Macro/Books/Pages.

[Arcon]

Naw looks to me that it's just you solo "Trying" to speak for everyone else. If you weren't so gungho about this a "Same thread", You wouldn't have to explain yourself which you are doing repeatably.

I hate leaving the last word to someone who's wrong, it gives the impression that I can't defend myself against them, which is untrue. I'm aware that that's a childish attitude and leads to several unnecessary arguments, but it's part of my OCD and I can't just ignore it.

One way or another there is a lot of threads that are the same and similar. By calling this thread pointless you've called everyone that took their time and effect in posting in it thus far pointless... rude much?

No, I called every repost except the first pointless. And it's not an insult to anyone, it's merely a fact, which is uncomfortable to some people (apparently you too, as you're not taking it well). I'm just stating that all their threads won't reach the devs, as it's already been posted and I doubt the reps are big into repeating themselves over and over, mainly because they already told us how it works. By pointing out that there's been other threads, it would make sense to find those and keep discussing things in there, to keep all the information in one thread and not scattered around ten different ones where no one could find relevant information if they're looking for it.

I've read a lot of those old threads and most of them talked about adding a new system to the previous macro's system, where this one just adds lines to be able to input more changes to said gear. Why not try not being a forum nazi? and add to the conversation... maybe you'll have something more intelligent to say.

I said plenty of intelligent things about it supporting this very cause in other threads. Repeating myself in here would do no good to anyone. You're just taking it personally that I told you that there's been threads about this very issue before, which you shouldn't have, because it wasn't.

And while there's many threads suggesting slightly different macro/gear things, some are actually exactly the same (none of which insist that 12 lines is somehow the sweet spot, though, which I admit I also find odd). There's also a reason for why most threads are suggesting something else, by the way, and it's precisely because people suspect that SE are either not gonna change it (may be related to PS2 issues, as macros are also stored in active memory, which we all know is painfully small on the PS2), or take too long mulling it over, so they come up with alternate solutions to the same problem. Some of which are pretty excellent, and which I'd prefer over more macro lines. Regardless, I support all of these threads fully and I liked every one of them, including yours.

[Krashport]

I hate leaving the last word to someone who's wrong, it gives the impression that I can't defend myself against them, which is untrue. I'm aware that that's a childish attitude and leads to several unnecessary arguments, but it's part of my OCD and I can't just ignore it.

Thanks for clearing that up and explaining that you're Code of conduct is based on a childish attitude.^^

I said plenty of intelligent things about it supporting this very cause in other threads. Repeating myself in here would do no good to anyone. You're just taking it personally that I told you that there's been threads about this very issue before, which you shouldn't have, because it wasn't.

I agree, with in some of those threads you have quite afew things to enlighten the subject. Where now you don't have (you just said it yourself); nothing else to add. then why are you within this thread, one can't help to wonder. Ok all those mutiple thread you have shown are same and similar in many ways, if this thread is I'm sure a rep will take care of it.

And while there's many threads suggesting slightly different macro/gear things, some are actually exactly the same (none of which insist that 12 lines is somehow the sweet spot, though, which I admit I also find odd).

Thanks for taking all that time surfing through the forums and linking all those useful links about concerning Macros saves me the trouble. About your feelings on the sweet number (12), Gear swaps are considered Head, Body, Hands, Legs, Feet, Waist, Back, Neck, Ear1/2, Ring1/2 for the most part reason why I chose the number (12). Question at Arcon, Why do you feel it's odd? Do you think their should be more or less lines within a macro?

There's also a reason for why most threads are suggesting something else, by the way, and it's precisely because people suspect that SE are either not gonna change it (may be related to PS2 issues, as macros are also stored in active memory, which we all know is painfully small on the PS2), or take too long mulling it over, so they come up with alternate solutions to the same problem. Some of which are pretty excellent, and which I'd prefer over more macro lines. Regardless, I support all of these threads fully and I liked every one of them, including yours.

See that's the thing out of all those threads you shared with us most of them are assumptions about Playstation 2 limitations. but where is the facts I checked everywhere and can not find anything not even a rep said anything about this, not even in those Threads you shared with us where is the Facts. If you have a link enlighten us.

[Arcon]

[..] then why are you within this thread, one can't help to wonder.

Why are you here? What constructive thoughts did you have to add, except for the OP which was redundant? Do you think you own the thread because you posted the OP?

About your feelings on the sweet number (12), Gear swaps are considered Head, Body, Hands, Legs, Feet, Waist, Back, Neck, Ear1/2, Ring1/2 for the most part reason why I chose the number (12). Question at Arcon, Why do you feel it's odd? Do you think their should be more or less lines within a macro?

Unless they add some version of the previously mentioned /equipset command, or some form of conditional gear engine like SpellCast, I say more. 12 is an arbitrary number you chose, which leaves no room for ammo changes (which you should swap too, as it will not wipe your TP), and staves/instruments for mages and bards. Not to mention lack of a macro line for the actual comment, which you'd have to waste an entire macro for just to activate it, which you could otherwise place on one line. Also it would prevent putting other commands on there, like switching back to another macro set/book.

See that's the thing out of all those threads you shared with us most of them are assumptions about Playstation 2 limitations. but where is the facts I checked everywhere and can not find anything not even a rep said anything about this, not even in those Threads you shared with us where is the Facts. If you have a link enlighten us.

I don't, nor did I ever state that that was the case. I just said that it "may" be related to it, as we all know that the PS2 is short on memory. And to our current knowledge that is a fact, as it was stated by several community reps and SE staff, in response to inventory limitations, blinking issues and auto-translate options. So the theory is that it may extend to macro storage as well.

Here's the thing, why don't they add more lines? People have theories. Either SE can't, and the only way that would apply is if it was limited by the PS2, as neither the PC nor the Xbox impose any restrictions that the PS2 can handle otherwise. If that's the case, our suggestions are fruitless, because there's nothing to be done about this. That's why some people move on to suggesting other things that would bypass these issues.

The second option would be they don't want to. Sadly, this is a real option, as SE has shown unreasonable paranoia about these things in plenty of other cases. They're so afraid that people will abuse things that aren't worth abusing, that they figure they need to limit the capabilities of their loyal customers to prevent it. If that's the case, all our petitions and suggestions are futile anyway.

However, if neither of those things apply, why limit it to 12? Why not do 20? That should be enough for all gear changes and some miscellaneous stuff (like activating the spell/ability itself and changing back to another set). Why not 32? Do you think someone will abuse it to shout in 32 lines? And hell, even if someone would, there's ways to prevent that, for example just allow only x shout-lines out of the 32. Why do you feel 12 is appropriate? Why are you so scared of an upper limit? It almost reminds me of SE's own paranoia, which I also never figured out.

12 simply doesn't feel logical to me. The 6 we have now are arbitrary. 12 is 2x arbitrary, picked by you because that's what you deemed necessary for efficient gearswapping. However, that's only the case for you and how you play. Others have their macros laid out differently and wanna swap more gear. Some wanna combine macros into one, with a wait command. There's plenty of reasons why 12 would be bad as well. It would only suck half as much as 6, but it would still suck. Unless they gave us an SE approved version of SpellCast, in which case I wouldn't care if they reduced the lines to 2.

[Krashport]

Why are you here? What constructive thoughts did you have to add, except for the OP which was redundant? Do you think you own the thread because you posted the OP?

Think your Code of conduct is acting up again. ^^

Unless they add some version of the previously mentioned /equipset command, or some form of conditional gear engine like SpellCast, I say more. 12 is an arbitrary number you chose, which leaves no room for ammo changes (which you should swap too, as it will not wipe your TP)

Ranger & Corsair.
Range Attack Set.
/equip "Ammo" <Rusty Bolt> Just don't forget to keep those quivers open!
/range <t>

Ranger & Corsair.
Haste set and or Weapon skill Set.
/equip "Head" (1)
/equip "Body" (2)
/equip "Hands" (3)
/equip "Legs" (4)
/equip "Feet" (5)
/equip "Ring1" (6)
/equip "Ring2" (7)
/equip "Ear1" (8)
/equip "Ear2" (9)
/equip "Back" (10)
/equip "Waist" (11)
/equip "Neck" (12)

and staves/instruments for mages and bards. Not to mention lack of a macro line for the actual comment, which you'd have to waste an entire macro for just to activate it, which you could otherwise place on one line. Also it would prevent putting other commands on there, like switching back to another macro set/book.

Black Mage & and any other Mage Job.
Nuke/Curing Set.
/equip "Main" <Staff>
/equip "Sub" <Grip>
/equip "Ammo" <???>
/equip "Ranged" <???>
/Spell "cure/Fire" <st>

Black Mage & and any other Mage Job. Refresh set and or Curing/Nuking Set.
/equip "Head" (1)
/equip "Body" (2)
/equip "Hands" (3)
/equip "Legs" (4)
/equip "Feet" (5)
/equip "Ring1" (6)
/equip "Ring2" (7)
/equip "Ear1" (8)
/equip "Ear2" (9)
/equip "Back" (10)
/equip "Waist" (11)
/equip "Neck" (12)

However, if neither of those things apply, why limit it to 12? Why not do 20? That should be enough for all gear changes and some miscellaneous stuff (like activating the spell/ability itself and changing back to another set). Why not 32? Do you think someone will abuse it to shout in 32 lines? And hell, even if someone would, there's ways to prevent that, for example just allow only x shout-lines out of the 32. Why do you feel 12 is appropriate? Why are you so scared of an upper limit? It almost reminds me of SE's own paranoia, which I also never figured out.

Why would you need that many lines please tell us, how would you work 20-32 lines of usage!!? The only Idea I could fathom is that you want one macro to do it all. Haste gear>Weapon gear>Weapon skill>repeat "go afk".

12 simply doesn't feel logical to me. The 6 we have now are arbitrary. 12 is 2x arbitrary, picked by you because that's what you deemed necessary for efficient gearswapping. However, that's only the case for you and how you play. Others have their macros laid out differently and wanna swap more gear. Some wanna combine macros into one, with a wait command. There's plenty of reasons why 12 would be bad as well. It would only suck half as much as 6, but it would still suck.

Code of conduct. ^^

[Arcon]

Think you're Code of conduct is acting up again. ^^

On the contrary, I just repeated to you what you said to me, to point out to you how you were the one acting childish this time. I know very well when I'm being childish and immature and I have no problems at all to admit to it, but this wasn't one of those times. This was you being childish and me calling you out on it. You asked me why I'm in here, which is a pointless question because this is an official forum where every currently paying customer may express their opinion, so I directed the same question back at you.

Ranger & Corsair.
Range Attack Set.
[..]
you still have (10) open lines... you can only do two actions, you shouldn't* need anymore.

Ranger & Corsair.
Haste set and or Weapon skill Set.
[..]

Black Mage & and any other Mage Job.
Nuke/Curing Set.
[..]

you still have (7) open lines... you can only do five actions, you shouldn't need anymore.

Black Mage & and any other Mage Job. Refresh set and or Curing/Nuking Set.
[..]

Bolded your error in judgment, which is exactly what I was talking about. "You shouldn't need anymore" is just you imposing your ideas and your style of playing on others. You're not in any position to tell anyone what they should or shouldn't need. Just earlier Thanotos told you that gear swapping is wrong and shouldn't be a part of the game, which you immediately dismissed. It's the same thing. You're not comfortable with his judgment of what you should be allowed to do. Yet you feel you can judge others on the same matter?

Why would you need that many lines please tell us, how would you work 20-32 lines of usage!!? The only Idea I could fathom is that you want one macro to do it all. Haste gear>Weapon gear>Weapon skill>repeat "go afk".

I wouldn't, and I never said it was for me. Very few of my macros even exceed one line, so I don't care at all about how many in particular it is. All I'm saying is that 12 is a completely arbitrary number to other people. You picked it because it would fit your playstyle and now you seem hell bent on it being "just right", and keep listing weird and incomplete examples that I can't even make much sense of, although I admit it may be the alcohol, so I'll review it in the morning. It still doesn't change the fact that there's certain actions for which I want to change 15 pieces of gear, which is not possible with your suggested "solution".

Code of conduct. ^^

Nope, again not. That was a perfectly valid argument, and I have to admit I feel a little disheartened that you ignored it based on your perception of my attitude, which wouldn't, in any way, invalidate the argument itself, even if that perception was accurate. I've been feeling especially chipper today and I was never in the mood to behave immaturely at all. I'm simply telling you what your argument sounds like to other people. It sounds like you picked a number that just suits you, and you defending it and telling others that they change too much gear or shouldn't need anymore just makes you sound arrogant and fascist, placing your own opinion over other peoples'. Because in the end, that's all it is, your opinion. And while you're entitled to it just like everyone else, it doesn't make it special, right or even appropriate.

Now, I've explained to you why just 12 slots are unreasonable, and the only counter-argument you had was "you shouldn't need anymore", which is as wrong as needing anything in a game can be, as Thanotos' pointed out with his opinion that you shouldn't need any gear swaps at all. So your only counter-argument was your opinion of other peoples' playstyle.

You, however, never explained to me why 32 slots would be unreasonable. Your bolded reply seems to indicate that you're quite shocked at that suggestion, because you seem to have read into it that that I actually wanna change 32 pieces of gear with one press of a button or something, which isn't the case. But even if it was, why is that bad? Would it hurt you if I had 32 macro lines? Or even if you had it? Why is it excessive? Of course we're still under the assumption that PS2 memory isn't a limitation for this, because otherwise all our arguments would be pointless, but if we disregard that restriction, why is it excessive? Do you know how little memory storing every single macro takes? Around 140 KB to have one entire macro book loaded. That's less than 0.05% of my FFXI's average memory consumption (running on a PC). So from a technical standpoint it's obviously not excessive. From a gameplay standpoint? You can't change more than 16 pieces at a time anyway, and if you wanted to, for whatever reason, why shouldn't you be able to do so?

I'm not saying anyone at all needs it. I'm just saying there's also no argument against it. There is, however, an argument against your 12. Simply because it's not enough for some people.

Also, no one here is advocating Windower. If we were, we wouldn't be pushing for these suggestions on the official forums, because they can all be easily alleviated by certain tools that are readily available. We're still here, which is a sign that we actually want the game to develop outside of Windower. But it wouldn't hurt anyone if SE took some hints from certain third party utilities, as they're there for a reason: because they're tremendously useful. Personally I'd love if SE took some of Windower's ideas and made it completely obsolete and I'm pretty sure I'm not alone in this belief.

oh god, not another one of these threads... look up the term "ad nauseum", it applies perfectly to how often this subject has been asked and answered.

Just asked, actually. To my knowledge it hasn't been officially answered yet.

[Krashport]

On the contrary, I just repeated to you what you said to me, to point out to you how you were the one acting childish this time. I know very well when I'm being childish and immature and I have no problems at all to admit to it, but this wasn't one of those times. This was you being childish and me calling you out on it. You asked me why I'm in here, which is a pointless question because this is an official forum where every currently paying customer may express their opinion, so I directed the same question back at you.

V

I said plenty of intelligent things about it supporting this very cause in other threads.Repeating myself in here would do no good to anyone. You're just taking it personally that I told you that there's been threads about this very issue before, which you shouldn't have, because it wasn't.

If you don't want to repeat yourself and obvious you said it yourself and still repeating yourself, See bold. having nothing to add besides what you have said in other threads, Which in fact you are repeating yourself. that is the question that I have asked you.

Bolded your error in judgment, which is exactly what I was talking about. "You shouldn't need anymore" is just you imposing your ideas and your style of playing on others. You're not in any position to tell anyone what they should or shouldn't need. Just earlier Thanotos told you that gear swapping is wrong and shouldn't be a part of the game, which you immediately dismissed. It's the same thing. You're not comfortable with his judgment of what you should be allowed to do. Yet you feel you can judge others on the same matter?

V

I just want to say that swapping gear in itself during combat is a retarded concept, and I would be happy to see it removed period. Being able to use and benefit from every piece of armor in the game equipable by my class, in a span of seconds while engaged to an enemy is just ridiculous.

^

Seeing that swapping gear, gear in general is a big part of Final Fantasy XI. Why do you feel it's ridiculous and it should be stopped?

Gotta get your facts straight... It's call asking a question.

I wouldn't, and I never said it was for me. Very few of my macros even exceed one line, so I don't care at all about how many in particular it is. All I'm saying is that 12 is a completely arbitrary number to other people. You picked it because it would fit your playstyle and now you seem hell bent on it being "just right", and keep listing weird and incomplete examples that I can't even make much sense of, although I admit it may be the alcohol, so I'll review it in the morning. It still doesn't change the fact that there's certain actions for which I want to change 15 pieces of gear, which is not possible with your suggested "solution".

Bold: Everyone posts a bit with themselves in mind, but knowing it's on the forums other people opinions will come to surface.

Bold:You really have a habit speaking for others, But I know you're really speaking for yourself and using the words people, us, everyone, players as a handicap.

Bold:Wrong I picked it because it will convert Macro set 2-A into macro set 1-A giving more space to the macro bar and not having 2 or more Macro sets for a gear swap.

Nope, again not. That was a perfectly valid argument, and I have to admit I feel a little disheartened that you ignored it based on your perception of my attitude, which wouldn't, in any way, invalidate the argument itself, even if that perception was accurate. I've been feeling especially chipper today and I was never in the mood to behave immaturely at all. I'm simply telling you what your argument sounds like to other people. It sounds like you picked a number that just suits you, and you defending it and telling others that they change too much gear or shouldn't need anymore just makes you sound arrogant and fascist, placing your own opinion over other peoples'. Because in the end, that's all it is, your opinion. And while you're entitled to it just like everyone else, it doesn't make it special, right or even appropriate.

V

12 simply doesn't feel logical to me. The 6 we have now are arbitrary. 12 is 2x arbitrary, picked by you because that's what you deemed necessary for efficient gearswapping. However, that's only the case for you and how you play. Others have their macros laid out differently and wanna swap more gear. Some wanna combine macros into one, with a wait command. There's plenty of reasons why 12 would be bad as well. It would only suck half as much as 6, but it would still suck.

This is what you're calling a valid argument, everyone knows that all members playing the game plays it differently. so you're pointing out the obvious. But it's called "Gear swap" Sword,Shield,Bow,Ammo are considered weapons. but yeah I can see and understand how one can look at weapons being gear... and wanting to swap them out.

Now, I've explained to you why just 12 slots are unreasonable, and the only counter-argument you had was "you shouldn't need anymore", which is as wrong as needing anything in a game can be, as Thanotos' pointed out with his opinion that you shouldn't need any gear swaps at all. So your only counter-argument was your opinion of other peoples' playstyle.

Bold: You did? you just said awhile back in your post you only just use one macro line and seeing we have 6 atm how would 12 effect you? "Remember this is just a question"
Bold:Show me where I did this, I know that I asked Thanotos a question, which they never answered...

You, however, never explained to me why 32 slots would be unreasonable. Your bolded reply seems to indicate that you're quite shocked at that suggestion, because you seem to have read into it that that I actually wanna change 32 pieces of gear with one press of a button or something, which isn't the case. But even if it was, why is that bad? Would it hurt you if I had 32 macro lines? Or even if you had it? Why is it excessive? Of course we're still under the assumption that PS2 memory isn't a limitation for this, because otherwise all our arguments would be pointless, but if we disregard that restriction, why is it excessive? Do you know how little memory storing every single macro takes? Around 140 KB to have one entire macro book loaded. That's less than 0.05% of my FFXI's average memory consumption (running on a PC). So from a technical standpoint it's obviously not excessive. From a gameplay standpoint? You can't change more than 16 pieces at a time anyway, and if you wanted to, for whatever reason, why shouldn't you be able to do so?

Bold:I personally would like to see this happen see figs.

Macro having 6 Lines:

Macro having 12 Lines:

Bold:If you can come up with a need to have so many lines within a macro for said use. I might understand your question Edit: 20~30+.

[cidbahamut]

Gotta get you're facts straight... It's call asking a question.

I guess I was too subtle last time.

[Arcon]

If you don't want to repeat yourself and obvious you said it yourself and still repeating yourself, See bold. having nothing to add besides what you have said in other threads, Which in fact you are repeating yourself. that is the question that I have asked you.

I wasn't repeating myself at all, I was repeating what you said. And the question was still pointless, which is why I didn't answer it then, but I did answer it in my previous post, so you should be happy now.

Seeing that swapping gear, gear in general is a big part of Final Fantasy XI. Why do you feel it's ridiculous and it should be stopped?

Gotta get your facts straight... It's call asking a question.

You are extremely selective when you're reading. Apparently you skipped over the first part, the part where you told him that gear swapping is a "big part of FFXI", which is again your opinion and not at all a question. It is also precisely what his problem is, so you just took the fact that he's dissatisfied with (gear swaps) and evaluated it according to your opinion. That is very far from a question. Just because you turned it back to him and asked his opinion again it doesn't change the fact that you assumed something completely contrary to his judgment and posed it as a fact, when it really isn't.

Bold: Everyone posts a bit with themselves in mind, but knowing it's on the forums other people opinions will come to surface.

I don't get what you mean by that. Of course what I said is my opinion, but that doesn't change the fact that I'm not using more than two macro lines at most, so this wouldn't very much affect me. I just want SE to make a better game, because it deserves to be better.

Bold:You really have a habit speaking for others, But I know you're really speaking for yourself and using the words people, us, everyone, players as a handicap.

I am speaking for the people in this thread who disagreed with your judgment, and if you think there is no one, then why do you think there's 6 pages of everyone arguing against you? I never claimed to speak for everyone. I also never claimed that you're alone in your opinion. I'm just telling you there's another. If no one agreed with me they wouldn't have liked my posts. So yes, I am, as a matter of fact, representing more opinions than just my own. I'm not saying it to make myself sound superior, because, again, these are opinions. All of it. All of what you said and all of what I said. We can define who's reasonable or not, but we can't define who's right, because there is no right. But I not alone in thinking that 12 lines are not enough (apparently).

Bold:Wrong I picked it because it will convert my Macro set 2-A into macro set 1-A giving me more space to the macro bar and not having 2 or more Macro sets for a gear swap.

Added the bolded words, to make you understand my point. It would work for you, not for everyone. Hence, you picked it based on your playstyle, which is exactly what I said.

This is what you're calling a valid argument, everyone knows that all members playing the game plays it differently. so you're pointing out the obvious. But it's called "Gear swap" Sword,Shield,Bow,Ammo are considered weapons. but yeah I can see and understand how one can look at weapons being gear... and wanting to swap them out.

So you're arguing syntax now? Why is gear swap okay, but weapon swap isn't? And yes, weapons are, as a matter of fact, gear (and no, a shield is not considered a weapon, even though you can hit people in the face with it).

Bold: You did? you just said awhile back in your post you only just use one macro line and seeing we have 6 atm how would 12 effect you? "Remember this is just a question"

Just because it doesn't affect me personally, it doesn't mean it can't be unreasonable. I don't steal apples, that doesn't mean I think shooting every apple thief is reasonable just because it doesn't affect me. I gave you one very valid reason for why it's unreasonable, one you're still yet to refute: it doesn't work for everyone.

Bold:Show me where I did this, I know that I asked Thanotos a question, which they never answered...

I drew Thanotos' post as a parallel to show you how other people disagree with your judgment in the exact same way that you're disagreeing with mine. He thinks gear changing is unreasonable, you think changing more than 12 pieces is unreasonable. The latter part of that sentence was not directed at your response to him.

Bold:I personally would like to see this happen see figs.

Macro having 6 Lines:

Macro having 12 Lines:

And that still doesn't at all say why 32 slots are unreasaonable. I know what you want, you said it in your first post. But that doesn't help everyone. Other people would still be stuck on the same problem you're having now afterwards.

Bold:If you can come up with a need to have so many lines within a macro for said use. I might understand your question Edit: 20~30+.

Again, completely ignoring the question. I ask you, why is 32 lines bad? What speaks against it? I explicitely stated that I have no use for it and that I don't know what people can use it for. That's not the point. The point is, why not?

Here's a fictional scenario:
- Change 15 pieces of gear
- Cast a spell
- Change 15 pieces back

Happy? Now tell me why I shouldn't be able to do that if I wanted to.

[Glamdring]

Just asked, actually. To my knowledge it hasn't been officially answered yet.

it was answerred, one of the 1st we got actually. It was no. Something about client limitations on the max lines that could be produced. IIRC it was what launched the 300+ "stop supporting the PS2" threads--also answerred, as "no". I'd give you the link, but I'll be damned if I put myself through rereading all that drivel just to find it. Seem to recall it was a Dev post though, not Camate or Bayhonne.