Dharkin wrote:

Dev-Ngreth wrote:

Angahran-Bertox wrote:

Dev-Ngreth wrote:

There is a request in the Code Pipeline that items with charm scripts show their stats as if you were wearing them when you look at them.

This is not always going to result in the best numbers, but it will help. (some charms work only if you have been wearing them for a while, or moved around a while, etc...)
How about simply make them show 'Maximum' stats.

I understand that isn't perfect and people may wonder why they don't have the same stats, but possibly add a tag to the item display that clearly states 'Maximum Stats:' and they may get the hint.

Ang.
Neither of the answers is without issues.

I think you mean to say 100% stats. Some charms go beyond 100% so "max" is not always easily found either without running the script. And in the few cases where it gets up to about 300%... is rather inadequate!
I think I understand. Items have base stats and probably thanks to the code changes when purity and/or rec/req was added they have a percent above the item can go to. I guess i'd suggest that the modified box displays the absolute top possible stats, the script should act as if whatever requirements the item requires are maxed out (cha/logged in time/played time/quests/etc).

It's a complicated issue. We could talk about purity and power sources. That's a can of worms that probably doesn't have a solution.
I am not sure that anything even remotely simple could be made that would "know" what the maximum that the script can give, and display it... without the idea I said... which just displays it as "worn" but wills till "fail" for some scripts.

I.E. it is no simple thing to have something "interpret" how the script is going to run, and what the result will be, or even what the "max" is. It is not as simple as looking at what data is passed to the charm scripts. The charm scripts themselves almost always got looking for the data themselves... which is where the problem lays. It can either fake "run" the script, and get the results... or just assume a return of 100.



More...