API limits on how many accessories per category is completely unacceptable and spits in the face of UGC creators and multi-part accessories and that whole “powering imagination” thing. If this is the goal moving forwards with avatar limits: No. Full stop. Limits by category is quite bluntly put, pointless.
The limit rules behind the entire avatar accessory system on web is archaic and downright broken, there is no reason to continue enforcing arbitrary limits on “”“categories”""; that makes no sense. The number of tris, memory impact, etc. in any particular accessory does not care whatsoever about category, so I see no reason to enforce this archaic nonsense in new API. Setting this precedent would hurt freedom of expression on this platform severely. Until justification is provided or this is changed, this is completely stupid to me.
If you want to be smart about it, you could e.g. assign accessories an auto-generated “cost” that is proportional to their performance impact ingame, and impose a limit around that cost. This would allow people to have multi-part accessories (i.e. 2-part swordpacks, hair extensions, etc.) without making people constantly fret about an accessory limit, and without killing game performance. These accessories currently could otherwise be combined into single accessories that are more expensive ingame, but save players an accessory slot, which is not ideal from a game performance point of view. A system like this would encourage UGC developers (often non-technical people) to make low-cost accessories because players would be incentivized to buy accessories with a low cost so they can wear more of them. This leverages the economy to encourage good UGC practices.
I want to make sure that these dumb category limits are not the plan going forwards with avatars. This is not a good decision.
Repeating this here from my below post just to be clear.