Current AF2 3D models

[EdwinLi]

Took me a short time to build them but here they are. The color is a bit brighter than in the game but you can see the detail of each one.

AF2 Monk
http://en.xivmodels.com/?group/NjA2M...YwNjMsSVRFTQ==


AF2 Paladin
http://en.xivmodels.com/?group/NjA1M...YwNTMsSVRFTQ==


AF2 Dragoon
http://en.xivmodels.com/?group/NjA2N...YwNjgsSVRFTQ==

AF2 Black Mage
http://en.xivmodels.com/?group/NjA4M...YwODMsSVRFTQ==

AF2 Warrior
http://en.xivmodels.com/?group/NjA1N...YwNTgsSVRFTQ==

AF2 Bard
http://en.xivmodels.com/?group/NjA3M...YwNzMsSVRFTQ==

AF2 White Mage
http://en.xivmodels.com/?group/NjA3N...YwNzgsSVRFTQ==

AF2 Scholar
http://en.xivmodels.com/?group/NjA5M...YwOTMsSVRFTQ==

AF2 Summoner
Current the 3D model for Summoner AF2 color is off but there is not much different between AF1 and AF2 since AF2 uses the same color as AF1 but a bit darker.

[EdwinLi]

I'll bring this back up for people to see since some people have asked what each AF2 armor set looks like.

[Ranulf]

It all looks nice and everything, but given we don't have PS2 holding us back anymore, you'd figure they'd be more creative with the designs and not just palette swap them, add a few designs and call it good.

inb4 PS3 limitations.

[Naunet]

It all looks nice and everything, but given we don't have PS2 holding us back anymore, you'd figure they'd be more creative with the designs and not just palette swap them, add a few designs and call it good.

Seriously this. So frustrating.

[EdwinLi]

It all looks nice and everything, but given we don't have PS2 holding us back anymore, you'd figure they'd be more creative with the designs and not just palette swap them, add a few designs and call it good.

inb4 PS3 limitations.

Ya I am kind of disappointed with the designs.

Paladin "relic" armor set actually is the better designed one out of all these but the others are just out of place.

I just hope they add new vanity AF sets for vanity use once vanity system is introduced for more variety in AF looks.

[Alhanelem]

They're relic armor sets, not AF2.

[EdwinLi]

They're relic armor sets, not AF2.

You call them Relic.

I call them AF2.

I call them AF2 because they're the similar design to AF1 but their color theme is just changed, their appearance is only slightly adjust but not far from AF1, and they're given better stats to superior to the AF1.

[Alhanelem]

You call them Relic.

I call them AF2.

I call them AF2 because they're the similar design to AF1 but their color theme is just changed, their appearance is only slightly adjust but not far from AF1, and they're given better stats to superior to the AF1.

And they call them Relic because they're more rare and superior to the Artifacts.

If we're going to call everything the same thing but with a number, then it would be better to just do what wo does and call it tier 1, 2, 3.... raid gear.

if they were AF+1 SE would have left them as "Gallant (Insert)+1" instead of renaming them.

Well, yes. AF+1 is just as incorrect as AF2.

'Relic' Sets is referred to AF2,

While some players referred to it as that in FFXI, they were officially called relic armor. The storage slip that stores them calls them relic armor, SE called it relic armor when it came out, etc... It was the players who did that. The biggest problem with it is, (at the time) it created some ambiguity with people who were using AF# to refer to one of the AF armor quests. (e.g. I need to kill this NM for my AF2 quest...) The ambiguity issue was the origin of my original frustrations with the use of the term back in the day. (And before anyone says it should becalled AF2 because it's an AF reclor, again, the relic armors in XI were recolors).

[Flionheart]

And they call them Relic because they're more rare and superior to the Artifacts.

If we're going to call everything the same thing but with a number, then it would be better to just do what wo does and call it tier 1, 2, 3.... raid gear.

Well, yes. AF+1 is just as incorrect as AF2.

While some players referred to it as that in FFXI, they were officially called relic armor. The storage slip that stores them calls them relic armor, SE called it relic armor when it came out, etc... It was the players who did that. The biggest problem with it is, (at the time) it created some ambiguity with people who were using AF# to refer to one of the AF armor quests. (e.g. I need to kill this NM for my AF2 quest...) The ambiguity issue was the origin of my original frustrations with the use of the term back in the day. (And before anyone says it should becalled AF2 because it's an AF reclor, again, the relic armors in XI were recolors).

Shut up, you absolute plonker.

[Tupsi]

They're relic armor sets, not AF2.

It's a convention from FFXI and you know this - 'Relic' Sets is referred to AF2, as in 2nd Artifact Armor set, both works, if they were AF+1 SE would have left them as "Gallant (Insert)+1" instead of renaming them. Much like in XI the Empyrean Armor set is referred to as AF3, or 3rd Artifact Armor set.

I personally like the 'swap' nature of it because it keeps the same design for the most part but a different colorization, since in all honesty, why should it look radically different while being the same armor set for the most part?