Glamour-Ready Items

[Mwardell90]

I'm trying to dye my 2B Bottoms in my glamour dresser, but it looks like I am not allowed because it is part of an "outfit glamour". If the same item is not in an "outfit glamour", but still "glamour-ready", I can dye it permanently in my glamour dresser.

Is this a bug, oversight or feature?

[Vynnloritho]

Good afternoon! Thank you for posting in the Final Fantasy XIV Technical Support Forums.

We apologize for any inconvenience that has occurred when playing Final Fantasy XIV. Please see the following information from Patch 7.1 Notes regarding the use of Outfit Glamours:

Equipment stored as an outfit glamour will lose any dyes previously applied.
* You may re-dye the items after they have been used to glamour current equipment or added to a glamour plate.
- The entire set of equipment must be stored at the same time in order to create the outfit.
For example, if the desired outfit glamour requires equipment from the head, chest, legs, and feet categories, you may not store the head and feet pieces by themselves. Note that any pieces stored separately must be removed from the glamour dresser to create the outfit glamour.
- All items in the set must be of the same quality.
- Normal-quality equipment cannot be grouped alongside high-quality equipment.


We apologize for any inconvenience that has occurred when playing Final Fantasy XIV. Unfortunately, the issue you are describing is not a technical issue. We will be moving this thread to "General Discussion".

[BokoToloko]

We will be moving this thread to "General Discussion".

Big mistake. Now you're attracting the horde.

Now I can get to ask. What's the point of making stored outfits sets unable to store dyes? Discourages a lot from using the more expensive dyes for the outfit bound pieces.

[Brandr]

So it's a feature, a very annoying feature.

[Atma]

Big mistake. Now you're attracting the horde.

Now I can get to ask. What's the point of making stored outfits sets unable to store dyes? Discourages a lot from using the more expensive dyes for the outfit bound pieces.

Not hard to answer from a DB perspective.

Math is preventing that.

When you store an item into the glamour chest, it is not storing that 'specific item.' That would be wildly inefficient... imagine having to store hundreds of distinct copies of the exact same item data and hundreds of attributes for every single character across every data center's glamour chests to track specific items that exist in that space. That's why it doesn't store materia, spiritbond, crafter marks, or anything else that makes that item 'distinct.' It's not storing 'the item', it's storing the reference.

The efficient route, and almost assuredly what they are doing, is simply storing a 'pointer' to a reference on a master table. For example Character #11725234 Item #623 = Ref # 1725345 (2B BOOTS JET BLACK DYE). This means every character that wants to store 2B boots just needs to have that reference number associated with their glamour chest entry, not something distinct and specific about that individual item.

Saving dye color is already database bloat, but it's livable because instead of the reference table having to have simply have the base item, it needs to have n different references for that item, where n is the number of possible applied dyes.

For an outfit SET, we are now into a whole new world. With x pieces that could all have n possible dies applied, to store it as a pointer to a reference, you now need to have n^x entries on that master table representing every possible combination of n dyes across x items. Instead of n distinct references, we're now talking about billions. It's a problem of exponents.

Sometimes together is less efficient than apart.

[Brandr]

Not hard to answer from a DB perspective.

Math is preventing that.

When you store an item into the glamour chest, it is not storing that 'specific item.' That would be wildly inefficient... imagine having to store hundreds of distinct copies of the exact same item data and hundreds of attributes for every single character across every data center's glamour chests to track specific items that exist in that space. That's why it doesn't store materia, spiritbond, crafter marks, or anything else that makes that item 'distinct.' It's not storing 'the item', it's storing the reference.

The efficient route, and almost assuredly what they are doing, is simply storing a 'pointer' to a reference on a master table. For example Character #11725234 Item #623 = Ref # 1725345 (2B BOOTS JET BLACK DYE). This means every character that wants to store 2B boots just needs to have that reference number associated with their glamour chest entry, not something distinct and specific about that individual item.

Saving dye color is already database bloat, but it's livable because instead of the reference table having to have simply have the base item, it needs to have n different references for that item, where n is the number of possible applied dyes.

For an outfit SET, we are now into a whole new world. With x pieces that could all have n possible dies applied, to store it as a pointer to a reference, you now need to have n^x entries on that master table representing every possible combination of n dyes across x items. Instead of n distinct references, we're now talking about billions. It's a problem of exponents.

Sometimes together is less efficient than apart.

Billionaire company with an unjustifiable cash shop can do better.

[Mwardell90]

This is exactly my issue because I was trying to permadye it jet black.

So, now it sounds like I need to chose between a combined glamour set, or dying the pieces...

[MsQi]

A glamour catalog system would essentially be a checklist including all gear. It would be very data efficient but It would likely lack the dye feature of the glamour dresser. However the glamour dresser could become a dye box. You would store items from the catalog that you want specific dyes on.

They could create a catalog that stores dye data but that would greatly increase the data requirement as every item that can be dyed would require two dye spaces, even if null, whether you have it or not.

[Absurdity]

This is exactly my issue because I was trying to permadye it jet black.

So, now it sounds like I need to chose between a combined glamour set, or dying the pieces...

Yep, it's why I haven't engaged with the glamour sets a single time since they came out.

I usually pemanently dye pieces I frequently use either jet black or pure white (sometimes I have duplicates of the same item for each dye) because they are so comparatively expensive.

Since the outfit set prevents you from doing that it's essentially a feature that doesn't exist to me.

A glamour catalog system would essentially be a checklist including all gear. It would be very data efficient but It would likely lack the dye feature of the glamour dresser. However the glamour dresser could become a dye box. You would store items from the catalog that you want specific dyes on.

They could create a catalog that stores dye data but that would greatly increase the data requirement as every item that can be dyed would require two dye spaces, even if null, whether you have it or not.

They could also rework the dye system to permanently unlock a colour. You would no longer need to store dyes on an item if you could just dye it jet black/pure white at no cost every time you wanted to. (That's how GW2 does it, where the individual rare dyes are very expensive but they are a one time unlock)
It would also save a massive amount of inventory space if you no longer needed to store dye pots.

But that could potentially cut into mog station sales, for both dyes and additional retainers, so unlikely to happen.

[MsQi]

They could also rework the dye system to permanently unlock a colour. You would no longer need to store dyes on an item if you could just dye it jet black/pure white at no cost every time you wanted to. (That's how GW2 does it, where the individual rare dyes are very expensive but they are a one time unlock)
It would also save a massive amount of inventory space if you no longer needed to store dye pots.

But that could potentially cut into mog station sales, for both dyes and additional retainers, so unlikely to happen.

I personally have a philosophy of never spending real money for a consumable. I can occasionally be convinced for a permanent item.

As I said in another thread, like in WoW a collection system is likely to increase play time as people are replaying old and new content and trying a wider range of content, especially if they add achievements. Might be worth it to slaughter a couple cash cows for the health of the game community.