Arelith's current ecomony vs. Shop/Quarter prices

[The GrumpyCat]

So I'm going to speak for myself here- and I don't know, maybe my own experiences/priorities are entirely out of the norm and i'm just wierd.... but these are my thoughs as a player.

I've personaly not... really had a huge issue getting property. Sure, I havn't always found a home streight off the boat, but if I look around for a few weeks, then sooner or later a place tends to crop up. It likely won't be a very good place, but it'll be a place.

It is harder however, to get a -nice- quarter. A manor, a house on it's own, that sort of thing. Often I find the best way to get one now is not by checking signs, in fact, but rather having good contacts amongst the player base.

This is... good and bad.

But this isn't really what worries me.

The thing that irritates me as a player, is people holding large quarters or guildhouses but apparently bearly logging on or roleplaying. Now to be fair, some of this is a matter of time zones and play times. It's possible to say 'Oh curse that Bob Joe, he owns that massive home and is never about!' When in fact Bob Joe is around a fair bit, just not when you are.

But there are I feel, none the less, likely quite a few large houses abound that people seem to own just as trophy housing. This is something that does irritate me and I do hope to be working to deal with it in the future.

[AstralUniverse]

Honestly if the main problem is that guildhouses are left empty (so the entire faction can use the unoccupied rooms while still getting even more storage elsewhere) then just prevent them from accessing storage of quarters they dont own, within the guildhouse. If there's no PC holding a lease, why are the items saved through resets?

[Definately Not A Mimic]

I am probably repeating myself, but I'm going to chime in once more... if we are trying to encourage people to share housing, so factions do not hold 8 houses between them then this:

Increase citizen storage limit to 30 items
Subtract 20 items worth of citizenship storage limit IF the character owns a quarter (hey, you have a mansion with a big lawn now, need to put that lawnmower somewhere...)

This would even the storage playing field and ensure that players keep quarters only because they need/want to use them for their RP and/or because multiple players are using one quarter and have an actual need for a shared storage space.

.. is not going to solve that. Factions, especially ones that craft, want space they call all access. If I store all the herbalism in my 30 settlement slots, then someone needing seedbalm can not get to it unless I log in and hand it over. And yes, obviously that would be ideal, but between timezones and work schedules and RL, that can't always happen.
Out of all the ideas brought up, it still seems ideal if there were a way to give up your one quarter per character, to be on someone elses quarter to increase that shared chest storage. IMO of course.

p.s. I'm not good at quoting posts so apologies for the sloppy quote.

[torugor]

I Havent had the chance of finding this big guild houses. I think its natural ppl have big houses and others dont. Nobles should have palaces even castles.

I just think merchants should be easier so that economy could flow. And storage should be easier as well. Not saying it had to be in big houses or protected. Ppl should be able to protect from server shutdown and reload. Other than that a poor house could have many chests and all of them could be robbed easily.

We are talking about economy here. Everytime i log in a server there is 60 players around. Its enough for a full player based economy to work.

I started on lvl 1 and couldnt find a single npc selling me a iron armor in cordor. Thats cause all available npcs vendors are being used by high lvl chars to sell adamantiun and mithril. And i got my gear killing monsters.

Were there a vendor available i would love to put some iron full plate for sale in cordor. For most part i rather kill monsters and loot than buying. Actually monster loot is how i get all my money. That is not a player economy right now.

So I'm going to speak for myself here- and I don't know, maybe my own experiences/priorities are entirely out of the norm and i'm just wierd.... but these are my thoughs as a player.

I've personaly not... really had a huge issue getting property. Sure, I havn't always found a home streight off the boat, but if I look around for a few weeks, then sooner or later a place tends to crop up. It likely won't be a very good place, but it'll be a place.

It is harder however, to get a -nice- quarter. A manor, a house on it's own, that sort of thing. Often I find the best way to get one now is not by checking signs, in fact, but rather having good contacts amongst the player base.

This is... good and bad.

But this isn't really what worries me.

The thing that irritates me as a player, is people holding large quarters or guildhouses but apparently bearly logging on or roleplaying. Now to be fair, some of this is a matter of time zones and play times. It's possible to say 'Oh curse that Bob Joe, he owns that massive home and is never about!' When in fact Bob Joe is around a fair bit, just not when you are.

But there are I feel, none the less, likely quite a few large houses abound that people seem to own just as trophy housing. This is something that does irritate me and I do hope to be working to deal with it in the future.

[AstralUniverse]

I am probably repeating myself, but I'm going to chime in once more... if we are trying to encourage people to share housing, so factions do not hold 8 houses between them then this:

Increase citizen storage limit to 30 items
Subtract 20 items worth of citizenship storage limit IF the character owns a quarter (hey, you have a mansion with a big lawn now, need to put that lawnmower somewhere...)

This would even the storage playing field and ensure that players keep quarters only because they need/want to use them for their RP and/or because multiple players are using one quarter and have an actual need for a shared storage space.

.. is not going to solve that. Factions, especially ones that craft, want space they call all access. If I store all the herbalism in my 30 settlement slots, then someone needing seedbalm can not get to it unless I log in and hand it over. And yes, obviously that would be ideal, but between timezones and work schedules and RL, that can't always happen.
Out of all the ideas brought up, it still seems ideal if there were a way to give up your one quarter per character, to be on someone elses quarter to increase that shared chest storage. IMO of course.

p.s. I'm not good at quoting posts so apologies for the sloppy quote.

I'm not against having more storage for everyone, via larger vaults/storage/settlement storage but I just dont see how it would fix the problem. Right now, as explained by XXX, factions have no reason to occupy the rooms, because they already own them, and as you also said, factions tend to share resources anyway, so not owning these quarters actually saves them the trouble of toggling access to faction. Furthermore, with the exception of the guildhouse owner, can all buy properties elsewhere and expand their presence and influence, not just, but also the storage as well. Giving everyone more storage wont change that. These factions will just say Thank you, and find more things that they can hoard for future needs.

[Terminal_Templari]

.. is not going to solve that. Factions, especially ones that craft, want space they call all access. If I store all the herbalism in my 30 settlement slots, then someone needing seedbalm can not get to it unless I log in and hand it over. And yes, obviously that would be ideal, but between timezones and work schedules and RL, that can't always happen.

This is why i suggested making storage boxes in buildings much bigger (or perhaps just the higher end buildings?) and make the mainenance/rent exponentially larger.

(edit) Having thought about it a bit...

Having some entry-level homes that are unchanged from how they're like, now... smaller homes, rooms in the inn, etc.

Then, scale up ... a smaller number of upscale homes. more storage, more rent

High end homes would have more storage still, and exponentially more rent. Think: Guild hall

Mansions, could have highest-tier chests and ridiculously high rent

[-XXX-]

I am probably repeating myself, but I'm going to chime in once more... if we are trying to encourage people to share housing, so factions do not hold 8 houses between them then this:

Increase citizen storage limit to 30 items
Subtract 20 items worth of citizenship storage limit IF the character owns a quarter (hey, you have a mansion with a big lawn now, need to put that lawnmower somewhere...)

This would even the storage playing field and ensure that players keep quarters only because they need/want to use them for their RP and/or because multiple players are using one quarter and have an actual need for a shared storage space.

.. is not going to solve that. Factions, especially ones that craft, want space they call all access. If I store all the herbalism in my 30 settlement slots, then someone needing seedbalm can not get to it unless I log in and hand it over. And yes, obviously that would be ideal, but between timezones and work schedules and RL, that can't always happen.
Out of all the ideas brought up, it still seems ideal if there were a way to give up your one quarter per character, to be on someone elses quarter to increase that shared chest storage. IMO of course.

p.s. I'm not good at quoting posts so apologies for the sloppy quote.

I'm not against having more storage for everyone, via larger vaults/storage/settlement storage but I just dont see how it would fix the problem. Right now, as explained by XXX, factions have no reason to occupy the rooms, because they already own them, and as you also said, factions tend to share resources anyway, so not owning these quarters actually saves them the trouble of toggling access to faction. Furthermore, with the exception of the guildhouse owner, can all buy properties elsewhere and expand their presence and influence, not just, but also the storage as well. Giving everyone more storage wont change that. These factions will just say Thank you, and find more things that they can hoard for future needs.

Well, yes... to a certain extent. After all, multiple people sharing quarters can be seen as the quarter being used as intended, so this ought to be encouraged - there should be an upside for having an entire faction actively using a quarter.

Then again, I doubt that adding a functionality option to share your character's own personal citizenship storage with other people through the -factions system would be impossible either - we have that option with shops already.

[Marsi]

It's possible to say 'Oh curse that Bob Joe, he owns that massive home and is never about!' When in fact Bob Joe is around a fair bit, just not when you are.

But there are I feel, none the less, likely quite a few large houses abound that people seem to own just as trophy housing. This is something that does irritate me and I do hope to be working to deal with it in the future.

I've never really bought the "oh they're just on another timezone" counter-argument, personally. Active players leave clues, a paper-trail, and a network - they "exist" in a form even when offline. Playing in a difficult timezone means I've had to be sensitive to these bread crumbs and so find it obvious when a player is active or not, even if I wouldn't ordinarily run into them.

There are bound to be exceptions but I feel this holds true enough that it needn't be a fixture in every quarter hogging debate -- shouldn't the reputation of an owner of cool, hotly desired property with great roleplay potential be above suspicion?

Should property on Arelith even be so exclusive? Why do we have tens of empty NPC houses in every city? Why not just have an entire district of player housing?

[ReverentBlade]

Why not just have an entire district of player housing?

This is something I would like to see. Just make a sprawling slum district in Cordor with a bunch of simple homes and a big shopping mall with a million shops in the center. More goods on the market and more established characters with lairs can only be a good thing.

[Wings of Peace]

Why not just have an entire district of player housing?

This is something I would like to see. Just make a sprawling slum district in Cordor with a bunch of simple homes and a big shopping mall with a million shops in the center. More goods on the market and more established characters with lairs can only be a good thing.

Isn't this essentially what the Cordor apartmemts are?

[Reallylongunneededplayername]

The guildhouse matter could be solved by making it only possible to maintain by actually having a guild (-factions) with active members.

High end property could go up for bids so folk couldn't sell it from one to the other.

Lot of places should have class restrictions.

my 2cnt have been given.

[torugor]

What is the problem of this factions keeping stuff for their use? That`s why organizations get together...its the correct way for it to be.

Problem is that right now the guy who is alone and dont want to be in any organization has no option to sell stuff or have house.
Cause they dont have enough storage and all houses are occupied.

I am probably repeating myself, but I'm going to chime in once more... if we are trying to encourage people to share housing, so factions do not hold 8 houses between them then this:

Increase citizen storage limit to 30 items
Subtract 20 items worth of citizenship storage limit IF the character owns a quarter (hey, you have a mansion with a big lawn now, need to put that lawnmower somewhere...)

This would even the storage playing field and ensure that players keep quarters only because they need/want to use them for their RP and/or because multiple players are using one quarter and have an actual need for a shared storage space.

.. is not going to solve that. Factions, especially ones that craft, want space they call all access. If I store all the herbalism in my 30 settlement slots, then someone needing seedbalm can not get to it unless I log in and hand it over. And yes, obviously that would be ideal, but between timezones and work schedules and RL, that can't always happen.
Out of all the ideas brought up, it still seems ideal if there were a way to give up your one quarter per character, to be on someone elses quarter to increase that shared chest storage. IMO of course.

p.s. I'm not good at quoting posts so apologies for the sloppy quote.

I'm not against having more storage for everyone, via larger vaults/storage/settlement storage but I just dont see how it would fix the problem. Right now, as explained by XXX, factions have no reason to occupy the rooms, because they already own them, and as you also said, factions tend to share resources anyway, so not owning these quarters actually saves them the trouble of toggling access to faction. Furthermore, with the exception of the guildhouse owner, can all buy properties elsewhere and expand their presence and influence, not just, but also the storage as well. Giving everyone more storage wont change that. These factions will just say Thank you, and find more things that they can hoard for future needs.

[NPC Logger Number 2]

It's possible to say 'Oh curse that Bob Joe, he owns that massive home and is never about!' When in fact Bob Joe is around a fair bit, just not when you are.

But there are I feel, none the less, likely quite a few large houses abound that people seem to own just as trophy housing. This is something that does irritate me and I do hope to be working to deal with it in the future.

I've never really bought the "oh they're just on another timezone" counter-argument, personally. Active players leave clues, a paper-trail, and a network - they "exist" in a form even when offline. Playing in a difficult timezone means I've had to be sensitive to these bread crumbs and so find it obvious when a player is active or not, even if I wouldn't ordinarily run into them.

There are bound to be exceptions but I feel this holds true enough that it needn't be a fixture in every quarter hogging debate -- shouldn't the reputation of an owner of cool, hotly desired property with great roleplay potential be above suspicion?

Should property on Arelith even be so exclusive? Why do we have tens of empty NPC houses in every city? Why not just have an entire district of player housing?

I agree with everything quoted here but just want to add to it. Arelith is like a small pond, all the major players in a settlement know each other and know each other well. If the general consensus among players is that someone or a group is inactive or barely active it is probably a correct assumption. I think it really stinks when one of the best properties in a settlement is held down by some group of players that barely ever logs in. I really wish DM's would swoop in and release some of these properties soon, even if they are doing the "bare minimum" to hold onto them. If someone holds a guild house or mansion in Cordor for example, I'd like to think they should be required to be a part of the community in Cordor. Same goes for Guld, Brog, Myon, etc. If they're not part of that community, then even if they are active in a different timezone, I think the DM's should go ahead and evict them if asked by the settlement leader. If you want to do most of your RP in Guld, then you should buy a quarter in Guld, even if it is a smaller quarter, rather than for example holding onto a giant mansion in Cordor to the detriment of characters in Cordor. If you aren't going to do Druid RP, why should you get to hold onto the Weatherstone quarter? Things like this I think are what needs looked at just as much as whether or not they logged in recently.

[Curve]

I agree that DM intervention should be more heavy handed about this. I also think that settlement leaders should kick people out of guildhouses when they have these suspicions. Make an investigation of it, hire some people or send guards to see if it is an ill used property, and then follow the rules of engagement and give them the boot from the properties, and live with what comes of it. I understand that this does not apply to places outside of settlement powers. Am I missing something? Seems that players/characters have a lot of agency here that is not capitalized on.

[NPC Logger Number 2]

Am I missing something? Seems that players/characters have a lot of agency here that is not capitalized on.

From what I've seen people who hold onto these highly desired properties tend to make a conscious effort to lever log in, at least on the character that owns them. If you can't interact with them then you can't evict them. Fear of eviction from settlement leaders is probably a major contributing factor to why so many of these big home owners are never around, because in the past settlement leaders have frivolously evicted active members of their communities in order to hand their properties to people in their own social circles. This bad behavior from settlement leaders, which ultimately amounted to OOC nepotism, went largely unpunished from what the majority of players can see, so I can understand why people would be terrified of a sudden eviction for no good IC reason. Expecting players to police themselves is basically what lead to this never log in mentality.

[The GrumpyCat]

A few points here.

1) Yes, we should do more. I think we're waiting to see what the introduction of New Guld with it's extra housing will do to the situation first, but in the long term I do want to stamp down on 'quarter hogging' more.

2) In the mean time, if settlment leaders and the like do spot this happening then make effort. Leave notes on Doors. Put signs outside. If you know who the person is via the Forums/Discord try contacting them that way to organize a meeting. And, after trying these methods for a while (say... about a week) then come to us and we'll look at the situation. And if someone really is just ignoring you, or hogging the property, we'll step in.

3) Whilst I'm by no means against adding some more quarters... at the same time I'm not convinced that adding 1000 new mansions is good for the server. Scarcity does breed rp. A desire for a quarter, a nice house, a shop ect- can make roleplay. Getting such a thing shouldn't be trivial. That said, it shouldn't be a nie impossible task either. There's a balence to be had here.

[NPC Logger Number 2]

I think the problem is that settlement mechanics punish players for logging in and being active in the community right now. If settlement leaders could evict you anytime, whether you are online or not, it would probably lead to property owners going out of their way to be active and make a name for themselves in the community, rather than hiding or not logging in at all to avoid being seen. Of course settlement leaders would have to be policed more, to make sure they aren't just handing every property to their OOC buddies, but I think that should be done anyways, and it would be easier to just do that than to try and monitor the activity of every single player on the server and try to gauge by some unseen metric whether or not they are active enough to own that quarter. There's only less than a dozen settlement leaders, would it really be that hard to just assign a DM to each of them to make sure they are playing a character and not just gaming the system to get the best quarters for them and their buddies?

[AstralUniverse]

A desire for a quarter, a nice house, a shop ect- can make roleplay. Getting such a thing shouldn't be trivial. That said, it shouldn't be a nie impossible task either. There's a balence to be had here.

It is not impossible. You can always grab a shop in Dunmarle or somewhere in Sencliff, or any number of low-traffic place where you can, technically, have a shop, for RP's sake. But lets put RP aside here - shop in a tactical location is a huge semi-passive income tool when it comes to somewhere like Cordor, Andunour, etc. Do you up there in the staff even realize just how gigantic the economical gap (and therefore, the influence of the character on their surroundings, because that just how it works) between characters in factions who either own those shops or are in group with someone who does, and characters out of factions who do things the old fashion way?

A character out of faction also has no hope ever getting a hand on one of these shops in a good location - because they would lack the milion(s?) gold they would need to buy it these days, so the cycle continues.

This gap needs toning down asap because with every "economy related" skill/system/award we get, this gap becomes even bigger and encourages 1) ooc cliques and 2) hogging.

[-XXX-]

There's another issue that might need to be addressed - owning quarters by proxy.

[tinfoil hat on]
There's a good chunk of really exclusive IG property being owned by very obscure and unknown characters. I wonder how many of those might actually be throwaway alts that exist solely for the purpose of keeping the quarter for somebody else in order to evade or hinder possible eviction.
Example:
Player1 has two characters : Tim and Bob, Tim being their main
Player2 has two characters : Joe and Sam, Joe being their main

Sam exists mainly to own and manage a quarter that's actually used by Tim while Bob exists mainly to own and manage a quarter that's actually used by Joe.
Everyone might know Tim and Joe as they are active and cause a lot of trouble, but when the Amnian Inquisition comes for their property to enact retribution... all they find are the locked doors of quarters owned by Sam and Bob
[tinfoil hat off/]

[The GrumpyCat]

I think the problem is that settlement mechanics punish players for logging in and being active in the community right now. If settlement leaders could evict you anytime, whether you are online or not, it would probably lead to property owners going out of their way to be active and make a name for themselves in the community, rather than hiding or not logging in at all to avoid being seen. Of course settlement leaders would have to be policed more, to make sure they aren't just handing every property to their OOC buddies, but I think that should be done anyways, and it would be easier to just do that than to try and monitor the activity of every single player on the server and try to gauge by some unseen metric whether or not they are active enough to own that quarter. There's only less than a dozen settlement leaders, would it really be that hard to just assign a DM to each of them to make sure they are playing a character and not just gaming the system to get the best quarters for them and their buddies?

'Settlment leaders giving quarters to their buddies' is by no means the issue here. They can do that already.

The issue is that we belive that heavy mechanical effects should be lead by, ideally, roleplay. That effort should be put in, that attempts should be made of to-ing and fro-ing for property.

If we removed the rp requirement for property release then in theory say- Guldorand could get a new mayor, who's first action is to release the quarters and shops of everyone not in his faction. Maybe he doesn't give them to anyone in his faction (though it's perfectly IC to do so) but he releases all the others. So when the kin of Guld log in next day, they find all their belongings lost, without any recorse.

Are you ok with that? Are you ok knowing that if you own a house in a settlment, you could loose it at any time at all. Literally one day log off, next day log on to find everything is gone.

That's not fun or fair for anyone.

But lets put RP aside here - shop in a tactical location is a huge semi-passive income tool when it comes to somewhere like Cordor, Andunour, etc. Do you up there in the staff even realize just how gigantic the economical gap (and therefore, the influence of the character on their surroundings, because that just how it works) between characters in factions who either own those shops or are in group with someone who does, and characters out of factions who do things the old fashion way?

In the case of Cordor and settlments you have the voting system for that. Vote in someone who will move said factions out, so you and yours can move in.

[-XXX-]

If we removed the rp requirement for property release then in theory say- Guldorand could get a new mayor, who's first action is to release the quarters and shops of everyone not in his faction. Maybe he doesn't give them to anyone in his faction (though it's perfectly IC to do so) but he releases all the others. So when the kin of Guld log in next day, they find all their belongings lost, without any recorse.

Are you ok with that? Are you ok knowing that if you own a house in a settlment, you could loose it at any time at all. Literally one day log off, next day log on to find everything is gone.

Personally I'd have been OK with that if it helped mitigating and alleviating the quarterlogging issue. We do have citizenship storage for holding essential items and it's not advisable to keep fortune in quarter chests anyway.

In a way, owning a quarter in a settlement would have been a very similar situation to owning a quarter in a guild house - the guild house owner can deny you access to your quarter without any issue in such cases.
Ofc. it's often assumed that guild members would justify their use of faction resources by being an active part of the faction. Why shouldn't settlements be viewed similarly in this regard?


Ideally, the quarter eviction would have a scripted time period (some RL days) before taking effect, so that the the owner had an opportunity to collect their stuff, but allowing cheeky players to evade eviction is not ideal simply by asking too much time investment and unfun OOC effort from the players of characters who should be able to manage these aspects of their settlement without much trouble so that they could focus on actual RP.
It can often take several RL weeks before it becomes apparent that there might be a quarterlogger that's not tied to the settlement in any other way than sitting on a quarter hoping that they'd go unnoticed.
By the time the players of the elected leaders figure out that they might need to get the DMs involved a half of their term might have already expired - IMO the current system is awfully inflexible, that's what I'm saying.

[AstralUniverse]

In the case of Cordor and settlments you have the voting system for that. Vote in someone who will move said factions out, so you and yours can move in.

You sorta miss my point there. A faction can be moved out. all it takes is a single member of the faction owning a shop. This is not an IC problem. This is an economical gap between people with and without shops in tactical locations and the ever increasing encouragement of teaming up with players oocly because you dont always want to play a type of character that can be bound a faction RP. It also means that a single character can, over some time, be richer than the settlement which their shop is located in, without any RP needed, without trade RP at all. That doesnt make any sense. And again, with things like bidding for Outpost changes, and castles being auctioned... this will only get worse.

[Xerah]

If you want to know why some settlement leaders avoid evicting people, please see this absolute toxic rumour mongering post below:

Am I missing something? Seems that players/characters have a lot of agency here that is not capitalized on.

From what I've seen people who hold onto these highly desired properties tend to make a conscious effort to lever log in, at least on the character that owns them. If you can't interact with them then you can't evict them. Fear of eviction from settlement leaders is probably a major contributing factor to why so many of these big home owners are never around, because in the past settlement leaders have frivolously evicted active members of their communities in order to hand their properties to people in their own social circles. This bad behavior from settlement leaders, which ultimately amounted to OOC nepotism, went largely unpunished from what the majority of players can see, so I can understand why people would be terrified of a sudden eviction for no good IC reason. Expecting players to police themselves is basically what lead to this never log in mentality.

To further put this in perspective, when I ran Cordor for 3 months, there were countless OOC complaints about how I was evicting everyone unfairly and I was awful for doing so. I was creating a police state in Cordor and those types of things should be expected. The rub? The only person who got evicted was the barracks owner.

During that rule, I even scried on a noble house planning on how they were going to control the election. Of course, I wanted to go evict them, but then I'd have to deal with the kind of toxic responses that you see in the post above so I left it be. And that's a huge problem. People know how they would do it and project that on you in an OOC way to make thing unfun even if me as a player does not have that intent.

Never logging in is also a terrible approach because we can just ask for DM's approval to evict. So, that seems dumb. You care more about a property that you never use than logging in and having fun. It's actually unbelievable that this is your viewpoint. If anyone out there has this similar viewpoint, I would strongly recommend you take a step back and reevaluate yourself but you are an extreme detriment to the server by spreading these kinds of OOC rumours and hate.

[AstralUniverse]

Never logging in is also a terrible approach because we can just ask for DM's approval to evict. So, that seems dumb. You care more about a property that you never use than logging in and having fun. It's actually unbelievable that this is your viewpoint. If anyone out there has this similar viewpoint, I would strongly recommend you take a step back and reevaluate yourself but you are an extreme detriment to the server by spreading these kinds of OOC rumours and hate.

I dont think it's like a 'strategy' for anyone. Its simply a classic case of a player getting burned out by drama and wants to lvl a lowbie alt and chill, but also not give up their main character just yet. Usually these main character get shelved and just hog the quarter from what I noticed, but that's probably not the main conscious intent. Just a failure on the player's side to recognize that either "this is the time to face consequences" or roll.

[Mattamue]

Pvp rule break accusations are prohibited on the forums.

Quarter hogging accusations and speculation feel like they should be prohibited as well for the same reasons.

Suspected offenders should be reported. Entirely its own separate topic (for the DMs) from the economy.

Otherwise, I don't think lease cost is a fix for concerns about property turn over. Others have pointed out why. Tying property into a bump for epic sacrifice may encourage more turnover.

Additionally, Guld has been alluded to here, but folks may not know just how big the update will be. It's been said that, "And quarters... Well there are MANY upwards of 50? Even if they are claimed, many will be released elsewhere"