Mirage logic expansion.

Difficulties in implementation aside, the idea of turning a base into a forest sounds hilarious.

Having it work for infantry would certainly be a good one to include. I've got this image of a bunch of snipers (or in classic cartoon style, spies) disguised as bushes now :D .

Useing a object specific desguises could make interesting camo pillboxs, ghillie snipers, and others where you'ld want an object out of sight, but not invisable.

Side thought, is desguised units exempt from superweapon targeting? Or does it have the same issue cloaked units had?

@EVA-251, Mirage generator? :P

Just curious, how would this work for buildings larger than 1x1? Seeing a 4x4 square of trees, even if they were different kinds of trees, would be quite obvious no matter how you put it.

Also, what about infantry subcell placement? If I saw 3 trees packed together on a single cell that would be a dead giveaway.

Then again, if a player is paying attention, mirage tanks themselves are somewhat obvious...

The thought was that of one 'tree' per object, infantry or massive building.

My plan was to create ghillie snipers and camoflauged buildings. They each would have had a custom image that would have fit both the situation and environment. Ghillie snipers would blend in, but not disappear. Buildings with be camoflauged with netting and folliage to create an effect simaller to the RA1 camo pillbox.

Now that you've got me thinking of it like the tank's or spy's ability, I see how that can be problematic. To me, it would be by far the most useful as mentioned at the top of this post, but I have no qualms with going a differnt direction.

hm, I can just imagine, "Mirage Construction Yard"

That would look interesting.

Anyways, the idea is actually good, but as far as buildings, well why bother using mirage logic if the building isn't going to move? Just make the building's base image that camouflaged image. Sure, when it's firing it should reveal itself, but you can still see the muzzle flash from the pill box, etc.

I'm still concerned with Infantry subcell placement. Seeing 3 little anythings packed onto a single cell tells me instantly that they are infantry, whether or not they look like bushes.

With vanilla terrain, a cluster of objects would certainly stand out. With properly made terrain however, a ghillie suit could blend in quite well, even when clustered. More so, even with mirage tanks, you have to chose placement. A tree in the middle of a road is a dead give away. Same with this, if you cluster them then its your fault.

As for buildings, I will use a 1x1 pillbox as an example, though I personally would use the same logic for 2x2 and maybe larger. Were I to make a pillbox like the one in RA1, it would be harder to see, though still visible. Place it well, and your enemy may wonder into its field of fire. However, thats only for a human player, the computer still sees it as clearly as it if was painted a vibrant pink with a "HERE I AM!" sign.

Now, take the same pillbox and give it a personalized mirage image. You can make the building look more defined when exposed, or not. Its up to the modder, but it will now take full advantage of the mirage targeting behavior. Specific units can be given the ability to see it, and the sharp eyed player can still notice it. Its not full invisibility where you just see a blank spot, but its not exposed ether.

Again, the same can apply to larger buildings. 2x2 is the obvious next step, though it does get increasingly problematic as you get larger. This logic may well be severely limited for standard mods, as the default mapping/visual style doesn't lend itself well to this. It does, however, have many useful applications for Total Conversion mods.

aaah, right. AI. Duh.

Well I guess You are right. Mirage tanks were always detectable to me though, even when hidden relatively well. But that's mainly because I know the maps so well that I can scope out any trees that seem out of place, even if they don't really seem out of place. Know what I mean?

Anyways, now that you explain it like that, I see no reason against it, so if anyone is gonna take on this issue I support it.