Theoretically, would making Glam Dressers & etc account based lighten the load?

[Vipes]

Now, I don't know how data works for FFXIV but from what I gather, increasing the glam dresser storage, plates, and other things would cause more strain/data per character. Would the same happen if such systems were converted to be account based instead? For example, as it is now, each character has 15 glam plates. What if instead it was 30 glam plates per account? Granted that means each character doesn't have their own plates now, but maybe it would be worth it? What if all the items in the dresser were stored in the account, instead of the character?

[DeaconMoore]

Spaghetti code is how data works in FFXIV. The calamity had real world implications. I'm not sure they'd want to give up per character outfit sales from the mogstation this change would enable. And no clue if a change like this would help anything as the database would be getting larger regardless, just potentially having multiple characters accessing the same one instead of each having their own. Might be too tied to individual inventory as well that could cause issues deploying.

[TTiscancer]

People with multiple characters would be completely screwed over, not gonna happen.

[Halivel]

Having several characters isn't that common anyway, in all honesty, so it isn't very clear if making plate acount-wide would help at all. Plus I honestly suspect that the real problem is, much how it's with queues, in how much servers are able to handle when people are online, not when they are logged out, and if that's the case - then alts don't play into it at all, since you can't play on two characters on same account at the same time.

I personally won't be against of glamour plates and glamour in general being account-wide if it can help with loads and if it's possible at all, though.

[Seraphor]

What if it's based on what can be loaded at any one time?
You can only log in to one character at a time, so that's 15 slots per character at any one time.
If everyone suddenly doubled to 30, even if it was shared with alts, then it could still have the same effect as simply doubling it for every character.

[Chawan]

I think an account wide dresser would be nice.. cause then any event items i put in there can be used on any future characters if and when I decide to make more. I can see why square might not be supportive of the idea though.. mostly they could potentially lose money this way.. however I don’t think it would honestly be that much of a loss if most ppl don’t play alts much anyway..

[Iscah]

All six of my frequently used characters have a full fifteen plates, none of them sharing their outfits with the others.

The contents of their dressers are also at least half unique gear.

Merging them specifically to downgrade the total number of slots assigned to all characters across an account would be a massive downgrade for me, besides the side effect of getting to share things between characters.

If they could make the dresser (not plates) account-wide without losing slots per character, that would be great because I'd need to store less things overall. But it seems unlikely.

[Alien_Gamer]

there's a separate database for account wide items which is almost full, so probably not. yoshi referenced it a few years ago on a live letter Q/A about why so few mogstation items are account bound.

[Terin]

As someone with some experience in coding, the truth is there's just know way for us to know. What may seem a simple solution, might involve other nuances that make it impossible. Still, it should've prevent us from making suggestions!

I've personally wondered if perhaps Job Crystals could be reworked (in terms of coding), and essentially tie "glamour plate" functionality to them? It would simultaneously make the crystals require more data, while removing the data needed for glamour plates, at least IN THEORY, which is all I can really offer.

Now that tradeskills finally have their own Job Crystals, it seems like a fairly organic solution. I know some people enjoy having multiple glamours for the same job, and in a perfect world we'd have both, but I think most players would rather have a glamour for EACH job, than only 15 "do whatever you want" plates.

Just my two cents.

[Iscah]

I've personally wondered if perhaps Job Crystals could be reworked (in terms of coding), and essentially tie "glamour plate" functionality to them? It would simultaneously make the crystals require more data, while removing the data needed for glamour plates, at least IN THEORY, which is all I can really offer.

Now that tradeskills finally have their own Job Crystals, it seems like a fairly organic solution. I know some people enjoy having multiple glamours for the same job, and in a perfect world we'd have both, but I think most players would rather have a glamour for EACH job, than only 15 "do whatever you want" plates.

That just sounds like a roundabout way of saying "give us more plates". The crystals don't hold any customisable data now, they're just a piece of equipment. They're not going to somehow be able to store more plate data just because they've invent a system to link it to job crystals – the same amount of data is still needed per plate.

And I don't see any value in linking it to jobs rather than giving the same number of freely usable plates, especially when they can already be linked to gearsets if you want to. Personally I have several plates for my favourite jobs and the others get switched in and out as I'm levelling them.