Status
Not open for further replies.

Zyaedra

Proposal
  • All homes would cost 1 lot when placed and allow 100 items for their base storage.
  • Players would be able to use their available lots to increase the item space in their home by 100 per lot used (via the Structure Management Terminal).
  • For reward/special homes that currently allow more than 100 items per lot, players could convert the structure into a storage box (the size of the *extra storage) that could be used in another structure. I am not sure how this would work, maybe the player radials the deed and chooses to convert the deed into extra storage... but hopefully the process would be reversable if the player later decides to use that structure.
    Edit for clarity: reward/special homes would also require 1-lot to be placed but would retain their extra storage.
*extra storage is anything greater than (number of lots) x (100). Example: the Hangar requires 2 lots and allows 500 item storage, so it has 300 extra storage.
Justification
Encourages players to choose/use the houses they like and add to them, rather than weighing/choosing what's most efficient. If players are using additional homes just for storage, this would allow them to consolidate everything into one house if they wanted. I don't know if this can be done lol... I imagine it would probably be a huge headache to implement.
Motivation
Along with adding flexibility, this would give players a reason to participate in content to earn those special reward structures even if they don't want to use the actual structures.
Imagine not having a reason to prioritize item space or lot size over aesthetic....
 
Upvote -2 Downvote
Voting on this suggestion has been paused.
What does this achieve really? If you need a 100 storage 1 lot house for more harvester lots, that already exists. If you’re looking to increase storage size on an existing house, that already exists.

Most of the special “content” structures you describe already have less lots for more storage which is why some people do that content. As people have mentioned, what you’re proposing would achieve the opposite of what you think would happen.
 
I am bored so will debate some more here. The lots issue is valid because right now for 1 lot I can get a little house with 1 or 2 rooms blech (on only some planets). Or I can spend more and get a multi room multi level house regardless of storage, If we make it all houses only cost 1 lot I can get the nice 5 lot multi level house for 1 and add in the 1200 storage from token and collection and be up 4 lots with the same nice multi level house (skin). I am not against change I am just againt things that have consequences beyond what people may have thought of. Plus some things once done are very hard if not impossible to undo and this is one of them. It is creative for sure.
 
Veizyr said:
What does this achieve really? If you need a 100 storage 1 lot house for more harvester lots, that already exists. If you’re looking to increase storage size on an existing house, that already exists.

Most of the special “content” structures you describe already have less lots for more storage which is why some people do that content. As people have mentioned, what you’re proposing would achieve the opposite of what you think would happen.
Click to expand...
I am really sorry my original post was super unclear as far as what the end goal would be. It was just flexibility in lot usage and home choice.

edit to expand on the last point: all homes would be 1-lot, so lot size would no longer be a factor in home choice, and we could choose to invest our lots for additional storage (or not).
 
Last edited:
Tyr said:
I am bored so will debate some more here. The lots issue is valid because right now for 1 lot I can get a little house with 1 or 2 rooms blech (on only some planets). Or I can spend more and get a multi room multi level house regardless of storage, If we make it all houses only cost 1 lot I can get the nice 5 lot multi level house for 1 and add in the 1200 storage from token and collection and be up 4 lots with the same nice multi level house (skin). I am not against change I am just againt things that have consequences beyond what people may have thought of. Plus some things once done are very hard if not impossible to undo and this is one of them. It is creative for sure.
Click to expand...
the hangar is 500 storage for 2 lots and has a large footprint with 3 levels. you can get the chronicler tent that costs 1-lot and gives 100 items and also increase its storage a crazy amount for the space.
what consequences do you foresee?
 
They could also seperate "lots" from houses so you have house lots and harv/fact lots but that too would be quite a bit of work. However I think they are working on this issue already but not 100% sure.
 
Tyr said:
They could also seperate "lots" from houses so you have house lots and harv/fact lots but that too would be quite a bit of work. However I think they are working on this issue already but not 100% sure.
Click to expand...
that would be cool
 
Zyaedra said:
the hangar is 500 storage for 2 lots and has a large footprint with 3 levels. you can get the chronicler tent that costs 1-lot and gives 100 items and also increase its storage a crazy amount for the space.
what consequences do you foresee?
Click to expand...
The issue is that I can now get my house that used to cost 5 lots for 1 and add the 1200 storage because I don't need more storage so that leaves me 4 extra lots I did not have which is 1 elite and 1 heavy harv extra I can place. (which is exactly what I would do.) That is just 1 example.
 
Last edited:
If I understand correctly PV is saying you can pick any house, and then add lots to it for storage. Start off with 1 lot = 100 storage for that house, and the house becomes your choice. You can pick a large house and put 1 lot in it for 100 storage. If you wanted that house to be a 5 lot house with 500 storage then you can use 5 lots. I don't think it is about the extra storage, I am sure we all know about that and enjoy it.
 
Tyr said:
The issue is that I can now get my house that used to cost 5 lots for 1 and add the 1200 storage because I don't need more storage so that leaves me 4 extra lots I did not have which is 1 elite and 1 heavy harv extra I can place. (which is exactly what I would do.)
Click to expand...
Thinking about this from how the storage boxes currently work, I would imagine everyone who has existing 5-lot structures would not magically see lots freed up unless something went wrong with the implementation -- they would have to retrieve their lots from the Structure Management Terminal, as long as they have the item space freed up (100 items per lot) to do so.
 
Tyr said:
  • All homes would cost 1 lot when placed and allow 100 items for their base storage.
It is not saying it would cost 5 lots to place a big house and then add 1 lot for 100.
Click to expand...
Yes all homes would cost 1 lot. It would not matter the house you pick. Then you can use more of your lots to add more storage, but that would be your choice. Special buildings would operate outside of this logic as they offer more storage due to being awarded for completing something.
 
Zyaedra said:
Thinking about this from how the storage boxes currently work, I would imagine everyone who has existing 5-lot structures would not magically see lots freed up unless something went wrong with the implementation -- they would have to retrieve their lots from the Structure Management Terminal, as long as they have the item space freed up (100 items per lot) to do so.
Click to expand...
So you would make everyone have to pack up their houses and take off the storage they have so they can redo it this way. It would still let me have the extra 4 just have to go through hoops to place my house again. Think I will wait for the housing update and see as this idea while creative just is not it and can cause the issues discussed by me and others.
 
Tyr said:
So you would make everyone have to pack up their houses and take off the storage they have so they can redo it this way. It would still let me have the extra 4 just have to go through hoops to place my house again. Think I will wait for the housing update and see as this idea while creative just is not it and can cause the issues discussed by me and others.
Click to expand...
Why would people have to pack up their houses? We don't need to pack up our houses to remove storage increases, we just have to make sure that space is available.
 
Tyr said:
So you would make everyone have to pack up their houses and take off the storage they have so they can redo it this way. It would still let me have the extra 4 just have to go through hoops to place my house again. Think I will wait for the housing update and see as this idea while creative just is not it and can cause the issues discussed by me and others.
Click to expand...
Uhm No....
 
The idea comes from the community, the dev's job would be to see if they can implement it with no impact to the user. Your comment has a lot of assumptions, which I believe 100% would not be the case.
 
Again separate out house lots from other lots and you are fine. But if not it will have consequences. No the idea comes from 1 person and is a creative idea. However I know some will happen because I am one who will be doing it. Give me 4 extra lots to use. Will everyone do that? Of course not but enough will.
 
Last edited:
Am still bored so another example - Say I don't care about crafting or resource gathering or storage really. With the 1 lot per house I can now have 10 Large Houses (that is 40 Large houses total for all alts) instead of just 2. Think about it and you can see where this might become an issue as well.
 
Zyaedra said:
first and last playervoice. i am not cut out for it lol. admins can delete if ya want
Click to expand...
Your idea is creative and good if you added in the one piece where they change house lots to be there own thing so it avoids the issues.
 
Aurahna said:
Curious on your role, are you the lead developer or the project engineer?
Click to expand...
I am no one. Just the ability to have and place 40 large houses is an issue in itself. Can you even begin to think about what could come from that alone even without the other problems. Feedback that disagrees with someone or that points out a possible flaw is not negative. I think the idea is creative and good if it can be reworded and reworked to avoid the common sense issues that people have brought up already not to mention the ones not thought of.

This is why it can sometimes be good to hash it out before it is a PV if a person is sensitive to feedback. You can hear people point out stuff and refine your idea to address the issues when you can all the time knowing there is always going to be someone who may just dislike it just because. So yeah go ahead and jump off Aurahna because feedback is being given that you don't care for.

And FYI from the community standards piece -
  • Intended to break, implies the breaking of, or discusses the anonymity of a Staff Account;
 
Status
Not open for further replies.