Rent on properties

Barin999

Journeyman
When a game enables housing for rent or purchase, players need to save up or/and grind faction to their preferred location.
So there is a portion of preparation and savings in this.
After a couple of expansions and levels up, money or certain status has scaled differently.
What used to be expensive and took a decent investment is now, very cheap and easy to get. So in a way your home has degraded in value, it's become less 'important', less of an achievement to have such a home.

My suggestion: Let us scale up the rental prices/upkeep as new levels/expansions is layed out.
So with top level 50 a house might cost 10 platinum coins. But when level 60 is available, the prices have increased and that same house now sells for 50 or 100 platinum. (I think, you get where I am going with this.)

Let's try and keep the value into real estate in the game as the game grows and economy scales.

Why? It allows for rent reduction items to be useful and craftable. And it gives the "prestige" aspect back to the houses people are purchasing or have done so if the past.
I'm not saying it should become a pain, but a gradual increase with the value of ingame coin would be acceptable.

What do you think?
 
Last edited:

Chimerical

Novice
I'm all for taking money out of the system. Inflation tends to kill mmo's for me, and eventually drive me away. When everybody become Jeff Bezos, money becomes unimportant and the game degrades rapidly, in my opinion.
 

Nephele

Administrator
Staff member
The problem with this is that as prices increase, the barrier to entry for new players gets higher and higher and higher. I totally support the goal of the idea, which is to have a scaling money sink, but I would want to see an implementation that doesn't make the game less friendly to new players over time.
 

Barin999

Journeyman
The problem with this is that as prices increase, the barrier to entry for new players gets higher and higher and higher. I totally support the goal of the idea, which is to have a scaling money sink, but I would want to see an implementation that doesn't make the game less friendly to new players over time.
How about if the rent of your home/residence goes up as you level up? So instead of a general house market increase, the rent is set to the player's level?
You'll keep cheap housing for lower players and will have a moneysink for players with higher level?
Prices go up as you level up your character and that direct is linked to the rent fee of your own home.
 

Barin999

Journeyman
I would want to see an implementation that doesn't make the game less friendly to new players over time.
I've given it some more thought;

I know this might sound strange but just give this first few sentences some thought...
A home could be a feature in the game that requires investment. So much even that not every player might WANT to own a house. So that players who do, have every reason to brag about them and benefit from their efforts in real estate. Quite often homes are a feature that is undervalued or misused. A good home and rental design could greatly influence player community over time and provide players with actual pride to have and showcase their home with other players.

1 Location of property will influence initial purchasing price and perhaps even upkeep cost over time.
Where a cheap home, will only have an initial cost, but very limited things to change or add on (decoration or amenities, facilities of other fashion). A more expensive home might allow players more options to alter the looks of the interior and add more decorative elements, possibly even allow facilities.

2 Facilities will require more expenses and an upkeep to maintain the "right" to use them within your home.

3 As players level and 'earn more prestige from the npc's', their steward/npc nearby, will raise the general upkeep with the player..to scale ofc. This general upkeep and raise is linked to the nature of the homes; basic, advanced, prestige, extensive, lordly. (don't stumble over the terminology, pls). Each new player can buy a basic home if they have earned the rights to purchase one. A higher level player can also purchase that home, scaled to their level, the initial price will differ.

4 No tradeskilling will be allowed within player homes.

5 Certain homes will allow for a range of facilities to be purchased additionally beyond the initial purchase cost. Each better/more expensive version will allow for more facilities then the previous one.

6 Players that do not maintain their upkeep, will loose the utility of those facilities, and if they do not maintain their overall upkeep. They will locked out, temporarely until they pay up again. No back payments are required.

7 Players can choose to turn off certain facilities they already purchased to lower their ongoing upkeep costs.

8 Players themselves can choose how expensive their home will get, the more you want to more it will cost as upkeep. A humble abode will cost little, but will allow you very little as wel. Every new player or starting player would have the basic housing within reach or within the near future.

9 The only thing that is not within control of the player is the fact that the upkeep price will rise as the player/owner levels up. That again could be scaled to the amount of cash a player of that level could have within reach. It will require effort.

10 Paying the upkeep itself could be done using a well positioned NPC and within your very home. This could be a simple roster with an overview of your expenses.
 

Nephele

Administrator
Staff member
I think that's a good set of rules to start with, Barin. It allows housing to be a scaling money sink based on the capability of the individual player, but doesn't put us into a situation where the requirements to get started go up over time.

The only piece I think that might still be problematic is #9. Experience tells me that is very hard to predict how much free cash a character will have based on their level alone. It depends far more on what activities they pursue in the game. So I worry that any scaling would have to be set so low as to be trivial to a large percentage of players, just because there's so much variation in how much money people tend to have or earn in these games.
 

Barin999

Journeyman
The only piece I think that might still be problematic is #9. So I worry that any scaling would have to be set so low as to be trivial to a large percentage of players, just because there's so much variation in how much money people tend to have or earn in these games.
True and that's why I wrote the first paragraph to set the scene more clearely.
Buying and maintaining a home could/should be something a player has worked hard on and is still doing.
If you don't play efficient enough or you don't have that cashflow going to upkeep that home, you'll experience it.
It's not such a downfall to have no home, it's an extra thing. One can live without, but it's for those players that seek to experience this feature of the game. And are willing to plan/ work for it.

You will not fail in the game because you don't have a home. You can just do just fine without. It could just have some conveniences (storage, rest, food consumption, bragging rights, ...)
This may sound drastic, but it could be designed more subtle then you might be reading in my replies.
And for those who can't effort the expensive homes, you can always fall back on the basic homes. Cheaper, less conveniences, but still somewhere to call home. If it's within reach of a new player, it should be so for advanced players with cashflow issues. (if you see what I mean).
 

Chimerical

Novice
Does real estate become a trade-able commodity in game? Can a player of modest means pay in game currency to buy a nicer property?
 

Barin999

Journeyman
Does real estate become a trade-able commodity in game? Can a player of modest means pay in game currency to buy a nicer property?
I wouldn't make it trade-able. What's the reason for it? One could set access permissions; to enter or alter or pay upkeep as a none-owner. But Trading houses seems like a lot of itemization would need to be "moved" from one account to another. Perhaps that's too much of a hassle for the dev's to be a useful/meaningful feature.

Of course, players can buy another home. (If players should be restricted to one home or be able to have multiple at ones, is another discussion.) I'ld see that making sense, one moves up in the world of Terminus.
 

Nephele

Administrator
Staff member
A couple of disclaimers:

  1. We know (or are at least 90% sure) that any housing system for Pantheon would be an expansion-level feature, post launch. The devs have said as much on multiple occasions.
  2. There have been numerous threads discussing housing ideas on the official forums
  3. Neph has a very specific version of where he wants housing to lead once it is implemented (player cities, integration with crafting and adventuring spheres (and possibly a diplomacy sphere), community projects, dynamic content generation).

So with that in mind:

Option 1: Player buys a plot of land and constructs their house. All plots of land are the same size. Players start with whatever they can afford but can then upgrade as time goes on, making the house bigger etc. Upkeep is based on the size of the house.

Guilds can purchase plots of land and construct a guild hall. All guild hall plots are the same size but much larger than player plots (because guild halls are bigger and can do more things). Upkeep is based on the size of the guild hall.

Option 2: Player buys a plot of land and constructs their house. There are different sizes of plots. Size of the plot determines the largest house it can support. Larger plots have a higher purchase price/upkeep than smaller plots. Guild plots are the largest plots. Special rules may potentially govern these plots. Upkeep is based on the size of the plot, and potentially also the size of the house/guild hall on the plot.

In either option, you need a way for players to easily move from one plot to another. For example, let's say I initially buy a housing plot outside Thronefast. Later, I join a guild that is building out a housing area near Faerthale. I should be able to move over to my guild's housing area. This is especially true if there are player cities and public works (which is what I want, since we have to wait for an expansion for housing).

Allowing houses to be upgraded over time works in either option as well. The only thing that changes is the maximum extent of the upgrades you can do, which in Option 2 is based on the size of the plot.

Using either option, there will likely be an issue where there aren't enough housing plots available for all characters on a server (they only way to really insure that is to instance housing areas). Logically, this would generally lead to us asking for tools to buy/sell real estate - however, other games have shown us that in-game real estate trades lead to very rich players acting as land barons. Players need to feel like they have the opportunity to purchase a housing plot if they earn enough money. Because of that, all land purchases/sales should be handled by NPC entities to insure that the housing system is perceived as "fair". This also means that there will need to be strict and artificial limitations on land ownership such as one plot per account.

The key here is that people need to see housing as an attainable goal. Housing is very important to many players for many different reasons. Unfortunately, if you allow players to charge each other whatever they want for housing markets, the resulting wave of unhappiness will drive people away from the game if you're not careful. This was true in Vanguard for a little while before player population dropped, and has been true in FFXIV (since for some silly reason they never set their game up to spawn more housing neighborhoods dynamically).
 

Chimerical

Novice
I would go with option two, sameness bores me. Limiting to one plot I would think should policy. Some folks live and die by housing, some folks never go into town if they can avoid it. I don't envy folks for having more than me, I merely strive for what makes me happy. I would hope the developers would know enough about their server populations to provide sufficient housing plots, and/or apartments in the cities. Personally I'd like to see some plots scattered about the lands, maybe make them discernible at a certain level of perception. I'd rather have a cabin in the mountains than a house in the suburbs. That's just me.

I would make a certain number of plots available, that makes sense for a given server. I'm not looking for suburban sprawl. I don't think a proper balance would be difficult to obtain. Should be able to iron that out before they release housing.

I should state that while I would buy, build and upgrade a house, I don't lose any sleep over them not being in at launch.
 

Trasak

Apprentice
Staff member
Staff Writer
What if rent was paid with something other than the trading currency? Something like faction tokens, or sacrificed magical items?

I am really not in favor of mobs, even humanoids, of dropping much cash. Mob farming of gold and the increased amounts given out as levels increase are largely to blame for the vast inflation from first level to max level. Once you factor in the fact that coins will be weightless in Pantheon I see it as being a huge possible future problem.

I would prefer to see coinage almost exclusively from turn-in task quests. These could be low level slayer type quests or tradeskill writs or even high level relic collection quests. The cash rewards for the quests could be modified by the game system to control the general inflation of the server over time. The primary cash sinks should be travel and item storage.

If we include huge cash sinks like buying real estate and taxes/rent then the influx of cash will need to be higher to have enough money in the market for player to player trading.

I am also a fan of hybrid housing where some of it is open world but locked plots, some of it is simple instanced and the last is folded space neighborhoods (a limited number of neighborhoods that you can wake around in and buy a limited number of plots but each neighborhood is spatially stacked on top of each other). The true open world housing would have huge upkeep and would have biddable rent contracts so those who want to fork over the cash can have them. The neighborhood plots will have deeds that can be traded and will have significant upkeep but not crippling. The full instanced apartments will be pretty low initial and on going cost but will be very limited on the number of storage items that can be put inside.
 
Top