Should houses not provide storage on their own, and at least as much or more than the storage shed?

I think that I and just about every single player of New World are waiting for some much needed improvements to storage in game, here are some ideas to contemplate.

We can have 11 settlement storage sheds. These settlements can be controlled by a faction, and this has impacts of taxes and such, but not storage directly.
We can have 6 outpost storage sheds. These outposts cannot be controlled by any faction, as a result, fast travel is not impacted by factions. Storage is not affected.
We can have 3 Houses. A player owns a house, factions can determine taxes, but have no impact on storage, and should not affect transfers between Houses.
We can have 1 Camp. Camps are currently very underused, and all but useless, serving only really usefully as a respawn point, with limited other functions.

We can pay gold to move items from one settlement storage shed to another, if both storage sheds are in settlements controlled by the same faction, and (I think, not sure of this) our character is in that faction. As settlements change hands, this would have an affect of the ability to move items from one place to another. Personally, I find this problematic, but if I don’t own a home in such a place, I can live with it. {OTOH, if I do own a home in a settlement, I expect to have the ability to move things from one of my homes to another of my homes, at no cost, and regardless of any faction related stuff.}

Some things to consider:
Houses are bigger than storage sheds.
Storage sheds grant 1,000 pounds initially each, with upgrades adding more.
Houses add nothing to your storage.
Houses can have chests, but these chests only offer two functions.

  1. They provide quite limited storage.
  2. They link to settlement storage to an in-house access point.

Higher tier houses can have more chests, but why have multiple chests in a house, adding confusion and taking up space? If any and every chest is just part of a single storage space, what the heck is the point of that?

Let us contemplate an improvement to this current state of affairs:
First, houses need to provide storage themselves, and this storage needs to at least equal that of the settlements ‘storage shed’ basic 1,000 pounds capacity, and if I had my way, they would get 1,000 pounds per tier of the house, as the prices versus benefits right now are totally out of whack. If houses were modified to provide these storage values, we would be seeing an increase in base storage of from 1,000 pounds to 12,000 pounds of storage over current values, depending on players owning at least one tier 1 house, and up to 3 their three houses.

Next, I would contemplate the existing storage capacity provided by chests, and their additional function of linking settlement storage to in-home access points. Would these chest even be needing to add additional storage space if the houses already added 1,000 pounds/tier? If they did offer additional storage space then building the larger and more expensive storage chests would be a good thing, but I would like to see chests limited to one per house, regardless of the tier of the house, because the houses would already be providing storage, and additional chests would just get in the way.

Right now, we CANNOT move items from one house to another, unless the settlements are both owned by our character’s faction. This is wrong and annoying, a players faction memberships, for whatever that is supposed to be worth, should have no impact on their own houses ability to move content from one to the other, without PAYING anything, to anyone, for doing so. An improvement would be to allow the function of a storage chest, in addition to linking a players house with the local settlement’s storage shed, it also provides a link to the other houses that a player owns, making it possible to magically access storage in any of your three houses, and their local settlements storage sheds, from any house a player owns. If AGS wanted to have a separate type of chest that allowed this feature, that of inter-house storage linking, and another type that links local settlement storage shed with home storage capacity, that could be in interesting thing, and give a reason to have more than one storage chest item in a house.

The final thing I would suggest would be a greatly under-utilized aspect of the game, and that is the player’s ability to have a camp. Right now, almost no one uses their camps every time and place they go. Let us consider what a camp currently is, and what it could become…

You can make a camp and respawn to it if you die, and it is close, and if you don’t log out. You can also carry out some crafting at your camp.

What if your camp could be leveled up, and vastly improved, customized and decorated? Right now, you camp can already do some {very limited} activities, and that is good an all, but I love character progression, and unlike houses, a camp could be a very personalized place, what with your ability to put it anywhere a camp can be built, and if one location is not where you currently want it, you can move it somewhere else, and not be tied to a city at all. But for this thread, I’ll limit myself to discussions about storage and access to storage.

Let us look at a camp as a fourth house in some respects. Make Camps expandable and customizable, so instead of just a tent, bedroll and a fire, you can actually have a tent that lets you go inside it, or even make it a tiny hut. Either way, the inside dimensions don’t need to be equal to the outside dimensions, and let’s add a crafted storage chest to the things that your higher than tier 5 camp might have as an upgrade. Right now, all the various crafted (or looted) storage chests offer is an in house link to the local settlements storage shed, in addition to the storage they themselves grant. What if there were different functional kinds of chests, ones that do what all chests currently do, that of linking a specific house to the local settlement’s storage shed, ones that link different houses, each with this kind of chest, that only link to other houses like chests, and a third kind, that allow linking the players one and only camp with the houses they own?

House to local settlement storage shed link. As is, no change from current.
House to like equipped House storage link. Requires that both houses have this other, additional kind of storage chest.
House to Camp storage link. A third storage chest type, 4 of which would allow players to link storage access in all of their homes and settlements to their anywhere in the world camp, provided that they leveled up their camp, crafted/looted/bought of were gifted the chests needed to do this.

Some other threads that came before mine.


I hate the entire storage shed experience. Link all the storage ffs.


I’m appreciative of the response, even if the response isn’t what my suggestion was, but what about the camp getting to be linked in and storage access point? I would love to be able to deposit stuff into my house(s) storage from the field, as this would save a large amount of playing time that is otherwise wasted running back and forth to town to drop things off in person, and my suggestion would be to make a camp, and from within the camp menu, be able to place items into/take out of, any of my Houses storage, and if those houses had a storage chest, also be able to access the settlement’s storage capacity there as well, as they are already linked right now.

Limiting storage space is poor game design outside of the simulation game genre. This is especially true when cutting down vast swaths of land or figuratively digging up entire mountains in pursuit of progression is regarded as a key feature of the crafting experience. There’s no reasoning behind limiting storage except for a traditional free-2-play monetization technique: selling inventory space.

1 Like

I think it limits those that will manipulate and exploit the market the most. I like the limitation, because I think it has a more profound limiting effect on the above mentioned.

So, I hope I get this right. Do you think a storage limitation is good because it’s some sort of market manipulation prevention? Honestly, I’m not sure if this makes any sense.

Trading is a core element of this game and playing the market clearly is intended by the developers. Else, the number of resources required to progress from crafting levels 125+ on wouldn’t be that high. To give you an example, furnishing requires wood, metals, and cloth in ridiculously large amounts. Here’s a list of resources required for one of the 150 - 200 steps:

Produce 19,810x Oak Stain
Shopping List:
198100x Potent Solvent
79240x Oil

Source: New World Furnishing Leveling Guide and Aptitude Calculator

Of course, you’re most likely not producing all that stuff at once, but if you intend to pursue more than one trade skill, your max storage capacity quickly is reached.

And on a side note, market manipulation is possible even with limited storage. :wink:

Ah, some much needed discussion…

I snipped that post down a bit, I hope you do not mind, and I hope that AGS doesn’t try to ‘sell’ storage at some point.

It doesn’t, though. Folks playing the market will always exploit the overloaded storage shed by working the game mechanics to that end, so the rest of us are at an even bigger disadvantage, so contrary to what you posted, the market exploiters will have all the storage they need, regardless of what the limits are, while folks that actually ‘play the game’ rather than ‘playing the market’ are hurt more by the current system. If everyone had more space, the advantages enjoyed by the market/game mechanic exploiters would be less important.

I have to agree here, limited storage like we currently have hurts the regular players more, and breaks my immersion in the game, because my HOUSE provides me with no extra storage!

I have to ask for more replies about the suggestions in the OP, about the proposed increase in storage because of home ownership, and higher tier homes giving a bigger boost than the low tier home, and the low tier home giving AT LEAST as much storage space as the settlement storage shed.

1 Like

My main issues with in game storage isn’t the amount of storage space that I get (of course, I want more like everyone), but that the access to my storage, and my housing doesn’t, in itself, give me radically more storage space, are immersion breaking aspects that don’t really make sense, and from the perspective of QoL improvements, I can already see that the very bad way we currently have of accessing our trophies really needs to be improved, and having camp upgrades that allow us to access our in-home storage, from our camp, really needs to happen sooner rather than later.

Your suggestions sound way too fun. No chance :smiley:

1 Like

Alas, that is indeed a possibility. Some folks that I have talked to in my gaming clan said that they thought that these ideas would ‘break’ their immersion in the game, but later admitted that they had so far not encountered the problem with wanting to do a “quick change” of which trophy’s, in which houses, they were wanting to use, because they hadn’t really used their trophies yet… :rofl:

I crafted three sets of starter trophies (16 per set), a couple weeks ago, and what with the limit of 5 active per house, and the current clunky system of having to physically travel to each house to change things around…

My next two threads are going to cover how I would envision some neat in-game ways to make remote access/interaction a thing, while building immersion. Things like Trophy display cases, that offer remote interaction with the trophies in a house (based upon the tier of the display case), from a players camp, and the possibility of crafting a “Mannequin” that would serve to both display a set of armor within a players house, but also allow for remote access and fast swapping out of one armor set for what the player is currently using, by entering their camp and making the wardrobe change.

These two QoL improvements alone would be huge, and implementing them by way of items your character can craft would be awesome.

1 Like

Slightly off tangent, but related. One of the issues I feel we have is that the storage requirements are limited because all items are weighed in multiples of 0.1. The makes 100 feathers (a small, light weight item) weigh significantly heavier than a solid metal breastplate (large and heavy). The knock on is that our storage sheds end up filled with small items - food, arcana, reagents etc. Though likely a huge amount of work, if items weighed in multiples of 0.01 and everything was “re-weighed”, we’d likely free up a large amount of the space we currently use which would mean that 1000 units of storage would be able to hold a lot more (which is one of the big issues).

Taking your idea one step sideways, I think houses should be able to be upgraded with specific crafting points. For example, if I added a Kitchen to my house in Windsward, it would provide me with +1 to the tier station in the settlement (to a maximum of 5), 500 storage units for associated items (cooking ingredients and food) and allow me to craft food from my house. Certain upgrades may require a garden (most refining stations!) and upgrades should be limited based on the tier of house. This would go someway to offsetting the uncontrollable tiers of stations too.

Lastly (and made this suggestion in another thread too :), in locations where we don’t have a house, allow us to “rent” out warehouse space where we can place chests. This would basically give you the same functionality as a house currently does, but for less money/rent and no trophy slots. It would be good for crafters who make furnishings and also provide a bit of income for settlements where people don’t get a house.

1 Like

Agree to the re-weighing suggestion.

Love the idea of crafting improvement furniture. Such a feature would add meaning to the furniture that you place in your house. I can see arcanist houses with alchemist equipment, jars, and so on whereas the house of an armorsmith probably features casts and stuff you need for armorsmithing. Sounds cool.

Renting out warehouse space: Would it make sense to allow players to add rental space to their house

1 Like

I agree at times I can’t even play the game the way I want to play it because storage is always an issue for me. I have one house thus far with four Hope Storage Chests. I thought that would be sufficient and in some regards it is. However, I encountered an issue with the number of items that I can have in storage. My storage is several hundred pounds under its max limit, but I can’t add anything else to it because I somehow exceeded the number of items that can be stored. There is no indication in the storage system itself that tells me the maximum number of items that I can store only that when I try to move something into storage, I encounter the message that I exceeded either weight or number of items that can be stored.

I understand storage is probably a concern regarding the system administration side to allot each player a certain amount of storage as you would if you were storing other types of data, but that often isn’t limited to the number of items, data types, only storage size itself.

My recommendation either limit it by weight or the number of items that can be stored per tier of storage, but not both. It is pointless to invest in higher tier storage if you are limited by number of items that can be stored.

In other aspects the storage system is cumbersome in the fact that you can’t easily associate fishing gear with jewelry making gear. I spend several minutes each time I go to do something, like fishing or logging to find all of my fishing gear to put on or logging gear for example.

Additionally, a separate topic, by limiting the trade store to 100 items is not efficient for players trying to actually use the trade store to sell stuff. I can easily exceed 100 items with things that I make. It results in players spamming the global channel with their items for sell.

We can only hope that those that are interested in improving a player’s quality of life are actually looking at these types of posts.

I am sure the Amazon team receives more gripes than praises that is just the nature of the beast. I do love the dynamics of the game and the amazing graphics. A lot of work went into the visual experience for the player. I am confident with time that there will be a number of major quality of life improvements for players. What we are only ~60 - 70 days into game since release.

I can see this game blossoming into so much more over time, similar to World of Warcraft as long as you don’t dumb it down and make the grinds pointless if dynamics are only going to change 4-5 months later to make it easier for players to achieve skill milestones.

at some point were are going to need more storage space and houses as new areas get released.

il throw my old idea in here.

  1. allow transfers from any shed to any shed. there is literally no reason to lock it to territory control.
  2. convert and make more furniture do stuff. (cabinets and storage containers should act like bag perks that make sense to that type of storage. (apothecary cabinet = reduced weight for alchemical stuff) and generic cabinets act like chests and stuff like place settings could give food duration bonuses

now there is a reason to furnish your home besides as a flex or to just hold trophies.

also add a decimal or two to your weight system

some of the item weights makes no god damn sense.

This topic was automatically closed 30 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.