Feedback: 24 player cap for housing is far too small

bellatrixed · January 2017

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

Moglijuana wrote: »

Anyone know the max amount of players allowed inside the largest houses?

24 players in a Manor, plus yourself.

Homestead is going to be a feature that appeals the most to large trade guilds, RP guilds, and social guilds. This is especially true since we can use our personal houses for entire guilds.

My RP guild of 34 members has been incredibly excited about housing and working on earning gold for it since it was first announced last January. The 24 cap is too small to even fit all the members of the guild in the house at the same time, and we're on the smaller side of guilds!

I also regularly host RP events which draw crowds of 40-60 people, and know of many more who host RP events that draw even more players. Many RPers have been excitedly planning on making event houses, but the 24 cap will prevent them from being used for the vast majority of events.

If you leave the cap at 24, you will truly be shooting yourself in the foot with the income potential of housing. I was going to get the huge manor in Reaper's March to use for events, but no longer have a reason to if only 24 people can fit.

Please consider changing this. Homestead is an amazing feature for social events, but in order to be successful we need to actually be able to fit people in it.

Light_Bringer17 · January 2017

I have to agree here, housing is something the RP community has been looking forward to for --well forever technically-- and we have a great, rather large community. Some of the best RP events I've been to have been cross guild hosted events with participation at least to the 40-60 range mentioned above.

One aspect I was looking forward to is some of these balls I know the noble houses were going to put on, auctions trading and market RP guilds, like my own planned to put on, jousting tournaments, the list goes on. My guild (though still new) has a good 14 active members, just us coming to an event puts the cap well over half.

I am begging ESO to please reconsider this cap for the larger houses. I feel, and I'm sure many others do as well, as if I was skipping along towards the greatness of player housing only to crest the hill and...

There is Clavicus Vile sitting at the door with a maniacal grin on his face. Saying "Well, you got your end of the bargain, even if its not quite what you thought it would be." (Insert condescending quip from Barbas)

Grileenor · January 2017

I agree too. It doesn't make sense to only allow guilds with 50+ people to trade, but only allow less than half as much to meet in a house. Whatever the reason is for this limit, it has to be changed. Manors are huge and even medium sized guilds should be able to meet there.

Anazasi · January 2017

yeah some guilds will want to get those big castles and wow if a guild has 500 members well you can see the issues already.

Nevindri · January 2017

I agree that 24 is far too small of a limit on the largest homes. It's going to put a damper on the plans that a lot of us RPers had for housing.

Can you please at least let us test the population limits while Homestead is on the PTS? 24 is just too low.

NewBlacksmurf · January 2017

I agree it should literally allow at least 100.

The idea here is based on the voice chat used for guilds on consoles.

100 ppl per channel needs and has to align with the manor max.

The whole purpose for the manor is the guilds.
It makes absolutely no sense that even a PvP large group max doesn't accounts for extra players.

Example:
Guild announcement. On X date come to Guild house 4 if you want to group for X event

And then perhaps the PvP group gathers but not everyone is selected so with 100 ppl max, there can be trial or dungeon and questing group formed.

All to say that 100 is the magic number at a minimum.

Manor -100
Large home - 50
Medium - 25
Small -12

* please also add a way to kick ppl out.

Runs · January 2017

Is it 24 plus you standard... and double that if you are ESO plus, or is it 24 plus you for everyone?

kojou · January 2017

I can see it now...

ZoS: Increased cap of players in manors to 100

Players: Why is there so much lag in the houses when we have 100 players in them.

Universe · January 2017

I agree.
The population cap should be as follows:
Small Home: 5
Medium Home: 10
Large Home: 25
Manor: 50

redspecter23 · January 2017

I'm sure there is some technical reason for the cap to be so low. At least I hope they didn't just arbitrarily choose this number because that makes no sense.

MythicEmperor · January 2017

I think that before drawing specific numbers, ZO$ should have waited for player feedback and lag tests in the houses themselves, instead of whatever estimates they used. While I do understand that 24 is very low, I also see the game limitations that could prevent a number such as 100. I think that players should first test the houses with others, giving feedback on performance with different player counts. The number before the game becomes like Cyrodiil is the number that should be set in place.

NewBlacksmurf · January 2017

ztyhurstub17_ESO wrote: »

I can see it now...

ZoS: Increased cap of players in manors to 100

Players: Why is there so much lag in the houses when we have 100 players in them.

@ztyhurstub17_ESO
It's instances tho so the player count should have been in the design plans.

Ok let's be realistic tho.
Ppl are upset about storage but let's say....it's better addressed in another feature or idea. Cool.

One of the requests with housing is Guild housing. With that goes grouping and trading as well as crafting.

Ppl join guilds for
1. Group content
2. Traders
3. Crafting

So if these were not all done with the design, this update is a huge missed opportunity or basically released too early.

Paulington · January 2017

I do agree that twenty four seems too little, however it's quite a specific number so I wager that there's likely a technical reason for this limit, would be nice to know if that is the case.

I'd love to see this quadrupled at least, I know my guild could easily fit forty eight in one house for an event, so more is needed!

NewBlacksmurf · January 2017

Paulington wrote: »

I do agree that twenty four seems too little, however it's quite a specific number so I wager that there's likely a technical reason for this limit, would be nice to know if that is the case.

I'd love to see this quadrupled at least, I know my guild could easily fit forty eight in one house for an event, so more is needed!

It's the large group size.
Comes from ppl doing designs/development who don't play the actual game with real ppl on more than one platform.

(My opinion)

j.greenmanb16_ESO · January 2017

Yeah, that cap is uber low. Is that cap with or without a sub?

Either way, that is only useful for rather small guilds and totally leaves out the larger ones. Even if they arent RP guilds. I know a few Trading Guild owners who have been wanting to Host auctions and etc in a "guild home"

ZOS_GinaBruno · January 2017

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

DannyLV702 · January 2017

I'm not an important member of any of my guilds, so when there's events and such I already know I'll be excluded

bellatrixed · 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.

I can understand that, but are there any plans to work on the performance issues for the future at least?

Because regardless of the reasons behind it, a cap of 24 (and presumably even smaller for the small/medium/large houses) will make ESO the MMO with the smallest player housing cap out of -any MMO on the market- which certainly tanks the potential here.

ZOS_GinaBruno · January 2017

Yeah, we are looking at ways we could increase the number. It's nothing that would change in time for launch, though.

DannyLV702 · January 2017

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

Yeah, we are looking at ways we could increase the number. It's nothing that would change in time for launch, though.

Well damn. Guess I'll party alone

GreenTea · January 2017

I was a little bummed out too when I heard the number because I want to use a home for my weekly event, but /usually/ I don't have more than about 20 people at a time as people come and go throughout the evening. I'm a bit nervous it might be too little, but it's a starting point and we'll see how things go when it hits live.

*big, sad, wishful thinking eyes at ZoS* Buuuut as a feedback, boosting it to even 30 would be fantastic though and likely more than enough for most RP events. I'm guessing most "Big" events will just simply need to use traditional zone spots which will likely be more convenient anyways for luring more RPers, considering you won't need to have particular people on your friends list/in a group to get to it.

Enodoc · January 2017

Lord wrote: »

I agree.
The population cap should be as follows:
Small Home: 5
Medium Home: 10
Large Home: 25
Manor: 50

Nah, you need to think about it technically:
Small Home: 4 (small group size)
Medium Home: 12 (trial group size)
Large Home: 24 (large group size)
Manor: 60 (AoE cap limit)

Steffi_K · 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.

Erm.. perfomance resons? Rly?
Upgrade your hardware with the money you get? Fix the base problems of the game? Lag? Bugs? Botters? and so on?
Do you even know what problems you have? There were so many dedicated threads about all the bugs in the game and still most of them remain.

Joy_Division · 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.

Thank you very much for this response. The OP was well thought out and articulated.

NewBlacksmurf · 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.

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

Yeah, we are looking at ways we could increase the number. It's nothing that would change in time for launch, though.

So no one thought that 24 was too small when guilds can reach 500 members.

I have to believe that 50 seems more reasonable regardless of performance.

Maybe you all can just phase manors to have multiple 24 occupancy versions of the same house based on access?

DaniAngione · January 2017

Is it?

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

Vorkrunne · January 2017

NewBlacksmurf wrote: »

* please also add a way to kick ppl out.

We can. It's in the patch notes.

Jeremiah87 · January 2017

I agree that the player caps for houses should be larger than they are. I also understand that there are technical reasons behind the current decisions on player limits but I would like to see them raised if possible with the initial release or a promise for that to happen at a later time(soon-ish).

notimetocare · January 2017

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

SirAndy · January 2017

bellatrixed wrote: »

The 24 cap is too small to even fit all the members of the guild in the house at the same time, and we're on the smaller side of guilds!

Same here, my main guild is pooling money to buy one of the castles ...

24 people seems a wee bit on the small end of things.

xXSilverDragonXx · January 2017

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.