Should house size still determine storage space?

[RaDian FlGith]

how do you know that? as far as I know, when you crate a house everything goes in a crate under the plot that takes up 1 square. seems to me you are just making stuff up.

Yes, that's right... making stuff up. Never actually saw a Dev make a comment on this. Never read the reason for the limitations anywhere. Never saw them comment on why Castles and Keeps and larger than 18x18 plots weren't available.

I'm sure they just arbitrarily chose some number...

Probably didn't test it at all.

And me, I just make it up as I go along.

</sarcasm>

 

[Lord Chaos]

Get rid of all the unused houses first. You know the ones I speak of.

You mean the unpaid ones, right?

 

[Jean-Loot PKard]

Fantastic idea. Leave castles and keeps alone, but any way to raise the storage space of all other plots I would welcome (uogamecode.com, ingame gold, without charge, through a quest whatever..)

The huge trailer parks with millions of 18x18 suck

 

[wee papa smurf]

UNused? Kelmo, sweety first off SOME of those houses you say are unused might belong to players who ARE on other shards playing one day and on that shard the next. Just cause you cant see them dont mean they are abandoned.
I greatly admit there are houses out there that are stuck in loops and wont fall till hell freezes over.
I personaly have homes on 11 shards, I know I dont get to play each shard every day and I am guilty of ignoring a shard or two for a week or two at a time (due to fact of my stroke I cant sit at the computer like I use to for hours).
KEY NOTE : I pay for my accounts to have those homes.

Dev asked for houses that players thought might be bugged or on the idoc refresh list and lost to be turned in to them. If you feel a house is abandoned (account off for longer then 90 days) please let them know. I am sure a quick check of date of last paid play is on the accounts log can be done and clear up any of your quams about the house(s) you are concerned about.

Im sure he means the "return to brittania" houses?

 

[MrNiceMNC]

@ the orig point of this thread, Great idea! Wish it would happen.

 

[Olahorand]

There would be two ways of going about making such a change. You could either grant all houses the same storage as a 18x18 (Keep and Castle retain same storage). Or they could add a method to obtain additional storage up to at least what an 18x18 provides. The most obvious method being you pay gold for it.

I think changes to house storage would help at least a little bit in creating static communities once again.

I agree with the proposal (if I remember right I mentioned this house size based storage difference as unfair for paid accounts a while ago and earned a lot of fire).

*Salute*
Olahorand

 

[Haddy G]

The most obvious method being you pay gold for it.

Doubt this will ever happen, but I can see this happening "Housing Max Storage only $19.99 per account"

 

[Saunders]

I rather like the gold for storage idea. It helps community, acts as a bit of a gold sink, and allows you to upgrade your house as you get more gold, without having to move.

 

[slaveone]

Isn't this a copy of Mr. Nice thread? Did we really need two threads on the same subject? Anyhow if this is done ALL houses should be boosted to the storage capacity of a Castle. I don't feel that Castle's or Keep's should get to still have more storage than everything else if this is done. This will only make them even more expensive than they already are and at 800-900 million on Atlantic that's just to darn high. If ALL houses had the same as a castle that might actually help bring those castle and keep prices DOWN as opposed to UP. Anything that is going to raise the value of the highest end housing and lower the value of everything else should NEVER even be considered! Just give all housing the same storage space that of a castle and call it a day. In the end the castle people still have WAY more space to display their items that should be reward enough....

 

[Lady Storm]

I would like to see atleast the storage capasity of a Tower/18x18 for all lower sized houses. This would be across the board for smalls an for that person happy to just have a tiny house but needs the room of the 18's.

On the down side:
Remembr the first year ... if you had a house you could place a box/chest and fill it with 125 items/400stones but you were not limited on storage only the 15 lock downs an the 1 dedicated secure chest.
Times changed that for server concerns of lag. Lag was the reason for limiting storage. Not to blow a hole in your hopes but someone out there will start a thread to stop them from doing it cause it will lag the hell out of them.

 

[phantus]

10 + account age = # of squares you get for housing no matter what shard you place it on. All work as max storage(collectively). 7x7 minimum plot size.

12 year account gets 22 squares.
- 1 7x7 on Baja
- 1 8x8 on Pacific
- 1 7x7 on Siege

Storage info on each sign acts as the same house.

I'd like something like this.

or JC's stuff would work too

 

[ingsmsico]

Yes, that's right... making stuff up. Never actually saw a Dev make a comment on this. Never read the reason for the limitations anywhere. Never saw them comment on why Castles and Keeps and larger than 18x18 plots weren't available.

I'm sure they just arbitrarily chose some number...

Probably didn't test it at all.

And me, I just make it up as I go along.

this seems to all be true. you've said nothing to the contrary. your childish insolence is not convincing.

 

[JC the Builder]

On the down side:
Remembr the first year ... if you had a house you could place a box/chest and fill it with 125 items/400stones but you were not limited on storage only the 15 lock downs an the 1 dedicated secure chest.
Times changed that for server concerns of lag. Lag was the reason for limiting storage. Not to blow a hole in your hopes but someone out there will start a thread to stop them from doing it cause it will lag the hell out of them.

It wasn't lag, it was server storage space. The amount of items being stored was increasing exponentially due to there being virtually no limit on the amount you could leave in your house. More items also meant a longer time to backup a shard. Back then a shard backup took 4-6 hours. Today they have it down to less than 10 minutes. And there is a ton of stuff in the game today than a decade ago.

Two reasons why granting the same size storage to smaller houses:

1) There is still a limit on how many items you can store.
2) Servers are a lot more powerful today than they were 12 years ago.
3) Unfortunate but true: there are less people playing today so that means less houses.

 

[Terrapin]

I would be THRILLED if the smallest houses could hold the same amount. There are lots of quirky, neat places where a small house would fit, but due to storage, I never pick them.

i concur

 

[hawkeye_pike]

I agree, I always was convinced that storage should not depend on the size of your house. You can do pretty nice things with small houses, and I don't see a reason why someone should be penalized for having a small house, as your account is not limited storage-wise, but by the number of houses he can own.

 

[ingsmsico]

I don't see a reason why someone should be penalized for having a small house, as your account is not limited storage-wise, but by the number of houses he can own.

no one else does either, except G.V.P., who has concocted some of the most baffling arguments against this simple, sensible idea that I have ever read in my life.