I think this would be the most straight forward but because you could be in a situation where people want two different looks on say Paladin, but that would be impossible without packing all the items around in the suggestion because the glamour is bound into the job (disrupting the effectiveness of the glamour log).Quote:
Originally Posted by Bourne_Endeavor
It's not an impossibility to do it this way, and I do think it is the most straight forward, but I believe in the end people will ask for glamour sets so we should probably head that direction from the start... if possible (like Naunet was describing).
-
05-13-2017, 01:01 PMShougun
-
05-13-2017, 01:11 PMCabalabob
As a PLD main, my DRK and WAR both look very odd in their shining knight armour. I have glamours setup for both of them that are just sitting in my retainers wasting space because I can't use them.
Sad to say though, they have no plans to fix this right now, can't remember which but in one of the live letters, the director said changing the glamour system is a low priority as it would require they build a new system from the ground up.
But as others have said, 90% of the gear in this game is irrelevant if not for glamour. So it should really be a much higher priority than it is.
My personal favourite idea is to glamour onto gearsets rather than onto armour. So if I made a gearset labelled "DRK" I could glamour equipment onto the slots in that gearset (head, body, hands etc.) then, job requirements permitting, when I equip that set, I'd appear to be wearing that glamour. If I change a piece of gear, I will default to my normal looks until I register the gear I'm wearing as the "DRK" gearset again.
This would do so many things.
1. Allow each job to have a unique look. ("PLD" = knight, "WAR" = barbarian, "DRK" = evil knight, all 3 gearsets using the same shire armour).
2. Allow 1 job to have multiple looks on the same gear. ("PLD 1" = knight, "PLD 2" = town clothes. Both gearsets could be the same shire armour).
3. Inherently limit server load the system causes, because we have a limited number of gearsets already.
4. Allow us to update our gear without constantly having to reglamour (it gets tedious updating my glamour every 2 days when I replace a piece of gear. With this system, you'd simply equip a new piece and press the update gearset button). -
05-13-2017, 01:34 PMRaijinSupremeLetting the glamour be used on the soul crystal instead of the gear itself would also fix our issues.Quote:
Originally Posted by kattzkitti
-
05-13-2017, 01:59 PMAlphaFox
I mean at this point I would even be fine with using the Prism as an Equipable, add a new slot and pop it on. Let us rename and re-glamour it if we like. Long as the gear in that prism is allowed for that class everything instantly gets converted. Kinda feel my wording is bad so gonna try this...
1) Equip the desired look (wear all your emporers new ___, armors, weapons)
2) Use the Prism
3) Give it a nickname or let it show what is saved on it, complete with a "preview" option.
4) Equip it and save set.
Multiple shared equipment jobs? Just swap the prism for the desired saved look.
Would also prefer something better or easier, but just tossing ideas cus I figure better than nothing. :S -
05-13-2017, 02:29 PMFelis
solution:
highest tome gear for healer #1
2nd highest tome gear for healer #2
24 man raid gear for healer #3 -
05-13-2017, 03:00 PMRyoungoragla
While I'd love glamour sets and a glamour log, I don't see them being implemented for a long while as it would mean completely overhauling the current glamour system.
Perhaps as a more immediate measure, they could allow you to "duplicate" items with the unique tag in your inventory through an npc for a gil fee or through the use of an item. These duplicate will be identical to the original except they will not have the unique tag (so you can make multiple copies), cannot be turned in for gc seals, cannot be desynthed and sell for only 1 gil (so duplicates grant no advantages beyond glamour). All doing this should take on the programming side is making copies of existing items and altering the tags on the copy.
This way the current glamour system can still be used until a better one can take it's place while allowing us to glamour each job individually.
The two side effects of this would be making the second ring slot easier to obtain and those that glamour each job individually would also have to slot materia for each job individually. The ring problem can be solved by not allowing a copy to be worn at the same time as the original or disallowing the copying of rings altogether (easy solution, but now can't glamour rings by job). The materia problem may be more difficult to solve. Perhaps, there could be an option to duplicate materia on the gear onto the copy. Since slotted materia cannot be removed without destroying the materia, this would not grant any advantages beyond the original item. The materia problem could also be left as is as it will allow players to also slot materia by job which may be a benefit to some, but a hassle and an extra gear grind for others.
I know this is not an ideal solution and I would prefer glamour sets and a log, but I think that it is a possible solution that works with the current glamour system we have without requiring any massive overhauls. -
05-13-2017, 03:28 PMAzperYeah, but then you need three sets of gear for an already crowded armory. I'd rather they just fixed their awful glamour system.Quote:
Originally Posted by Felis
-
05-13-2017, 04:22 PMPooky
Its going to be quite sad for so many people who are looking forward to playing Red Mage and having to share that look with Black Mage and Summoner. I mean Red Mage is such a unique and iconic look, I would want my Red Mage to look like one and I would want my other casters to NOT look like one. This really should be a much higher priority for the devs.
-
05-13-2017, 07:29 PMLaeruneI was worried about this, Red Mage is my favourite Final Fantasy class and I hoped they would get their own gearset, just so they would be share gear with the other casters and get a wizard look. The same could also be said for the 3 tanks, while Paladin and Dark Knight are knights, I see Warrior more like a Vikiing/Barbarian, for me they do not fit with the knight look.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pooky