Pavel Penev

#20262 made me think the approach we've taken is way too fragile. Potentially even expanding on the above suggestion, turning the current simple string fields that just hold the id...

Attributes sound great. Another thing that just came to mind - linting isn't going to work great with #20265 and its follow-ups, is it? We can lint translations in the...

`¯\_(ツ)_/¯` Looks cleaner to me, and you only define every file once that way. This was more of a suggestion than a "we _have_ to do it".

I think if we want a real improvement (in flexibility) we should have both. Otherwise this is simply moving stuff around for no actual gain (well yes, consistency).

Okay, how do you denote that "this is a special structure that can be captured by an/any friendly capturing unit (engineer)"? And how do you think that compares to "this...

**BUMP!** What is the status here? @reaperrr are you able to finish this?

How does scoping for these mission-specific translation files work? Is there any? If yes, that would be the reason to keep them separate. If we combined them we'd likely need...

That will only work until we start getting conflicting objectives from multiple missions.

That would likely work, but it neither foolproof nor clean. One would need to be scouring existing strings when adding a new one, finding an unused sequence of characters like...

Fixed a couple more small nits plus the above comment. Also updated the PR description.