This presumes the combat units get preferential treatment when it comes to equipment, which doesn't need to be the case, and generally isn't -- by default the game treats all units placed in the queue equally, distributing the available/produced equipment between them. Additionally, this problem affects all produced units, no matter their intended purpose, so I don't think it's an argument against dedicated garrison AI, specifically.That was my point. The combat units already in queue and reinforcements from war hog most of the equipment so very little is left for any garrisons.
I don't believe this to be accurate -- the war, at least when performed by the AI vs AI, lasts typically couple years, sometimes more. During this time multiple states are captured and the front moves deeper in land, leaving these captured areas without garrison forces. And like discussed earlier, it takes a few months to build units, not years, so there's wide margin for them to get deployed and contribute. Even if they don't, there's more wars about to happen so having these units ready for future duties is hardly a problem? Especially when initial complaint was how the AI would be unable to prepare such units in advance...( and even if it did build garrisons specifically triggered by occupation needs they would be ready about right when the war ends ).