Dear Mesanna, "Reward the players that pay the FULL Year" ? HALLO ?

[popps]

@Mesanna

At the last Developer Meet And Greet On Pacific, Monday Feb. 8th 2016 a line in the Transcripts caught my attention.....

"Lady Mesanna: I would much rather reward the players that pay the full year by giving xtra vet rewards or something to that effect."

I beg your pardon ?

You have stopped Veteran Rewards to be earned at 15 Years active Account Age, which it means, that players who paid a FULL 16th or 17th or 18th or soon 19th Year of subscription get no unique rewarding for such payments and then you come out saying that you'd "much rather reward the players that pay the full year" ?

Yes, you add "by giving extra vet rewards" but, unfortunately, to my viewing, that still does not make it fair to "them" because, you see, I think that keeping an account as active for, say, 19 or 20 years "ain't the same" as keeping it active for 15 years and a few extra "picks" for those years is not the same to have unique rewards which those Veterans could only pick, albeit all active accounts' ages could get to use.....

So, personally, I do not think that the rewarding for those that pay the full year is rewarding as it should be, when that means only a few extra picks and not, really unique, qualifying Veteran Rewards pertaining to those top ages Years which only them can qualify to pick.

I think that Broadsword should go back to add every year a Veteran Reward that is unique for that Year's top active account Age and scrap the 15 Years CAP althougether..... this would be, to my viewing, really rewarding those Veteran players who actually maintained their account as active for that "full" year as you say you would like to reward them as this would be a recognition of the long time loyalty of these customers rewarding it as I think it should be, by actually giving a meaningfull status recognition to those 16, 17, 18, 19 Years of old active account Age and not artificially "stop" them at 15......

That's my opinion on this.

 

[MalagAste]

I believe she did say something about adding a 20 year reward when we hit that mark.

And not to burst your bubble but honestly that sort of thing discourages players from starting feeling that they are "WAY behind" and will never catch up. Already how many players are butt hurt over not being able to get shard shields? And you want to add to that more grumbling and feelings of never being able to get anywhere?

I honestly think Mesanna has the right idea. I would welcome more rewards for all my years of devotion. I often don't want to "waste" a pick since I only get two on most things that I would like because I feel they are such "low" rewards and it just burns me to waste a 15+ year pick on some 1st to 5th year reward... but when I was 1 to 5 years new we didn't have such awesome picks..... we actually thought that the hideous robes were "awesome" picks. If I could take them back I would.

I really wish they would update the robes to actually be something worth wearing. I mean honestly who the heck wants a 3 physical resist robe or cloak??? No ONE. No one wants resists. They want things they can't normally put on things... SSI would be nice, SDI would be great... MR would be excellent... And a combination of some of that maybe even HCI, DCI, Increased Stamina, Mana, etc... Damage Increase. NO one is going to ever pick them again with what they have now.

 

[kaio]

I think that the new vet rewards should be cool and unique. I'm not a big fan of stuff like "shard shields" because its too much of a game changer. (14 year to pick them is to piss on the community, make it a 10 year rewards, would have been more fair.).

The question still remains, howto reward active "accounts". Giving people 1-2 extra rewards a year, will devaluate all vet rewards, i find this bad even thou i dont sell my rewards.
What i would like to have access to as an active player, is a secondary house upto 10x10 or something like that..

 

[Goodmann]

I think that the new vet rewards should be cool and unique. I'm not a big fan of stuff like "shard shields" because its too much of a game changer. (14 year to pick them is to piss on the community, make it a 10 year rewards, would have been more fair.).

The question still remains, howto reward active "accounts". Giving people 1-2 extra rewards a year, will devaluate all vet rewards, i find this bad even thou i dont sell my rewards.
What i would like to have access to as an active player, is a secondary house upto 10x10 or something like that..

vet rewards are to use for veterans not something you need to put a price on. Shard shields have revived some shards so they are working as intended. Just wait 4 more years and you can get your own shields

 

[Tanivar]

Are there enough 15+ year vets to make the dev time worth it? There may not be and that's why they've stopped adding the rewards. They're going to instead put the dev time in to benefit the bulk of their customers.

 

[kaio]

vet rewards are to use for veterans not something you need to put a price on. Shard shields have revived some shards so they are working as intended. Just wait 4 more years and you can get your own shields

Everything has a price.
And yes everyone that did xshard trading before shardshields entered the marked, was put out of buisness.
I ran a shop where i would buy xfer tokens, xfer back and forth to various shards, to buy and sell stuff.
I couldt compete with the freeloaders that used shard shields, because i had to buy every token for 50mill++.

This was and is very game changing not just for me, but for everyone.

 

[OREOGL]

Are there enough 15+ year vets to make the dev time worth it? There may not be and that's why they've stopped adding the rewards. They're going to instead put the dev time in to benefit the bulk of their customers.

And now the thread is complete.

So what age, do you suppose, makes up the "bulk"?

 

[MalagAste]

And now the thread is complete.

So what age, do you suppose, makes up the "bulk"?

That's a good question OREOGL... I know that I have 3 accounts at about 17 years, 2 or 3 between 12 and 15, another 3 or 4 that are 10+ years, and 3 or 4 that are 5 and under.

I have loads of friends many of whom have 6+ accounts the majority of which are 15+ years old many of whom will be 19 this year. Then there are a bunch of friends who have under 5 accounts who are either recently returned and still have younger accounts somewhere under 10 years... and a few who have been gone a LONG time but came back and their accounts are under 5 years. Most the people I play with have at LEAST 2 accounts...

So IMO the "Average" among my friends would probably be between 8 to 12 years. And then if you think that 14 isn't that far out of reach. IMO.

Not to mention I have shields to EVERY shard so most my "friends" know this and I do run to other shards for them. Now one of my biggest problems with that is I keep forgetting to put the *(*(*(&*&( gold in the (&*O*&)(*$ transfer. So either I get to where I was going without my gold.... Or I forget to take what's left home and have been leaving pockets of gold places and can't remember where with whom...

 

[Fridgster]

Are there enough 15+ year vets to make the dev time worth it? There may not be and that's why they've stopped adding the rewards. They're going to instead put the dev time in to benefit the bulk of their customers.

Dont know about others but I have 4 accounts that are 15 years. Back when doom was first opened at one point I had 20+ accounts that at this time would be 15. So I'm guessing there are a few

 

[Uvtha]

Are there enough 15+ year vets to make the dev time worth it? There may not be and that's why they've stopped adding the rewards. They're going to instead put the dev time in to benefit the bulk of their customers.

I tried that last time he brought this up... no dice.

 

[Tanivar]

So so far we have


Fridgster

MalagAste
& some vague but obviously large number.

 

[FrejaSP]

I like Mesanna's idea of more rewards choices

There are so many choices of Vet rewards now, that I sure could need more choices a year.
Also we need to give players a reason to pay 3 month more before instead of paying 3 month a year,
A year can be long time to wait, both for old and for new players. My idea is

First year, now 3 a year, make it 2 each 3th month
Second to 5th year, now 1 a year, make it 1 each 3th month
6th to max years, now 2 a year, make it 2 each 3th month

I don't think we need to add new kind of rewards to 15+ years, I rather see more for the 3th to 9th years group to give new accounts a reason to keep paying.

 

[OREOGL]

So so far we have


Fridgster

MalagAste
& some vague but obviously large number.

Honestly, I'm not sure if matters if there were even just 1 account reaching 15 years.

That is pretty big, let alone people reaching the 20 year mark
which is astounding.

These are the people you reward.

 

[HoneythornGump]

Everything has a price.
And yes everyone that did xshard trading before shardshields entered the marked, was put out of buisness.
I ran a shop where i would buy xfer tokens, xfer back and forth to various shards, to buy and sell stuff.
I couldt compete with the freeloaders that used shard shields, because i had to buy every token for 50mill++.

This was and is very game changing not just for me, but for everyone.

Agree 100%.

Goodman is dead wrong about about shard shields breathing life into dead shards.. Shard Shield caused an Exodus to Atlantic, and now many other shards have become wastelands.

You are right: 15 Year Veteran Rewards are pissing on the community. So let's make a 20 Year reward, that way a player returning who can't activicate his old account only has to wait until 2036 before he can get his shard shields.

Shard Shields was the worst introduction of an item ever in UO. The most unbalancing item EVER, and not only that...why would you introduce an item into the game that is going to result in decreased revenue from the game store in a dying game. A game that needs every dime it can get to going forward.

Guess what? Pen of Wisdom is obsolete now too with the new Rune Books.

Another great decision that is going to cause a loss of revenue, albiet no where near the loss of sales of transfer tokens.

I can only shake my head in disgust....

 

[Uvtha]

Honestly, I'm not sure if matters if there were even just 1 account reaching 15 years.

That is pretty big, let alone people reaching the 20 year mark
which is astounding.

These are the people you reward.

Eh, they (myself included) get titles, thats plenty. I'd rather they work on the game for everyone rather than just for me.

 

[Longtooths]

I find this hilarious. In a previous locked thread when people like myself brought up that by getting rid of the 90day rule, new accounts would take their place. We were berated and told there were no new accounts and Where would all these magical new accounts come from etc.

Now in this thread those same people are taking up the torch for all the poor new accounts that don't have a chance at getting vet rewards.

Funny how the excuses and justifications change with people depending on the argument.

 

[OREOGL]

Eh, they (myself included) get titles, thats plenty. I'd rather they work on the game for everyone rather than just for me.

You're right, we should remove all vet rewards, delete the existing ones, and just give everyone titles.

That'll go over well, good call.

 

[Picus at the office]

Shard shields killed the smaller shards. They made ATL into the shopping mall for the game while hindering those who most needed the diverse shopping experience that once existed. I understand the idea and the thought that they should be a benefit for the game but it seems to have been another fatal mistake.

Myself I'm still 1.2 years away from being able to get a shield and have 15 rewards waiting to be claimed plus next year and my 15th. If I hadn't taken some breaks or kept my original account I'd be nearing voting age for sure.

 

[Capt. Lucky]

A fair reward would be to allow us to pay for 1 month and get 3 free to at least raise us to the level of the exploiters. No? That's not fair? Okay how about 4 free houses like the exploiters get per account. Is that fair? I think so,

 

[Corwyn]

Just a slight topic derailment about shard shields. I seem to recall that before the shard shields were introduced, there were several people begging for some way to go from shard to shard without having to by transfer tokens. Sounds to me like some of the players are second-guessing that request. How many that now see it as a negative were the same ones asking for it originally?

Make a wish... see what happens.

 

[Uvtha]

You're right, we should remove all vet rewards, delete the existing ones, and just give everyone titles.

That'll go over well, good call.

Or just leave it like it is? 15 years worth is plenty of items, and the higher you go the less and less people are going to be able to take advantage of that time investment by the dev team.

 

[OREOGL]

Or just leave it like it is? 15 years worth is plenty of items, and the higher you go the less and less people are going to be able to take advantage of that time investment by the dev team.

Suddenly titles aren't good enough? What happened?

I get your point, and you're entitled to your opinion but I wouldn't speak for others in this case.

 

[Uvtha]

A fair reward would be to allow us to pay for 1 month and get 3 free to at least raise us to the level of the exploiters. No? That's not fair? Okay how about 4 free houses like the exploiters get per account. Is that fair? I think so,

You can actually do exactly the same thing, and get the exact same benifit they do right now. It's obviously not the same thing as getting to play for free. The account is closed.

As for 4 "free" houses... they aren't free, and you are getting a bit ridiculous here.

There is no unfairness going on here. You can choose to do the exact same thing as people who use the 90 day loophole, something that has never been called an exploit, or illegal, or even wrong. If you choose not to take advantage that's your decision. You are the one drawing a moral line, and taking a moral stand. It's all coming down to your perception that you aren't being "rewarded" for the personal morals that you chose. I think you need to choose between being, in your eyes, a moral person, or getting extra houses (assuming you want them) at a reduced sub rate.

They said they want to give a benefit to people who pay consecutive months, what more do you want? Do you really want it to be active account or house poofs an hour later? Is that REALLY what this game needs right now?

 

[Uvtha]

Suddenly titles aren't good enough? What happened?

I get your point, and you're entitled to your opinion but I wouldn't speak for others in this case.

When was I speaking for others? Do I really have to put "IMO" before every statement I make? You don't ,why should I have to? Infer that I, the speaker am speaking for myself, unless I go to a clear length to say otherwise.

The argument here is simple. Resources used to make stuff for everyone... or resources used to make stuff for an ever-diminishing group (that to clarify I belong to) of aged elites? IN MY OPINION, that's the bottom line.

 

[OREOGL]

When was I speaking for others? Do I really have to put "IMO" before every statement I make? You don't ,why should I have to? Infer that I, the speaker am speaking for myself, unless I go to a clear length to say otherwise.

The argument here is simple. Resources used to make stuff for everyone... or resources used to make stuff for an ever-diminishing group (that to clarify I belong to) of aged elites? IN MY OPINION, that's the bottom line.

Your argument implied it when you said "they (muself included).."

Arguably the majority of the remaining player base are "aged elites."

 

[Uvtha]

Your argument implied it when you said "they (muself included).."

Arguably the majority of the remaining player base are "aged elites."

Yes, "they" the people I was referring to, not speaking for, or implying that I spoke for. I think it's a reach to assume any time someone refers to a collective group of people that they are speaking for them. The only reason I specified I am part of that group was to dispell any notion of bias against people with old accounts.

Anyway, as for the remainder of the player base being aged elites, then we should just make content for all of them, not little staged tiers of them, IMO.

 

[Lorddog]

let us trade in vet rewards for a different one. perhaps on a 2 to 1 basis with the year being the lower of the 2 turned in.

perhaps similar to the tots turn-in GUI

 

[OREOGL]

Yes, "they" the people I was referring to, not speaking for, or implying that I spoke for. I think it's a reach to assume any time someone refers to a collective group of people that they are speaking for them. The only reason I specified I am part of that group was to dispell any notion of bias against people with old accounts.

Anyway, as for the remainder of the player base being aged elites, then we should just make content for all of them, not little staged tiers of them, IMO.

Very simply put when you grouped yourself it would read "(we) get titles, that's plenty.

But clearly this a difference of views. I just happen to disagree.

 

[Uvtha]

Very simply put when you grouped yourself it would read "(we) get titles, that's plenty.

But clearly this a difference of views. I just happen to disagree.

That's not speaking for anyone. It's stating an opinion about a group I'm in. "We post here on stratics, that's cool". Do you read that as speaking on behalf of the group?

 

[OREOGL]

That's not speaking for anyone. It's stating an opinion about a group I'm in. "We post here on stratics, that's cool". Do you read that as speaking on behalf of the group?

This is a different context, the point was more geared to who are you to decide what is plenty for that group.

 

[Uvtha]

This is a different context, the point was more geared to who are you to decide what is plenty for that group.

I think because you disagree with me you inferred something I didn't imply. Anyway, I'm in an unrelated bad mood and I'm over reacting to what I felt was you putting words into my mouth, that I never intended in the slightest. so nevermind my apologies for going on about .t

 

[OREOGL]

I think because you disagree with me you inferred something I didn't imply.

If I inferred it it was based on evidence. I agree.

But I digress, we have derailed this enough. I will simply agree to disagree.

 

[Capt. Lucky]

Just a slight topic derailment about shard shields. I seem to recall that before the shard shields were introduced, there were several people begging for some way to go from shard to shard without having to by transfer tokens. Sounds to me like some of the players are second-guessing that request. How many that now see it as a negative were the same ones asking for it originally?

Make a wish... see what happens.

BS/EA makes a lot of cash off transfer tokens, Everyone wants that, but we won't get them. I'm a little surprised they even offered them as an upper tier vet reward. The response to a "shard transfer gate" was really something worth consideration. That has some merit. It was responded to by Mesanna with a simple flat "No". That's something that isn't in the best interest of EA.

 

[It Lives]

The fact is the rewards can be used by any age account. I don't agree with it but it has already been done and will not be changed. I do agree however that continued long term use should be rewarded with unique and exclusive content...

 

[Capt. Lucky]

You can actually do exactly the same thing, and get the exact same benifit they do right now. It's obviously not the same thing as getting to play for free. The account is closed.

As for 4 "free" houses... they aren't free, and you are getting a bit ridiculous here.

There is no unfairness going on here. You can choose to do the exact same thing as people who use the 90 day loophole, something that has never been called an exploit, or illegal, or even wrong. If you choose not to take advantage that's your decision. You are the one drawing a moral line, and taking a moral stand. It's all coming down to your perception that you aren't being "rewarded" for the personal morals that you chose. I think you need to choose between being, in your eyes, a moral person, or getting extra houses (assuming you want them) at a reduced sub rate.

They said they want to give a benefit to people who pay consecutive months, what more do you want? Do you really want it to be active account or house poofs an hour later? Is that REALLY what this game needs right now?

The game need this exploit fixed ASAP. I want my buy one get 3 get subscription rate or my 3 free houses. I want to be treated as fair as the exploiters who are abusing this system get treated. *drop mic*

 

[Uvtha]

BS/EA makes a lot of cash off transfer tokens, Everyone wants that, but we won't get them. I'm a little surprised they even offered them as an upper tier vet reward. The response to a "shard transfer gate" was really something worth consideration. That has some merit. It was responded to by Mesanna with a simple flat "No". That's something that isn't in the best interest of EA.

Well a shard gate would make completely useless all the shard shields and tokens, so yeah, I think it would cause an uproar and rightly so. Of course I have always thought shard shields were a terrible idea myself. That would have been the time to install a shard gate. It's far too late to do so now.

 

[Uvtha]

The game need this exploit fixed ASAP. I want my buy one get 3 get subscription rate or my 3 free houses. I want to be treated as fair as the exploiters who are abusing this system get treated. *drop mic*

So you said, but your demands don't make sense. What you should demand is "I wan't to pay an extra 4 dollars a month to my subscription for every extra house I want." Correlating the 90 day loophole to free game time or free houses doesn't make sense.

 

[Goodmann]

some angry non 14 year vets hanging around keep those accounts open and you will get there

 

[Capt. Lucky]

So you said, but your demands don't make sense. What you should demand is "I wan't to pay an extra 4 dollars a month to my subscription for every extra house I want." Correlating the 90 day loophole to free game time or free houses doesn't make sense.

Mesanna wants to reward *me* a multiple full time subscriber? Make me even with the exploiters. Not too much to ask. I honestly have no idea what your talking about though. I pay full price now. No need to charge me extra for whatever I get. Or am I to further subsidize the exploiters, and you?

 

[Capt. Lucky]

some angry non 14 year vets hanging around keep those accounts open and you will get there

I guess everything is suppose to be free now. Free game time, free storage, free houses... I guess as soon as the dev team works for free and EA gets that free electricity, servers, employees, buildings, etc we're all set!

 

[Uvtha]

Mesanna wants to reward *me* a multiple full time subscriber? Make me even with the exploiters. Not too much to ask. I honestly have no idea what your talking about though. I pay full price now. No need to charge me extra for whatever I get. Or am I to further subsidize the exploiters, and you?

You are saying "I deserve FREE stuff because I sub all the time." You are saying people who use the 90 day rule are getting FREE stuff. They aren't. They are paying for the account. When the account is closed, they don't have access to the account, it just holds their house spot, which essentially boils down to the cost of the account spread out over those 90 days for the privilege of a housing spot. So it would be the same thing as you paying an extra 3-4 bucks for an extra house.

 

[Uvtha]

I guess everything is suppose to be free now. Free game time, free storage, free houses... I guess as soon as the dev team works for free and EA gets that free electricity, servers, employees, buildings, etc we're all set!

It's...not...free. When you activate your account, a 90 day grace period for your potential house comes with it. There has never been any stated limitation on that grace period. An account that closes after a month or an account that closes after 10 straight years both get the same 90 day grace period. YOU have that grace period if you ever want or need to use it. It's part of the subscription that you pay for.

 

[Capt. Lucky]

You are saying "I deserve FREE stuff because I sub all the time." You are saying people who use the 90 day rule are getting FREE stuff. They aren't. They are paying for the account. When the account is closed, they don't have access to the account, it just holds their house spot, which essentially boils down to the cost of the account spread out over those 90 days for the privilege of a housing spot. So it would be the same thing as you paying an extra 3-4 bucks for an extra house.

That makes zero sense on any level. Not a surprise to hear it from you though lol. These accounts hold an undeserved PRIME house spot (people aren't holding onto swamp land here folks) AND a ton of free storage that can be used anytime they want by their main account. I'm sure the Gold sites love it. Hundreds of bucks for a castle is pretty sweet when it costs practically nothing to hold it forever. These exploiters and moochers are getting a ton of free stuff. They get about 120 bucks a year in free stuff. I want my 120 bucks. That's fair. Can we keep this in one thread or PM or whatever? lol Your on me like a dog on a bone lol. I running all over trying to answer all the questions you keep throwing at me lol. In the time you wasted here in the forums you could have easily earned 13 bucks and manned up this month.

 

[Assia Penryn]

I would gladly welcome extra vet rewards picks.

 

[Capt. Lucky]

It's...not...free. When you activate your account, a 90 day grace period for your potential house comes with it. There has never been any stated limitation on that grace period. An account that closes after a month or an account that closes after 10 straight years both get the same 90 day grace period. YOU have that grace period if you ever want or need to use it. It's part of the subscription that you pay for.

It's not a problem if you don't use it. But you clearly are part of the problem. The "dead account" is in full use by the main accounts with tons of free storage and the ability to hoard up house spots. Get this moocher mentality outta your head. Trust me you will have a very difficult life you you expect people to keep handing out free stuff to you, Account goes dormant clear the friends list and property can't be accessed. I'm all for someone going through a hard time. But I'm not for helping moochers and exploiters.

 

[Capt. Lucky]

I would gladly welcome extra vet rewards picks.

*SMH* lol Just give everyone everything. I want my 120 bucks the exploiters get a year, or my 4 free houses, I want my 4x free storage, I want to pick my prime spots. I just want even with the exploiters.

 

[OREOGL]

I think there are some general assumptions being made here.

There is the assumption that the "prime" spots aren't being paid for and the further on to assume they would open up if they lowered the 90 days.

Objectively I would assert based on the number of prime spots and available houses that this isn't correct or at a minimum, it wouldn't be the majority.

If we look at it further from this angle, it would only leave the you're paying 1/3rd of the cost to keep a spare house.

Going back to the original assessment, it wouldn't matter because the majority of these are not prime locations and hold no impact on others.

And then at the root of the argument is getting something for nothing. In my mind this seems to be a weak argument since these are not prime locations, hold no impact to others, derive some value to the game other than just closing an account because of an unprime location.

 

[Uvtha]

These accounts hold an undeserved PRIME house spot

You assume. You have no evidence. It's quite possible that every house in luna belongs to an active account. You don't know. I doubt it of course, but you are just making assumptions here.

I want my 120 bucks.

It's not free stuff. It's not your 120 dollars anyway, that's not how it works. If it's theoretically anyone's money, it's EA's and clearly they don't care about it.

Your on me like a dog on a bone lol. I running all over trying to answer all the questions you keep throwing at me lol. In the time you wasted here in the forums you could have easily earned 13 bucks and manned up this month.

You're being ridiculous and hyperbolic, I'm bored and combative. Pretty simple equation.

You also assume I am not paying for my account. I am. I'm standing in my house as I type this. I have one house, and only one character uses that house. I have another account I play on occasion, that character is not associated with my main character and doesn't use her house except to use the public dye tub and crystal portals that are available to everyone, and when I don't play that other account, any house it holds collapses. She's lost like 3 houses now.

I DO shut my "main" account down for periods of time but only during periods I don't play period. My house is integral to my coming back, so I keep it up. I wouldn't pay year round to keep it up though, if they got rid of the rule I would just move on. I wouldn't be mad, or complain, I would just move on.

I don't care if they get rid of the 90 day rule or not, I just think its better for the game to leave it be because, a) it's been a part of the game since house limits were enacted, and it's very widespread, b) it was never something people were told not to do, warned not to do, or threatened with reprisal for doing, and c) The devs through the years knew about it, and clearly, never cared.

 

[Capt. Lucky]

You assume. You have no evidence. It's quite possible that every house in luna belongs to an active account. You don't know. I doubt it of course, but you are just making assumptions here.



It's not free stuff. It's not your 120 dollars anyway, that's not how it works. If it's theoretically anyone's money, it's EA's and clearly they don't care about it.



You're being ridiculous and hyperbolic, I'm bored and combative. Pretty simple equation.

You also assume I am not paying for my account. I am. I'm standing in my house as I type this. I have one house, and only one character uses that house. I have another account I play on occasion, that character is not associated with my main character and doesn't use her house except to use the public dye tub and crystal portals that are available to everyone, and when I don't play that other account, any house it holds collapses. She's lost like 3 houses now.

I DO shut my "main" account down for periods of time but only during periods I don't play period. My house is integral to my coming back, so I keep it up. I wouldn't pay year round to keep it up though, if they got rid of the rule I would just move on. I wouldn't be mad, or complain, I would just move on.

I don't care if they get rid of the 90 day rule or not, I just think its better for the game to leave it be because, a) it's been a part of the game since house limits were enacted, and it's very widespread, b) it was never something people were told not to do, warned not to do, or threatened with reprisal for doing, and c) The devs through the years knew about it, and clearly, never cared.

You can bury your head in the sand and make insane arguments, but change is coming. So if you pay a little something it's justifies exploiting. Your a grin lol. Boring but a grin.

 

[Uvtha]

It's not a problem if you don't use it. But you clearly are part of the problem. The "dead account" is in full use by the main accounts with tons of free storage and the ability to hoard up house spots. Get this moocher mentality outta your head. Trust me you will have a very difficult life you you expect people to keep handing out free stuff to you, Account goes dormant clear the friends list and property can't be accessed. I'm all for someone going through a hard time. But I'm not for helping moochers and exploiters.

Take your blinders off for a moment, there John Galt, no one is mooching off of you. You don't run the game. If anyone is being "mooched" off of, its EA, but I think it's pretty easy to argue that they are taking advantage of the high demand of housing by keeping the supply 1 to a customer, to entice you to open new accounts, as much as players are taking advantage of them.

Again, you keep calling it an exploit. Where was it ever stated it was an exploit? You can have the opinion that it's an exploit, but that doesn't make it fact