Open DanAlbert opened 3 years ago
Are the vehicle group spawns that we have now (see attached image) meant to be the garrisons in this FR? Should they be?
Yep, that's what I had in mind.
Ok here are some design questions I have regarding this:
IIRC part of my inspiration here was the Wags video for the F-16 JSOW where he targeted a group of parked vehicles. I was thinking that reserves would all deploy to a single area as inactive targets, though since we don't actually have any limit on reserve quantity, we would either need to allow for multiple locations, or cap the reserves.
Thinking about it a bit more, we wouldn't want to remove the existing garrison TGOs (the ones in your screenshot) without completing the more lofty goal of allowing active units to be tasked to arbitrary locations, since we don't want to completely remove non-FLOT guard units.
So I think if you're asking because you are looking to tackle the problem, my vote would be to deploy the reserves in the parked formations, but also leave the existing guards untouched for now. I'm open to alternatives of course, that's just how I'd envisioned it.
Answering the questions specifically (again, just my thoughts on them):
Do parked inactive ground units affect frame rate the way parked inactive aircraft do? I recall particularly VR users saying that their PCs were struggling due to the added CPU load from parked aircraft, even though we never figured out why a parked inactive aircraft would need extra cpu cycles.
They can enable culling.
Is there any reason to keep the current style of "here's a bunch of tanks sitting around"? Right now I don't think so, but wanted to check.
They're defensive positions. Maybe that's now how every campaign designers uses them, but I always place them on the approach to the base to add a little extra defense beyond what the FLOT is capable of.
Ok so a new target type is needed then, for a static set of parked vehicles, and the original defensive position type should stay? I'm ok with that.
At least until front-line units can be tasked to arbitrary locations, yeah. That's a much larger project that I'm not sure is even solvable for the AI with our limited terrain info :)
They can enable culling.
Wouldn't these garrisoned vehicles be at control points near the frontlines and typically within the radius that doesn't get culled? Do you mean for garrisoned vehicles to specifically get culled if culling is turned on?
It's a solvable problem.
Base garrisons are currently permanent static objectives in bases. Instead, reserve units deployed to bases that are not deployed to the front line should be deployed as garrisons to a motor pool area. These units would have no objectives in the mission, but would be able to deploy to the front line the next turn to make up for losses. This would solve the current problem where a complete wipe of the front line usually means zero units on the front the next turn because the replacements were purchased but won't be available until next turn.