[Crepestrom]

Fixes: #3611
increases maintainability of the code as you do not need to modify 8 basic stat modifiers in the same exact way
Breaks many addons that use the old system of modifiers
Also negative and positive modifiers are combined instead of being applied seperatly
eg: a +50% durability and -50% durability modifier will cancel out to +0% durability instead of -25% durability (75% of total durability)

Before:

After:

[Crepestrom]

https://www.desmos.com/calculator/evdonhlker
Changed to match this
a slightly modified old version of this pr

[IntegratedQuantum]

But clamping it makes no sense. -100% should not be reachable, just like +∞.

[Crepestrom]

[Crepestrom]

its been seperated

[Argmaster]

1. What is the plan for custom property handling?
   I see you have hard coded mapping property-modifier_fancy_name
2. Hot take: leave only the fancy name, give the numbers only on hover+shift or toggle them with F9 or something like this. So you have advanced and not advanced tooltip.
3. It seems to sacrifice modularity, what is the motivation for that change? Was it discussed before? What kind of influence will it have over mod developers? Will they also prefer monolith modifiers over small ones?

[IntegratedQuantum]

It seems to sacrifice modularity, what is the motivation for that change?

The motivation is to reduce an explosion of different modifier types once more stats are introduced for armor and accessories.
Ideally all our modifiers should be generalized where possible to give more options to addons.

Hot take: leave only the fancy name, give the numbers only on hover+shift or toggle them with F9 or something like this.

I actually have a hot counter-take for you: Move the fance names into the name, and leave only the numbers in the tooltip

[Argmaster]

I actually have a hot counter-take for you: Move the fance names into the name, and leave only the numbers in the tooltip

While it should work fine I'm English, how will it work with translation into languages that require different adverb suffixes depending on the "sex/gender" (idk the proper language term translation) of the item?

Obviously I have an example in Polish.
Pickaxe (pl. Kilof) is a male noun and requires the prefix eg. Powerful (pl. Potężny) so a Powerful Pickaxe translates into Potężny Kilof
On the other hand, a Shover (pl. Łopata) is a feminine noun and requires pl. Potężna (suffix changes from "-ny" to "-na") ie. Potężna Łopata

While example is in Polish and one might say that's a weird language, I am pretty sure there are other languages with tricks like this that will make translation of procedural names quite tricky, especially declarative translation.

[Argmaster]

The motivation is to reduce an explosion of different modifier types once more stats are introduced for armor and accessories.

I would expect a linear growth, exponential only when modder creativity is involved, and for the latter I doubt we can avoid it.
I guess I don't have a strong opinion on that, maybe except the fact I don't like the hard coded mapping involved.

[Crepestrom]

i think the reason we use this scaling is because
say we have a pickaxe with 20 slots
and we fill them with branches with a +5% durability bonus
the pickaxe would have +100% durability

[Crepestrom]

though honestly that doesnt sound that bad as you have a weak pickaxe
even if you can fill a tool with stuff

[IntegratedQuantum]

While it should work fine I'm English, how will it work with translation into languages that require different adverb suffixes depending on the "sex/gender" (idk the proper language term translation) of the item?

At some point language writers have to get creative. Maybe you can say something like Pickaxe of Power (google translate turns that into Kilof Mocy/Łopata Mocy not sure if that is anything you'd actually say). Or maybe we'll need to find ways to incorporate some of these specialties when they arise. Either way, Cubyz as a game will be english first, we have enough other stuff to worry about right now.

I would expect a linear growth, exponential only when modder creativity is involved, and for the latter I doubt we can avoid it.

Linear growth, but the factor will get quite high, and we already have 4 with just multiplicative and good at/bad at. I'm sure at some point we want additive/subtractive, that's 6 modifiers for each property, and they all need unique IDs too, I think this will be a nightmare.

[Crepestrom]

that could be a cool feature for materials to have
where putting gold in your pickaxe makes it a gold pickaxe

[IntegratedQuantum]

I approve of this from a technical standpoint, though I would like to still get some more opinion on whether it should have parenthesis or not. I'll make a poll on discord for this.