Adam

I misread this earlier, likely API has crashed/isn't running/not reachable by lobby which is why this won't work - likely due to breaking changes in 5.3 as per usual

I think this is mostly fixed now? @AriAvery did a bunch on this and I think it's retail accurate now (or very close to retail)?

It's because it's not implemented at all

should be relatively easy to implement provided there's an accurate exp algorithm that can be used, otherwise it's not really worth the effort

- [x] Apply a different struct to an opcode, maybe like a dropdown of all the registered structs would be cool

this ultimately comes down to the fact that the upstream schema is incredibly difficult to work with and I haven't bothered to fix it as a result there's some WIP...

Yep, and there can be groups in these or groups of these too, it's a huge mess. Fixing the groups would require them to have a name at least, and...

You can't for groups, because a group might repeat say 20 times and have several members, which would look more like ``` struct BaseParam { uint kind; uint value; }...

I think it's not too much of a problem if the groups were named, because then you could generate structures for all of them, but as is, it's kind of...

Double nested repeat isn't done, nor is crazy shit like this: ```json { "sheet": "GCSupplyDuty", "definitions": [ { "type": "repeat", "count": 11, "definition": { "type": "repeat", "count": 3, "definition": {...