Wehrmacht Veterancy - the silent cancer of CoH

[slim]

If merely reading the thread was a waste of your precious bandwidth (download only)

TBH he would have used some of his upload as well =)

But I’m not going to get involved

[Wilson]

Their only function was to get killed in the single player campaign; that's why their veterancy made them all more difficult to kill to provide a better chalenge to the protagonist US player.

Do they ever get vet in the single player game? I don't recall it (but it has been a while since I played it). They were always going to be a multiplayer faction, so I'm not entirely sure this is what Relic were thinking.

Also drChengle, I know you've said multiple times that you know it isn't practical to change Wehr vet now, and I agree that back in 1.0 it was a much bigger issue, and that a complete overhaul would have been better than the multitude of smaller changes to everything else. I don't contest that point (you've put together much too good an argument).

[drChengele]

They do get vet in the single player game, especially on higher difficulty settings. Some missions, if they get protracted, include hordes of vet3 Grenadiers. I am not sure if this is scripted or merely a consequence of the AI floating manpower and actually researching the upgrades.

SmellyTerror's idea is also good. The trick just might be in making KKC veterancies varied. For a while I toyed with a thought of making doctrine specific KKC veterancy in my mod. Seeing as how this was too much work (designing three sets of three levels of veterancy for EVERY SINGLE UNIT), a simpler solution sprang to mind.

Let's say that when you pick a doctrine, it unlocks hidden researches in KKC, in addition to the regular veterancies. These researches are doctrine specific global veterancy which add unique bonuses. They are more specific than regular vet, more expensive, and there is more of them.
Some samples: Defensive could get "Logistics support" which would reduce the cost of mines and Goliaths, Blitz could get "Screened Assault" which would enable Nebels to toss a smoke barrage and give Stormtroopers the ability to camouflage (as they would have it removed at the start), Terror would give "Terror Tactics" which would increase the range of snipers and give Grenadiers the ability to autocloak in cover.

All this would be coupled with the limitation of a player only being able to select one level 3 regular Veterancy, to encourage diferentiation.

[Jaigen]

Completely agree with you drchengle but i fear that a major wehr vet overhaul wont come till the next expansion. till then we can at least point out to the designers that some vets needs a change. 15% hp on nebels anyone?

[Ano2]

You know the new beta would be the ideal time to try out a new vet method. Its all a question of whether Relic see wehr vet as the problem it is, and whether they consider it enough of a priority to change. Obviously it is a top priority, but Relic may well be occupied with making sure those pesky wehr mounted mgs aren't op!

[drChengele]

Turret mounted MGs are another example of the global nature of Wehr veterancy screwing things up. There was nothing wrong with turret mounted MGs. They were on par with the Shermans'. Therefore, the sole reason they were nerfed (and Shermans' were not) is because they are a global upgrade and therefore have a potential to be overpowered.

I do not think this Beta will even touch upon the subject of Wehrmacht veterancy, but we might at least try to turn Relic's attention to the fact that there are a lot of useless vet effects. Perhaps some of these might just get fixed. The way they did it for Pumas and Pioneers.

[rifleman]

They were far less effective than the 50cal of the sherman, now they are water pistols, there was a post in a thread about those mgs a while ago where some guy did the math and i think the current turret mgs have less than the 1/20 of the damage and suppression of the HMG42.
Sure there is potential of OPness the same way there is around every corner of CoH. It shouldn't cause any worry. The same potential of OPness from universal upgrades also exists in BARs, Sherman Gun Upgrade, PElite Vet Sargeant, Royal Engies improved emplacements... can't think of anything else right now.

[nfoo]

I think a lot of you are overdoing it a bit ... in acting as the Wehr Veterancy was useless and a joke.
I've read comments like: "They wanted diversity, now WE are PAYING for it.".
What a load of stupid. With what are you paying? That the Vet is weaker than the US? This is the most unreasonable and useless argument.
Having all your Units vetted and end game bring out vetted KCH ... Wehr is so screwed. ^^

I'm sorry, but I think it's a brilliant method of balancing and adding diversity and the post is hysterical.

The Wehr Veterancy is a weaker because it is global and you don't have to preserve the Units. So you benefit greatly from Medic Bunkers. Everybody knows that.
You say Medic Bunkers are unbalanced because they pump out vetted Units, about which you say that their Veterancy is too weak. Is see a mistake there, do you?

It is exactly the style of playing with Wehrmacht and the reason why you see the Medic Bunker more often than an US Medic Station - and because it's a bunker and you can put units into it. I've seen a great game - not great playing, but the game was great - by link0. Wehr won by Volks feeding his Medic Bunkers and spitting out Vetted Grens. Heck, he had about 8-9 Grens on the field, max.
The US player had 2 Rifles, 2 Rangers, 2 Flaming Engies. The Rangers got extremly strong with Vet3 and was the only reason the game wasn't over after 15-20 Minutes.
Wehr get's fewer upkeep penalty, so the US needs their fewer Units to be a little stronger. Yes: fewer Units/Squads.

For me, this post has no reason and your complaints have no reason.
I'm pissed of, too, when I see a vet3 tiger coming out, because it is like Superman: the shots don't hurt. But I know how it works, that it comes and that it has a reason to be like it is. It is not OP and not unbeatable.

And it is totally fine, because OVERALL it makes for an interessting and balanced game. The Wehr vs. US matchup is totally fine and great and your Wehr Vet helps you against Brits, too.

You should all calm dawn and take a step back.
The US gets benefits from a stronger VET, but it's earned harder and US gets other penaltys, like the overall higher MP hit, too -> and in the end that makes a very interessting and balanced game.

[German Steel!]

I'm pissed of, too, when I see a vet3 tiger coming out, because it is like Superman

We also pay for such things. For example, here's the veterancy table of Flak 88s:

Level Effect Requirement
1 -15% Received Damage Veteran Vehicle Crews
2 +15% Maximum Health Crack Vehicle Crews
3 -15% Received Penetration Elite Vehicle Crews

[Demonic Spoon]

ViiKumi made an interesting point. You can't argue that the American/PE system of vet is logical, either; Green troops with no combat experience didn't become the best of the best battle-hardened supersoldiers within one battle.

I'm not sure it's really an issue of attachment to units, either. Remember that Wehrmacht is the second most structured army in the game, next to Brits (Who also have a nontraditional vet system). Americans and PE focus more on generalist units, whereas Wehr is a bit more specific. Losing an individual Wehr squad often hurts more than it does Americans or PE, ESPECIALLY if upgraded.

Wehr unit individuality I believe comes from the different roles each squad plays in the army.

[Pyro Paul]

My personal suggestion to fix wehr vetrency...

Add a 4th level of vetrency to Wehr... this 4th level is independent of the other 3 purchaused vetrency and is gained by XP.

so wehr vetrency is split into 2 groups
you have 3 levels of 'Training/Drilling' which allows your troops to be more survivable on the battlefield.

then independent of that you have 1 level of 'Battlefield Vetrency' which is a single level of offencive vetrency allowing them to be more effective in combat.

because battlefield vetrency is independent some troops can gain it long before, or even purely with out the purchaused vetrency. and this battlefield vetrency would be rather hard to achieve on some units while being relitively easy on others. Volks would easily achieve this vetrency where as KCH would have an extreamly hard time.


another idea on top of this is to make 'Elite' units have a 5th level of vetrency which is given to them if they have both Battlefield and training vetrency.

Thinking along the lines of a well kept and babied Tiger becoming a 'Ace' tiger.

so the Tiger, the Panther, the KCH, and the Officer are only open to this 5th level... and on thoes units it would be Extreamly Hard to get the battlefield vetrency as well as costly to get the training vetrency so the advantages should be Well worth it.

[Demonic Spoon]

The problem is that would be potentially unbalancing, you'd need to nerf something.

[Leobardis]

ViiKumi made an interesting point. You can't argue that the American/PE system of vet is logical, either; Green troops with no combat experience didn't become the best of the best battle-hardened supersoldiers within one battle.

This is where I disagree. Not to derail the topic (this is a small aside), but learning something in a class, or taking basic training, is different from actually BEING in combat. Academia is completely different than experience, and being in LIVE combat for 5 minutes is completely different, because deep down, when you are training, you KNOW it is not life or death.

Not being in the military I cannot do more than conjecture, but everything I've ever read (ironic isn't it), definitely suggests and discusses the fact that preparations are preparations, not experience.

So i think yeah, they get training, but now they are on the field.

maybe this vet is a better awareness of their immediate surroundings

ie. I am experienced getting around a city, I am confident I can find my way around ANY city in the world, but until I go to a foreign city and actual experience it, I won't be as knowledgeable as a citizen of that city.

[Pyro Paul]

The problem is that would be potentially unbalancing, you'd need to nerf something.

not really, i was thinking along the lines of My Battlefield vet would require an insane amount of XP... so basically the amount of XP required for your unit to get vet 1 2 And 3 would be the same amount of me to get Vet 1...

so the XP to get vet 3 rangers is about 3/4ths the xp i need to get the battle vet for my KCH...

Insanely hard to get, with limited offencive advantages...
balanced in my oppinon.

[drChengele]

You say Medic Bunkers are unbalanced because they pump out vetted Units, about which you say that their Veterancy is too weak. Is see a mistake there, do you?

Seems to me you completely missed the point. Where exactly do I say that veterancy of Grenadiers is weak?

You should all calm dawn and take a step back.
The US gets benefits from a stronger VET, but it's earned harder and US gets other penaltys, like the overall higher MP hit, too -> and in the end that makes a very interessting and balanced game.

Diversity for the sake of diversity does not make an interesting and balanced game by default. If PE rode Velociraptors into the fray and Wehr had flying saucers, that would add diversity, but wouldn't mean squat for balance.

And as for the balance front, try this on for size: In a protracted game, when vet3 is reached in one or two fields, the playing field is no longer leveled because losing a squad hurts a US/PE player much more than it hurts Wehrmacht player. Diversity in mechanics or a balance problem? Not for me to decide.

Also, I see no need for phrases such as "hysterics" and "calm down". The original post is structured and level-headed. Please refute arguments instead of insisting on tone.

Sigh. Certain people seem to not have read the first paragraph of the original post. I'd like to point out that this post is placed in the main CoH forum. NOT in the balance subforums. Therefore, this is not a whine tread about whether or not Wehr veterancy is too weak or too strong (because it can be a bit of both, depends on the vet and the context).

This is a thread that serves to show that Wehr doesn't have veterancy. It has a series of consecutive upgrades. By definition, that is not veterancy. Some of you may stretch the imagination enough to see reason in the "eastern front veterans" explanation, which I respect; the fact remains that the eastern front Veteran Panzer gets a 15% incoming damage decrease, a measly machine gun, and armored skirts which do nothing except versus Zooks and RRs.

An on-the-field Veteran Sherman, however, gets increased speed, increased penetration, and at vet3, increased damage.

Perhaps this could be summed up by:

US and PE units get better at what they do the more killing they do. They get very nice and very specific, useful bonuses. (I will not discuss Brits at the moment because they are a topic unto themselves)

When Wehrmacht units get veterancy, they only sometimes get better at what they do. Survivability increases fit well with direct combat infantry, which is why infantry vet is OK. However, what if I want veteran mortars to be better at what they do? What if I want veteran bikes to be better at what they do? What if I want veteran FlaKs to be better at what they do?

Oh, and what about this: Wehr captured weapon teams can never get better regardless of researches and kills. All other armies' captured weapon teams can gain veterancy (even Brits weapon teams benefit from Lt/Capt bonuses).

Why is the Panzer IV turret mounted MG so much weaker than Sherman MG? If Wehr vet is "unique and adds balance and diversity", then why isn't the mounted MG on the Panzer the same as the one mounted on the Sherman? Shouldn't it be? If it shouldn't, why?

Why is it that when Riflemen get a universal upgrade that adds new weapons to the team (BAR), it's called a "universal upgrade" on top of which it can get veterancy, while when Panzer IVs get a universal upgrade that adds new weapons to the tank (Turret mounted MG) it is called "veterancy"? To those that say that Grenadiers can get LMGs as a counterpart to US's BAR rifles universal upgrades, I will respond that Shermans can get universal upgrades (76mm cannon), ammo-purchased unit upgrades (turret mounted .30cal), and veterancy.

Now all this may be more or less balanced. But, diversity? Come on. It's not diversity, it's lack of a feature (while that may be technically diverse, it isn't diverse in the right way for richness of gameplay). Any way you look at it, Wehrmacht doesn't have veterancy. Diversity my ass. How are BARs different from Elite armor? How are armored skirts different from 76mm cannons?

[German Steel!]

Sigh. Certain people seem to not have read the first paragraph of the original post.

You'd be truly surprised to find out the number of people that don't bother reading anything in the topics they post in. No, not even the OP.

[wehrwolfzug]

Ok so, can the good doctor compile a summary of all the great suggestions and debates that have come about in this thread. The thread is getting rather long and most people will not read the whole thread like some of us.

Can you take peices of everything you think will work from the thread and peice together a system that would work better?

Before this thread I had never realised how much of a handicap I had playing as wehr before. But I think with a little tweaking the wehr could be a even cooler faction.

[SmellyTerror]

You read the whole thread and think that Wehr vet is just a handicap?

[Pyro Paul]

well, the whole wehr vetrency is both a crutch and a god send all at the same time.


yes, allied vetrency is much better, but it is also a lot more frail. if committed my best Vet 3 forces to an engagement before as US and PE only to lose them by some fluke (strafing run, arty, a shreck spammed army of panzergrenadiers, a MP44 spammed army of panzergrenadiers and so forth)

as a game drags on me and my advesary would constantly deal blows to each other. eventually we get into the game sealer... the last 5 minutes of a long game where either side has jack and you are both trying desperatly to rebuild your forces. now while i have to rebuild fresh forces sans vet, the wehr player is getting his forces With vet. so the next engagement we push, he will win.

[drChengele]

Forum ate my post!

Anyways, Wehr veterancy is not a handicap. Or at least not a handicap versus Wehr. It is simply a global upgrade system, nothing more, nothing less, and that's a tried and tested concept which has been going on for ages, with well known good sides and bad sides.

I mean, what is Wehr infantry veterancy level 2 if not Starcraft's "infantry armor" research that you could get in Engineering Bay/Evolution Pit/Cybernetics Core, Starcraft being a decade old at this point?

So you will forgive me if I don't join in with the view some people expressed in this topic about the "innovative and different veterancy" Relic designed for Wehr. Diverse veterancy model my ass. That's no ruddy veterancy. That's an Engineering Bay.

It may be balanced to the moon and back - which it isn't, by the way, see Pyro's post above for one possible scenario - and it will still be an Engineering Bay.

[Dymo]

And in well matched 1v1, something on the order of 45-60 minutes, the Wehr will be bringing BOTH fresh Vet 2-3 Tanks and Infantry. The same will not be so for the US.

So once paid for, those Wehr "global upgrades" are golden...

[ViiKumi]

I mean, what is Wehr infantry veterancy level 2 if not Starcraft's "infantry armor" research that you could get in Engineering Bay/Evolution Pit/Cybernetics Core, Starcraft being a decade old at this point?

What's wrong with old things? How about that kill count veterancy you're so interested in... It's ages old too! I mean really. Your arguements lack the power they (at least in some proportions) had in the first posts.

Really, why should something great be changed just because it isn't "cool" enough in some guys opinion?

[drChengele]

Really, why should something great be changed just because it isn't "cool" enough in some guys opinion?

If you think my argument boils down to "isn't cool enough", you are wrong. That bit about Chuck Norris in the OPwas just a humorous afterthought. Leading a monolithical war machine can be just as cool as leading a party of gung-ho McGuyvers.

I never said that anything being old is a bad thing. If anything, I think modern games could yet learn a LOT from the "golden oldies".

Your arguements lack the power they (at least in some proportions) had in the first posts.

I didn't even post arguments, all I wanted to point out is that the "innovative" concept of Wehr veterancy isn't so innovative at all. This concept was present in other games since time immemorial (there is nothing wrong with that either); in CoH it serves as a substitute for an actual "combat experience =veterancy" system. The fact they are calling it veterancy doesn't irk me, but like I said, this is not a mere question of semantics because as long as these upgrades exist and are called "veterancy", Wehr isn't eligible to be considered for "kill-vet".

To be honest, I don't really want a kill-vet system for Wehr that badly. I am not saying "change this, it will fix problems". No, problems have already been largely fixed, to the extent a global upgrade scheme can be balanced against an individual vet system. What I am saying is "if they had done it differently from the start, a lot of problems could have been averted". And maybe today we would have a slightly better game.

I don't really want cool units. All I want is that units who did a lot of killing get better at what they do, not because I think that's what Wehr needs, but because that's how it works with all the other factions (with an interesting spin where Brits are concerned). Not because Wehr is at a balance disadvantage, but because this causes conceptual problems such as PzIV turret MGs being ineffective, Wehr keeping their veterancy when they create new squads (meaning protracted games and instagibbing squads hit other factions much more heavily, which is a bit of an unfair advantage, if you think about it), Medic bunkers being borderline overpowered, Wehr captured weapon crews never being able to get veterancy, etc.

[rifleman]

captured weapon crews get the veterancy of the squad they came from eg if volks capture a mg the mg crew get any vet volks get

--

Thread Summary : a lot of people (including the thread creator) agree that Wehr Vet system in terms of balance is ok, it works fine in the current game, as a concept according to quite a few needs almost a complete redisign according to others it does not.

--

My view is that the vet system works so don't fix it, CoH is running its last 1 maybe 2 years. Supporting arguments have been posted earlier.

Dr please make a summary of the most common suggestions for the proposed vet system and lets call it a day.

[BikerGnome]

Rifleman well put, things arent going to change, there are some great ideas here, but wehr vet (even if you dont belive it is vet) works just fine.

US - earns vet in a basic way but once earned they rock
PE earns vet and has chance to decide how that vet works for them
Brit officer / tank commander earn vet, which can then be used to support diffrent troops, but you need to keep them alive
Wehr - Buy vet, expensive but affects all units of the type.

There is variety which works in its different ways. I dont see why people keep wanting to make this faction play like another faction, especially when veterancy right now is balanced. Just play the damm game and use what you have got.

If a vet 3 tiger rolls, so what, the guy invested 700mp and i dont know how much fuel, he deserves a fricken killing machine

[Quercus]

Rifleman - I wouldn't say that is a completely accurate summation of the thread.
I would say a more accurate one would be:

DrChengele's proposition is that the "veterancy" system used by Wehrmacht, while being more or less balanced within the game, cannot really be considered to be a true veterancy system and the way it is implemented arguably has a negative effect on the way the game is played when compared to American and PE factions.

Of the people who have responded in this thread and who appear to understand the statements he is making, most seem to accept his comments but some believe that the pros of having a very unique veterancy system for the Wehrmacht outweigh the possible cons of it not being "true" veterancy.

I personally disagree with that point of view - the player should feel encouraged to protect and nurture veteran units rather than being able to throw them away because their replacements will be exactly the same.
I also still submit that the British veterancy system is also deeply flawed and effectively does not work, because of the absolute dependence on otherwise relatively useless, costly and fragile units.

[drChengele]

BikerGnome, again, semantics.

US - earns vet in a basic way but once earned they rock, plus they get engineering bay upgrades
PE earns vet and has chance to decide how that vet works for them, plus they get engineering bay upgrades
Brit officer / tank commander earn vet, which can then be used to support diffrent troops, but you need to keep them alive (not going to discuss Brits, like I said, completely different topic)
Wehr - Buy vet, expensive but affects all units of the type. (i.e. gets only engineering bay upgrades)

The balance of a vet3 Tiger is not at a dispute here. I applaud variety. However, this is like a billionth post that says "you just want this faction to play like another faction". That's decidedly not true. I don't want anything. All I did was point out the problems Wehr veterancy caused over the years it took to balance it.

Plus, there have been a lot of suggestions how to make a kill-vet for Wehr that would be absolutely, completely different from all the other kill-vets other three factions get.

I am willing to accept that Wehr is the only faction that doesn't get kill-vet, (in the same way Brits are the only one with mobile base buildings), but in that case let us at least identify the cause of that: Wehrmacht veterancy was rushed, it was in a pitiful state upon release, and the reason it is absent is a clear consequence of Wehr not having a campaign in vCoH.

Also, "just play the damm game and use what you have got" doesn't sound like a very constructive thing to say. Am I to understand I didn't play enough games? Or that we are not allowed to point out flaws that arise as a consequence to certain veterancy systems without your reproach?

rifleman: like hell I am summarizing a 12+ page thread!

P.S. Quercus, thank you.

[rifleman]

like hell I am summarizing a 12+ page thread! LOL i think quercus got it right

[Ballist1x]

id just increase the upkeep cost of each squad by a certain percentage for each level of vet they gain, because there has to be SOME cost attributed to each unit once the Vet is bought globally otherwise there is nothing to stop Wehr spamming Vet3 Grens and still rolling in Manpower, whilst their allied foes (US in particular) have extraordinary high upkeep on normal lowly/unvetted squads...

that s my issue with the pre bought vet

[German Steel!]

If grens are being spammed, get some mortars...

[Ballist1x]

ah right, usually by the time of vet3 grens the Wehr will have some Nebels, stuka, anything. as soon as they see your MT its dead before its packed up and run off...waste of time im afraid,

[Dymo]

An incremental upkeep cost increase would cripple the Wehr due to their Pioneer's already having a considerably higher upkeep cost than Rifles on a man-man basis.

Let's not forget that the Pio's already got zapped for upkeep to try and prevent spamming and that the Wehr have no upkeep reduction capabilities, except death, unlike the US.

So don't be so bloody cheap. As US just buy your upkeep reductions and the Wehr will buy their Vet.

[SuchisLife]

Taking away the Wehr pay for vet system would simply not work. How often do you see a volks squad beat a rifle squad, almost never. So volks would have very little chance to gain vet and by the time you got a gren squad out they would be up against riflemen with vet from killing volks. There's also the global upgrades that riflemen get that help them gain vet. Bars are a great example because they own all unvetted wehr infantry and can be upgraded by the time Wehr have their first gren squad out.
So if were going to look at Wehr's global vet then lets look at US global bar upgrade. I have to pay 50 mun to upgrade EACH volks squad and 75 mun for EACH gren squad compared to a one off bargain price for all riflemen. Same goes for tanks, shermans can get upgrades to make them better so they have to add upgrade options for P4's and stugs.
I'm not even going to bother to talk about how hard it would be for grens to gain vet against tommies and commands.
I could go on but I think it's obvious that if they changed the Wehr vet system they would have to re-balance everything else and by the time that was done we'd end up with 2 mirror image sides.
For the love of god, this game (USvWehr) is so close to being balanced that a change like this would send us back to the drawing board. So just leave things well alone.

[Murton]

Read DrC's posts again and you'll realise that he isn't asking for a change, he's merely making an observation, he even said himself that any changes made at this point would send the balance back to the stoneage, however if the Wehrmacht had true veterancy, earned through combat efficiency, and the game balanced around that premise then a lot of the so-called "balance issues" that plague the Wehrmacht game would have been completely avoided.

[Ballist1x]

So don't be so bloody cheap. As US just buy your upkeep reductions and the Wehr will buy their Vet.

the game fails though. The idea is what 1943-1945. i.e early on the US have little resources and need to build SY + upgrades etc to represent this.

However late war it was the germans who were starved of resource and the US who were swimming, and able to really build 10-20 Shermans per each panther/tiger that made it to the battlefield. This is not replicated in COH. In game with Wehr late game i am always swimming in everything.

With the US im never swimming in manpower its always holding me back from doing anything half as extravagant as going Tanks (1v1/2v2) and wheras Wehr/PE will nearly ALWAYS go tanks mid to late game simply because they are not crippled as much as the us in terms of manpower coming in.

[Venkman]

Regardless of production numbers not being directly proportional to the game play, do you really want more than four Shermans or M10s to have to equal one panther? That might be close to what we have but the only 'realistic' and 'balancing' fix seems to give the germans the better stuff (just like in the war) and to give the allies higher population caps. All that will do is nerf current allied units to throw more numbers into it and boost germans while increasing costs; that is to say different means to the same path.

[Henriech]

What it sounds like was that the Wehrmacht vet system came first. Then the developers felt that the American infatry needed help against the Wehrmacht infantry. So since the Wehrmacht got global veterancy, the Americans got global uprgrades such as BARs and nades for infantry and stickie bombs for vehicles.

Then the developers decided to gove the Americans the combat vet system, and buffed it a bit so the Americans would be on par with the Wehrmacht. To help the Wehrmacht against this, before and after global veterancy, they gave the Wehrmacht muntion upgrades for every squad to get, since the Americans have to earn vet with every squad.

What do you guys think? Seems a bit unfair since the Wehrmacht has to pay for it all. I think the Wehr should get global weapon upgrades, and PE veterancy. Plus, wouldn't it make sense to give the Wehr officers (the Brit Vet system)?

After all, the Wehrmacht was known for it's leaders from lowly Corporals to the high Feldmarschalls.

Does this make sense at all?

Regards, Thomas

[vfdarkcipher]

i dont want to make wehr any more like americans, so i dont like the global wehr upgrade idea. making the officer give bonuses to surrounding soldiers is a yes tho, atm hes useless

[Henriech]

I have an idea! How about this:

Wehrmacht could vet up like the PE and or Americans to an extent. No Brits, as that promotes blobbing, which is deathly to Wehrmact.

I think that the Wehrmacht should vet up depending on it's doctrine.

If it was defensive doctrine, it should vet up with PE defensive bonuses. With shield icons.

If it goes Blitz, it should vet up with PE offensive bonuses.

If it goes Terror, then Wehr should be able to choose.

What about the Kampfkrat Center?

I think we should keep. Wehr should be able to buy veterancy for call ins. It should be a bit cheaper, as only call in units should get the purchased veterancy.

Then the explanation of better trained units or eastern front veterans can come into play.

What about the speed of vetting up? Should it be like PE or Americans?

I think that the Wehrmaht can use the kampfkraft center for this one too. The PE gets veteran sargeants right? So why not the Wehrmacht get somethig similar?

The Wehrmacht could get three uprgades, each more expensive than the first.

It could be like this.

No Upgrade:

Units vet up slowly, slower than PE and Americans.

If a Squad (infantry or crew) loses 50% or more of it's members, it loses one veterancy level. If it only has one level of vet, it loses it.

Squads that get the final kill get vet.

No vet sharing

Upgrade 1: Squad NCO's: 150 Man 30 Fuel

Units vet up about as fast as PE units without Squad sargeants upgrade.

If a Squad (infantry or crew) loses 50% or more of it's members, it loses one veterancy level. If it only has one level of vet, it loses it.

Squads that get the final kill get vet.

No vet sharing


Upgrade 2: Squad Officers 300 Man 50 Fuel

Units vet up as fast as the PE with the squad sargeants upgrade.

If a Squad (infantry or crew) loses 50% or more of it's members, it loses one veterancy level. If it only has one level of vet, it retains it.

Squads that get the final kill get vet.

No vet sharing

Upgrade 3: Eastern Front Veteran Officers 500 Man 75 Fuel

Units vet up a touch faster than Americans.

If a Squad (infantry or crew) loses 50% or more of it's members, it loses no veterancy.

Squads that get the final kill get vet.

Squads work together (squads share a small percentage of vet with each kill in conjuction with the above rule)

A Few Special Units:

The Sniper:

Wehr players often complain that the American sniper is superior to the Wehrs. Being a bit cheaper, and getting camoed walking speed increased to that of uncamoed I used to disagree.

It used to be that at vet 3, the Wehrmacht sniper would get a double shot ability. However, since OF came out, Relic did away with the idea.

My idea is that at vet 2 or 3, the sniper should be able to purchase a G43 for 75 munitions which allows him to shoot the double shot.

Then both snipers would be unique and evenly matched.

The Wehrmacht Officer:

Many players see this guy as useless.

I disagree.

He was given a cost decrease and can supervise production for free.

For 150 munitions he can call a registered artillery any where on the map.

For muntions, he can retreat an enemy squad, very usefull for a surprise airborne squad or ranger squad on the flank.

However, I think that he can be made to be a little more useful.

I think that at vet three, he should be able to give infantry a small suppression bonus in a small radius.

I also think (taken from Europe in Ruins) he should be able to supervise a unit. Kind of like a british officer, that unit, and that unit alone should be automatically vet 1 as long as it is supervised. If it is already vet one, than it can recieve a larger suppression bonus.

The Nebelwerfer

It used to be the most useless unit in the game. That is until OF came out. Then it got a cost buff, and suppression and damage increase versus infantry. Plus, it's rockets were inciendiary.

It's no so bad now, but is still phased out in favor of the Stuka zu Fuss, which while less expensive in manpower, and a dash of fuel, at 150 munitions, it is expensive for a muntions heavy dependant Wehrmacht.

My suggestion is at vet 3, it can pay a muntions cost to load larger rockets that are inciendiary, but do as much damage as a Stuka zu Fuss.

Also at the vet goes up, increased accuracy should be nice. But only if the said target is in line of sight. Fog of war should always fuck up accuracy on artillery pieces and things similar.

Stuka zu Fuss

Arguably the Wehrmacht's best arty piece, the Stuka is almost perfect. However, one thing that always bugged me was the flame animation as the rockets impacted.

My suggestion, is at vet 2, the Stuka zu Fuss should pay a small fee to load an inciendiary shot.

So one can keep the animation, but the fire actually does some damage this time. Then the Wehrmacht woulod actually have more of a chance against Brits this time.

Motorcyle:

Except for the bike spam, perfected and widely promoted by Kashll this unit is alway so useful any more.

One, it's very fragile.

Two, it has almost no killing power.

Three, towards the late game, it's usefullness dies, except for a sucide scout.

My suggestion is simple. At vet 3, give a choice of three upgrades.

It can only choose one, for 70 munitions.

Either a better gun, more movement speed, or more sight range.

One could also have these choices for free on the basis of which ever doctrine one choosed. As the American jeep can capture points with raid from the armour doctrine.

Just a thought.

Knight's Cross Holders:

These guys are beast. Picked from among the best of the Reichwarriors, these guys are tough. Able to take 2 sniper shots per man, and having auto assault grenades, and panzerfaust at vet 3. These guys are really good.

Unfortunately, for 3 guys, this squad isn't cheap. Plus, they're a bitch to reinforce. If you lose one man, you might as well retreat the squad.

My suggestion, is a vet 3, have a global upgrade where one can pay a set fee to add one more guy to the squad.

It'd look like this.

Panzer Kommand
Upgrade: Rescued Veterans or Increased Training

All it does is add one extra man to the squad. Believe me, it'd make a world of a difference.


Veterancy Relevance

My last argument, is veterancy relevance.

Examples such as reduced pentration for motorcyles, and Snipers.

Increaded speed for officers?

They are being better about it now, but it used to be downright useless.

Speed for motorcyles, more camo time after a kill for snipers, reduced suppression for infantry and etc.

Regards, Thomas

Thanks for reading my ridiculously long post.

[Ballist1x]

Let's not forget that the Pio's already got zapped for upkeep to try and prevent spamming and that the Wehr have no upkeep reduction capabilities, except death, unlike the US.

So don't be so bloody cheap. As US just buy your upkeep reductions and the Wehr will buy their Vet.

but that only works where the units have an equivalent or lower cost for the US. they dont:/

So even if you spend 200 fuel on SY Upgrades, your Man Power Per Min income is still always going to be less than the Axis opponent (even sharing half the map equally).

The implication that US units can get better VET at lvl 2-3 is mooted by the ability of a combination of 2-3 units to one shot each tank/unit that the US can produce, taking them back to square one, of having lost the unit, having to spend a lot to acquire an inferior unit, still getting less MP than the axis and having to send green unit out vs Vetted units...

[FooF]

I haven't read through the entire thread (through page 7) and to the OP: brilliant.

I don't know if a system like this has been introduced or not, so excuse my ignorance if it has:

Vet would be Global but also experience-based. What I could imagine is that each unit class has it's own "XP counter" that fills as that unit class makes kills. For example, you have two squads of Grens. Those Grens end up killing 50 XP worth of units, thus, the 50 XP goes toward "Gren Veterancy." At 50 XP (for example) all Grens on the map get their Vet 1 upgrade. As the player uses those units more and more, they gain higher and higher global vet since they kill more. It does require you to use the units you want to Vet but once awarded, it's permanent.

The KKC would work identically as it does now but instead of granting the Veterancy, it allows the units under those fields to earn it. This is somewhat like others have stated before. I think it would be interesting if existing units had to visit the KCC (radius) to "level up." But that might be too much.

Same goes for Vehicles, Tanks, etc.

Thus, Vetting your Volks early on doesn't translate to Vetted Grens later, but at least the Volks you build from now on would still be Vetted (and the Grens would have the ability to get Vetted since the research at the KCC has already been done).

I hope that makes sense. Of course, balancing what the "class experience" needs to be would be interesting. Would it take 500 XP to get all your Panthers to Vet 3? 400 XP? Those arguments would be interesting. Also, what Vet gives you would need to be balanced as well.

[Henriech]

I meant for the speed of vetting up (amount of XP required).

Buying the expensive upgrades (similar to the PE's veteran sargeants) would just reduce vet requirements dictating the speed at which units vet up.

All units would vet up by killing stuff, just using the KKC and buying global upgrades, they vet up faster.

The only vet I suggested that was to actually be bought like now, was for unit call ins (mostly Blitz Doctrine) as they units are "trained beforehand", and then sent into combat.

Then I suggested that different vet upon different doctrines.

Def Doc: =Defensive Vet (similar to PE)

Blitz Doc:=Offensive Vet (similar to PE)

Terror Doc:=Choosing either (PE model)

Then I suggested some upgrades to make untis better and more unique.

Remember Wehr Sniper double shot? Because of the current vet model, spammage could occur.

If one could simply buy a semiautomatic rifle (at vet 2 or 3) G43 for the sniper, he could be both unique and hard to spam 340 man 75 muni and vetting up (keeping him alive) requirements. No spammage there.

I hope Relic peaks around this corner, because I want to make a change.

Regards, Thomas

[Quercus]

Henreich, that is a great idea. I'm not sure if you were suggesting this but I would go for:

Veterancy gained is through combat and the KKC now supports that rather than replacing it. The KKC still exists and still has similar upgrade options available, but these now reduce the XP requirements for those kinds of units to gain veterancy, thus still allowing for wermacht players to focus on certain unit types.

Without KKC: All units gain veterancy through combat but XP required for Vet1/2/3 is roughly 200% that of "normal" (e.g. U.S) equivalents.

With KKC (but no upgrades): As above but XP requirements are 150% of "normal".
With KKC and first upgrade level: XP requirements are 110% of "normal"
With KKC and second upgrade level: XP requirements are 90% of "normal"

I also (as stated a long time ago in this thread) think the British vet system needs changing to move the focus away from the single units as well.

[Henriech]

You pretty much have the general idea. I wasn't sure on percents, so I just used the rate of experience models for American, and PE with and without vet sargeants.

I will make a revised essay on this so people can better understand it.

[saibot]

If one were to implement a different Veterancy system for Wehrmacht one would need to make one that influences the meta game as little as possible while still promoting diversity.

I've got a little idea in my mind how that mightwork, allow me to elaborate.


----------------------------------

Wehrmacht units gain Veterancy by killing dudes and blowing stuff up like anybody else but their vet-bonuses would initially be not as good as US bonuses.

The KKC still exist but now it has two rows of upgrades:

1. The first row would be upgrades to increase the vet-bonuses for the four types of units (this simulates Abwehr officiers and veteran NCO's in the KKC briefing the soldiers how to more effectively fight the Yankees and Tommies). With these upgrades they are able to actually outperform american veterans, this mechanic would make keeping your (small) squads alive a challenge but a rewarding one. At the same time you would still be forced to play defensively in the beginning to deny the Americans their initially higher vet-bonuses.

Example:

Rifleman Vet1:

+25% Accuracy
-20% Received Accuracy

Grenadier Vet1 (without KKC-Infantry-upgrade):
+15% Accuracy
-10 Received Accuracy

Grenadier Vet1 (with KKC-Infantry-upgrade):
+30% Accuracy
-25 Recieved Accuracy


Now the Wehrmacht player needs to watch his man very closely to avoid losing his veterans, that's where the second row helps.

2. The second row would be the upgrades that speed up the veterancy gaining of Wehrmacht units (whether reducing the needed XP to achieve a level or increasing the earned XP amount is more appropriate is another topic).

A Wehrmacht player with both upgrades for a type of unit would have strong veterans that "level up" fast but can still be brought down quickly with focused fire, lucky artillery shells or a canister shot.

Wehr would lose Elite-Zombie-Factories-Of-DOOM, while still getting vets rather quickly after researching the upgrade.

--------------------------


Just an idea, tell me how much it sucks.

[Melonplant]

I like your idea saibot, but I think you'd still need to split them so that it takes 3 researches or each one. Perhaps the first upgrade could increase the vet to +18% accuracy -13% recieved accuracy or whatever is appropriate, and the next upgrade would further that.

This way the KKC building wouldn't be a two research building, and would prevent players from rush researching awesome veterancy from the get go (and still allow players to upgrade their units without paying out the butt for one mega research)

[Henriech]

That is also a good idea. However, I have two sections of xp in the KKC for my idea.

Section 1 KKC Universal Vet Upgrade:

Unit Call Ins

Basically any unit that the Wehrmacht calls in can have veterancy bought for them before they get on the field. They can still vet up normally too, but one could also just as easily buy vet for them.

The upgrades would be a little bit expensive though, to simulate elite training, or the cost of obtaining some Eastern Front veterans. This would be bought old style, minus the 4 different vet groups. There would be two groups: Infantry, and Vehicles (basically everything else).

Section 2 KKC Vet Upgrade:

Universal Upgrade for All Units:

Basically reduces vet exp requirements. Pretty much what Quercus said.

With Out UG:

Vet requires 200% exp requirements to that of an American equivalent.

With UG 1

Vet requires 150% exp requirements to that of an American equivalent.

With UG 2

Vet requires 100% exp requirements to that of an American equivalent.

With UG 3

Vet requires 75% exp requirements to that of an American equivalent.

---------------------------------------------------------

That was my original idea, and that Wehrmacht vet 3 would trump American vet 3, vet 2 was equal for both sides (about), and vet 1 American was more powerful vet than Wehrmacht vet 1.

However, I do the like Saibot's idea.

Regards, Thomas

[saibot]

@Melonplant

Actually with "rows" I meant that you actually have 8 upgrades:

Faster Vet: Infantry, Support, Halftracks, Tanks
Better Vet: Infantry, Support, Halftracks, Tanks

[Henriech]

sounds good

[SubZero]

Having encountered this day after day after day, I must heartedly agree that the Veteran System for Wehrmacht is unfair; especially versus British.

We must keep one unit alive all game and during combat to benefit from a level of veterancy, whilst they merely buy it, permenantly.
They do need something endgame to stand up to the Allies, however a purchasable upgrade seems the most appropriate.

I would see it similar to this:

All Support Units on the field get upgraded at 1.5x their cost. New units are non-vets, but can be purchased as per usual.

Infantry veterancy can be purchased at 2x their cost.

Tank veterancy can be purchased at 3x their cost.

In addition, the units are still able to earn veterancy the old fashioned way - through killing.