Maintenance for the week of November 24:
• PC/Mac: No maintenance – November 24
• PC/Mac: No maintenance – November 24
Player Housing Player Caps
-
Bladerunner1✭✭✭✭Agree, large houses should have a 24 player cap!notimetocare wrote: »
Yeah...Money...Not ingame gold. They need money to run servers. They can base player caps on large off gold if they like but they make less money.notimetocare wrote: »Bladerunner1 wrote: »notimetocare wrote: »Bladerunner1 wrote: »notimetocare wrote: »bellatrixed wrote: »notimetocare wrote: »
As to RP, you need large instances because you cant handle a bit of trolling?
We need large instances because the RP community has been excited about housing since it was first announced January 2016. We need large instances because all the RP guilds I know have been planning for housing and saving up for the better part of that year, and are now incredibly discouraged after realizing they won't even be able to RP as a group in houses, so what's the point?
You don't have to like RP, but willfully ignoring the wants/needs of social/RP guilds in regards to housing, which is certainly the segment of the population that housing is tailored for due to its absolute lack of actual functionality, is a little nonsensical to me.I dont think someone is social enough to fit 24 people at the same time in a house other than famous people or guild leaders.
This demonstrates a fundamental lack of understanding what RP is. It's not about people sitting in their house and waiting for people to pour in because they're famous, it's about guilds using them as RP hubs, it's about RP events being scheduled for a certain date/time in a certain house and a chunk of the community shows up.
It would be a little like me saying I don't think PVErs need any more dungeons because I haven't done all the existing ones yet.
I participate in and enjoy RP (aside from the one-handed erp that vampire rp seems to be inundated with).
Capping instances for performance issues is ignoring your wants and needs? It was advertised as player housing, not guild housing. This wasn't a dead giveaway?
Limited groups =/= Unable to RP as a group
Before you push further towards getting this thread locked, I'd like to chime in once more.
The devs haven't responded about why large homes are capped at 12 and manors are at 24. Everyone assuming performance issues is speculating now.
The devoted resources per crown/gold argument that large houses should stay capped at 12 doesn't make any sense. Looking at it from a purely monetary perspective, medium houses are far cheaper and have the same cap.
Labelling people who voice their opinion about the cap as "entitled" is another fallacy. We're their customers.
There are currently 9 large houses on the market that aren't looking very tempting as potential RP hotspots and that's sad because the homestead release is geared towards RPers.
Pointing out what I see is not pushing for a thread to be locked. Unless pointing things out is offending you because its true?
Difference in cost between medium:large and large:manor is incredible. Pretty easy to see that the devs would not condier the player cap worth differentiating.
No, it is a fact. The difference is whether you think entitled is bad or not.
Homestead is intended to appeal to everyone, not simply RPers.
It may be speculation as to 'why' the cap is to performance issues, but it is ignorant to claim that the devs haven't responded because the community managers in most cases speak to us on behalf of the devs
https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en-GB/discussion/312051/feedback-24-player-cap-for-housing-is-far-too-small/p1
The difference in cost between large house and manor is far from incredible. The crown costs of houses were released on ESO Live.
Once more, here's the comparison of Aldmeri Dominion options as they appear on the PTS:
Medium Altmer - house costs 5,000-6,500 + 13,830 crown value of optional bundled furniture
Large Altmer - 7,500 - 8,500 + 61,410 crown value of optional bundled furniture
Khajiit Manor - 10,000 + 30,010 crown value on optional bundled furniture.
Their earning potential is tied to the furniture more than anything. The combined crown value on the manor is less but holds more people, and yes I'm comparing crown values because in-game gold doesn't translate into profits. Homestead appeals mostly to RPers, and those who spend most of their time RPing don't typically have millions of gold to spend, but many do buy crowns when they see something they want.
The 3 manors with a 24 player cap don't fit the tastes of most RPers. 75% of the biggest properties are capped too low at 12, that's an opinion a majority of us "entitled" customers share judging by the poll and responses. The response from ZOS about the caps have been generic replies about performance. We still don't know why large houses are capped at 12 whereas manors can hold 24, but it's clearly not because of an incredible difference in crowns.
My comment on cost was not about crowns, and was made before crown announcement. And the assumed crown values are still meaningless.
Caps are likely made off gold costs, crown costs dont matter as much because they cant really create a realistic crown cost scale (if we assume accuracy of the assumed crown values). Most people wont buy houses with crowns because that much gold is stupid easy to make (yes, even the manors)
You can comment all you want about cost, but I think ZOS wants you to spend crowns rather than gold. They're going to make less of it with caps where they're at, much less of it on the large houses. You're awesome to be able to make stupid easy gold, good for you.1 -
notimetocare✭✭✭✭✭
✭Disagree, the current caps are fine!Bladerunner1 wrote: »notimetocare wrote: »
Yeah...Money...Not ingame gold. They need money to run servers. They can base player caps on large off gold if they like but they make less money.notimetocare wrote: »Bladerunner1 wrote: »notimetocare wrote: »Bladerunner1 wrote: »notimetocare wrote: »bellatrixed wrote: »notimetocare wrote: »
As to RP, you need large instances because you cant handle a bit of trolling?
We need large instances because the RP community has been excited about housing since it was first announced January 2016. We need large instances because all the RP guilds I know have been planning for housing and saving up for the better part of that year, and are now incredibly discouraged after realizing they won't even be able to RP as a group in houses, so what's the point?
You don't have to like RP, but willfully ignoring the wants/needs of social/RP guilds in regards to housing, which is certainly the segment of the population that housing is tailored for due to its absolute lack of actual functionality, is a little nonsensical to me.I dont think someone is social enough to fit 24 people at the same time in a house other than famous people or guild leaders.
This demonstrates a fundamental lack of understanding what RP is. It's not about people sitting in their house and waiting for people to pour in because they're famous, it's about guilds using them as RP hubs, it's about RP events being scheduled for a certain date/time in a certain house and a chunk of the community shows up.
It would be a little like me saying I don't think PVErs need any more dungeons because I haven't done all the existing ones yet.
I participate in and enjoy RP (aside from the one-handed erp that vampire rp seems to be inundated with).
Capping instances for performance issues is ignoring your wants and needs? It was advertised as player housing, not guild housing. This wasn't a dead giveaway?
Limited groups =/= Unable to RP as a group
Before you push further towards getting this thread locked, I'd like to chime in once more.
The devs haven't responded about why large homes are capped at 12 and manors are at 24. Everyone assuming performance issues is speculating now.
The devoted resources per crown/gold argument that large houses should stay capped at 12 doesn't make any sense. Looking at it from a purely monetary perspective, medium houses are far cheaper and have the same cap.
Labelling people who voice their opinion about the cap as "entitled" is another fallacy. We're their customers.
There are currently 9 large houses on the market that aren't looking very tempting as potential RP hotspots and that's sad because the homestead release is geared towards RPers.
Pointing out what I see is not pushing for a thread to be locked. Unless pointing things out is offending you because its true?
Difference in cost between medium:large and large:manor is incredible. Pretty easy to see that the devs would not condier the player cap worth differentiating.
No, it is a fact. The difference is whether you think entitled is bad or not.
Homestead is intended to appeal to everyone, not simply RPers.
It may be speculation as to 'why' the cap is to performance issues, but it is ignorant to claim that the devs haven't responded because the community managers in most cases speak to us on behalf of the devs
https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en-GB/discussion/312051/feedback-24-player-cap-for-housing-is-far-too-small/p1
The difference in cost between large house and manor is far from incredible. The crown costs of houses were released on ESO Live.
Once more, here's the comparison of Aldmeri Dominion options as they appear on the PTS:
Medium Altmer - house costs 5,000-6,500 + 13,830 crown value of optional bundled furniture
Large Altmer - 7,500 - 8,500 + 61,410 crown value of optional bundled furniture
Khajiit Manor - 10,000 + 30,010 crown value on optional bundled furniture.
Their earning potential is tied to the furniture more than anything. The combined crown value on the manor is less but holds more people, and yes I'm comparing crown values because in-game gold doesn't translate into profits. Homestead appeals mostly to RPers, and those who spend most of their time RPing don't typically have millions of gold to spend, but many do buy crowns when they see something they want.
The 3 manors with a 24 player cap don't fit the tastes of most RPers. 75% of the biggest properties are capped too low at 12, that's an opinion a majority of us "entitled" customers share judging by the poll and responses. The response from ZOS about the caps have been generic replies about performance. We still don't know why large houses are capped at 12 whereas manors can hold 24, but it's clearly not because of an incredible difference in crowns.
My comment on cost was not about crowns, and was made before crown announcement. And the assumed crown values are still meaningless.
Caps are likely made off gold costs, crown costs dont matter as much because they cant really create a realistic crown cost scale (if we assume accuracy of the assumed crown values). Most people wont buy houses with crowns because that much gold is stupid easy to make (yes, even the manors)
You can comment all you want about cost, but I think ZOS wants you to spend crowns rather than gold. They're going to make less of it with caps where they're at, much less of it on the large houses. You're awesome to be able to make stupid easy gold, good for you.
Crown store is intended to be convenience when it comes to things that are available in-game. This is why things like motifs are so expensive. Do they want people to buy from the crown store? Sure. Do they expect everyone to? No. When they first announced the housing patch it was stated that everything will be gold and crowns for convenience.
You assume they will make less money, I doubt there is going to be a noticeable difference with or without caps. Just about everyone complaining about caps on these forums, that lacks gold, will be buying a house, and they will likely buy the bigger houses because caps. It is just like everything else ZoS does that is complained about. People still pay.
Really, gold is very easy. You can steal for half an hour and get 30k+
0 -
shadoza✭✭✭✭Disagree, the current caps are fine!Krainor1974 wrote: »naatokb14_ESO wrote: »Hmmn.
I wonder if the houses in the fully customizeable player cities in Conan Exiles will have player caps.
Oh, wait. Survival game sandbox vs wanna-be-WOW MMO. Unreal Engine vs modified HeroEngine.
ZoS, the only thing you have that keeps me here and subbed is the Elder Scrolls Lore (Thank Bethesda), and the wonderful people in my RP guild.
To keep me after the end of this month you are going to have to start doing two things:
1. Fix your broken code
2. Start SERIOUSLY listening to your players
That is all.
Boy is Zos going to lose subscribers and money when this game hits stores, it's going to be the biggest game out there for sure.
I disagree. Conan Exiles is done by Funcom (they have not a clue) and it will attract a differ kind of player. It is basically a co-op masking as a MMO.0 -
shadoza✭✭✭✭Disagree, the current caps are fine!I would rather see the lower caps then suffer lag inside the home after the décor gets complicated.0
-
Runschei✭✭✭✭✭
✭Other, and I would like a sweetroll for my poll participation!I want more than 24 players in my guildmanors1 -
rudimentxb14_ESO✭✭✭Other, and I would like a sweetroll for my poll participation!Cap on manors should be no less than 753
-
Vipstaakki✭✭✭✭✭
✭Other, and I would like a sweetroll for my poll participation!Large houses should not have as high player cap as a manor. But higher than the medium house.1 -
MornaBaine✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Agree, large houses should have a 24 player cap!Vipstaakki wrote: »Large houses should not have as high player cap as a manor. But higher than the medium house.
I'd be willing to concede this if 24 were not already such a miserably low number. Make the manors 48 and the Large houses 24 and we'll talk.PAWS (Positively Against Wrip-off Stuff) - Say No to Crown Crates!1 -
MornaBaine✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Agree, large houses should have a 24 player cap!Here's hoping they will eventually increase the player cap on the Large homes, even if only to 18 players! Can we dare to dream @ZOS_GinaBruno ???PAWS (Positively Against Wrip-off Stuff) - Say No to Crown Crates!0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eXk-4F_hOXA