A consern about space efficieny since stormblood is not getting enough space increase

[Niwashi]

There's no need to sacrifice anything though. From the start, make dungeon gear dyeable. There, you've now got the likeness of the striking/scouting or scouting/aiming distinction in most cases. But atop that, allow for variations of each set. You can have your Noct fending with its silly little shoulder additions, your Dreadwyrm or Creator sets with their buttwings, or not. Similarly, where Scouting, Striking, and Aiming did vary before, you can have a version with the half-cloak added over the side (where that's the only difference between, say, Midas Striking and Aiming), throw a cloak over the whole thing (Creator striking vs. scouting) etc. Same item, quickly swapped appearances. Unless a more comprehensive glamour system also includes cross-class glamours, I feel like that'd add a fair bit more freedom than any glamour revision, and would reduce the item count despite that.

Even if the items' native appearances had a few variations, unless they also make major changes to the glamour system to be class/job specific, combining gear would put the melee jobs into the same problem tanks and healers have already: You can't glamour one outfit on your WHM and a completely different outfit on your SCH, or one outfit on your PLD and a completely different one on your DRK, if they're sharing the same base gear. (While getting melees to share the same problem would at some level be fair, I'd rather achieve that fairness by removing the problem from the jobs that already have it.)

On the other hand, if they do indeed ever update the glamour system so we can have different glamours using the same base equipment, then I'd completely support your preference for condensing the number of sets. But not until then.

[Shurrikhan]

Even if the items' native appearances had a few variations, unless they also make major changes to the glamour system to be class/job specific, combining gear would put the melee jobs into the same problem tanks and healers have already: You can't glamour one outfit on your WHM and a completely different outfit on your SCH, or one outfit on your PLD and a completely different one on your DRK, if they're sharing the same base gear. (While getting melees to share the same problem would at some level be fair, I'd rather achieve that fairness by removing the problem from the jobs that already have it.)

On the other hand, if they do indeed ever update the glamour system so we can have different glamours using the same base equipment, then I'd completely support your preference for condensing the number of sets. But not until then.

Just going to repost this part of the combined suggestion, spaced out this time to be less of a text-wall:

Glamours should always be applied to the slot, not the gear item itself, and on a job-by-job (or class, apart from SCH/SMN) basis.

Each job should have, say, 3 images available to each of its slots, with 3 glamour "sets" available for quick swapping/matching. Glamour prisms are consumed to add an item to the bank of 3 images per gear slot per job, or, if those slots are already full, to replace another image.

By default, any other images saved on any other job that your current job meets the level and class or job requirements for will be shown in your image slots. (Swap from a glamoured level 40 Warrior to a newly gained Paladin and it's no problem; you'd immediately see the applicable (even if incomplete) sets from you warrior in addition to your native/unglamoured set/look.)

Moreover whenever you spirit-bind an item, you have the option via a right-click (notification once out of combat following the spirit-bind) to save its image to your glamour bank (replacing another image if the bank is full).

[Ama_Hamada]

Just going to repost this part of the combined suggestion, spaced out this time to be less of a text-wall:

So basically it is like saying my job will look like this, regardless of gear there? makes it nicer upgrading gear in a middle of a run too.

Regardless I edited in my first post

[Shurrikhan]

So basically it is like saying my job will look like this, regardless of gear there? makes it nicer upgrading gear in a middle of a run too.

To try to go ahead and be clear this time, an elaboration:

You initially have your default (or "0") set, and space for three more. Let's say you make your first glamour set on your lead class or job, whatever it may be, which becomes slot "1". If you then swap to another class with applicable level, the selected set will continue to appear, just as before the swap. So let's say the first is Pugilist and the second Archer. I make a Toadskin glamour set for my Pugilist, keep using it up to 44 or so, then swap to my Archer which is only 24 and can't wear the Toadskin set yet. It appears as a filled slot, but greyed out, and on mouseover it shows the required level range. I make a new generic cloth glamour set (Advent or Tantalus or Lionheart clothes) for Archer, which becomes "2", and is also visible on Pugilist when I swap back. These are both visible in time to my level 34 Paladin, since it can still technically wear Toadskin, too, and can obviously wear the generic cloth. I then make a third set for it from the Cavalry set from Brayflox normal. Now all three are filled for my tanks, by default, but only 2/3 are filled for Pugilist and Archer since they'll never be able to wear the Cavalry set. Later I decide I want another plate set, so I have to replace one of the three sets currently in place, either of the two duplicates or the one I made for the plate armor class / Paladin. I decide to replace the Toadskin, but only for Paladin, leaving Marauder/Warrior and Dark Knight as they were with Toadskin, Lionheart, and Cavalry.

Essentially, you start off making glamours per armor set, simply because it's assumed that until you fill up your three slots, you'd rather have the option of duplicating the set from another class of the same role and/or armor class than have empty slots, since you can always just replace the filled ones whenever. You replace them and further customize your jobs within each armor class from each other once there's reason, or maximum slot limitations, enough to do so.

Note: the main limitation isn't actually the number of sets, but the number of images/mirages/glamours per gear slot per job. The sets, like gear sets, can overlap or duplicate however one likes.

:: This whole process would require as many prisms, of whatever types, as there are mirages/glamours of each craft type to bind to slots, down from for each item the appearance of which you want replaced. That would be roughly 20 prisms in total, to apply the above sets to every class (2 sets thus far for leather, 3 for DRK/WAR, the same with 1 added unique set for PLD, and 1 set for everyone else), or 25 if including all the Emperor's New accessories, down from 130 prisms required, and with 4 times as much glamour access for each job, with no added cost or clicks.

[Naunet]

We're getting way off topic talking about glamour system ideas, but IMO glamour sets should be stored completely separately - kind of like armor sets but in their own UI. This would allow being able to freely swap them whenever you wish.

[Khanscott]

There are a ton of gear pieces that are different shades of the same assets that could be glamable to pretty much everything else without much of an issue. Not having to need several full sets of Ramie gear to keep appearances would be nice. And yeah, "Grade # ..." items need to die in a hole.

[Lycieus]

I don't know if someone has already mentioned this or not, but a glamour log of sorts already exists in the game. The Armoire strips a considerable amount of information from items stored in it and it doesn't have to be loaded every time a character enters a zone and updated like player inventory(not that either of these things is really necessary, but it's how it's been done). If Square allowed us to store one copy of every armor in the game in it, it would essentially be a glamour log. All that would need to be done is to add a nice GUI to it and maybe further reduce the data associated with items stored in the Armoire.

[Ama_Hamada]

To try to go ahead and be clear this time, an elaboration:

You initially have your default (or "0") set, and space for three more. Let's say you make your first glamour set on your lead class or job, whatever it may be, which becomes slot "1". If you then swap to another class with applicable level, the selected set will continue to appear, just as before the swap. So let's say the first is Pugilist and the second Archer. Imake a Toadskin glamour set for my Pugilist, keep using it up to 44 or so, then swap to my Archer which is only 24 and can't wear the Toadskin set yet. It appears as a filled slot, but greyed out, and on mouseover it shows the required level range. I make a new generic cloth glamour set (Advent or Tantalus or Lionheart clothes) for Archer, which becomes "2", and is also visible on Pugilist when I swap back. These are both visible in time to my level 34 Paladin, since it can still technically wear Toadskin, too, and can obviously wear the generic cloth. I then make a third set for it from the Cavalry set from Brayflox normal. Now all three are filled for my tanks, by default, but only 2/3 are filled for Pugilist and Archer since they'll never be able to wear the Cavalry set. Later I decide I want another plate set, so I have to replace one of the three sets currently in place, either of the two duplicates or the one I made for the plate armor class / Paladin. I decide to replace the Toadskin, but only for Paladin, leaving Marauder/Warrior and Dark Knight as they were with Toadskin, Lionheart, and Cavalry.

Essentially, you start off making glamours per armor set, simply because it's assumed that until you fill up your three slots, you'd rather have the option of duplicating the set from another class of the same role and/or armor class than have empty slots, since you can always just replace the filled ones whenever. You replace them and further customize your jobs within each armor class from each other once there's reason, or maximum slot limitations, enough to do so.

Note: the main limitation isn't actually the number of sets, but the number of images/mirages/glamours per gear slot per job. The sets, like gear sets, can overlap or duplicate however one likes.

:: This whole process would require as many prisms, of whatever types, as there are mirages/glamours of each craft type to bind to slots, down from for each item the appearance of which you want replaced. That would be roughly 20 prisms in total, to apply the above sets to every class (2 sets thus far for leather, 3 for DRK/WAR, the same with 1 added unique set for PLD, and 1 set for everyone else), or 25 if including all the Emperor's New accessories, down from 130 prisms required, and with 4 times as much glamour access for each job, with no added cost or clicks.

Actually confused by this, I thought you where simply saying you can have 3 different look sets saved per job. From what I understand it sounds complicated, can you word this into something more simple? the more complex it is, the less likely a dev will do the system.

We're getting way off topic talking about glamour system ideas, but IMO glamour sets should be stored completely separately - kind of like armor sets but in their own UI. This would allow being able to freely swap them whenever you wish.

A lot of room issues has to do with lack of glam log.

Glam log/glam sets/ keeping/ storing sets and currency bloat is why we have the most issues, then comes item barrage for crafting (like ores used in one thing and cul being hoarder issues)

I don't know if someone has already mentioned this or not, but a glamour log of sorts already exists in the game. The Armoire strips a considerable amount of information from items stored in it and it doesn't have to be loaded every time a character enters a zone and updated like player inventory(not that either of these things is really necessary, but it's how it's been done). If Square allowed us to store one copy of every armor in the game in it, it would essentially be a glamour log. All that would need to be done is to add a nice GUI to it and maybe further reduce the data associated with items stored in the Armoire.

dyes and the fact it does not hold sets that it should hold has been talked about. Even if can be stored, if we want to rare dye it (rl money or super high gil cost) people tend to keep them on hand...

[Berethos]

dyes and the fact it does not hold sets that it should hold has been talked about. Even if can be stored, if we want to rare dye it (rl money or super high gil cost) people tend to keep them on hand...

Then the player has to make the decision - lose the "rare" dye (there's really no such thing, even the most expensive dyes aren't that expensive) and store for later or keep it and the gear out.

I mean, you already lose a "rare" dye when you dye the item a new color, and I don't see anyone getting upset over that.

SE shouldn't have to baby its players just because they don't like the consequences of a particular choice.

[Ama_Hamada]

Then the player has to make the decision - lose the "rare" dye (there's really no such thing, even the most expensive dyes aren't that expensive) and store for later or keep it and the gear out.

I mean, you already lose a "rare" dye when you dye the item a new color, and I don't see anyone getting upset over that.

SE shouldn't have to baby its players just because they don't like the consequences of a particular choice.

Still waiting on a reply on this:

.

It is not on me, no.
You are not understanding we have to deal with so meany items, why I do not
know.

If a game gives you a million items, but 1000 spots to put them in, has less room then a game that gives you 1000 items total with 200 spots to put them in. You are missing my point. You are just going by what you see on the surface (amount of space) and not comparing it to the amount of space we get compared to the amount we need to function. We do not have enough space to function and you have yet to show other games that do this. We are given too much currency that takes room, does Neverwinter do this? if not then we have more problems then there. Not that hard to figure out. Do we get crafting bags and other things that Neverwinter does? better off then FFXIV then.

Also the cost of our space cost more then that game maxing, then 6 retainers here and sub for 6 months, only 6 months cost more then forever on Neverwinter.

huh 175? you said 80 something +6 or something i doono even if that is the case still less then a year sub here +6 retainers for a year. (somewhere around 264 for non-legacy)



This is just one menu off one NPC, look at all these different currencies that give item bloat for no reason.

Or this:


still under one menu of one NPC.

It is ridiculous, the amount of space is taken up by currency just currency and we do not get crafting bags and other bags to help deal with this? Then we need rent space on top of a sub? talk about ripoff. Needing 99 items for a mount? forcing you use space. Makes it even more insult when you need trade items for currency to get OTHER CURRENCY!

Also do not forget the currency we do get under tabs adds to this problem, the caps we get.

Want to upgrade tools? need to hold on a currency for a minimum of 1 week sitting in inventory that lasts for ever since it never splits evenly.
Want to hunt to upgrade your gear? good thing we have a cap of 1k cent seals so you need to hold on the L.books to do that, to upgrade the right/belt, it takes 2x over cap and left is 3 x over cap.
72 umberite? nice that we need a currency cap where we need 6 x more, that currency needs sit in our inventory for a loooong time.

added:

This is not babying, this is showing why things need to change and why players feel they are being ripped off with inventory bloating. Having to buy a dye that costs 1 dollar that can be so easily lost (storing in armour, dying over, etc) or 500k or so gil is a rare dye. I am sure a lot of people are upset about the costs in mog shop, any logical person will find them too much on a sub game on top of it, including retainers. If the glam gear was account wide, sure acceptable, but not for one character (though getting off point of the thread now)