AbstractIcon: Force Icon Rework

[Windchild292]

This PR moves Force Icons to Abstract Icon, and divides them into three separate types. These are StandardForceIcon, LayeredForceIcon, and UnitIcon, all of which have differing functionality. Additionally, this adds LayeredForceIcon export to png, force icon TO&E icon copy/paste, and automated new day force icon operational status updates (based on a MekHQ option).

This PR also replaces the Force Icon images with the far more comprehensive and standardized Kailan pack, with full migration from the old setup and a new MekHQ extras repository containing the current pack and a pack of standard force icons created by Mjolnir06.

The full list of what this does, which I used to keep this organized:

• Move Force and Layered Icons to Abstract Icon
• Make the Unit Icon its own thing
• Force Icon Data Swapover to Kailan Pack
• Standard Force Icon migration to Layered Pieces
• Layered Force Icon migration to new Layered Pieces
• Unit Icon migration
• New Standard Force Icon Dialog
• New Layered Force Icon Dialog
• New Unit Icon Dialog
• GM Tools Force Icon Creation
• Layered Force Icon Export
• Create MekHQ Data Repository
• Fixes Feature Request:TOE Layered Icon Changes #347: TO&E Force Icon Copy/Paste
• Fixes Feature Request- Layered TOE Icon expansion #354
• Fixes medical.png in data>images>force>Pieces>Type needs to be renamed to Medical.png #2235
• Fixes Vehicle Tracked Force Icon is weirdly interacts with the other icon parts. #2448
• Fixes the flattened AbstractDirectory Setup by reworking it to no longer be flattened (required for the changes to work)
• Removes the broken AbstractDirectory Zip Setup (required for the changes to work)
• Swaps AbstractIconChooser to AbstractPanel
• Adds Automated Force Icon Operational Status on New Day

For reviewers:
This file is large because of the ~7k lines of migration, and almost all of the file differences are because of the Force Icon pack swapover. Code-wise most of the work is on the dialog-side, to get the three icon types (with the fourth, internal type used in LayeredForceIcon) selectable and usable.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #2946 (d88588c) into master (ea6a179) will decrease coverage by 0.55%.
The diff coverage is n/a.

❗ Current head d88588c differs from pull request most recent head c4336ca. Consider uploading reports for the commit c4336ca to get more accurate results

@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##             master    #2946      +/-   ##
============================================
- Coverage     10.78%   10.22%   -0.56%     
- Complexity     4030     4045      +15     
============================================
  Files           758      773      +15     
  Lines        102144   107928    +5784     
  Branches      16728    16767      +39     
============================================
+ Hits          11013    11038      +25     
- Misses        89752    95515    +5763     
+ Partials       1379     1375       -4     

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
MekHQ/src/mekhq/campaign/universe/Faction.java	65.38% <0.00%> (-0.65%)	⬇️
...ekhq/campaign/universe/RandomFactionGenerator.java	56.17% <0.00%> (-0.40%)	⬇️
MekHQ/src/mekhq/MekHQOptions.java	1.63% <0.00%> (-0.09%)	⬇️
MekHQ/src/mekhq/campaign/Campaign.java	12.01% <0.00%> (-0.03%)	⬇️
MekHQ/src/mekhq/gui/BasicInfo.java	0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
MekHQ/src/mekhq/gui/CampaignGUI.java	0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
MekHQ/src/mekhq/gui/FileDialogs.java	0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
MekHQ/src/mekhq/gui/ForceRenderer.java	0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
MekHQ/src/mekhq/campaign/unit/Unit.java	19.95% <0.00%> (ø)
MekHQ/src/mekhq/gui/CommandCenterTab.java	0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
... and 34 more

---

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update ea6a179...c4336ca. Read the comment docs.

[HammerGS]

Kinda like to see this one in for 49.6. But I can't even filter to see the changed code. It crashes Chrome for me. How about two separate PR's one for the data stuff and one for the code.

Otherwise I think this will never happen.

[Windchild292]

I'd have separated the two if they weren't mutually required. As for GitHub's handling... that's annoyingly bad code on their end.

[NickAragua]

Bottom line is, there is no way to meaningfully review the code changes. Feel free to spin out a separate PR with just the code changes for review purposes only.

[Windchild292]

I've opened #3014, which is just the code for this PR.