End The Siege Housing Experiment

[TheScoundrelRico]

I was amazed to see that the developers actually allowed Siege housing to be given to every account, no matter what shard the player played most. I do understand that there was some discussion with Siege players on this topic (apparently the wrong Siege players) but this appears to be a failed experiment.

I'm sure it sounded like something that would attract a bunch of players to Siege...but it didn't. All it has done is allow players who wanted a house on Siege to drop a plot and leave. Sure they have to come back from time to time to refresh it, but that isn't the point.

The point is, there are players who regularly play Siege Perilous that no longer have access to good housing locations due to the large number of Siege carpet baggers.

For those with homes on Siege that only visit to refresh your home...shame on you. For the Siege players that thought signing of on this change would increase the shard population...shame on you too.

And finally, for the developers who made this change...CHANGE IT BACK. One house per account (unless they have a grandfathered home). NO SECOND VACATION HOMES ON SIEGE...la

 

[FrejaSP]

We was asking for some kind of refresh to keep it in check. I believe Devs decided, that right now, there was lots of free spots, so they choose to allow it without refresh and add the refresh later, when it becomes a problem.
There are still free spots, maybe not so many in old Britannia but Malas still have a lot of free spots. I did fear we would see a lot ghost houses and there are some.
Some of us love houses, I do have 2 castles, one large tower, 2 large houses and one small house. I pay for each of them each month. 2 are used for TDO and 2 for NEW2 and 2 for myself.
Many of the houses you see are only paid 4 months a year and some of the old Siege players don't really play, they only keep their houses.
Now this new second houses, are they used? I believe many of them are, a lot players play both normal shards and Siege. Many of them gave up Siege several times in the past, not we see them more often on Siege.

You mean the second houses have to go but why them and not the houses only paid for few month a year and should I really be allowed to own 6 houses?
Yet there are free spots, so not really a problem.

 

[Poo]

I was amazed to see that the developers actually allowed Siege housing to be given to every account, no matter what shard the player played most. I do understand that there was some discussion with Siege players on this topic (apparently the wrong Siege players) but this appears to be a failed experiment.

I'm sure it sounded like something that would attract a bunch of players to Siege...but it didn't. All it has done is allow players who wanted a house on Siege to drop a plot and leave. Sure they have to come back from time to time to refresh it, but that isn't the point.

The point is, there are players who regularly play Siege Perilous that no longer have access to good housing locations due to the large number of Siege carpet baggers.

For those with homes on Siege that only visit to refresh your home...shame on you. For the Siege players that thought signing of on this change would increase the shard population...shame on you too.

And finally, for the developers who made this change...CHANGE IT BACK. One house per account (unless they have a grandfathered home). NO SECOND VACATION HOMES ON SIEGE...la

just so i understand your argument correctly.
you left the game and now you've come back and your upset that you cant have prime housing?
so your assuming that the prime housing spot you want is being used by someone playing production shard?
i dont know but ive seen more people on siege now then i ever have, so what if they have a production house as well?
your argument seems to be very elementary school recess me me me and lacking any real substance.

 

[SpyderBite]

The problem, Poo, is that people came to siege from the prodo server to place houses when the second "free" house on Siege was introduced. Most never returned. So, now we have their permanently placed homes sitting on Siege being refreshed everytime they log on to their prodo server.

At the minimum, a mandatory refresh should be required. I'd prefer we just end the experiment as well though. Let 'em drop. The new players on siege you are referring to are complaining about house placement as well.

 

[TheScoundrelRico]

i dont know but ive seen more people on siege now then i ever have, so what if they have a production house as well?
your argument seems to be very elementary school recess me me me and lacking any real substance.

I guess that goes to show how little you know about Siege, or how little you've visited over the years. That being said, for me personally, I really don't need a house and don't care if the change takes place or not, so your "me me me" comment is absurd.

I made a statement based on observations of the shard. It's empty (for the most part) yet most of the prime housing spots are filled...not by Siege players, but by people who rushed the shard, dropped a plot and left...not to return...la

 

[FrejaSP]

The problem, Poo, is that people came to siege from the prodo server to place houses when the second "free" house on Siege was introduced. Most never returned. So, now we have their permanently placed homes sitting on Siege being refreshed everytime they log on to their prodo server.

At the minimum, a mandatory refresh should be required. I'd prefer we just end the experiment as well though. Let 'em drop. The new players on siege you are referring to are complaining about house placement as well.

How do you know?

When I startede to to get Safe Haven town status (The player town around East Brit Cross Road), I was surprised to find most house owners was playing Siege and a lot of the second houses are used of players who now play both Siege and normal shards.
If you start searching the house owners, you will find out, most do play Siege, maybe not on the account, that own the house but on their main Siege char. A lot do like me have accounts holding an extra house and you may not know that house owner char.
I also know, many of the players who did come with the second house still play here as I had them in NEW2 when they came and know them.

 

[TheScoundrelRico]

Yet there are free spots, so not really a problem.

Of course you don't, you have 6 houses (well deserved since you do pay for them) in prime locations. Now imagine if you were new to the server, looking to make it your permanent shard...I'm guessing here, but I would imagine you would have more of a problem with the availability and locations for homes if you knew how many are just taking up space by people who don't play on Siege.

But then again, you were one of the people who thought this allowance would create a rush of new Siege players...you have to defend what you thought would happen...I get it. Too bad you were wrong...la

 

[FrejaSP]

I guess that goes to show how little you know about Siege, or how little you've visited over the years. That being said, for me personally, I really don't need a house and don't care if the change takes place or not, so your "me me me" comment is absurd.

I made a statement based on observations of the shard. It's empty (for the most part) yet most of the prime housing spots are filled...not by Siege players, but by people who rushed the shard, dropped a plot and left...not to return...la

How do you know if it is a second account of a Siege player, who own the house or a house paid few month a year or a second house owned of a normal shard player? You was not here when they come, you do not know them.
A lot Siege players have a RL too and do not play a lot hours a weak and maybe they just don't play in your time zone.

Victim was asking for the owners of the houses south of Vesper, guess what, they all had Siege players as owners.

 

[SpyderBite]

How do you know?

I didn't say knock down the homes of the active players. Those you are referring to aren't relevant because as you state, they are actively playing on Siege. We're not talking about people who play Siege regularly. Even infrequently. We're talking about those who haven't logged in since housing opened up to all the other servers.

I won't subscribe to the belief that if we let their empty dirt plot or unfurnished/customized home sit there long enough, they might decide to play Siege some day in the future.

 

[FrejaSP]

Of course you don't, you have 6 houses (well deserved since you do pay for them) in prime locations. Now imagine if you were new to the server, looking to make it your permanent shard...I'm guessing here, but I would imagine you would have more of a problem with the availability and locations for homes if you knew how many are just taking up space by people who don't play on Siege.

But then again, you were one of the people who thought this allowance would create a rush of new Siege players...you have to defend what you thought would happen...I get it. Too bad you were wrong...la

Now I do run NEW2 and I'm yet to see a new player who can't find a place for a house.

 

[TheScoundrelRico]

Stop defending your mistake. You thought it was a good idea...you were wrong, get over it. All I am trying to do is make the shard better for the subscribers who actually spend time on Siege...la

 

[Lore Denin (GL)]

I agree with Rico, I am working on cross shard RP event where we create an opening to the Dark Facet (Siege) which in our fiction has been to this point inaccessible. I've been scouting the shard for places to establish a colony and almost all the area's I wanted to setup a colony are filled with empty dirt plots.

I don't mind people even gently playing Siege and having a home what I don't like are people taking up housing for no other reason then to take up housing. There is a problem when housing on Siege is as hard to get as it is on Atlantic but I see less people then I do on Origin.

A fresh timer should be added if not having one is discouraging people that would play from going there. [I will still make my way there but I it might be a few weeks to a few months rather then having happened already depending on how much time I want to walk around and look for a location that will work for my rp colony.]

Lore's Player

 

[FrejaSP]

I didn't say knock down the homes of the active players. Those you are referring to aren't relevant because as you state, they are actively playing on Siege. We're not talking about people who play Siege regularly. Even infrequently. We're talking about those who haven't logged in since housing opened up to all the other servers.

Only Devs can find this houses and I agree, if dirt plot and not been used a year, they should drop.

 

[SpyderBite]

Now I do run NEW2 and I'm yet to see a new player who can't find a place for a house.

Two people asked why there were no 18x18 housing plots available anywhere other than Malas over the weekend. A few more last week. This is in General Chat.

 

[TheScoundrelRico]

Now I do run NEW2 and I'm yet to see a new player who can't find a place for a house.

Good for you, NEW and NEW2 are bad ideas for Siege, but that's not the issue.

I know there are spots available, I never said otherwise. My point is, I'd rather see a desolate landscape than have the server filled with house plots used by people who never spend time on Siege...la

 

[TheScoundrelRico]

Two people asked why there were no 18x18 housing plots available anywhere other than Malas over the weekend. A few more last week. This is in General Chat.

I saw that myself. But you are talking to a wall. She has to defend her support of the program...la

 

[SpyderBite]

I know there are spots available, I never said otherwise. My point is, I'd rather see a desolate landscape than have the server filled with house plots used by people who never spend time on Siege...la

Oh man. Can you imagine how much less lag there would be while trying to run Trader's Quest overland if inactive housing disappeared?

 

[FrejaSP]

I agree with Rico, I am working on cross shard RP event where we create an opening to the Dark Facet (Siege) which in our fiction has been to this point inaccessible. I've been scouting the shard for places to establish a colony and almost all the area's I wanted to setup a colony are filled with empty dirt plots.

I don't mind people even gently playing Siege and having a home what I don't like are people taking up housing for no other reason then to take up housing. There is a problem when housing on Siege is as hard to get as it is on Atlantic but I see less people then I do on Origin.

A fresh timer should be added if not having one is discouraging people that would play from going there. [I will still make my way there but I it might be a few weeks to a few months rather then having happened already depending on how much time I want to walk around and look for a location that will work for my rp colony.]

Lore's Player

How can you see what houses, that is used, maybe we are more players on Siege than you thought. We do not have more houses now, than we had a few years ago.

 

[TheScoundrelRico]

I agree with Rico, I am working on cross shard RP event where we create an opening to the Dark Facet (Siege) which in our fiction has been to this point inaccessible.

I'll keep an eye out for you, but don't hold your breath...hopefully, you could get them to come with the promise of a group of 7x7's (like I said, don't hold your breath)...la

 

[SpyderBite]

How can you see what houses, that is used, maybe we are more players on Siege than you thought. We do not have more houses now, than we had a few years ago.

That's the point.

Houses have timers on them. The game can tell the last time the owner or even co-owner of a home logged in to that particular server. That is how IDOC's work. So, if somebody hasn't logged in to Siege, but has logged in to say, Pacific, a 100 times in the past year. Knock down their Siege home.

We're not talking about us, as a community, asking the devs to randomly knock down homes that we think are abandoned.

 

[TheScoundrelRico]

maybe we are more players on Siege than you thought.

Sure, there are tens of thousands of players playing on Siege...all stealthing around and keeping to themselves. You nailed it...la

 

[FrejaSP]

A guild member of mine placed a keep in Safe haven last month, the plot was open for a few days. Houses still drop and new get placed.
How comes, that only Castle and Keeps have a price on Siege? anything less do not sell unless in a very nice spot.

 

[FrejaSP]

*Shake head* 2 returning players and one normal shard player are unhappy for Siege housing. Don't really count

 

[TheScoundrelRico]

How comes, that only Castle and Keeps have a price on Siege? anything less do not sell unless in a very nice spot.

Not sure, I've never paid for either. Why do you want the homes of people who don't play on the shard to stay? Do you honestly think they will someday think, "Oh, I have a house on Siege, let me move there since it's such an active shard"?

Try to think about new players and returning players who come to the shard, see most of the large plots taken, and then never see anyone in game...la

 

[TheScoundrelRico]

*Shake head* 2 returning players and one normal shard player are unhappy for Siege housing. Don't really count

So says the person who owns 6 (self reported) homes in good locations and is defending a poor decision made with good intentions. Sorry Freja but you don't get to decide who gets to be heard...la

 

[FrejaSP]

Not sure, I've never paid for either. Why do you want the homes of people who don't play on the shard to stay? Do you honestly think they will someday think, "Oh, I have a house on Siege, let me move there since it's such an active shard"?

Try to think about new players and returning players who come to the shard, see most of the large plots taken, and then never see anyone in game...la

I believe they play on Siege on and off

 

[Lore Denin (GL)]

I'll keep an eye out for you, but don't hold your breath...hopefully, you could get them to come with the promise of a group of 7x7's (like I said, don't hold your breath)...la

They are all pretty much there but spread out over the shard. With the Siege ruleset (travel restrictions and constant threat) it would be nice to have a central location and connect to allied player run towns using house teleporters.

That's the plan moving forward...

-Lore's Player

 

[TheScoundrelRico]

They are all pretty much there but spread out over the shard. With the Siege ruleset (travel restrictions and constant threat) it would be nice to have a central location and connect to allied player run towns using house teleporters.

That's the plan moving forward...

-Lore's Player

Awesome to hear...keep us up to date over on the Siege forum, would love to hear more...la

 

[SpyderBite]

Ok. So to end the confusion.

1. No further homes can be placed on Siege if the player already has a home on another Server. In other words, end the experiment or BOGO or whatever we want to call it.
2. Existing secondary homes will begin the normal decay cycle if a player does not login to Siege during a set period of time. Say 30 days just for giggles.
3. Players who only own a home on Siege on unaffected by any of the above.

 

[Lorddog]

I wouldn't want to have to log in to my siege house to refresh every xxx time. with it being my only house - (primary) I hope I wont have to do this refreshing requested. I may want to not play for 4 months (still paying thou)

 

[SpyderBite]

They are all pretty much there but spread out over the shard. With the Siege ruleset (travel restrictions and constant threat) it would be nice to have a central location and connect to allied player run towns using house teleporters.

That's the plan moving forward...

-Lore's Player

At the moment, Malas is really the only spot that would work. There are tons of 18x18 and smaller spots close to Umbra. But, as Rico said, we'll keep an eye out for better real estate.

 

[SpyderBite]

I wouldn't want to have to log in to my siege house to refresh every xxx time. with it being my only house - (primary) I hope I wont have to do this refreshing requested. I may want to not play for 4 months (still paying thou)

We're not referring to people who only have a home exclusively on Siege. We're referring to people who have homes on both Siege and another server.

 

[TheScoundrelRico]

I believe they play on Siege on and off

I believe 10 million players run around Siege Perilous every day, but the only reason you can't see them is they all have hide and stealth built into their templates.

Here's the thing...SB made a great point. Have it based on shard timing. If a player has a house on Siege, fine, that's awesome, the more the merrier, but if they don't refresh the house on Siege...the timer starts ticking.

If it's a second house...make the timer shorter...make them spend more time on Siege, even if it is just to refresh their home.

Nobody is asking that homes get dropped if they spend time on Siege...just the opposite...if they play Siege...awesome...la

 

[FrejaSP]

There are 2 large tower plots NW of Safe Haven, close to each others

 

[TheScoundrelRico]

Why would anyone want a house in that part of the shard? Pfft, it's full of those god awful castles and keeps, it's almost as bad as Ice Island...la

 

[TheScoundrelRico]

Ok. So to end the confusion.

1. No further homes can be placed on Siege if the player already has a home on another Server. In other words, end the experiment or BOGO or whatever we want to call it.
2. Existing secondary homes will begin the normal decay cycle if a player does not login to Siege during a set period of time. Say 30 days just for giggles.
3. Players who only own a home on Siege on unaffected by any of the above.

I like it. Count me in!!!...la

 

[Lore Denin (GL)]

To move the discussion in a more positive direction -

If a timer was added what do people think is as fair...

My thoughts are 90 days as if the account was not paid. If someone doesn't log in to refresh over a three month period, then the home starts the IDOC process. Sounds like a reasonable amount of time - both long enough that is someone has RL issues and is unable to play. log in, etc it but short enough that people are not waiting years for unused housing locations.

Also if you own a Siege home and no others - you DO NOT need to refresh.

-Lore Player

 

[FrejaSP]

To move the discussion in a more positive direction -

If a timer was added what do people think is as fair...

My thoughts are 90 days as if the account was not paid. If someone doesn't log in to refresh over a three month period, then the home starts the IDOC process. Sounds like a reasonable amount of time - both long enough that is someone has RL issues and is unable to play. log in, etc it but short enough that people are not waiting years for unused housing locations.

Also if you own a Siege home and no others - you DO NOT need to refresh.

-Lore Player

What about me owning a small Atlantic home, I places as second home? If my RL get messed up and I can't login for a few months, should my Siege castle then fall and my little Atlantic house stay?
People would need an option to choose what house to be primary.
No matter how you do this, we will end up with some sad stories.

If all could place a second house on a different shard, not just Siege, players would move their house, if they needed it somewhere else.

 

[TheScoundrelRico]

To move the discussion in a more positive direction -

If a timer was added what do people think is as fair...

My thoughts are 90 days as if the account was not paid. If someone doesn't log in to refresh over a three month period, then the home starts the IDOC process. Sounds like a reasonable amount of time - both long enough that is someone has RL issues and is unable to play. log in, etc it but short enough that people are not waiting years for unused housing locations.

Also if you own a Siege home and no others - you DO NOT need to refresh.

-Lore Player

Agreed, a 90 day timer seems fair, but personally, I would like to see the Siege housing exemption removed altogether...la

 

[TheScoundrelRico]

People would need an option to choose what house to be primary.

Eliminate the Siege house exemption and then you'd be all set. If that isn't an option, I'd be all for allowing for some sort of primary shard designation...la

 

[Scribbles]

Wait a minute... i can have an extra house on Siege with out decaying the house on another shard?

 

[Tazar]

I can't say the Siege "housing experiment" was a fail at all. I know of many that came over then or shortly after and have stayed. Did it greatly increase the population? no... but to me it seems to have kept things holding steady by offsetting some older Siege players that left.

Personally - I have 14 houses on Atlantic - and 14 on Siege. While the Siege houses are still "under construction" because deco is so much harder to obtain - I do use them pretty regularly... more on Siege than Atlantic. While I don't like unused plots sitting forever - I'd hate to have mine dropping just cause I didn't happen to log into that account that month.

And I don't think housing is that difficult to find - especially in Malas. Everyone just wants max everything (Castle/Keep/Tower/18x18) and ignores the lower stuff... There is plenty out there.

 

[kelmo]

*smiles* Yes you can Scribbles. Plenty of places open too.

 

[Scribbles]

You guys just got yourself a new neighbor... Ill be bringing the fruit cakes around soon. Trading ATL gold for siege gold. hehe

 

[FrejaSP]

Welcome to Siege

 

[Lore Denin (GL)]

What about me owning a small Atlantic home, I places as second home? If my RL get messed up and I can't login for a few months, should my Siege castle then fall and my little Atlantic house stay?
People would need an option to choose what house to be primary.
No matter how you do this, we will end up with some sad stories.

If all could place a second house on a different shard, not just Siege, players would move their house, if they needed it somewhere else.

Agreed!

 

[TheScoundrelRico]

I do use them pretty regularly...

And nobody is suggesting that you should lose them...as long as you use them...

And I don't think housing is that difficult to find - especially in Malas.

So since the shard is full of squatters, people who actually want to play Siege should just run off and place a house in Malas...because you said so. Great advise...thanks so much for the input...la

 

[startle]

@...la
Sorry you can't find a prime spot to place on Siege, but could you explain to me exactly how you determine if a house owner plays Siege?

 

[kelmo]

Where are these people that want to play Siege? Is there a line? Admission is 12 bucks a month. You only have to pay once.

 

[TheScoundrelRico]

@...la
Sorry you can't find a prime spot to place on Siege, but could you explain to me exactly how you determine if a house owner plays Siege?

LOL, I didn't say I couldn't find a prime spot. In regards to specifically explaining how I determine that...sorry, no I won't reveal my secret...IT'S MAGIC...la