Gob Sack

[Ashay]

I've had some ideas in regard to the inventory situation on XI. I understand that there have been many implementations to reduce the strain people have had with their inventories, but there's another pressing issue. For people that dedicate themselves to one main job, they're likely to have more than 80 pieces of equipment that they can utilize in macros. That becomes problematic when trying to fit it all into a Gobbie Bag. Having to carry food, medicine and tools also prevents being able to gear appropriately when necessary.

What I'm suggesting is that a new inventory be implemented, dubbed Gob Sack(similar in name to the Mog Sack). This could be a new inventory with a cap of 80 that is also accessible outside of Mog Houses. What would make this special is that you would still be able to equip any gear that's in this Gob Sack via macros or when in the equipment menu. For example, I'm unable to fit my hMP gear into my Gobbie Bag, so I keep it in my Mog Satchel. However, if I placed it into my Gob Sack, I would be able to use it in macros regularly as if the pieces were in my Gobbie Bag.

If this would be difficult to implement using only /equip, then adjusting it slightly as necessary wouldn't be an issue. How the macro syntax could work would be, in example:

(Item in Gobbie Bag)/equip1 main "Pluto's Staff"

(Item in Gob Sack)/equip2 sub "Ariesian Grip"

I'm not requesting another 80 inventory spaces just for the sake of having more room on my character, but more so that there be another way to macro in equipment that's not in the Gobbie Bag. This could be done using the existing Mog Satchel and Mog Sack and it would be fine.

Thanks for taking the time to read this!

[Divinius]

I believe this has been brought up several times in the past, regarding why you can't already do this with the existing mog satchel/sack. It has to do with not being able to equip gear and access items from more than one location. It's an inherent limitation of the game's code. If this were possible, they would have done it already with the existing storage options.

In short, PS2 limitations.

[Arcon]

In short, PS2 limitations.

No, no one ever said that. And it's wrong. It would work.

[Buffy]

My personal suggestion is a sack for each job, questable at level 100. If on ninja, can equip gear from ninja sack. If on blm, can equip gear from blm sack. Anything usable over multiple jobs can be put in main inventory along with meds. Just give us twenty sacks.

[Laraul]

Yes but people really don't need more room for gear. The problem is actually picking out the stuff you need from a list that's completely unorganized. It's like trying to find a needle in a hay stack.

[Tamoa]

Yes but people really don't need more room for gear.

Wrong. People who like to gear their job(s) for maximum efficiency DO need more room for gear. Not in their Mog House, but in their actual inventory.

It would be awesome if the OP's idea was to be implemented.

[Lokithor]

While it would be nice to have more room for gear, what might help almost as much would be to have a separate bag for things that drop from the field. Items received through the treasure pool (lot'ed, auto drop, default drop when solo, etc) would first go into the treasure bag. You could then take things out but not put anything in yourself. That way, you can use all of your slots for gear.

[Ashay]

Thanks for the comments! I think it would work well in the end. It would take time to fine tune, but that's what the test server is for, right? In the end, it would be a lot more useful to have that extra space for macros, even if it's using the existing Mog Sack and Satchel.

Allowing us to use items even if they're outside of the Gobbie Bag would be nice, but that wouldn't be sufficient enough for people with over 80 pieces of equipment. Mage jobs in particular have this issue, though anybody that's dedicated to their jobs will have a lot of equipment.

I don't think PS2 limitations could really conflict with this, considering they changed the way /wait works in macros.

[Sekundes]

I personally don't really care if the current system can allow for it. Providing more space on your char for gear means we all have space for all that situational gear which keeps us playing for that much longer so we can obtain it. It is in SE's best interest to give us more inventory space on our person. If it can be done in any form or fashion, it should be. If it can't then they should redo the system. If that means goodbye ps2? It's going to happen eventually as you cannot buy them anymore and when they die they are gone for good.

[Ashay]

I personally don't really care if the current system can allow for it. Providing more space on your char for gear means we all have space for all that situational gear which keeps us playing for that much longer so we can obtain it. It is in SE's best interest to give us more inventory space on our person. If it can be done in any form or fashion, it should be. If it can't then they should redo the system. If that means goodbye ps2? It's going to happen eventually as you cannot buy them anymore and when they die they are gone for good.

I agree. It seems as if the PS2 version is hindering XI more than it ever has in the past. More inventory spaces would be nice, hence having a separate inventory called Gob Sack. I'd be fine with the macro adjustment working with Mog Sacks and Satchels as well, though.

[Seriha]

My take on the current /equip command is that, at present, somewhere in the code the command is told where to look, which is your personal inventory. I see no reason why equivalents for your sack and satchel can't be made that simply modify this pointer.

[Ashay]

My take on the current /equip command is that, at present, somewhere in the code the command is told where to look, which is your personal inventory. I see no reason why equivalents for your sack and satchel can't be made that simply modify this pointer.

That's good news, I really hope they can make this happen. Especially as they're adding all of this new equipment for Lv.91~100.

[Javarr]

Personally as far as inventory goes, I say we need to have a system where each slot has it's own inventory. IE: a 15=20 slot area for weapons, 10-15 slot for bodies, so on and so forth. When you set out, you'd have all of the gear you pulled in these little "Mog Pouches" on your bag, and not jamming up your main inventory.

[Greatguardian]

No, no one ever said that. And it's wrong. It would work.

Care to elaborate? It's my impression that the Dev team has already said on more than one occasion that they can't access more than 160 items in two locations in the PS2 RAM at a time. That's why inventories are limited to 80 slots apiece, and you can only look at two of them at a time. Adding a new equip-ready storage option would require the game to hold 3 locations with 176 items at a time, which should be impossible based on what they've told us.

The only half-plausible solution I can think of off the top of my head is the introduction of an /equipsack command, which would only work on items in your mog sack rather than your inventory. This way, the game would still just be opening 76 items in two locations. However, you'd have to design your macros as well as your sack/inventory around which command you're going to be using for each piece. That would be a bit cumbersome.

[Arcon]

Care to elaborate?


The only half-plausible solution I can think of off the top of my head is the introduction of an /equipsack command, which would only work on items in your mog sack rather than your inventory.

Elaborated. That was exactly what the OP said (if I understood it correctly, only he called it /equip1 and /equip2 for satchel and sack respectively), and it has nothing at all to do with memory. The query, as is, could be sent to the server, where it would be decided if it's equippable or not. That's the way it currently works with items anyway. The client doesn't perform a check, whether or not the item exists in your inventory, it just sends the raw string to the server. You can test that semi-easily, if you equip an item before it drops to your inventory, if you press it a second before it drops. On the server, the item has already dropped, and it will equip it, before it says so on the client. This shows, that the client itself does not perform a check for the item, but just sends the command to the server, where the inventory-presence of said item is checked. So /equip1 or /equip2 would only really need to do the same thing, only the server checks for the satchel- or sack-presence.

[Ashay]

That's exactly what I meant. /equip1 being for the existing Gobbie Bag, /equip2 being for Mog Satchel, Mog Sack, or for something new, which was my idea of the Gob Sack. An additional 80 inventory slots that's specifically for equipment and items to be used when you select items or are in the equipment menu.

[Divinius]

Care to elaborate? It's my impression that the Dev team has already said on more than one occasion that they can't access more than 160 items in two locations in the PS2 RAM at a time. That's why inventories are limited to 80 slots apiece, and you can only look at two of them at a time. Adding a new equip-ready storage option would require the game to hold 3 locations with 176 items at a time, which should be impossible based on what they've told us.

The only half-plausible solution I can think of off the top of my head is the introduction of an /equipsack command, which would only work on items in your mog sack rather than your inventory. This way, the game would still just be opening 76 items in two locations. However, you'd have to design your macros as well as your sack/inventory around which command you're going to be using for each piece. That would be a bit cumbersome.

This was the impression I was under as well, since the devs have commented countless times on why things like this (and using consumable items directly from sack/satchel) could not be implemented. People have been requesting stuff like this since the implementation of the new storage areas. If it were easy to do, I would think they would have done it already.

But Arcon told me I was wrong, and since he obviously knows exactly how the game is coded and that it would be simplistic to implement, I just backed off and let him run with it. After all, I don't know either, all I have to go by is what the devs have said before. I'm not the expert that Arcon is.

[Defiledsickness]

in order for us to equip something that's not in our inventory they have to deal with codes that are specifically made to NOT let us do this. then they have to code the new gob sack as it was inventory yet have it not conflict with our normal inventory.

you cant swap stuff from your bag to character without trading an item unless you made it the same as player inventory or messed with a ton of codes.

i really doubt we'll ever get any further then we already are. the only thing i could see is a macro to swap your items for items from the sack or satchel. then you could macro to swap hMP set with MAB set and hit the next macro to equip.

[Raxiaz]

My personal suggestion is a sack for each job, questable at level 100. If on ninja, can equip gear from ninja sack. If on blm, can equip gear from blm sack. Anything usable over multiple jobs can be put in main inventory along with meds. Just give us twenty sacks.

This, quite simply.

[Arcon]

I'm not the expert that Arcon is.

Not many people recognize it. Thank you.

As I said, I think you just misinterpreted the OP. What he said isn't limited by the PS2, because it doesn't affect the client at all. All it would have to do is send a chat line to the server, something the PS2 client is more than capable of doing.


in order for us to equip something that's not in our inventory they have to deal with codes that are specifically made to NOT let us do this.

How do you know that? How do you know they ever made code like that? Do you think they check if the item is in your satchel, and if that's true, they won't let you equip it? Why would they do that, if there's no interface for us to equip from the satchel in the first place?


you cant swap stuff from your bag to character without trading an item unless you made it the same as player inventory or messed with a ton of codes.

Again, how do you know that? How do you know it's a ton, and not just one line, that would exist with or without satchels and sacks? Because that's how I would have done it. And if I could do it, SE can too. People need to stop insulting SE by repeating over and over again that their code could have been done better by a three year old disabled kid. Because if you're assuming what you do of their code, you're pretty much saying that.


i really doubt we'll ever get any further then we already are. the only thing i could see is a macro to swap your items for items from the sack or satchel. then you could macro to swap hMP set with MAB set and hit the next macro to equip.

This, on the other hand, would actually require a lot of changes to the code, the part of the code that allows only one item to switch places at a time. Ever notice that it takes twelve years, give or take, to swap out gear for different jobs from your Mog Safe? That's because the server prevents item transfer while another transfer is in progress. So if they gave us that option, gearing up from your satchel or sack would take ages, but it would work as it does now, or it would require them to change that particular piece of code (which would also be appreciated, but that, I believe, they won't ever touch, because it require looking at a lot of other things too, like trading and item drops from mobs, receiving rewards from NPCs, anything that involves the inventory in any way).

[Greatguardian]

As I said, I think you just misinterpreted the OP. What he said isn't limited by the PS2, because it doesn't affect the client at all. All it would have to do is send a chat line to the server, something the PS2 client is more than capable of doing.

Yes.


How do you know that? How do you know they ever made code like that? Do you think they check if the item is in your satchel, and if that's true, they won't let you equip it? Why would they do that, if there's no interface for us to equip from the satchel in the first place?

A good programmer would do this. Regardless of what the designer thinks the client SHOULD be doing, there's no telling how the client might decide to try to do things anyways. Why should a simple calculator block any input that isn't a number? Do people really try to add Z + leet * awesome? Well, yes. They could. And it would break their calculator. So even though adding words is retarded, the programmer has to allow for completely retarded/unanticipated input and make sure to restrict it from screwing up the program.

In an ideal program, you only allow exactly what you want to allow through, and block out everything else. If you only want your inventory to be equipable, you add catches to ensure that items in any other area cannot be used as equipment. I would be sincerely disappointed if SE's professional coders were so lax in designing fundamental code for use in a worldwide MMO.



Again, how do you know that? How do you know it's a ton, and not just one line, that would exist with or without satchels and sacks? Because that's how I would have done it. And if I could do it, SE can too. People need to stop insulting SE by repeating over and over again that their code could have been done better by a three year old disabled kid. Because if you're assuming what you do of their code, you're pretty much saying that.

I'm not even really sure what he (DefiledSickness) is even trying to say here. Though personally, even if I had implemented a block/catch with only one or two lines to prevent equipping items from non-Inventory areas, I would still have to do more than just delete that line. If I had a restriction in the first place, it was for security reasons (anti-exploit). Simply removing an anti-exploit measure and letting that be that would be an enormous breach of security. Even after removing the potential limitation to inventory-only equipment, they would have to redesign the code in such a way that players are able to equip from 2 sources but unable to find ways to trick the server into letting them equip from other sources.

It is just plain dumb as a coder to assume that either: A) No client is smarter/more savvy than you are, or B) No client will intentionally try to break/exploit/hijack your code. If the possibility exists, someone will pursue it. Taj made that abundantly clear when he still played.



This, on the other hand, would actually require a lot of changes to the code, the part of the code that allows only one item to switch places at a time. Ever notice that it takes twelve years, give or take, to swap out gear for different jobs from your Mog Safe? That's because the server prevents item transfer while another transfer is in progress. So if they gave us that option, gearing up from your satchel or sack would take ages, but it would work as it does now, or it would require them to change that particular piece of code (which would also be appreciated, but that, I believe, they won't ever touch, because it require looking at a lot of other things too, like trading and item drops from mobs, receiving rewards from NPCs, anything that involves the inventory in any way).

Ironically, this is also a simplistic security fix. There used to be no delay in moving items, and people exploited this in order to dupe items in their delivery boxes and other systems. They could remove the limitation, but that would require a significantly more sophisticated anti-cheating fix to the code which I highly doubt they'll pursue.

[Arcon]

A good programmer would do this. Regardless of what the designer thinks the client SHOULD be doing, there's no telling how the client might decide to try to do things anyways. Why should a simple calculator block any input that isn't a number? Do people really try to add Z + leet * awesome? Well, yes. They could. And it would break their calculator. So even though adding words is retarded, the programmer has to allow for completely retarded/unanticipated input and make sure to restrict it from screwing up the program.

In an ideal program, you only allow exactly what you want to allow through, and block out everything else. If you only want your inventory to be equipable, you add catches to ensure that items in any other area cannot be used as equipment. I would be sincerely disappointed if SE's professional coders were so lax in designing fundamental code for use in a worldwide MMO.

[..]

I'm not even really sure what he (DefiledSickness) is even trying to say here. Though personally, even if I had implemented a block/catch with only one or two lines to prevent equipping items from non-Inventory areas, I would still have to do more than just delete that line. If I had a restriction in the first place, it was for security reasons (anti-exploit). Simply removing an anti-exploit measure and letting that be that would be an enormous breach of security. Even after removing the potential limitation to inventory-only equipment, they would have to redesign the code in such a way that players are able to equip from 2 sources but unable to find ways to trick the server into letting them equip from other sources.

While in general that's all true, and security measures should be sure to catch all exceptions, in this particular system, what does it actually do? When I said interface, I meant a serverside interface. Right now, there's no possible way to send a query to the server to equip something from other places, because the server decides where it's equipped from. So having a catch for people trying to equip from their satchel is pointless, because there's no way for them to actually do it. So, no, the server doesn't have any code in place specifically restricting people from doing that. It has only code in place, that allows people to do certain things. And they simply don't have code to allow gearing from /satchel or /sack yet.

So they wouldn't have to worry about any restrictions, or violating some code that they have to revisit, they basically just have to copy the current code they have in place for the /equip command, and copy it for the /equipsatchel and /equipsack commands.

Although now thinking about it, it might not be quite as easy as this. They'd also have to make the equipped gear from /sack or /satchel show green, so they'd have to add a reference to where the gear is equipped from (and also restrict moving that gear around, although a mechanism for that is already in place, which they could also copy from the regular inventory). So maybe not quite as easy after all, at least not considering the surrounding features.


It is just plain dumb as a coder to assume that either: A) No client is smarter/more savvy than you are, or B) No client will intentionally try to break/exploit/hijack your code. If the possibility exists, someone will pursue it. Taj made that abundantly clear when he still played.

Very true, and SE is still behind on that part. See dead/invisible monsters still being transmitted to the client, as well as TP/MP of party/alliance members. All those things cry for abuse by any semi-talented coder. As I explained, I just don't think they allowed equips from everywhere, and then have a servercheck to make sure it equips from inventory only, but the other way around. So there would be no need for such restrictions in the first place, and invalid commands would never be executed at all.


Ironically, this is also a simplistic security fix. There used to be no delay in moving items, and people exploited this in order to dupe items in their delivery boxes and other systems. They could remove the limitation, but that would require a significantly more sophisticated anti-cheating fix to the code which I highly doubt they'll pursue.

I didn't know that, thanks for the info. And yes, unlikely they'd pursue such options, which kinda hints at lazy coding and half-assed fixes, but as long as it works, it's unlikely they'll touch it.

[Greatguardian]

Are we still certain that the inventory is being changed server-side in the first place? I hadn't picked up on that. If they had required a server-side query, then the act of changing multiple pieces of equipment quickly would be laggy and prone to mistakes. You would also be unable to change equipment if your internet connection was cut off at any point.

I'm fairly sure this is not the case. Equipment changes appear instantaneous, and the game can recognize 16-slot changes over the span of 0.1 seconds. You are also able to change your equipment on your client while R0'ing (though if you completely disconnect, the server is never notified of these changes and thus dismisses them when you log back in).

It would make more sense to me if equipment checks are done client side, and only the relevant final data is sent to the server where the actual stats/calculations are done. This would be the fastest, most efficient method, I'd think.

[Arcon]

I was fairly confident that it does take place server-side, but you've got me wondering. I didn't know you could even change gear while R0ing for example. Of course the server does perform the final check, if there's a client-side check involved, it would be to reduce server-spam, so that people don't try to equip items they can't wear all the time. Also, it would help the client change gear before the actual gear change takes place, if the change is valid, which makes it appear as reduced lag.

The amount of items changed doesn't matter so much, as the duration for sequencing the data that's being transferred is still minimal compared to the actual round-trip time (which is the major delimiting factor), and it does in fact cause lag sometimes, which skips certain gear changes. Although to be perfectly honest, I'm not sure if that's always due to this lag, or if there are other factors involved.

Guess I'll have to do some further testing when I get the chance to log in next time.

[Greatguardian]

Well, as for skipping gear changes, this seems to happen more as a function of macro stacking than server-side lag. For example, on the PC version of the game using single lines to denote 16 gear swaps, you can change your gear and use a stat-dependent JA (Chakra) at the same time and get the exact same expected result every time.

eg:
/console exec ChakraGear.txt
/ja "Chakra" <me>

The real gear jumbles start appearing when you have to hit multiple macros. I've been given the impression that each line in a macro is taken sequentially with minor innate delay, rather than simultaneously. This tends to account for the majority of macro-mishaps that occur when two macros are pressed back to back, as pressing a new macro will automatically break/discontinue the previous one.

There is definitely a final check server-side, though, as when you R0 you can change your equipment but your model won't actually blink out. It's my impression that actual item stats are stored server-side, so while the client may be able to tell the server what items you're wearing and what action you're taking, the client won't know what any of those items do until the server processes that information.

Eg: Rather than sending a packet to the server saying "Hey, change my gear to x/x/x/x/x/x/x", and then sending a packet to the server saying "Oh hey, also make me use Chakra", I think it's more likely that the client sends a packet to the server saying "Hey, Greatguardian just used Chakra while wearing x/x/x/x/x/x" followed by "Hey, Greatguardian just attacked the monster while wearing y/y/y/y/y/y/y"

[Draylo]

Drop ps2 support!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Feynman]

Greatguardian and Arcon, I /salute you!

For most people on here it seems that your conversation would have turned into a huge fight. Instead you guys talked, made good points, exchanged ideas and provided something useful to this forum.

I am not a programmer so I thought all of this was very interesting and was happy to be able to read it without tons of slander and hate laced through it.

[Arcon]

There is definitely a final check server-side, though, as when you R0 you can change your equipment but your model won't actually blink out. It's my impression that actual item stats are stored server-side, so while the client may be able to tell the server what items you're wearing and what action you're taking, the client won't know what any of those items do until the server processes that information.

Eg: Rather than sending a packet to the server saying "Hey, change my gear to x/x/x/x/x/x/x", and then sending a packet to the server saying "Oh hey, also make me use Chakra", I think it's more likely that the client sends a packet to the server saying "Hey, Greatguardian just used Chakra while wearing x/x/x/x/x/x" followed by "Hey, Greatguardian just attacked the monster while wearing y/y/y/y/y/y/y"

The way I would have implemented it (and the way I'm implementing it), is that the client only transmits actions, not the current status of the character (since the server has the priority information anyway). That would save on lots of information having to be sent. It wouldn't take much longer to send that information, but it would create a much higher network load, especially for the server. Gear-information isn't that massive, but if everyone would send it virtually permanently, it would accumulate to quite a lot.

Wouldn't your system imply that the server could "revert" changes, if they don't coincide? I don't remember ever "seeing" that taking place, although it wouldn't have to be a visible (or noticeable) process.

How exactly do you mean that gear changes work during R0? I thought you meant the model blinking, but if that's not it, what else? Or you mean that it won't give you an error during a job change?

[Seriha]

Eg: Rather than sending a packet to the server saying "Hey, change my gear to x/x/x/x/x/x/x", and then sending a packet to the server saying "Oh hey, also make me use Chakra", I think it's more likely that the client sends a packet to the server saying "Hey, Greatguardian just used Chakra while wearing x/x/x/x/x/x" followed by "Hey, Greatguardian just attacked the monster while wearing y/y/y/y/y/y/y"

Which would be a grossly inefficient method of coding its own right. For the sake of bandwidth, only individual changes should be registered as they happen. The fact multiple changes can happen simultaneously to our perception doesn't mean they are, it's just computers doing what they do (compute~) sequentially and at great speeds.

In the case of gear swaps, the most rudimentary method to do it would be a combination of If/Then statements. We know the enactor is the /equip command. As I posted earlier, the game has to know where to look for gear, and bluntly, SE would be a bunch of idiots if they let the client dictate what was actually in their personal inventory. Since the /equip command doesn't require the inventory/sack/satchel windows open to work, the whole "PS2 limitations" line is pretty pointless to invoke. Either way, the server knows what you have. The server must look where this knowledge is stored before commencing checks like job/level/race requirements. If you fail that check or the server doesn't find the requested item in your inventory, nothing happens. If the item is there and you can wear it, the next move would be to remove what you're currently wearing, sequentially subtracting any stats it offered. Once that is done, the new gear piece is equipped with all of its modifying values added onto your collective parameters.

So, instead of looking at a series of auto-attacks where "player auto-attacked in xyz gear", the last part was defined the moment anything happened to their data to determine the relevant stats (gear swaps, (de)buffs, JA use, etc.). Technically, we don't tell the server we're auto-attacking every time, either, as that's a process that begins when engaged and repeats relative to our delay. We're at the mercy of the server sending the info back saying that not only did we auto-attack, but for the client to run the animation(s) for your weapon(s) and view the result in your log/onscreen.

Multiply this with thousands of people online at a time and all that needless data of full equipment reports from the client for every single action would add up. And since we've probably all experienced congestion lag (Think the busy times of Beseiged and Campaign) once zones start breaking 100+ people, these checks are probably somehow related the zone server(s). Personally, I've had equip macros fail in these situations where they'd otherwise work. I've also found that trying to run a wait at anything under 0.7 seconds for multiple swaps in a single slot tends to result in a failure of the second one going through if the first wasn't on already. Some might argue this a client issue, and it may very well be a contributor, but I can still remember my newb days when there'd be over 200 people in the Dunes and I'm in a party near no others where swaps messed up and pulled mobs would 'teleport' from point to point until secured by the tank. So, there's a definite critical mass in server transmission somewhere, with the 720+ number being when things get really, really unstable.

Veering back to the /equip command, though. Variants to account for the sack or satchel technically aren't needed. Two more layers of checks could be added where after it checks your main inventory for the item, it sequentially goes from satchel to sack looking for it if it isn't in the prior. From a computational perspective, this could get resource heavy for every time it has to jump to the 2nd or 3rd array, maybe cutting that 720+ number down to 240+. As such, this is why 3 individual commands may be better since they'd still be individual checks up to 80 instead of the bing-bang-boom of 240 run sequentially for each 80 with an all-in-one.

Regardless, I still feel we should have a higher capacity for active use inventory through one of the two methods. I do not want to see "job sacks" since it'd be a nightmare juggling things that aren't All Jobs but more than one in what would translate to 21+ inventories. If SE did veer toward that route, breaking the distinction down to equipment slot would be more easily managed. I feel like we're a bit too late in the game's life for that, though.

[Greatguardian]

The way I would have implemented it (and the way I'm implementing it), is that the client only transmits actions, not the current status of the character (since the server has the priority information anyway). That would save on lots of information having to be sent. It wouldn't take much longer to send that information, but it would create a much higher network load, especially for the server. Gear-information isn't that massive, but if everyone would send it virtually permanently, it would accumulate to quite a lot.

Wouldn't your system imply that the server could "revert" changes, if they don't coincide? I don't remember ever "seeing" that taking place, although it wouldn't have to be a visible (or noticeable) process.

How exactly do you mean that gear changes work during R0? I thought you meant the model blinking, but if that's not it, what else? Or you mean that it won't give you an error during a job change?

As far as reverting changes, do you mean if action packets are received out of order? I don't think it would necessitate changing your gear for you, though the actual effects of said gear may not be processed properly. The calculations for ability usage and attacks are all done server side, so the only important information that the client has to send the server consists of what you're doing, what you're wearing and/or what your stats are.

In order to prevent client-side stat "injection", personally I would have designed the system in such a way that the stats themselves are only determined on the server's side, while the gear the player is wearing can be determined client side (for speed, mainly). It is far less dangerous to allow the client the potential to trick the server into thinking they're wearing a Judge's Greatsword than to allow them the potential to trick the server into thinking they are brew-mode gods 24/7.

As far as gear changes during R0, you can still "change" your gear and get Equipment Changed messages. Whenever your connection is restored, you will be wearing whatever you last told the client to put on you. However, the actual stats on the gear won't affect your character until you restore your connection. I'm actually not sure whether or not the model blinks now that I really think about it -_-. I've had a fairly stable connection for a while now. It very well might, and now I'm not really sure at all. Regardless, it doesn't actually do much of anything since the server doesn't know what it's supposed to be doing.

@Seriha, sending a 16-object array along with your actions to the server is hardly a bandwidth hog =/. Attacks don't just loop, they have to be processed by the server individually whenever the client actually attacks. When the client turns to face away from the target, or moves out of range of the target, it does not attack. It is not a simple while(Status == "Engaged") loop whose interior can be marginalized.

The difference between relying on the server to store your equipment information and update that information only after a request from the client, and the client telling the server items/stats to use for each action, is the difference between occasionally weaponskilling in the relative strength of your Chakra gear and vice versa depending on your connection speed and the speed of your actions. From a gameplay perspective, it is significantly more accurate for them to allow the client to tell the server what the player is wearing for each action before the server runs each calculation than to rely on the server to have up-to-date information on the player's gear status every time it runs a calculation for them.

[Seriha]

I still think you're sending pointless data with your proposed equipment method. As long as something isn't actively happening to change your stats, a performed action, either by or to you, can be pulled indefinitely from the stored data collectively harvested through base stats, (de)buffs, and gear. It's also more friendly to the tic system since the server doesn't have to ask the client if you're wearing something with regen/refresh/regain/etc. for each and every slot every 3 seconds because it should already know when those parameters were set involving the related stats. It also basically parrots monster stats since while they don't wear gear, side-by-side, they should look exactly like players when it comes to all possible parameters used to calculate combat data.

As for auto-attacking, it wouldn't be 'auto' if didn't loop. Haste/Slow aside, the act itself technically doesn't need to know our stats to run on its own, but rather they're queried to determine the result for when it can be successfully performed. The loop, in turn, ends if we die, the mob dies, or we disengage and is subsequently paused when the target is out of range/out of our frontal cone/we're slept/stunned or another action is performed like JA/WS/Magic/Item use. But as long as we're basically flagged for being in combat via /attack on, ctrl+a, or whatever, it will want to try and run forever. If that's not a loop, I don't know what is.

[Lokithor]

Gear is all managed server side to avoid client side hacks that would allow you to obtain any gear you like. Things that are not vetted server side are hackable (flee hack anyone?).

[Arcon]

I'm fairly confident that melee attacks are handled server-side only. The client does not send regular attack-data to the server. It's the reason why we can attack moving mobs by walking ahead of them and looking in the same direction as them. Because the server thinks that you're in optimal melee range, so it commences an attack. If that was handled client-side, the client would have no reason to start an attack when you're in front of the mob. Also, if that was the case, it could be hacked to attack faster than you should under normal circumstances (think Attack-button).

The way I think it works is like this, all of this below is my opinion, and largely unverified, but supports the observations I make around FFXI enough to form a stable platform:

"Gear" data does not actually store any stats at all. Only the slot, charges, and job, race and level requirements are actually stored in an item, the rest is just text. The game isn't aware of the boni to attributes, it just displays the items in the appropriate slots, and changes the graphics to reflect that.

All the stats of the gear is handled server-side. The client only receives the attributes of the player from the server. This includes STR, DEX, VIT, INT, MND and CHR stats, the boni to those attributes (the green +X), HP, MP, TP, Attack, Defense, skills, elemental resistance and job levels. It uses that data to display the values on the screen, but doesn't actually calculate anything. Otherwise it would have to know the potency of a buff as well (like the potency of March, which depends on the BRD's skill). The only stat it uses to actually calculate anything is movement speed.

The gearchange is always handled server-side. The client can only send commands to change it, the server decides when it's actually being changed, or if it's changed at all. A player's stats are updated every time gear is changed, the stats are saved in the server's player profile. So as soon as the gear is changed, the new stats take effect. These are then (periodically) sent to the client, so it can display the new values. This does not happen with the gear change, but it certain intervals, which is why Attack and Defense values sometimes seem to update "delayed" from an actual gearchange.

This is how I see it, and it seems to coincide with what's going on in the game. The stuff about R0ing I'll have to try out by forcing a R0 and see what I can do, I can't speak to that yet.

[Ashay]

I think it's safe to say we'll have to wait for some dev. feedback to know for sure whether or not this can be implemented. I'd imagine it would take time, but given that it would make things easier for players, I'd think they would want to do it.

[Amador]

It would be very sad not to be able to see this level of utility when it comes down to inventory, macros and overall potential found within these ideas.

The idea of being able to use Mog Sack and Satchel as Inventory 2 and 3 to be macro-able in terms of: /equip2 ring1 "Dark Ring" /equip3 ring2 "Dark Ring" /equip2 ear1 "Loquacious Earring" and so on would allow for better management of equipment in terms of MDT, PDT, TP, WS sets.

It would also allow for certain same name objects such as Dark Rings to not conflict with one another when used in the same Macro List since they would be pooled into your equipment. However, if this is a bit much it could be further simplified to add a "Gobbie Sack" which would be for holding equipment that can actually hold gear that can be macro as a /equip2 while keeping the others the same.

[Lokithor]

If the purpose of all of this is to be able to equip gear from 2 or more inventories, then maybe we also need to clarify other expectations. For example, items that are in your inventory can also be "used" from the items list. Things like food and equipped items with enchantments. There's also things that are consumed through game actions such as ninja tools and ammo. Maybe to cut the developers some slack, "usable" items would all still need to be in the main inventory.

[Amador]

It would be decent to be able to use items from an inventory other than the main one.

I for one dislike carrying all of my pop items, medicines and such on my main inventory. I tend to keep them in the satchel, or mog sack. So it is a bit of a hassle to dig them out, make room, use them, put them back and such.

So that too would definitely be nice looking into.

[Swords]

Well here's an offshot idea. We currently know that it's impossible to expand the current gobbie bag beyond 80 do to coding limitations, but what if they were developed into a organizational sub-bag type architecture, by breaking up the bag into smaller sections.

Essentially everything in your Gobbie bag would be broken up into categories like med's/food/head/body/feet/misc items/etc. Each of these categories would be treated like it's own individual bag up to 80 slots. The Macro's behavioral programming might have to be adjusted somewhat to address the change, but depending on how it's setup SE wouldn't likely have to worry too much.

But, that's just a random thought that might work.

EDIT: I didn't read past the first few posts btw, so if someone already posted a similar idea I apologize in advance.

[Seriha]

It's been brought up, and I'd generally be okay with that. Since my point of contention was that equip commands could be told where to look, /equipsack or /equipsatchel is basically the same as /equip feet "whatever" since the slot marked would be the pointer. In terms of gobbie bag quests, I guess people could start with 5 slots in all equipment areas, each one adding +2 each, ending in 25 slots (more than enough for people to start lugging around 8 staves/obis/gorgets/belts). A useable item section or general drop pool can remain at 80.

[Mirage]

Doesn't your character keep auto-attacking the mob you're engaged to even a short while after you've lost connection? That should be plenty of evidence of the client not sending auto attack data at least.

I also just skimmed most of this thread but if you didn't already think of this, it might worth knowing that if you use something like plasticsurgeon to change your appearance client-side, the client will no longer allow you to equip race-specific gear of the race the client thinks you no longer are. It stays on if you put it on before "changing" race, though.

Of course, I have never done this personally, I watched a friend who no longer plays do it.

[Ashay]

Having a separate inventory for each type of equipment would be nice, but I imagine that it'd be even more complicated than to adjust macros and add a new inventory type using the new macro function. If that's the only way this could work though, it'd be just as fine in the long run.

The main idea I had was that you could use /equip1 and /equip2 for the Gobbie Bag and Gob Sack respectively, for the sake of simplicity. That would be another increase of 80 inventory slots, which I know a lot of people wouldn't mind having. Changing macros to work like this but for the Mog Satchel and Sack would be just as good, utilizing /equip2 and /equip3. If it could work, it'd be an easy adjustment to any existing macros and allow for better preparation in terms of what you can equip during battle.

[Greatguardian]

If you want me to be perfectly honest, my biggest concern would be Spellcast compatibility with the new /equip system. That might take nearly as much coding as the change SE has to make, coming from a significantly smaller and unpaid staff.

[Amador]

... seriously? Posting on the official forum over your concern for a 3rd party program? lol.

I hope the 3rd party tool spellcast goes obsolete very quickly.

[hiko]

add new commands to move item sack/satchel <=> bag (without opening windows client side).

i dont think the equip2 is as simple to code as you think because equiping gears is not just moving item from bag to equipment list: equiped gears are still in bag with an "equiped" tag (can't move them)

[Daniel_Hatcher]

Well here's an offshot idea. We currently know that it's impossible to expand the current gobbie bag beyond 80 do to coding limitations, but what if they were developed into a organizational sub-bag type architecture, by breaking up the bag into smaller sections.

Essentially everything in your Gobbie bag would be broken up into categories like med's/food/head/body/feet/misc items/etc. Each of these categories would be treated like it's own individual bag up to 80 slots. The Macro's behavioral programming might have to be adjusted somewhat to address the change, but depending on how it's setup SE wouldn't likely have to worry too much.

But, that's just a random thought that might work.

EDIT: I didn't read past the first few posts btw, so if someone already posted a similar idea I apologize in advance.

Isn't the technicality of it that it can't go past 99, don't know about you but I'd be fine with 99 inventory.

[Swords]

Perhaps, I mostly threw that out there because of the technical limitations preventing inventory slots from going beyond 80. I thought it might be able to circumvent the mechanics and limitations by breaking up everything and treating each category as it's own psudo-gob bag.

[Greatguardian]

... seriously? Posting on the official forum over your concern for a 3rd party program? lol.

I hope the 3rd party tool spellcast goes obsolete very quickly.

If people insist on making a big fuss about it, I'm sure the GMs will just delete the post. I was just hoping people would be mature enough to discuss the very relevant topic like adults. So far, that seems the case, so I don't think there was anything wrong in my assumption.

As for Spellcast going obsolete, that's never going to happen. If they were to introduce /equip1 and /equip2 into the game, they still wouldn't be worth using by the PC playerbase until Spellcast compatibility was added.

As for the 80 inventory limit, yes that is a technical issue. They cannot expand our inventory beyond 80 slots per "space". They can give us more sacks, server space allowing, but they can't expand our inventory beyond 80 slots.

[Kiakasha]

Yes but people really don't need more room for gear. The problem is actually picking out the stuff you need from a list that's completely unorganized. It's like trying to find a needle in a hay stack.

Advanced players need more space for ALL of the situational gear the devs keep cranking out... its all about builds (tp idle ws etc) if u haven't noticed...

[Arcon]

If you want me to be perfectly honest, my biggest concern would be Spellcast compatibility with the new /equip system. That might take nearly as much coding as the change SE has to make, coming from a significantly smaller and unpaid staff.

The location of an item is known to the PC client, or can be found very quickly at least (real time), which means every item must be stored locally somewhere. Which means, it could be made to just find the right location at runtime (or even keep its own memory), and then adjust the /equip command accordingly.

The only problem would be, due to the retarded augment system, that different items with same names can exist. Usually you can just leave identically named items in different spaces, to avoid mix-ups, but this would make it harder. On the other hand, especially with SpellCast, you could work around that, if they allowed you to look in certain spaces specifically. So you could specify to equip Indra's staff from /sack, for lightning damage affinity, and from /satchel for lightning accuracy affinity.

Something like:
<if skill="enfeebling">
<main inv="satchel">$%SpellElementAccuracyStaff</main>
</if>
<elseif skill="elemental|dark">
<main inv="sack">$%SpellElementDamageStaff</main>
</elseif>

This would only work if you had different staves (or multiple staves) in each location. If you use Lv.51 elemental staves, you could do something else, like store the right location for the staff in a variable. Either way, it would still be advantageous to use SpellCast over normal macros.

I wish Windower was obsolete, I wish SE would make the game playable by themselves. But I don't think that goal is within either their capabilities, or desires, which would be even worse. They seem to be quite happy where they are, which is a crying shame, because the game, from a technical standpoint, is horrible.

[Amador]

If people insist on making a big fuss about it, I'm sure the GMs will just delete the post. I was just hoping people would be mature enough to discuss the very relevant topic like adults. So far, that seems the case, so I don't think there was anything wrong in my assumption.

As for Spellcast going obsolete, that's never going to happen. If they were to introduce /equip1 and /equip2 into the game, they still wouldn't be worth using by the PC playerbase until Spellcast compatibility was added.

As for the 80 inventory limit, yes that is a technical issue. They cannot expand our inventory beyond 80 slots per "space". They can give us more sacks, server space allowing, but they can't expand our inventory beyond 80 slots.


Don't derail this thread into a pathetic windower/spell cast discussion.

What's the point in playing a game when you have a little robot doing it all for you?

Your play style is just a copy of what some other cheater is doing. Instead of taking time to make your own macros and play them by your own hand as they should be you're just having someone else hand you over an xml. file to help you play just the same way they play.

How do you discuss cheating as an adult when that in it's own is kid stuff?

I've been a PC player since this game was released, and I have never felt the need to mess with 3rd party tools to help me play. I'm not the only person who feels this way about windower either. It's cheat tool plain and simple.

They did add a Windowed version of the game. A legit version. So as an adult, don't sugar coat the obvious face it for what it is. Cheats are cheats.

Edit Reason: Man and as an add on. They're barely considering ditching PS2, IF at all that survey was in regards to that. You think they're going to worry about some 3rd party tool creators?

"Due to spellcast limitations, we cannot implement this feature." gtfo.

[Ashay]

The point of this topic isn't about Spellcast or otherwise, it's about a new inventory and using a new macro function to utilize this new space well. If they implemented it, I'm sure they would add an on or off function, turning the Gob Sack into a standard extra inventory space and making it so that old macro commands would work normally.

Or they could use /equip for the Gobbie Bag, and /equipgs for the second inventory. I doubt they would go out of their way to completely ruin an existing system, and that's not my intention either. I simply feel that it would be the best way to enhance the macro system enough for players to be able to equip whatever they need to under whatever circumstance.

[Caesaris]

This is one of the better ideas that i've seen on here. Even if they just made it so the Mog Sack could be used to hold consumables like pet food, jug pets, nin tools, ammo, etc. Maybe, just to keep it from being overly abused, allow the players to be able to access items from their Mog Sack that would only be used from the ammo/ranged slot. Being a longtime BST and more recently, a NIN, i have like 30 slots taken up by pet food, jug pets, and now ninja tools. I haven't capped my Ninjitsu skills yet, so I still use the standard tools. It would be nice to have a satchel or backpack of some kind that would allow us to use consumable items via macro's. Just restrict the kinds of items to ranged/ammo/tools to keep it from being abused.

[FrankReynolds]

I'm all for this. I don't even carry anything but sneak, invis and utsusemi tools when I'm not on ninja. Too much friggin inventory taken. If SE can't figure this out, they should hire one of those guys over at Windower or w/e to do it for them.

[Ashay]

I'm glad to hear such great feedback about my idea! I feel it would be more useful than anything else they could update for players. Swapping items in and out of the Gobbie Bag can be a hassle when things are chaotic. I can barely fit Echo Drops let alone any ether I may want to carry for Voidwatch.

[Amador]

It's a shame we can't bring this idea over to the JP community as well. I wonder what their thoughts are regarding the matter.

It would be nice if this forum implemented some type of universal auto translate feature, and a poll system which could be directed to both JP/NA/GE/FR speaking players.

This really does deserve some looking into. Inventories just aren't enough, we need to be able to utilize the items we work hard to get! So much is very useful, and we're limited drastically. Could there be an answer regarding if the dev team may have something that is at least similar to this?

[Prothscar]

Not sure if it has been said, but since this is sort of an inventory-based thread, make gear that you actually have equipped not take up your inventory space. Seriously, why does my breastplate take up space in my backpack if I am wearing it?

Overall finding a way to overcome the incredibly limiting inventory would be grand. My Blue Mage for example has 76 pieces of gear in my main inventory at all times. I have another 40-50 pieces of gear that I am unable to use due to inventory constraints that sit rotting in my mock sack, and when I need those gear sets I have to make concessions and store other gear sets in said mog sack in order to swap the required gear over.

[Arcon]

Not sure if it has been said, but since this is sort of an inventory-based thread, make gear that you actually have equipped not take up your inventory space. Seriously, why does my breastplate take up space in my backpack if I am wearing it?

Imagine the joy of not being able to ungear (or job change) because there's no room in your inventory. SE's solution would be to drop items that don't fit in it.

[Kristal]

Seriously, why does my breastplate take up space in my backpack if I am wearing it?

Because your character isn't naked when you wear 'nothing'? Notice how equiped items become greyed out? That's actually the default gear. Since it has no name ingame, it takes the name of the item that replaced it! It's really the phantom gear that occupies the slot now!

For a more logical reason, check Arcon's reply...

[Krashport]

why not just make the Mog sack into a "Items group two"

Commands Menu---
-Status
-Equipment
-Magic
-Items One ---- 80/80
-Items Two ---- 80/80
-Abilities
-ect...

It would be like having 160 inventory slots on the fly and giving us access to both of them, It would just be splitting it up into two groups, also removing it from the View House menu "Mog Sack" also giving us access for those items to work w/in macros. Doing it this way doesn't seem to much of a difficulty. :D

[Ashay]

That would be nice, and they could use the same macro adjustments or something similar to what I've said to make it work. I don't really believe it would be too difficult to add.

[Amador]

Would be lovely to hear something in regards to an idea either player suggested or something the devs have in regards to this. It would make the use of the current macro system not feel so outdated. It'd be a refreshing hassle free improvement.

[Amador]

So any new thoughts or information regarding a possible implementation of this type of system; or a similar improvement to allow more accessibility to better utilizing our inventory space, macros, and equipment selection due to the growing increase of situational based gear being released soon in December 2011-March 2012?

[Xellith]

If you ever do NOT need more room for your gear then you either are just a dual boxed whm or are doing it wrong. We need more slots or this system implemented.

[Amador]

No kidding. At a certain point, the rise of levels also meant being able to store away and forget about old gear.

Now with the new updates around the corner they're making that old gear situational, and or better to use then certain pieces.

If they continue down the path or recycling old gear, making it better then we'll need a lot more than 80 slots.

Being able to equip this gear from other 2 inventories and or a special inventory would be tremendous and really help out true career players.

[Meyi]

I support this. Even if they made it so the Mog Sack was accessible through macros, I'd support that feature too.

I have almost no room because of my black mage, and I'm still missing pieces...

[Ashay]

I support this. Even if they made it so the Mog Sack was accessible through macros, I'd support that feature too.

I have almost no room because of my black mage, and I'm still missing pieces...

That was the whole point behind my ideas. Even if they used the already existing Mog Sack and Satchel, it would be a huge improvement over only being able to use macros from the Gobbie Bag. The Gob Sack thing is just another form of inventory so that we can have yet another 80 inventory spaces per character.

Being dedicated to one or a few jobs can be really demanding on inventory space, and this seems like the only real solution to be able to macro in everything you would want or need to.

[Rohelius]

I also found myself not using monk anymore because it would mean i have to buy all elemental tools and still have to carry TP-WS-PDT or MDT-EVA-Chakra gear.....
Solution: i main ninja now :/

I support this.

[Juri_Licious]

It's pretty difficult and time consuming setting up gear swaps on the fly when, you play multiple classes and they hog all your inventory spots.

I support this as well.

[LeaderofAtlantis]

Seriously, if SE implemented something like this, the game would become so gear dependent and leetists would make me want to quit a game I love and have played almost since the initial NA release without anything more than maybe a 1 or 2 week break (because I'm on vacation somewhere). I gear swap too, but the balance to allowing us to do that is probably limiting our inventory space. We have to make decisions as to what we need for a particular battle.

I know this isn't going to win me a popularity contest, but come on.

[Arcon]

Seriously, if SE implemented something like this, the game would become so gear dependent and leetists would make me want to quit a game I love and have played almost since the initial NA release without anything more than maybe a 1 or 2 week break (because I'm on vacation somewhere). I gear swap too, but the balance to allowing us to do that is probably limiting our inventory space.

No, the PS2 is, SE said so themselves. How is it not gear dependant already? How would it make it worse? Seems like a bunch of groundless assumptions. And even if it was true, why would they make the game hell for you?

[LeaderofAtlantis]

Fine the PS2 is, that's not the main point of my argument though. I'm a THF mainly. I've gone through the phases of "Do you have TH gear? You must wear it at all times", etc.

Gear swapping was not part of the original design of the game. It's an overlooked side effect to the original coding and they won't fix it, but they certainly shouldn't make it even easier for you to do. My feeling is that if your gameplay is that gear dependent, that might be one reason creatures like Absolute Virtue and Pandemonium Warden weren't taken out before the Lv75 cap was increased.

I gear swap, I do, but I don't need more than 80 slots to play and play well.

[Dirtyfinger]

I gear swap, I do, but I don't need more than 80 slots to play and play well.

Poor argument, just because you don't optimize your character at all times doesn't mean others don't.

[Ashay]

Seriously, if SE implemented something like this, the game would become so gear dependent and leetists would make me want to quit a game I love and have played almost since the initial NA release without anything more than maybe a 1 or 2 week break (because I'm on vacation somewhere). I gear swap too, but the balance to allowing us to do that is probably limiting our inventory space. We have to make decisions as to what we need for a particular battle.

My reasoning behind this idea isn't to be an elitist though, it's about being the best player you can be on a game that has a lot of challenging things to do. I'm sure a lot of people that have been playing for years have a lot of equipment to show for their time and effort, and not being able to use it well is a terrible setback to the game.

As WHM being my main job, I have to be versatile in everything I do. I can't just carry around a Cure Potency set and call it a day, I have to be ready to use Enhancing, Enfeebling, Divine and other types of magic which require specific pieces of equipment. I'm not even able to change off of WHM to another job easily because of how demanding the inventory space for my main job is. If anything, this idea would make playing a lot easier for a lot of people, maybe even more enjoyable and less stressful as well.

All of the newer content post Lv.75 has required that players be able to adapt to the situation as many monsters have special attacks that require necessary preparation, be it equipment, or items and ninja tools. Having to carry around over ten ninjutsu tools at all times is a hassle, and that goes for those subbing NIN as well.

Arguing that this isn't a good idea because you don't personally need the extra inventory space or macro adjustments isn't really fair. You say you're on THF most of the time, and list your main job as PUP. You have two jobs, as opposed to people that have been playing for over five years and have 10 or 15 jobs leveled to 95. Over all that time, it's likely that these veteran players have obtained a lot of equipment. There's AF+1, AFII+1, AFIII+2, Limbus, Salvage, Einherjar, Sky and Sea, Abjuration, and Voidwatch equipment. The list goes on and a lot of it is definitely situational.

Most importantly to remember is that the update is coming soon and that's going to have AFII+2 gear. They'll never stop adding equipment, because that's what keeps people motivated to play. Being able to macro it on even if it's in your Mog Sack or Satchel would be efficient and benefit all players, overall.

[LeaderofAtlantis]

Didn't even notice PUP was being listed as my main job. I've been away awhile from the forums, so I haven't figured out all the new settings yet. I also have PLD to Lv90 (I work 8-12 hour days and sometimes 7 days a week, so anymore, I can't play hardcore like I used to).

My point was that the inventory space limitations is another form of balance. If we could just have access to all the best gear available all the time for all situations, it kind of forces us all into a cookie cutter gear set and play style in order to win.

I feel the same way when I see people say "you have to be this job with these jobs in order to kill this NM." Is that because they designed it that way or is it because we just aren't planning our strategies well enough with what we have available to us? I would argue that 9 times out of 10, it's the latter.

[LeaderofAtlantis]

Poor argument, just because you don't optimize your character at all times doesn't mean others don't.


Poor argument. Plenty of people didn't want SE to change the minimum level requirement for Abyssea either, but that doesn't mean it shouldn't have happened. I mean, if you can take a job from Lv30 to Lv75 or higher in less than 24 hours, why not just create a Moogle that asks "What level do you want to be?" and get "the grind" over with. I'm guessing you wouldn't want that either because it'd be absurd.

If you need more than 80 gear pieces in order to be successful in a battle in this game, you're doing something wrong.

[FrankReynolds]

Poor argument. Plenty of people didn't want SE to change the minimum level requirement for Abyssea either, but that doesn't mean it shouldn't have happened. I mean, if you can take a job from Lv30 to Lv75 or higher in less than 24 hours, why not just create a Moogle that asks "What level do you want to be?" and get "the grind" over with. I'm guessing you wouldn't want that either because it'd be absurd.

If you need more than 80 gear pieces in order to be successful in a battle in this game, you're doing something wrong.

Actually his argument was spot on.

Just because you can main heal on WHM with no gear on doesn't mean that it's a good idea, or even fun for that matter.

SE put macros in the game (as they should have), and using them means having gear to use them with.

If you don't want to change gear for the situation, that's your prerogative, But the bulk of the community wants to swap into the best gear possible for each action they perform. That means we need a way to access that gear. Making and using macros is as much of a challenge as anything else in the game, and just as much a part of it. Frankly if you are bad at gear swap macros, then on at least some level, you are not good at the game.

[Dirtyfinger]

Poor argument. Plenty of people didn't want SE to change the minimum level requirement for Abyssea either, but that doesn't mean it shouldn't have happened. I mean, if you can take a job from Lv30 to Lv75 or higher in less than 24 hours, why not just create a Moogle that asks "What level do you want to be?" and get "the grind" over with. I'm guessing you wouldn't want that either because it'd be absurd.

If you need more than 80 gear pieces in order to be successful in a battle in this game, you're doing something wrong.

Explain to me how I'm doing it wrong by having say 70+ pieces of equipment?

Apart from the obvious TP & WS sets there's a magnitude of other sets I carry around to be well, optimial, which in turn is kinder on the healers.

Let's say I'm on Samurai:

I have +50 Enmity for Provoke - easy to figure out why.

I have +200 for Barfire, and with a properly equipped Bar spell set mage I can reach over 350, handy for tanking things like Tiamat or Orthrus if I'm in Abysea.

MDT set so I always take -50% of the damage taken (with Shellra V), also some MDB to negate that further.

PDT -50% for nasty TP moves, or if Third Eye is down.

Then there's stuff like the Meditate, Sekkanoki gear.

Edit: I forgot to mention I can exceed that amount of gear quite easily on NIN seeing as I'd have to carry Ninjutsu tools, Nuking set and additional weapons if I'm in Abyssea for proc.

[Arcon]

If you need more than 80 gear pieces in order to be successful in a battle in this game, you're doing something wrong.

Yes, thankfully no one argued that. Well, except you just now. Not sure who you're talking to. But some people tend to talk to themselves on here, so I'll just go with it.

[Amador]

What we're trying to do here is implement an idea of how we as a player base can better use our current "Mog Sack" and "Mog Satchel" or even implement the idea of a "Gob Sack" which allows us to utilize gear, items, potentially magic and abilities that requires item use such as Ninjitsu,Tomahawk, Angon, and Elemental Cards as well as any other such item without the need of having it in the main inventory.

In example: /equip2 head "Twilight Head" /item2 "Massive Armband" <t> /ma "Tonko: Ni" <me> /item2 "Antidote" <me>
Regardless of which way it's implemented, it will be extremely beneficial, and allow ways of character development beyond a gear perspective, medicines are very underused in this game. That is something that would promote the use of them best being able to actually have the inventory to do so.

This will allow for better organization. As this game progresses, level 99 is reached, new expansions, new trials, and items are released we will need more inventory access. If you look at a majority of equipment, it's not always right to have it on 100% of the time because it is not ideal. Macros allow us to use our abilities best, acquire TP faster, WS harder, WS safer, be more offensive, or defensive. Everything calls for different means.

It's not about being hardcore, or an elite player. It's about developing your character so that even when you're low on playtime you can do things quickly because you have the means to do so. So what we want is to be able to use what we have available to us in a legitimate manner.

You are not forced in anyway to use macros or to play the way that others do. If you choose and find a certain play style you are happy with by all means enjoy. However, for those of us who like macro extensive play as is found in many MMOs, RTS games, and Shooters, we would like the ability to do more with what we have, with what we've worked hard to obtain.

"Is that because they designed it that way or is it because we just aren't planning our strategies well enough with what we have available to us?" -Leaderofatlantis

This right here is what we're trying to accomplish. We're trying to utilize what we have available to us in order to be better players. It's not that they have designed it this way, it's that it's a limitation. Therefore, this quote is false because we have been using what is available to us in gear swaps however demanding to make things work. Without macro swapping, and utilizing ideal gear for specific situations we wouldn't be able to get by a lot of battles.

I urge you revise, what you have stated in your posts and you rethink what you have said. As what we are trying to do in this thread is a means to find a way to show the devs what a good idea it would be to better utilize our inventories. As your character develops, you will find that THF, PLD and PUP are very equipment, and very macro dependent jobs.

Whether your current skill as a player allows you to see it now or later, it's something you will eventually find is very useful, and allows and broadens the way you plan your battles.

[Lokithor]

This is an old game. Providing mechanisms in the game that encourage people to collect (and use) more gear benefits the longevity of the game. I'm all for that.

[Amador]

This is an old game. Providing mechanisms in the game that encourage people to collect (and use) more gear benefits the longevity of the game. I'm all for that.

Get a eye in on the new equipment being developed/tested/discussed?

Pretty amazing gear, a lot of which will definitely earn a keep and stay in our current inventories, however this further stresses the inventory issue at hand!

It's safe to assume that most people who care about their career job and or even just jobs they excel at to be good with when required by whatever event calls sit around 75~79 inventory space, some even 80.

Regardless, new gear will in fact always come. Old game or not, the game still changes and freshens up as much as possible every update. I hope that the inventory, and usability of macros is something that is freshened sooner rather than later.

It's something they're doing for 14 from what I've read as well.

They want to make it so that certain items do not consume inventory space. Kind of like they're own special place. It'd be nice to see -something- at this point regarding some of that for Final Fantasy 11.

[FrankReynolds]

They want to make it so that certain items do not consume inventory space. Kind of like they're own special place. It'd be nice to see -something- at this point regarding some of that for Final Fantasy 11.

That would be a huge step in the right direction. Maybe make a bag for each slot, and one for consumables.

80 slots for body
80 slots for hands
80 slots for head piece
80 slots for neck
80 slots for ammo
80 slots ......

That would make organizing inventory and changing jobs sooooo much faster :)

[Amador]

That would be a huge step in the right direction. Maybe make a bag for each slot, and one for consumables.

80 slots for body
80 slots for hands
80 slots for head piece
80 slots for neck
80 slots for ammo
80 slots ......

That would make organizing inventory and changing jobs sooooo much faster :)

That's... a bit excessive.

What they were doing for 14, and or are doing for 14. Is a way to allow food items, medicines, temps to not use up inventory space. As well as something to do with equipped items and what not.

They also, currently allow bazaar to be a separate inventory in a way. Allowing you to put items up for sale, for reasonable or unreasonable prices. Either way, they do not remain in your main inventory and you're able to leave them there.

So there's a lot of ways they could look into this, and maybe make a inventory slot very much like they do for medications in Abyssea. This time however for things like food, ninjitsu, ammo, who knows. However, it's just another one of those things that would be beneficial. Although not as beneficial as being able to utilize your inventory on the field regardless of inventory you're looking into Mog Sack/Satchel/Main.

[FrankReynolds]

I know it's excessive, but you know what "they" say: "Never ask for a nickle if you need a dime. Ask for a dollar."

Or something along those lines. The point being that organization is needed too. Currently everything gets thrown in one bag, and you have to sort through it all to try and find crap. Being able to know exactly where to look for an item based on what the item was would be really handy, instead of memorizing the organization of several hundred items.

Part of the reason I brought it up is because the devs are asking people what items they would like to see added to storage slips, and my best answer is NONE. Those storage slips are a pain in the ass. its like I have 3 mog houses now. I have shit on a bunch of different slips , other things spread amongst my multiple bags, and even more in different bags on my mule. They need to either come out with NON job specific gear that is sooo awesome that I can throw all this crap out and never look back, or Really overhaul the storage. I mean it was great that they added the mogsack / satchel..... but then they immediately added 500 pieces of job specific gear to go in it, and a really fast means of leveling all those jobs.

I have no idea how they code the items, so I don't know if they can change the storage modules completely, makes RA/EX items into Key Items, Add like 5 more mog sacks, or what.... but this is getting silly. Now they are revamping old gear that everyone had stored so you will need to pull all that crap back out too .....

EDIT: Being able to send / trade stuff with another character that is linked to the same SE account would be an improvement. I really don't have the patience to log in and out multiple times moving items to mules. It would be a lot more convenient to be able to just walk up and trade. And before you say I can already do that.... I'm talking about the R/E items.

[Tsukino_Kaji]

That would be a huge step in the right direction. Maybe make a bag for each slot, and one for consumables.

80 slots for body
80 slots for hands
80 slots for head piece
80 slots for neck
80 slots for ammo
80 slots ......

That would make organizing inventory and changing jobs sooooo much faster :)I would REALY hate having to go into 16 different menus to gear a job every single time.

[Arcon]

I would REALY hate having to go into 16 different menus to gear a job every single time.

I think he means being able to equip from all of those. It would be easier to implement than equipping from Sack/Satchel (which is what this thread suggested), because there are no special cases and the script wouldn't need to look in which bag to search for an item (i.e. earrings will always be in the earring-bag).

And (if that's what he meant) it wouldn't require gearing at all, unless you have more than 80 pieces for every slot, which I wouldn't mind if it became an actual limit, because I doubt there's more than 40 ideal pieces for every occasion on every job.

[FrankReynolds]

I think he means being able to equip from all of those. It would be easier to implement than equipping from Sack/Satchel (which is what this thread suggested), because there are no special cases and the script wouldn't need to look in which bag to search for an item (i.e. earrings will always be in the earring-bag).

And (if that's what he meant) it wouldn't require gearing at all, unless you have more than 80 pieces for every slot, which I wouldn't mind if it became an actual limit, because I doubt there's more than 40 ideal pieces for every occasion on every job.

Exactly. I'm sure they will never do something like that, but hey, why not ask anyways.

[Tsukino_Kaji]

They said the bag was limited to 80 due to the PS2. No joke, some DEV said it. I think they would technically limit what you are suggesting as well.

[Amador]

They said the bag was limited to 80 due to the PS2. No joke, some DEV said it. I think they would technically limit what you are suggesting as well.

More than likely not since because of that they added Satchel and Mog Sack. Furthermore they did in some way or another state that they wanted to potentially add another. Therefore it'd unlikely it'd be something that they couldn't continue to add on. It's just a shame they can't transcend 80 due to those PS2 Limitations.

So, if they added more inventories now it'd basically be the same. Be nice if they had utility and not just a form of an invisible pack mule.

[Ashay]

Either idea would be great, really. With FrankReynolds' idea, it would make keeping the gear for your favorite jobs on you at all times much easier than any other implementation they could make. It could work pretty easily if they changed the coding to have "/equip head" equip anything you macro in from the 80 inventory spaces for headpieces.

I imagine it would work by selecting Items from the menu, then having a sub-menu with Main, Sub, Ranged, Ammo, Head, Neck, Earrings, Body, Hands, Rings, Back, Waist, Legs and Feet, with an actual Items menu at the top to use for carrying potions, food and ninja tools.

With my idea, the main thing I'd like to see implemented is an adjustment to macros so that they can be better utilized in making gameplay the best it can be. Gob Sack is just a name for another 80 space inventory. There's a Gobbie Bag, which is your main inventory, then Mog Safe, Storage, Mog Locker, Mog Satchel and Mog Sack. My idea behind Gob Sack was that it could be something similar to the Gobbie Bag, another 80 inventory spaces for you to use items from, to use ninja tools from, to use macros with.

That was the whole idea behind /equip1 macroing on equipment from your Gobbie Bag, while /equip2 could macro on equipment from the "Gob Sack". I don't think it's an impossible thing to ask for. I'm not asking for the Gobbie Bag to be extended in size to 160, or even just 100 because I know that would be impossible to implement. Anything that would make playing a little less stressful would be welcome.

Porter Moogles and Storage Slips are nice, and being able to send certain items to other characters on your account is cool, but it's not relative to the main issue I'm trying to press.

[FrankReynolds]

Another thing they could do is make an option to turn expendables into Temp items. You of course wouldn't be able to ever sell them, but they would not take any inventory.

[Amador]

This is kinda what they were doing on 14, however they weren't barring you from selling an item or not. It was just a place for these type of items to go.

Which would be pretty cool.

[Ashay]

Can we get a little attention over here, devs?