Why would a government decide AGAINST constructing apartments?

ArchivedUser

The dev team has mentioned that player run governments will have the ability to choose whether or not they will fund instanced apartments.

I'm wondering, given that they made it a choice and not an automatic part of progression, if there would be a reason as to why a node WOULDNT want instanced apartments.

ArchivedUser

The only thing I can think of off the top of my head is that maybe you want to try and control who moves into the city and the amount people moving into the city. If your guild is the predominate make up of the citizenship of that city and you already own most of the in-city housing, you might wabt to keep that control.

ArchivedUser

Migrants. Keep out the migrants.

ArchivedUser

Condos are the true enemy of any civilization

ArchivedUser

Dictators want no disruptions by outsiders who may see through their dysfunctional minds. It's called fear of loss of control.   

ArchivedUser

Well one of the first thoughts that came to mind is this: You and your guild have worked on building a city for a while and finally gotten it (and for the sake of example this one will be a scientific node) and another guild comes it and they have more people then you and basically force the leadership role of your city to them and they start making decisions that you guys don't agree with and their old enemies come to attack your city bringing their problems to you.

ArchivedUser

Not having apartments may give you some better control of the populations that can pledge citizenship to your node - ^^ 

I don't think we have enough details to understand yet how node development works in terms of government choices, so we will need to wait and see. I'm sure there will be lots of "building projects" to choose from that are all useful in their own way and perhaps the government of a node might decide that apartments are their least priority and would rather focus on the construction of other features first. 

I'm sure all node "building projects" will require the citizens (players) to complete quests, gather materials and build up the wealth of the node to have the funds necessary to build them.  Apartments might appear to be functional as homes and may generate income for the government but perhaps not - maybe something else would be more to the liking of the Node government ^^

ArchivedUser

Nodes have a series of plots for placing modules.
Their will be more modules available than plots.
One of those available modules is apartments.
There will be others, equally valuable in their own way.
So its a matter of choice.

ArchivedUser

It would be very shortsighted to reduce player housing allocation in your node. Buildings and structures degrade over time unless the population remains active. Less player housing means fewer citizens, which means less taxes needed to maintain the city's infrastructure, including vital fortifications.

ArchivedUser

lexmax said:

It would be very shortsighted to reduce player housing allocation in your node. Buildings and structures degrade over time unless the population remains active. Less player housing means fewer citizens, which means less taxes needed to maintain the city's infrastructure, including vital fortifications.

This is true, @lexmax - unless what @Rune_Relic says is true (which I think it is).
There might be some "modules" that the current reign wants to build, for whatever purpose, instead of building apartments.

My question to this would be, if there's one locked plot for apartments, or if the plot may vary.

ArchivedUser

Herdo said:

lexmax said:

It would be very shortsighted to reduce player housing allocation in your node. Buildings and structures degrade over time unless the population remains active. Less player housing means fewer citizens, which means less taxes needed to maintain the city's infrastructure, including vital fortifications.

This is true, @lexmax - unless what @Rune_Relic says is true (which I think it is).
There might be some "modules" that the current reign wants to build, for whatever purpose, instead of building apartments.

My question to this would be, if there's one locked plot for apartments, or if the plot may vary.

I don't think what I said conflicts with what @Rune_Relic said (video link).

There will be "sectored out zones" within a node that are unbuilt, that are going to require direction from the mayor and the government to determine what building types will be built at these locations:

• Apartment complex

• Merchant housing

• Guild halls

• Marketplace

• Barracks

ArchivedUser

No apartments for citizens less people to support the node.  Less needed resources in a resource intensive environment.  Less people to help defend.  Even guild mates will want their own space.  A happy citizen makes a happy community and one that will want to defend their home.  A good leader is only as good as the people he leads.  

Word will spread of such a place and people will stay way and not want to help or do business with them.

Those who think they can do it alone or with few followers  will fall flat on their face.  

ArchivedUser

CylverRayne said:

No apartments for citizens less people to support the node.  Less needed resources in a resource intensive environment.  Less people to help defend.  Even guild mates will want their own space.  A happy citizen makes a happy community and one that will want to defend their home.  A good leader is only as good as the people he leads.  

Word will spread of such a place and people will stay way and not want to help or do business with them.

Those who think they can do it alone or with few followers  will fall flat on their face.  

Agree. Every player choice has a consequence (risk versus reward design pillar). The choices of governments can have devastating consequences.

If your government only decides to build merchant housing and not instanced housing (apartments) then your node will have limited citizenship, because non-instanced player housing (merchant housing) and freeholds are limited in number.

The fewer citizens, the less taxation the node will collect, therefore the less resources the node will have to defend itself and its trade routes. 

ArchivedUser

Besides trying to keep your city to your group of friends/guild/allies exclusively there really isn't much besides controlling the populace (which what I said above really is), unless Intrepid decides to put penalties on a population beyond a certain limit but I doubt they'd want or see reason to doing so.

ArchivedUser

It's possible that there won't be a reason not to have apartments, rather, the ability to make that choice would be exercised in order to determine build order.

For example, lets say a couple of active guilds build a city. They are constantly warring, so they set taxes high (as they know their guildmates won't leave) and elect to build barracks first. Later on when things are more stable, they build apartments, up citizenship, and lower taxes.

ArchivedUser

Herdo said:

lexmax said:

It would be very shortsighted to reduce player housing allocation in your node. Buildings and structures degrade over time unless the population remains active. Less player housing means fewer citizens, which means less taxes needed to maintain the city's infrastructure, including vital fortifications.

This is true, @lexmax - unless what @Rune_Relic says is true (which I think it is).
There might be some "modules" that the current reign wants to build, for whatever purpose, instead of building apartments.

My question to this would be, if there's one locked plot for apartments, or if the plot may vary.

Thats a good question. We dont know if inner plots will be transient, temporary or permanent. Thats an important detail for gameplay.
We do know beast incursion events will destroy those plots and are specifically targetted to do so.

ArchivedUser

From the top of my head, you know (as a Leader) that there's a big chance you'll lose the city soon/ or there is an active guild/group vying for leadership. Now, if we see the apartments as a module you can put in that would let in more players get (instance) housing, what if another module helps you secure slightly more your reign over the city? Like, military barracks that offers players better armors (guessing) while augmenting your 'hold' on your seat of power or some such? Or you prefer expanding the market to get more caravans through, boosting business. I think there's quite a lot of reasons why Leaders might not go for apartments, we just haven't thought of them yet. 

These are theories/ examples only. We have no clear idea exactly how it all works but that might be a way. Possible modules to add to cities (These are guesses only):

Apartments (Instanced), offers a place for players to stay/live/RPz. Helps the city by bringing / keeping players around.
Barracks, offers a layer of protection. Higher level guards maybe, possibility to train in martial skills...!?
Market Expansion, offers more business for caravans and a wider variety of things to buy in town.
Redlight District, offers ... Well, hum, maybe more shady deals on poisons, daggers, backdoor alley deals.

You know what I'm getting at, what Modules do you think might/would be in game to improve a Metropolis?

ArchivedUser

They could be run by a conservative government.

ArchivedUser

Not everyone has visions of raising a mighty metropolis and a mecca of civilization.  If you're a bunch of friends from other games or irl then not having  apartments makes perfect sense because you don't want people outside of your clique moving in and messing things up. If you and your group have the ability to progress the node to a certain point by yourself then I doubt you would need an influx of players to maintain that level.  

Just because they don't offer apartments wouldn't necessarily mean no outsiders would ever come.  They could benefit from a transient population and eventually some of these players may want to stick around. If they simply bought all the freehold plots as well they could then give out the plots to individuals who they like.  This could drive the node to further advancement while allowing the ruling body to maintain a firm control on who infiltrates their node.  Perhaps the node could still end up as a metropolis eventually as it advances through this method of controlled growth.

ArchivedUser

Less space for bars and taverns!

ArchivedUser

Zid said:

Less space for bars and taverns!

This is probably the most important point raised in this thread actually.

ArchivedUser

Dominus Kuuk said:

Not everyone has visions of raising a mighty metropolis and a mecca of civilization.  If you're a bunch of friends from other games or irl then not having  apartments makes perfect sense because you don't want people outside of your clique moving in and messing things up. If you and your group have the ability to progress the node to a certain point by yourself then I doubt you would need an influx of players to maintain that level.  

Just because they don't offer apartments wouldn't necessarily mean no outsiders would ever come.  They could benefit from a transient population and eventually some of these players may want to stick around. If they simply bought all the freehold plots as well they could then give out the plots to individuals who they like.  This could drive the node to further advancement while allowing the ruling body to maintain a firm control on who infiltrates their node.  Perhaps the node could still end up as a metropolis eventually as it advances through this method of controlled growth.

Is it even possible for someone to own multiple plots of freehold land in a given ZOI? Or is each person limited to one?

ArchivedUser

Efroc said:

Dominus Kuuk said:

Not everyone has visions of raising a mighty metropolis and a mecca of civilization.  If you're a bunch of friends from other games or irl then not having  apartments makes perfect sense because you don't want people outside of your clique moving in and messing things up. If you and your group have the ability to progress the node to a certain point by yourself then I doubt you would need an influx of players to maintain that level.  

Just because they don't offer apartments wouldn't necessarily mean no outsiders would ever come.  They could benefit from a transient population and eventually some of these players may want to stick around. If they simply bought all the freehold plots as well they could then give out the plots to individuals who they like.  This could drive the node to further advancement while allowing the ruling body to maintain a firm control on who infiltrates their node.  Perhaps the node could still end up as a metropolis eventually as it advances through this method of controlled growth.

Is it even possible for someone to own multiple plots of freehold land in a given ZOI? Or is each person limited to one?

Each character is limited to one of each housing type.

ArchivedUser

Do we have any idea how many housing plots will be available to players per node stage?

ArchivedUser

Efroc said:

Do we have any idea how many housing plots will be available to players per node stage?

No info on that yet, just that it scales with the node size.

ArchivedUser

lexmax said:

Efroc said:

Dominus Kuuk said:

Not everyone has visions of raising a mighty metropolis and a mecca of civilization.  If you're a bunch of friends from other games or irl then not having  apartments makes perfect sense because you don't want people outside of your clique moving in and messing things up. If you and your group have the ability to progress the node to a certain point by yourself then I doubt you would need an influx of players to maintain that level.  

Just because they don't offer apartments wouldn't necessarily mean no outsiders would ever come.  They could benefit from a transient population and eventually some of these players may want to stick around. If they simply bought all the freehold plots as well they could then give out the plots to individuals who they like.  This could drive the node to further advancement while allowing the ruling body to maintain a firm control on who infiltrates their node.  Perhaps the node could still end up as a metropolis eventually as it advances through this method of controlled growth.

Is it even possible for someone to own multiple plots of freehold land in a given ZOI? Or is each person limited to one?

Each character is limited to one of each housing type.

Just to clear up any confusion, each account, not character, so if you have 8 alts, you won't have 8 freeholds. 

ArchivedUser

lexmax said:

Efroc said:

Dominus Kuuk said:

Not everyone has visions of raising a mighty metropolis and a mecca of civilization.  If you're a bunch of friends from other games or irl then not having  apartments makes perfect sense because you don't want people outside of your clique moving in and messing things up. If you and your group have the ability to progress the node to a certain point by yourself then I doubt you would need an influx of players to maintain that level.  

Just because they don't offer apartments wouldn't necessarily mean no outsiders would ever come.  They could benefit from a transient population and eventually some of these players may want to stick around. If they simply bought all the freehold plots as well they could then give out the plots to individuals who they like.  This could drive the node to further advancement while allowing the ruling body to maintain a firm control on who infiltrates their node.  Perhaps the node could still end up as a metropolis eventually as it advances through this method of controlled growth.

Is it even possible for someone to own multiple plots of freehold land in a given ZOI? Or is each person limited to one?

Each character is limited to one of each housing type.

ArchivedUser

duplicate removed.