier, either in this thread or another. The consensus opinion was that a KS house would provide a discount to the total rent. If you have a village KS house then you will get that amount of discount on the rentable value of whatever house you own. That way you keep the benefit that you paid for but also get the opportunity to upgrade your house. Assuming that upgrades are even possible. Guess a lot of this is still an open issue.

 

there's a CLEAR EXAMPLE in Lord Kai's experience, it is DEFINITELY one DEED per account right now, corrections appreciated if anything is inaccurate :

1. he DONATED total $ enough for TWO deeds, but it was all applied to ONE deed
2. he contacted publisher, they cofirmed ONE deed ONLY per account
3. publisher created TWO accounts; with two completely SEPARATE deeds

this makes sense, otherwise deeds could all eventually be aggregated to ONE master player, who cold theoretically own ALL game real estate

can always ADD more real estate in future episodes, based on massive cummunity acceptance/growth, looking good now, option to adjust as required in the future, game on

 

Jatvardur

That sounds fair as long as you could then make a decision to downgrade and go back to your free house

 

whatever you select in KS is what you're eligible for, unless they decide to continue fund-raising in the SotA website itself ... if you are a citizen on KS, then you're going to be guaranteed a village deed tax-free for life ... there is NO guarantee of upgrade for $1000 more to town deed later on, etc.

what might happen is an extension period, where if you want to upgrade from a lower level you can, but i think they'll stop once those slots are filled (400 citizens total, etc.)

once the original slots are full, i think they'll freeze out any more movement until the game goes online ... then the story will REALLY begin to play out

 

I know that, and wouldn't want to pay another $1000 (would need that for my lawyer if I did that)

What I meant was if you bought one in game or won one or whatever they do for the rest of the people. So you get a normal, pay rent city house, this shouldn't mean you have to chose between losing your rent free village house and getting the pay rent city house.

As someone suggested above you could make it so the no rent village deed combines into that so you pay 1/3 less rent or whatever but this shouldn't be a one off forever choice, you should still have the option to sell of that city house and go back to your free village house

 

i refer back to Lord Kei's original catch-22 ... for completely different reasons, the publisher expressly told him ONE deed per account PERIOD !!!

whether you had one and came up on another, or had none and suddenly wanted to buy two, whatever the situation, the structure is currently set up that is not an option, only one deed per account

you'd have to choose, which deed (KS tax-free or paid deed) to keep on the existing account, and set up a new account for the second deed (which if you chose as the taxed deed, from that point on you'd be responsible for those taxes!) but have no taxes still on your original KS account deed

thats how i'm hearing it, pretty sure its accurate, $1000 &lt; lawyer, DO IT

 

Yep, I've also read or heard that it is one deed per account. I'll have to dig up the chatlog or other source to confirm.

Currently, the tax-free benefit moves with the deed. So a KS backer who transfers that unique tax-free deed to another player will lose that benefit.

 

We know it is one deed per account. What we are talking out loud about is the possibilities / consequences of allowing more than one deed per account. Given that the game is pre-alpha I don't think this topic is completely off the table yet.

 

@Jatvardur

Sincerely, until the game is underway and empty lots start appearing in cities, towns, and villages (or unless the devs decide to create from the start at least 2x more housing lots than they expect players) leaving the 1 deed per account limit in place is a good idea.

After all, the game has already over 17K backers that will receive a copy of the game; if there will be just a few thousand lots then the game will already have a hefty housing deficit. Allowing players to own more than one house while there are still "homeless" players around doesn't seem like a good idea to me.

For my part, lack of housing won't keep me from pledging - but it might push me into offline play. Not just lack of housing, though; other nice feature on the game that can be dominated by a small group of players and denied to the rest (such as a guild castle) might also push me offline if in the end I think having access to all the otherwise "exclusive toys" will be more fun than the community aspect of online play.