Feedback: 24 player cap for housing is far too small

Epona222 · January 2017

DaniAngione wrote: »

Is it?

I guess I don't have many friends...

Quality over quantity

Enodoc · January 2017

xXSilverDragonXx wrote: »

I think given that you cannot get a guild hall where it is connected to the actual guild roster, this is pretty doable. Just invite your close friends. If they stop playing revoke access and invite someone new in their stead. As long as I get first dibs on getting into my homes when I have a bunch of friends online that have invites, I find it workable. However, if I can't get in because I have friends there and the cap is 24 that is gonna seriously suck.

You'll always be able to get into your own house. The cap is [x] + You.

NewBlacksmurf · January 2017

Vorkrunne wrote: »

NewBlacksmurf wrote: »

* please also add a way to kick ppl out.

We can. It's in the patch notes.

@Vorkrunne

I should've written that better. I don't mean in terms of disabling their access to a shared home.

I'm saying in terms of gathering folks up for something. Kicking players to home 1 but in phase 2 or 3

Does that read better?

Pearlscales · January 2017

I too support raising this cap, if possible.

I may find large crowds unappealing, but that is no reason to hinder those who do not share my reservations.

newtinmpls · January 2017

I would like to see a "guildhall" option that would simply allow "anyone/ any number" from the guild(s) that were able to access the hall.

NewBlacksmurf · January 2017

notimetocare wrote: »

IDK perfectly fine to cap it imo

Housing is going to kill the world for RP, having a limit to bring some back out into the world is fine
And if you got 15fps in the housing, you would complain just as much. They cant win

@notimetocare
But 24 ppl tho?

So let's say 24 ppl are in practing a raid or something all in combat. And the FPS take a hit....

Or dueling, etc.

Kinda goes back to the feedback given by others for the features.

Like hey ZOS just add practice dummies in the world. (Not in housing only)

Hey ZOS let us sit on things....in the world
Hey ZOS maybe dueling shouldn't be allowed in towns (i.e. Housingeither cause of performance)

But then at the Wayshrine near any undaunted quest giver, or large groups of traders in a town, well have 50-150 players in one spot not counting NPCs.

How does housing work worse?

Krainor1974 · January 2017

Why not make it like bags, banks and buy house cap upgrades up to 100 by gold or crowns.
Plus 10 visitors per upgrade.
We get more people and they get $$
It's a win win

NewBlacksmurf · January 2017

Krainor1974 wrote: »

Why not make it like bags, banks and buy house cap upgrades up to 100 by gold or crowns.
Plus 10 visitors per upgrade.
We get more people and they get $$
It's a win win

@Krainor1974

They're saying it's performance based.
If they go back and charge to extend, then it's not performance based and comes off as a money grab as well as being dishonest.

My hope is that it's extended to at least 50 ppl.

MornaBaine · January 2017

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

Thanks for your feedback, all. The limit to the number of players in each home is indeed due to performance reasons.

Then you need to figure out how to fix it. 24 is useless to even small RP guilds. We were so exicted to think we could have large RP events without being trolled constantly by other players (another thing ZOS refuses to do anything meaningful about) and I was happy to spend real money to acquire TWO of the largest manors. Now they are completely not worth it at all. I am incredibly disappointed. @ZOS_GinaBruno will you tell us what EACH size house will hold?

Moglijuana · January 2017

Thanks for the info Gina!

MornaBaine · January 2017

notimetocare wrote: »

IDK perfectly fine to cap it imo

Housing is going to kill the world for RP, having a limit to bring some back out into the world is fine
And if you got 15fps in the housing, you would complain just as much. They cant win

The primary reason RPers wanted this was to avoid the constant trolling we get from other players out in the regular world. Maybe ZOS could consider doing something about that and then this wouldn't seem so awful.

ParaNostram · January 2017

The cap needs to be higher. There's no other way to put it. RP guilds want to use these houses as RP hubs. I mean 50 would be a good number, 100 would be grand.

Before anyone says anything, yes I know RP between a hundred people would be chaotic but I'm talking about guild photos and things of the sort too here, and these manors are large and RP seperates into several groups usually in different places in the manor. I'm not saying 24+ people RP is common, but don't artificially limit the number of people that can be involved pl0x

Laplace · January 2017

If the Craglorn Cavern is half as big as it looked on the video, 24 people will make it feel empty.

24 people is ludicrously low. Come on, Zenimax, you had one job.

MornaBaine · January 2017

And at only 24 players over 3 million gold is WAY too much to ask. I shudder to think what the crown/real money cost is going to be. If we're stuck at 24 players at launch the price needs to be halved. You can raise it for new buyers when you've figured out how to get to that 100 cap.

Nestor · January 2017

I wonder if they disable some things like Dueling or general AoE Spam if the cap can be raised. Then again I have been in 50 to 100 player zeros running dolmen and that was fine

Glaiceana · January 2017

This is such a disappointment to hear...
I have been thinking about a guild home for such a long time. With the new details about housing, it seemed it would be possible. However, as others have said 24 is way too small. Definitely couldn't have meetups based at homes if this is the case.
Please make it at the very least 50 players

What is the current cap per instance in say Mournhold, 100? Maybe it is actually 50, if so that would be perfect. Even if it is only for the largest homes/manors. That would be fine. I understand not having 50 people inside a hut...

Vorkrunne · January 2017

NewBlacksmurf wrote: »

Vorkrunne wrote: »

NewBlacksmurf wrote: »

* please also add a way to kick ppl out.

We can. It's in the patch notes.

@Vorkrunne

I should've written that better. I don't mean in terms of disabling their access to a shared home.

I'm saying in terms of gathering folks up for something. Kicking players to home 1 but in phase 2 or 3

Does that read better?

Oh XD

I associate "kicking" with kicking from somewhere/kicking from a group/getting rid of.

I think what you meant was "placed" or "teleport" a visitor to phase 2 or 3 of the same house.

lordhakai · January 2017

@ZOS_GinaBruno is the cap for max allowed in at a time or the max allowed permissions.

Blacksheepart · January 2017

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

Thanks for your feedback, all. The limit to the number of players in each home is indeed due to performance reasons.

The large guilds should just go on in the random questing properties that don't limit if that's the case. (As I have walked in on some RP in these places before)

I'm a PVPer but if I'm going to waste gold or real cash on something, I'd want my whole guild+ be able to use it.

driosketch · January 2017

Are large houses capped at 12?

NewBlacksmurf · January 2017

Nestor wrote: »

I wonder if they disable some things like Dueling or general AoE Spam if the cap can be raised. Then again I have been in 50 to 100 player zeros running dolmen and that was fine

Yeah so I don't really understand this and the comment you made is a great example.
I'll add that on console 50 ppl work fine as well cause we get the black out effects which reduce load times and stuff

Vorkrunne wrote: »

NewBlacksmurf wrote: »

Vorkrunne wrote: »

NewBlacksmurf wrote: »

* please also add a way to kick ppl out.

We can. It's in the patch notes.

@Vorkrunne

I should've written that better. I don't mean in terms of disabling their access to a shared home.

I'm saying in terms of gathering folks up for something. Kicking players to home 1 but in phase 2 or 3

Does that read better?

Oh XD

I associate "kicking" with kicking from somewhere/kicking from a group/getting rid of.

I think what you meant was "placed" or "teleport" a visitor to phase 2 or 3 of the same house.

Yeah that reads better. Sorry.
Definately meant placed or teleport

Elephant42 · January 2017

Does anyone know what the player caps are for the smaller houses?

OrphanHelgen · January 2017

Cant believe zos answered a role playing rage thread and ignored the 100k end game rage out there.

MornaBaine · January 2017

OK so I was just on the PTS and have toured most of the large homes and a couple of the medium ones. NONE of them tell you how many players they hold. THAT information NEEDS to be on the description in the crown store. So we still don't know how many people can get in the smaller homes. I WANT THAT INFO.

Secondly, they all seem to just be copies of existing buildings. Like literally the floorplans are exactly the same. No variation and just big open spaces, no individual rooms with doors. That I find extremely disappointing. I was expecting something on the order of the mansions in the TG and DB DLCs which are far more elaborate and beautiful than the base game buildings. ESPECIALLY considering the cost.

Thus far I am disappointed in the houses themselves.

Vorkrunne · January 2017

MornaBaine wrote: »

NONE of them tell you how many players they hold. THAT information NEEDS to be on the description in the crown store. So we still don't know how many people can get in the smaller homes.

I agree. That information should be in a tooltip/ announced somewhere on the crown store.

How many players can be inside a home is important when purchasing.

Bladerunner1 · January 2017

The large houses, manors, cave and island really could use an increase in player cap beyond 24. The big target audience, RPers, are feeling somewhat let down. The RP guilds I've joined and several others I'm aware of have been known to draw in 30-60ish people for single guild, multi-guild or multi-faction venues, and all the hosts were willing to pony up either in game gold or crowns for the huge spots because, let's face it, most RPers don't have much in-game gold.

I'm glad to see the devs are looking at ways to increase the cap, and I hope that change can come quickly.

Acrolas · January 2017

One of my guild emails from New Year's said, basically, we need more money and donations because Guild Housing is coming.

And I said, basically, prepare to be disappointed. It was a bit shady, too, soliciting gold for a feature that nobody really had any solid details about yet. And given how nobody ever stops talking in guild chat, I don't know if I ever want to see them in virtual person.

(The patch notes were a little mean to Tony, too; we all know Karen's the one we don't want to invite...)

Bristol · January 2017

As the GM of a small RP guild, this limit is concerning. Homestead was once an exciting new feature brimming with possibility; now it is a disappointing could-have-been. How can I justify the gold (or cash) and all the time and energy spent to create an RP locale if my entire guild cannot partake? It will partition the community further and leave friends out.

I'd sooner not use it. Please consider increasing the cap.

Samsayia · January 2017

I agree with OP on this. The biggest drawing potential for player housing is related to guilds; if devs thought players were getting housing just to privately play around with it that couldn't be farther from the truth. Player housing is so hype because of the social and RP implications that go with it. Housing isn't a pve achievement or trophy, it's private dwelling space.

And player housing above all allows for something that is hardly offered in other MMO's out there: the potential for Guildhalls.

Guildhalls! I've heard the term @Homes used to describe Guildhalls. It's something I really can't think of what other game out there allows Guilds to have an instanced zone for Guild @Homes or if they do offer it I don't think it's to the potential of what player housing COULD offer to guilds.

So guildhalls and private event areas is totally something ESO can have and make it strong and thus unique to their game and that has incredible marketing value. Other games allow players to have an instanced zones (a type of player housing) but not so much guildhalls and private event areas (to my knowledge). So when OP says ZoS is shooting itself in the foot with the player cap? It echoes across the marketing value, not just the player-approval rating. I reaaaallly hope devs will reconsider the instance cap.

bosmern_ESO · January 2017

Buy one of the crown store houses.

No seriously, it seems like ZoS made the update for only those two houses. They're probably 3x the size of the manors that cost 3m and you can tell thats where a ton of work went into. They make the manors look like classic houses.