(10-20-2015, 11:42 AM)Oli! Wrote:But it is. Why would one person have a claim on one house, why he or she could not be giving it to a FC and allow more people to use these features as well? They can do very much the same with their FC garden, stables ect as well without being the leader. It is by your logic still ONE person owning it, seeming it does not seem to matter if a person owns a FC already or not.(10-20-2015, 11:35 AM)Virella Wrote: Well you could put that logic to anyone who is in a FC "Why don't you just use your personal room? Why do you need your own house? Why don't you give it away to some FC? You selfish jerk!". It's a wee bit flawed, greedy or not, we can apply it to personal housing in general. I for one never think they should have allowed personal housing, or made a different system for it. Wildstar system for personal housing? Yes please!
It's not flawed because it's not an applicable comparison.
There are mechanical differences between rooms and houses, such as the inability to garden, or train chocobos.
The two are not, and will not be on equal enough footing for a comparison, until they are functionally identical.
So why only FC leaders should suffer from being targeted? Personal housing is flawed in general; people with lots of gil will own houses, who don't have it won't, simple as that. That is what SE needs to address, not the few odd exceptions who happen to have both.
