So a common issue I have when using ALiVE is placing garrisons. For example if the players are working out of Rhino on Clafghan, I'll put blufor AI in the towers, patrolling around the perimeter, etc. My issue is if I sync that group pulling "guard duty" to the Virtual AI, then they won't stay put, or might but will throw off the AI commander by never going to do what he tells them to do.

If I do NOT sync them, then the AI commander will treat the scenario like they don't exist, and place one of his own allotted groups to defend the area. However they will not take up smart static positions inside towers, or conduct themselves the same way I can manage with manual placement. (Not an ALiVE issue, that. Just pointing out that there is a benefit to manual placement)

I'd like to know if there's a way to get the commander to recognize these groups/units/vehicles as garrison or defending forces, and free himself up a few more groups to use for pushing objectives. If that is not currently possible, I'd like to open a dialogue about this as a potential feature for a future update.

I responded to you on BI thread, @patpowercat but for good measure...

[
  {
    {
      If (!isNull (driver _x) ) then {
        {
          if !(_x getVariable ["NOAI",false]) then
          {
            _x setVariable ["NOAI", true, false];
          };
        } foreach (units group (driver _x));

      };
    } Foreach (vehicles select {_x isKindOf "Helicopter"});
  },
  10,
  []
] call CBA_fnc_addPerFrameHandler;

I use 64 and it works great. best map in the game imo. Not saying it's done... not done at all. The issues ski mentioned do exist. However the biggest issue, amount of objects, is effectively null and void on x64. And even not being done, it's absolutely amazeballz

For good measure, my PC is a beast. Will leave it at that lol.

https://forums.bistudio.com/topic/200913-x-cam-taunus-version-10/

Could someone who knows what they are doing be so kind as to index the new x-cam map? I can get to it some time soon if not, just never done it before and the map is AMAZING.

But that's the problem is that there really isn't a clear definition of "what" anywhere. For example, without looking through at least two pages on the wiki, and messing with the modules, I'd have no idea "what" the numbers and colors on debug mean, which isn't the best example now that a lot of that has been discussed several times here and on the wiki (still not centralized though).

Better example is... Player Combat Logistics. One would assume that Player Combat Logistics is what you see in the editor...

But then if I go look at what most assume is it on the wiki...

http://alivemod.com/wiki/index.php/Logistics_Support

I'm still very much at a loss as to "what" it is. Until I've been around for a bit with the stuff and I find the blurb about it over on...

http://alivemod.com/wiki/index.php/Command_%26_Control

But then I'm trying to figure out what to do with the C2ISTAR Module itself, lol. I hope that kinda makes the point without being brash. Point is, WHAT everything is and does should probably be clearly defined before you start talking about the why's and hows. Yes, people can probably figure it out with some effort looking at it all in the editor. But eventually or, sooner than eventually, they'll turn to google, and you definitely want the right thing coming up to answer them. I would hope.

Go google Alivemod player combat logistics, tell me the first article that comes up lol.

Works for me.

Sorry it means OR in nerd. Will fix.

Custom Objectives Module Wiki Article

@Friznit and other devs, here's an example of my intent for each module.

http://alivemod.com/wiki/index.php/Virtual_AI_System

Looks to be working. Thanks @Friznit you may close out this customer support ticket.

Yes major differences. I made a mission on tanoa with blacklist markers over the airfields for blufor. The rest was fair game to both sides. I think each OpCom had 259 objectives or thereabouts, and despite setting each at a platoon size for the start, each opcom seemed to have around 30 groups, starting. I did not add civilians yet in the images below, but I did later in the evening and still had zero issues. Eventually, the game crashed but it was an A3 error, not a memory issue. Something with dev branch. I saved the pics, see below.

Anyway, I ran this on my PC in single player mode (eden), GTX 1070, i7 6700, 16gb ram... at a view distance of around 5,000 with ultra settings, and kept a consistent rate of around 56 frames. In single player test mode! For comparison... after init the game was eating about 3500mb in mem usage.. that's 500 over the current x32 limit. In other words it would have crashed me with a memory allocation error just trying to load this up. A few hours later it was at 5700. Still smooth as silk.

People don't seem to realize it, but x64 is going to change everything, especially for people who make, and use, "heavy" mods like ALiVE.

By the way, I did all this with ACE, TFAR, RHS, and a few other mods running on top of alive. All the good, widely accepted mods are releasing _x64.dll's in anticipation.

http://i.imgur.com/RPwyO4C.png

http://i.imgur.com/7Y2oO6z.png