[Exxy]

Although this may be in-part due to the fact due to the fact the group I'm a part of was OOCly evicted from a hard-to-get-back plot, I feel like characters with Housing Permissions (Bouncer, Builder, Farmer) should count towards the required "monthly" visit(s).

My reasoning being that a character with Permissions most likely has some substantial tie to the house/area and is invested enough to visit even if the House Owner is on break. Perhaps maybe having all (or 2-3+) of the non-House Owner characters with Permissions count as a House Owner Visit if it seems just giving them a 1:1 seems too far-fetched.


I apologize if this is a rehash of an old suggestion; I have a feeling it's been brought up before, at least.

[Snake]

The correct thing to do in this case would be give the key to your 'friend' so he keeps the house from being wiped if you know you're not coming back after a long while. (Unless it actually doesn't work like this.)

Auto-Evict is there for a reason.

[Mivereous]

[strike]The correct thing to do in this case would be give the key to your 'friend' so he keeps the house from being wiped if you know you're not coming back after a long while. (Unless it actually doesn't work like this.)[/strike]

Auto-Evict is there for a reason.

Watch your mouth, Nord.

[Snake]

...wat

Giving your ASAGO House Ticket to a friend so they can own the house spot while you're gone is twinking?

(TFW I wasn't remembering the name of the item that gives the house permit so called it 'key', sorry for the confusion and you can kill the nord now before the dragon comes--)

[Rendar]

Houses aren't tied to asago house tickets.

They're tied to keys.

[Snake]

Howdy. Then I guess it's an alright suggestion.

[Neus]

I think this would make it too easy to indefinitely maintain a house spot, which defeats the point of the auto-evict.

[Exxy]

I think this would make it too easy to indefinitely maintain a house spot, which defeats the point of the auto-evict.

We already have players who will capture a 'desired' (or better put, limited) spot with Housing Plots simply to have it for one reason or another (while easily maintaining ownership; logging in and/or visiting the house location on the keyed character doesn't require to actually utilize it) and the current implementation of the mechanic still cheats out players/characters who use the house/have significant ties to the house and want its location to be represented ICly.

The main point of this thread is probably better left to figuring out a better alternative to how Housing Rights/Ownership works than what the opening title suggests. I mean, hell, if we could maybe even just setting a RP/Say Counter in each Monthly House Save; if you hit 30-50+ combined instances of Say/Emote (whisper, lemote, wemote, shout included) it's not counted to be wiped (desired requirement left to be decided upon). This way, it would be up to anyone that RPs in the house to keep its plot from being cleared rather than people with permissions-only.


Another point I'd like to throw in this (although probably better fit to a [QUE] Bug Report), is there seems to be something amiss with the timer/counter itself (or the source misremembering, given the following its hard to determine). The House Owner's character read on log-in "Last Played: Mon Feb 2017 13:51" with no indication of the actual -day- (as in numerics). Although there's room to speculate it could be any Monday from February (most likely the first or second Monday), there's been comments/threads concerning timers 'miscounting' (like ban timers, for example) so I don't think it should be simply dismissed. Another person and I were in the house on Wednesday (3-8-17), then noticed Thursday sometime around 3:00 PM Est. (3-9-17) that it was claimed by another person (which doesn't add up unless houses are reset every ~32 days rather than monthly on-the-day). . . meaning one of two things; I rather assume something with the timer associated with the House System is wonky than think integrity is in-question over something like this.

I would just like for this to be re-evaluated, in one way or another.

[Neus]

True, it's not hard to maintain a spot, but it requires the owner to be active.

[Exxy]

Of everything I said, that's all you have in response?? . . . I think it's safe to say I'm done bothering.