We have detected that cookies are not enabled on your browser. Please enable cookies to ensure the proper experience.
Page 6 of 7 FirstFirst ... 2 3 4 5 6 7 LastLast
Results 126 to 150 of 151
  1. #126

    Re: New Neighbourhoods or dismissing "abandoned" houses...

    I've been playing LOTRO since the first day it went f2p (I wanted to play before, but I'm a college student and I couldn't afford that). One of the things I really loved about the game was designing houses. After I leveled up my main, I started saving for a deluxe house as I was rapidly outgrowing my Standard. But when I had finally saved up enough for the house and maintenance, I went to buy one, only to find out that there were no deluxe houses left to buy!

    I was really dissapointed, I had really wanted to buy a deluxe house. I wish Turbine would do something about this. I would even consider paying TP for a deluxe house.

  2. #127
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Indianapolis Home of The Indy 500
    Posts
    1,411

    Re: New Neighbourhoods or dismissing "abandoned" houses...

    ^
    Agreed unfortunetly there is an Entitelment group that have houses left the game or play very very infrequently and think not paying Maintenance and not releasing the House back to the market is ok because they MAY Come Back and Play SOME DAY.

    Turbine Used to boot people out for non payment they changed that awhile back due to world wide extended troop deployments. They failed to consider that with the spawning of Nieghborhoods being limited to an upper limit hat eventually the houses would all be full/used and left sitting vacant unpaid for.

    It is a problem many are calling on turbine to fix but some feel that it is not fair......Even though paying maintenance always was still is Required there are just no consequences being enforced to correct the problem.

  3. #128
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    425

    Re: New Neighbourhoods or dismissing "abandoned" houses...

    i would love to be in the same neighbourhood as my kin house. Unfortunately it is surrounded by homes that are obviously abandoned. Im fine where my house is, but its a little bit annoying that I cant be in the same neighbourhood because of how the housing policy works.

    Please turbine, free up the abandoned houses for active players!

  4. #129

    Thumbs down Re: New Neighbourhoods or dismissing "abandoned" houses...

    Quote Originally Posted by Silverrose_the_Hobbit View Post
    I was really dissapointed, I had really wanted to buy a deluxe house. I wish Turbine would do something about this. I would even consider paying TP for a deluxe house.
    You shouldn't have to pay with points unless they make it so free players can't get housing. The housing should be available to you, just not at the cost of other players.

    Quote Originally Posted by NickStern View Post
    Agreed unfortunetly there is an Entitelment group that have houses left the game or play very very infrequently and think not paying Maintenance and not releasing the House back to the market is ok because they MAY Come Back and Play SOME DAY.
    I don't agree, this exists solely in your mind. For me there is no MAY or SOME.

    Quote Originally Posted by NickStern View Post
    Turbine Used to boot people out for non payment they changed that awhile back due to world wide extended troop deployments. They failed to consider that with the spawning of Nieghborhoods being limited to an upper limit hat eventually the houses would all be full/used and left sitting vacant unpaid for.
    Well then you should see the problem as that there is a limit on housing.

    Quote Originally Posted by SoAndSo View Post
    i would love to be in the same neighbourhood as my kin house. Unfortunately it is surrounded by homes that are obviously abandoned. Im fine where my house is, but its a little bit annoying that I cant be in the same neighbourhood because of how the housing policy works.
    I think you should be able to have your house within your kin neighborhood, they should change the way it works so that you can have your kin move to a neighborhood where it is just all of you.

    Quote Originally Posted by SoAndSo View Post
    Please turbine, free up the abandoned houses for active players!
    This is not the only answer, just the quickest and easiest and at the cost of others. Why must it be the quick and the easy?

  5. #130
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    223

    Re: New Neighbourhoods or dismissing "abandoned" houses...

    I can't imagine that returning after a year to a dead neighborhood is satisfactory to anyone. I have moved my house a few times but after a few months 90% of the houses are always unmaintained. Some kind of solution would be really great to liven up the housing areas...

  6. #131

    Arrow Re: New Neighbourhoods or dismissing "abandoned" houses...

    Every time I come back the scenery has always changed, there are new people in the neighborhood, I am happy too see old neighbors still around, even if I don't see them physically, I can see the decorations on their lawn have changed and it is still the same player owning the house. I prefer not seeing other people running around, I like it quiet. I spend my time fishing in my backyard or going to the town store.

  7. #132
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    1,943

    Re: New Neighbourhoods or dismissing "abandoned" houses...

    Quote Originally Posted by -LoNgHiLL- View Post
    Every time I come back the scenery has always changed, there are new people in the neighborhood, I am happy too see old neighbors still around, even if I don't see them physically, I can see the decorations on their lawn have changed and it is still the same player owning the house. I prefer not seeing other people running around, I like it quiet. I spend my time fishing in my backyard or going to the town store.
    And there's nothing wrong with that. However, advocating leaving 80%+ of the houses in the game inaccessable to active players is denying THEM the freedom to enjoy those same experiences.

    It's pretty simple to me. Pay your rent, and you will never lose your house. Ever. Stop paying, and after a time you will lose the house, to someone who might make use of it. You would still be able to claim a new house the same as the old one, and meet new neighbours (meaning you would still have the experiences you described, except from the other side of the equation).

  8. #133
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    The middle
    Posts
    411

    Re: New Neighbourhoods or dismissing "abandoned" houses...

    I think that if turbine is going to let houses sit vacant for extended periods of time and not return the abandoned homes back to the market for other players, then then need to do away with up keep costs.

    What is the point of paying weekly up keep to keep my house, if I could just stop paying it and still have the spot reserved for my toons? I think it is a privilege to have a house to decorate. I pay for that privilege every week with in game currency. If I stopped paying, I'd expect after a reasonable period of time and warnings sent via in game mail to lose that house and allow someone else to purchase it and pay upkeep.

    2 years seems above and beyond fair to me. It is almost half the life of the game itself! If these players come back - they can purchase another house if one is available. But I can see no good justifiable reason to keep these abandoned homes locked away from actively playing characters who would 1) pay the upkeep on them 2) actually use them. Turbine is effectively punishing actively playing characters by allowing non-playing accounts to hold on to houses.

    That's how it works IRL right? If I up and stop paying my mortgage, after a period of time (a pretty long one actually), the bank comes in and takes over my house and sells it to someone else.

    Free up the abandoned houses and support the players who actually support the game. Seems fair to me.
    At home on Nimrodel for 4 years.
    Hadleighy/champ/100 (main), Brynnraen/guard/100 (retired main) , Zarefina/mini/100 (solo), Hazriel/LM/88, Rachlarien/RK/83, Brynreign/Beorn/71, Rudbekia/burg/34, Aysawen/capt/36, Haddley/hunter/16

  9. #134

    Thumbs down Re: New Neighbourhoods or dismissing "abandoned" houses...

    Quote Originally Posted by Tiamo View Post
    However, advocating leaving 80%+ of the houses in the game inaccessable to active players is denying THEM the freedom to enjoy those same experiences.
    I don't believe it is 80% and it does not. They should just make new houses available. Then everyone can enjoy it. Each new neighborhood would have all fresh new home owners.

    Quote Originally Posted by Tiamo View Post
    It's pretty simple to me. Pay your rent, and you will never lose your house. Ever. Stop paying, and after a time you will lose the house, to someone who might make use of it. You would still be able to claim a new house the same as the old one, and meet new neighbours (meaning you would still have the experiences you described, except from the other side of the equation).
    Well can't be that simple because you miss the part about it not being rent, it is upkeep, you know paying a gardener or whatnot. We buy the house we own it. What you propose is that the homes are everyone's and that other people have the right to make use of another persons house. The experience would be the same as if I lost my characters and got a token to make new characters with identical equipment and stats. Defeats the point of "RPG" to me.

    Quote Originally Posted by keeker_ks View Post
    I think that if turbine is going to let houses sit vacant for extended periods of time and not return the abandoned homes back to the market for other players, then then need to do away with up keep costs.

    What is the point of paying weekly up keep to keep my house, if I could just stop paying it and still have the spot reserved for my toons? I think it is a privilege to have a house to decorate. I pay for that privilege every week with in game currency. If I stopped paying, I'd expect after a reasonable period of time and warnings sent via in game mail to lose that house and allow someone else to purchase it and pay upkeep.
    I don't like the upkeep costs myself, but they feel the need to regulate the market. Less gold being available keeps prices down. Why would you expect to have someone else in your house if you locked up and stopped paying for a gardener to prune your lawn?

    Quote Originally Posted by keeker_ks View Post
    If these players come back - they can purchase another house if one is available. But I can see no good justifiable reason to keep these abandoned homes locked away from actively playing characters who would 1) pay the upkeep on them 2) actually use them. Turbine is effectively punishing actively playing characters by allowing non-playing accounts to hold on to houses.
    First come first served, that is the way it has been. If you are not there, you are not there. You were not there when the housing became available. It is justifiable because it is not your house, it belongs to someone else. I agree that new players are being punished for not having played earlier, so the answer is to upgrade and open more neighborhoods, to meet the demand of the F2P model.

    Quote Originally Posted by keeker_ks View Post
    That's how it works IRL right? If I up and stop paying my mortgage, after a period of time (a pretty long one actually), the bank comes in and takes over my house and sells it to someone else.
    No, not everyone pays a mortgage, and in game we are not paying a mortgage, are we? It might seem like it. Especially with the "housing authority" annoyances.

    Quote Originally Posted by keeker_ks View Post
    Free up the abandoned houses and support the players who actually support the game. Seems fair to me.
    Not me.

  10. #135
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    1,943

    Re: New Neighbourhoods or dismissing "abandoned" houses...

    Quote Originally Posted by -LoNgHiLL- View Post
    I don't believe it is 80% and it does not. They should just make new houses available. Then everyone can enjoy it. Each new neighborhood would have all fresh new home owners.
    Neither of us has statistics, but I have visited MANY neighbourhoods (as another forumite once did) and made a note of the houses that were locked due to failure to pay upkeep. It was EASILY 80%. There were even WHOLE NEIGHBOURHOODS - that's 100% - that were essentially abandoned. If they just added new neighbourhoods, it does nothing to remedy the ghost towns we have now. A neighbourhood with one or two active players is pointless.

    Well can't be that simple because you miss the part about it not being rent, it is upkeep, you know paying a gardener or whatnot. We buy the house we own it. What you propose is that the homes are everyone's and that other people have the right to make use of another persons house. The experience would be the same as if I lost my characters and got a token to make new characters with identical equipment and stats. Defeats the point of "RPG" to me.
    You're going to argue semantics? Yes, it's actually called upkeep. Call it what you want, it's beside the point and a deliberate attempt to obfuscate my argument. You pay a fee to use the house. If you fail to pay the fee, you don't get to use the house. That's rent. You want RPG realism? Consider that if I don't pay my rent for even a couple of months, my landlord will evict me. Turbine should just do the same. That's realistic.

    I don't like the upkeep costs myself, but they feel the need to regulate the market. Less gold being available keeps prices down. Why would you expect to have someone else in your house if you locked up and stopped paying for a gardener to prune your lawn?
    Your analogy is flawed. You are not paying for a gardener, you're paying for access to the house.

    First come first served, that is the way it has been. If you are not there, you are not there. You were not there when the housing became available. It is justifiable because it is not your house, it belongs to someone else. I agree that new players are being punished for not having played earlier, so the answer is to upgrade and open more neighborhoods, to meet the demand of the F2P model.
    It only belongs to someone else as long as they continue to pay for it.

    No, not everyone pays a mortgage, and in game we are not paying a mortgage, are we? It might seem like it. Especially with the "housing authority" annoyances.
    No, it's not really like a mortgage, wherein you would own the house at the end. This is RENT.

    Not me.
    I suspect you're in the minority (in fact, you seem to be so even in this thread...).

  11. #136

    Re: New Neighbourhoods or dismissing "abandoned" houses...

    Quote Originally Posted by -LoNgHiLL- View Post
    You have lost your house. Your house is no less yours than all your "belongings," it is no less a possession than your other "possessions." You purchased the house and the location, and the town. That is a specific house, you spent your time in it, you decorated it. You can't just get that same exact house again, unless of course you are lucky, and it is still on the market when you return.

    You are not thinking of the sentimental value of the digital belongings, you are just thinking of achievement. You have achieved house, you have house badge!
    While it may be worded as "purchase", we do not own the houses. We just rent them. One big payment up front, to secure location, and then weekly rent to keep it for us.

    There is this false naming of "pay upkeep" for player, while it functions as "pay rent". If we stopped paying upkeep, our house would slowly fall in disrepair, until turning into ruins. Instead, we just loose access to the house, to quick travel to house and also access to the house chests and decotrations. It still is maintained by whatever gardener is clipping the hedges and trimming the tree branches.

    Yes, there are scenarious of people having to go on the moment notice, the victims of accidents and/or natural catastrophs loosing their real homes and gaming rigs, access to net etc etc.

    There always will be. However, if there so long a period you didnt turn up for the game, and especuially if the system is now overloaded with unpaid rend housing, something's finally had to be done.

    I'd all for getting more neighbourhoods, but really, that will be just a baindaid over festering wound. Unless the solutions is implemented to return locked houses to the market, the increased housing limits (and depending on database, that may have been quite hard to do, or it would already been done by Turbine) will be filled with all people currently wanting their houses and not getting them, so in a few months we will be back to the square one of no more houses. Again.

    If someone says, but we have free houses - it is really the big and the oldest servers who have this problem - definitely Brandywine, but i have heard complains from Landroval, Snowbourn and Laurelin too, albeit in a lesser amount.

    As for having ghost neighbourhoods, that unfortunately is curse of every server. On newer ones people have option to relocate to the newly opened neighbourhoods to cure it. Lots of active kins do so - wait for a new neighbourhood to open, then take all possible spots into it with their alts, so that kin can get together. Not so on old servers where most spots are already taken.
    [charsig=http://lotrosigs.level3.turbine.com/2521c000000163bef/01003/signature.png]undefined[/charsig]
    Thank you, Turbine, for listening and giving us an opt-out of FE! Good work!

  12. #137

    Re: New Neighbourhoods or dismissing "abandoned" houses...

    Something needs to be done. If someone has an abandoned home for more than 1+ years, they should be removed. It's ridiculous Turbine would rather cater to inactive players who *might* come back over active players who really want those home locations. And if they're gone that long I sincerely doubt they'll ever come back. It's wasted space.

  13. #138

    Thumbs down Re: New Neighbourhoods or dismissing "abandoned" houses...

    Quote Originally Posted by Tiamo View Post
    A neighbourhood with one or two active players is pointless.
    Not pointless, pointlessness is relative.

    Quote Originally Posted by Tiamo View Post
    Call it what you want, it's beside the point and a deliberate attempt to obfuscate my argument.
    I don't know about that...

    Quote Originally Posted by Tiamo View Post
    You pay a fee to use the house. If you fail to pay the fee, you don't get to use the house. That's rent.
    That is only the way they make it work to force you to pay, if your house fell into disrepair but you could still use it, not everyone would pay, I know I would like my house too look like it was unimportant.

    Quote Originally Posted by Tiamo View Post
    You want RPG realism? Consider that if I don't pay my rent for even a couple of months, my landlord will evict me. Turbine should just do the same. That's realistic.
    Yeah, but that is real modern times, the game is fantasy LotR.

    Quote Originally Posted by Tiamo View Post
    Your analogy is flawed. You are not paying for a gardener, you're paying for access to the house.
    I don't think so, you are paying to keep your house looking pretty and not infested and falling apart. Have you been to that house in that mission over in Dwaling? That is what we are paying to keep our house looking like. They just use the loss of access as the incentive to get you to pay.

    Quote Originally Posted by Tiamo View Post
    It only belongs to someone else as long as they continue to pay for it.
    No, it is permanent house ownership.

    Quote Originally Posted by Tiamo View Post
    No, it's not really like a mortgage, wherein you would own the house at the end. This is RENT.
    We already own the house.

    Quote Originally Posted by Tiamo View Post
    I suspect you're in the minority (in fact, you seem to be so even in this thread...).
    Oh no, a deliberate attempt to obfuscate my argument.

    Quote Originally Posted by Hatter_of_Bree View Post
    While it may be worded as "purchase", we do not own the houses. We just rent them. One big payment up front, to secure location, and then weekly rent to keep it for us.
    That is just the way it seems.

    Quote Originally Posted by Hatter_of_Bree View Post
    There is this false naming of "pay upkeep" for player, while it functions as "pay rent". If we stopped paying upkeep, our house would slowly fall in disrepair, until turning into ruins. Instead, we just loose access to the house, to quick travel to house and also access to the house chests and decotrations. It still is maintained by whatever gardener is clipping the hedges and trimming the tree branches.
    The naming is correct, it only functions that way as an incentive to pay. That is why you have to pay upkeep for past weeks that you missed, they continue to keep your house from falling into disrepair and want to be compensated.

    Quote Originally Posted by Hatter_of_Bree View Post
    I'd all for getting more neighbourhoods, but really, that will be just a baindaid over festering wound. Unless the solutions is implemented to return locked houses to the market, the increased housing limits (and depending on database, that may have been quite hard to do, or it would already been done by Turbine) will be filled with all people currently wanting their houses and not getting them, so in a few months we will be back to the square one of no more houses. Again.
    No, it shouldn't, everyone in game with the funds should have access to housing. They would never run out if housing if they just kept making new houses. If they keep your character information, they should keep your house information. Where they need the revamp is in way they have housing work.

    Maybe they shouldn't be doing housing neighborhoods. You buy a house and it exists in your own little personal instance, when you have more money you can upgrade it. You would still have water falls, streams and the store, just not all the other player's houses. If you have a kinship, instead of getting to buy a hall you can make a kin neighborhood, where you can grant members of your kin houses. That way if you stop playing, your little housing instance can just be compressed and stored with your character information.

    Quote Originally Posted by Faerilea View Post
    Something needs to be done. If someone has an abandoned home for more than 1+ years, they should be removed. It's ridiculous Turbine would rather cater to inactive players who *might* come back over active players who really want those home locations. And if they're gone that long I sincerely doubt they'll ever come back. It's wasted space.
    Well, something needs to be done to give all players access to housing, but not taking from currently inactive players who were given assurances they would not lose their houses. They are not abandoned homes; first come, first served. I don't doubt it. It is not necessarily wasted space, wasted space is relative!

  14. #139
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    2

    Unhappy Re: New Neighbourhoods or dismissing "abandoned" houses...

    So kinda curious is anything ever gonna change?
    We players who pay for the game expirence miss out because hundreds of previous players own houses and sit there with no consequence??? if ur made to pay up keep then when up keep is not made u LOSE ur priviledge! With all these available neighborhoods and NOT ONE house to purchase is just disappointing!! and to find ppl been gone for years and the house is still there's is stupid! I think u need to reavaluatre player importance and commitment! New games become available all the time u need to please the ones u have or they may just find a home somewhere else!

  15. #140
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    US
    Posts
    180

    Re: New Neighbourhoods or dismissing "abandoned" houses...

    There are still a few houses out there, you just need to know where to look. For example: Go to thorin's hall or the elven homes instead of staring at bree all the time wondering why nothing's open... It's a new player hub, it's GOING TO BE FULL...

  16. #141

    Re: New Neighbourhoods or dismissing "abandoned" houses...

    Quote Originally Posted by Thorebane View Post
    They get dismissed if they haven't paid their upkeep for 6 weeks. After that all their stuff goes and they have I think two weeks to recover otherwise it's gone forever.
    So wrong. Currently you can buy a house and never make one payment and own it forever and ever and ever.

    Unlike the real world - where some people near where I live finally got the boot after having bought a house for just over 1 million dollars and never making one payment. LOL took SIX YEARS to evict them.

    Should see this
    http://forums.lotro.com/showthread.p...89#post6154789
    for all the facts and figures and depate on housing.

  17. #142

    Re: New Neighbourhoods or dismissing "abandoned" houses...

    Quote Originally Posted by Belladol View Post
    So kinda curious is anything ever gonna change?
    We players who pay for the game expirence miss out because hundreds of previous players own houses and sit there with no consequence??? if ur made to pay up keep then when up keep is not made u LOSE ur priviledge! With all these available neighborhoods and NOT ONE house to purchase is just disappointing!! and to find ppl been gone for years and the house is still there's is stupid! I think u need to reavaluatre player importance and commitment! New games become available all the time u need to please the ones u have or they may just find a home somewhere else!
    Go visit this thread
    http://forums.lotro.com/showthread.p...ose-on-housing
    and put your thoughts down there.
    Last edited by Gandie2; May 06 2012 at 03:09 PM.

  18. #143

    Re: New Neighbourhoods or dismissing "abandoned" houses...

    Quote Originally Posted by Faerilea View Post
    Something needs to be done. If someone has an abandoned home for more than 1+ years, they should be removed. It's ridiculous Turbine would rather cater to inactive players who *might* come back over active players who really want those home locations. And if they're gone that long I sincerely doubt they'll ever come back. It's wasted space.
    Point 1 I agree with 100% - Something needs to be done. Having Zero houses available for new and current players who as of yet do not own a house is wrong. We should have the same opportunity to buy a house as all the previous people had. It cracks me up when people suggest, "Well just go buy in thorins if Bree is full." Why should this person not have the same choice as all the people before him.

    There are two ways to make homes available. Increase the number of spawnable neighborhoods. Or start foreclosing on homes that do not pay rent. Turbine seems to be resistant to keep upping the spawnable neighborhoods. I know they did it once. Increasing Bree, Brandywine from a max of 250 to a max of 325. But it capped again and the extra 125 neighborhoods filled up in just over half a year. However, having done it once it seems the mechanism is in place. Certainly they could up the other neighborhoods that have reached the 250 max like the did for bree brandywine.

    People said the original 250 max was a limit of the existing code. Now that they (turbine) went through what ever it took to change the code I'd think they could keep adding neighborhoods. People have said they don't because it taxes finite resources. I do not know computer's and computer systems on the level to discuss this one way or another. Turbines reluctance to add more neighborhoods does point to something like this as the reason.

    Which leaves option two. Foreclose on housing. I see no reason to do some half measure on this. Either make failure to pay weekly up keep cause for losing a house or don't. If we do bring on foreclosure years long grace periods make a mockery of it and make it unworkable. People could purposefully log in after 11 months pay one week then let it linger for another 11 months. We would still have shuttered houses, except they would all get 1 week out of 52 paid.

    So I agree with your statement 'they should be removed' but I think 1 month is more then enough of a grace period. I would make it one week and up the amount that can be prepaid to 8 weeks. I do find 1 month workable however.

    Your third point again I agree with 100%, It is ridiculous that turbine continue's to allow people who either no longer play, or care so little about the house they own they they do not find it worth the in game cost to pay upkeep. As long as there is a supply of new houses for people this bit of behavior by Turbine is not a bother. What makes it irksome is when the lack of housing for existing players is zero. This is what makes this truly ridiculous. Because they are truly catering to people who no longer exist in this world over people who do.

    My right to own a home that I am going to use and pay upkeep on trumps people who do not play or do not pay upkeep right to own a home.

    Your forth point I find to be not relevant. Rather or not people who have left the game and let their houses upkeep lapse come back is not the point. The point is that it is wrong to cater to them over current players, which brings us to your last point. It is a waste of space to do so.

    Which brings me to the point I'd like to add. If turbine start forclosing no one loses. The reason people wish to hold onto existing homes is they feel they are a limited and scarce resource. If turbine starts forclosing there will be literally thousands of vacant homes available. Bree Brandywine would suddenly have 7000 vacant houses available. In this situation what has someone that lost a home to foreclosure lost out on. The 10% difference in the cost of buying a new home over reopening their old one. We are depriving new players and existing players the oppertunity to own a home to save someone who does not currently play 100 silver on the off chance they return.

    Ridiculous

  19. #144

    Re: New Neighbourhoods or dismissing "abandoned" houses...

    Quote Originally Posted by EvilTreerat View Post
    They have 6 weeks to pre-pay. After that give them a 2 week grace period.... After that... poof. It's gone. .
    Well Said. Personally I feel the 6 week, 2 week model is more then enough time. However, if doubling these numbers would cut down on the crying and more importantly make allowances for people they really do have situations where these time limits would be hard to meet, I see no problem making it 12 weeks, 3 full months of pre pay and, 4 weeks, 1 full month of grace. This time period would not be so long that it would fail to address the problem.

    The problem being that all the spawned housing stock is in a shuttered state with no one able to enjoy the benifits of owning these homes. Owned by people that either no longer play the game or no longer care enough about the beniftis of home ownership to pay the monthly up keep. Either way repossess these houses so people that want a house can have one.

    Quote Originally Posted by EvilTreerat View Post
    As for the "but I take a break here and there!" people - cry me a river. I've taken breaks measured in months and I've not yet had stuff go into escrow. Then again I know what that thing called a "calendar" is for - I've got all the "6 week LotRO rent due" days marked on it. If you know you're going to be gone with no internet access for more than 6 weeks then add a few people you trust to the permissions list so they can pay the rent for you and you handle repayment when you get back. You don't even have to grant them other permissions. When I had to be out of state for a bit I gave my brother 10 gold, added his characters to the maintenance permission, and when I got back the house was fully paid.

    Yes some very rare cases of a disaster-relief specialist or military personnel MIGHT have to leave abruptly with less than a days notice and be gone for more than 2 months at a stretch. But I would be very surprised if there are more than 50 total in this game and I doubt they're so hung up on keeping a virtual house that they won't be understanding.
    Exactly. No need to add to this.

  20. #145
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Mountains of Southern CO
    Posts
    186

    Re: New Neighbourhoods or dismissing "abandoned" houses...

    OK so I'm not sure what servers you guys are on but on the Riddermark when I go home there are countless houses empty and for sale. I have lived in Falathorn and Bree and the case is the same in both locations.... SO I just don't get what the problem is!! Am I missing something here?? What servers are we talking about!? Perhaps there should be server committees so people can address the problem on their server as a group. Strength in numbers sort of thing and the more VIP's involved the better, Money talks! and freebies walk! No offence to anyone just a hard cold fact!

  21. #146

    Re: New Neighbourhoods or dismissing "abandoned" houses...

    Riddermark must be a less crowded server. Brandywine is apparently more or less out of everything but Kinship Houses. Landroval (my server) is hit-or-miss - some types of housing are packed, some are not. I never have trouble finding dwarvish housing... which would be awesome if I played a dwarf. But Elvish and Human housing (the two races I play) are pretty well packed, except for the one or two houses in every neighborhood that are either so far out the back of beyond or have such lousy views from their front yards that no one wants them.

    And believe it or not, yes, people care about the view from their front yard. Because a lot of us dream of the day when Turbine gets its act together and overhauls housing so it can actually be a social point where you and your kinnies/friends gather for RP and fun.


    [EDIT] And yes, I'm a VIP. I pay for the privilege of playing this game. I'd like to see some of my quarterly subscription fee go to a part of the game I USE, not just more raids and leet gearz.

  22. #147
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Mountains of Southern CO
    Posts
    186

    Re: New Neighbourhoods or dismissing "abandoned" houses...

    Well there you have it! And! I'm not implying anyone is not a VIP but just that more of us should be involved in this issue to get the attention that some of us seem to need for it. I suppose the Ridder is less crowded and must be why I like it so much. I too love my view and have given up several houses to get the best I can find. I totally agree about haveing more social interaction in the neighborhoods. I still press the issue of server committees, perhaps a grand council of Kinships in order to address issues on the more crowded servers and present them to Turbine in a unified manner rather than willy nilly. Just some thoughts on my part. Just to be clear I feel a great deal of connection to the community and although I prefer to remain a solo player and move about the servers as a loner I also enjoy the company of other players and would like to see people enjoy Middle Earth as much as I do!!.

    Quote Originally Posted by Chylde View Post
    Riddermark must be a less crowded server. Brandywine is apparently more or less out of everything but Kinship Houses. Landroval (my server) is hit-or-miss - some types of housing are packed, some are not. I never have trouble finding dwarvish housing... which would be awesome if I played a dwarf. But Elvish and Human housing (the two races I play) are pretty well packed, except for the one or two houses in every neighborhood that are either so far out the back of beyond or have such lousy views from their front yards that no one wants them.

    And believe it or not, yes, people care about the view from their front yard. Because a lot of us dream of the day when Turbine gets its act together and overhauls housing so it can actually be a social point where you and your kinnies/friends gather for RP and fun.


    [EDIT] And yes, I'm a VIP. I pay for the privilege of playing this game. I'd like to see some of my quarterly subscription fee go to a part of the game I USE, not just more raids and leet gearz.

  23. #148
    I think that this issue will get some attention if enough people politely sign this petition (http://forums.lotro.com/showthread.p...38#post6328838).

    I don't think the complaining is helping, even though I am just as frustrated about this as everyone else is. I am currently homeless because I abandoned my home in the elf housing area, thinking that I would be able to buy one eventually (I didn't know the cap for new housing instances had been reached) in the shire which is where I desperately want a home. Unfortunately for me that was a dumb move and I am homeless for who knows how long until they address this issue.

    P.S. there's a nice deluxe house available in the elf homesteads in ered luin now if anyone wants it (its in Brandywine server).

  24. #149
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    101
    /sign

  25. #150
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    472
    Quote Originally Posted by Dusthuffer View Post
    /sign
    Falling on Deaf Ears.....

    Turbine could care less about housing Game imersion or Customer satisfaction.
    If they can not sell it in the store or charge $70 for a Quest Pack called an expansion they will do nothing about it.
    I do not know what I want I must consult with Floon who will tell me.Turbine reduced aggro range.Noticed too many players run away from mobs.Wonder how many were escaping unwanted XP gain.

 

 
Page 6 of 7 FirstFirst ... 2 3 4 5 6 7 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

This form's session has expired. You need to reload the page.

Reload