Inconsistencies in veterancy bonus

Imo units should be balanced across all veterancy level taking into XP values and how fast each gain vet levels.

In addition vet bonus should be promote the role of a unit.

Currently this not the case, in many cases, i will bring two that have been changed recently.

Examples:
The Otheer Panther and Brumbar are top tier Tank with high tech cost.

Brumbar has an XP value of 2040 and it needs 4080 XP to reach vet 2.
Panther has an XP value of 2530 and it needs 5060 XP to reach vet 2.

SU-85 is a Top tier TD with an a lower tech cost and now cost.

Su-85 has an XP value of 1790 and it needs 3580 XP to reach vet 2.

For vet 2 this units get the following bonuses:
Brumbar x1.2 armor from 240/105 to 288/126, 0.9 reload from 8.25 to 7.42
Panther x1.1 armor from 260/90 to 286/99, x1.4 turret rotation speed
Su-85 x1.3 penetration from 240/230/220 to 312/299/286, x1.3 accuracy from 0.055/0.045/0.04 to 0.072/0.059/0.052

That completely chance the balance of these units from vet 0 to vet 2.

At vet 0 a Su-85 firing at max range on Brumbar has 0.04*22 = 88% chance to hit 220/240 = 92% chance to penetrate the vehicle. Total chance to hit and penetrate is 81%. (number a bit higher due to collision hits)

A Su-85 need 5 penetrating hits to kill a brumbar and the chance to get them in row is 35%

A vet 2 Su-85 firing at max range on vet 2 Brumbar has 0.052*22 = 114% chance to hit 286/288 = 99% (going up to 100% a few meters closer) chance to penetrate the vehicle. Total chance to hit and penetrate is 99%. (number a bit higher due to collision hits)

A Su-85 need 5 penetrating hits to kill a brumbar and the chance to get them in row is now 95%

-----
At vet 0 a Su-85 firing at max range on Panther has 0.04*24 = 96% chance to hit 220/260 = 85% chance to penetrate the vehicle. Total chance to hit and penetrate is 82%. (number a bit higher due to collision hits)

A Su-85 need 6 penetrating hits to kill a brumbar and the chance to get them in row is 30%

A vet 2 Su-85 firing at max range on vet 2 Panther has 0.052*24 = 125% chance to hit 286/286 = 100% going to 100% chance to penetrate the vehicle. Total chance to hit and penetrate is now 100%.

A Su-85 need 6 penetrating hits to kill a Panther and the chance to get them in row is now 100%.


This calculation are clear indication that balance across vet level is not maintained. To make things even worse Su-85 has a lower XP value, become available earlier and fire of higher XP value target so it has a good chance to vet faster.

At this point the armor vet bonus is almost useless vet a vet 2 SU-85 and this units would be far better with another bonus.

This just one example for inconsistencies in balance across vet levels and I am sure one can find more. The issues it totally irrelevant to faction balance since I am pretty sure one can find similar examples on the side of the fence (I simply happened to have this stat available atm).

This calculation are clear indication that balance across vet level is not maintained

Why do you assume it should be maintained?

Why you didn't suggested that SU-85 should get armor bonus with vet, because enemy AT units get bonus in penetration?

Should all units get HP bonus with vet to make up for enemy reload bonus with vet?

Should T34 get armor bonus to deflect more P4 shots or penetration bonus to negate P4 armor vet?

Vet bonuses are not equal.
Never will be.
Nor are supposed to.

If first vet revamp patch 5 years ago and then vet of each new faction didn't gave you the memo, nothing ever will.

Why do you assume it should be maintained?

It should not be maintained, a unit with higher XP value gaining defensive bonus should actually be in better position since it manged to gain the same vet level while it was more difficult.

In the current example it the exact opposite.

Why you didn't suggested that SU-85 should get armor bonus with vet, because enemy AT units get bonus in penetration?

That is incorrect, the mojority of axis units do not get penetration as vet bonus. Pls check your stats.

Should all units get HP bonus with vet to make up for enemy reload bonus with vet?

No each unit should costumed made veterancy that help it improve in it role, but in balance with what the enemy units get. In the case of EFA most of the bonuses are similar regardless of the role of the unit.

It should not be maintained, a unit with higher XP value gaining defensive bonus should actually be in better position since it manged to gain the same vet level while it was more difficult.

In the current example it the exact opposite.

But you are completely ignoring units role with that approach.
Panther is supposed to destroy armor by outlasting it and its not supposed to counter its own hardcounter, it will however have little to no problems with any other armor in game that isn't top tier TD and its vet makes it even easier.

No each unit should costumed made veterancy that help it improve in it role, but in balance with what the enemy units get. In the case of EFA most of the bonuses are similar regardless of the role of the unit.

You mean.... like it is currently for all units, minus some vet1 EFA bonuses?

And how T34 vs P4 bonuses are similar?
How SU-85 vs Panther bonuses are?

Not even cons vs grens are similar anymore and they were just copies of each other.

Penals and PGs also are incomparable.

Last time the bonuses were any similar regardless of role of the unit was within the first 6 months of the game release, then came revamp and units were given unique bonuses which was expanded even further with time.

The armor bonus is far from useless. There are other units that fight panthers besides SU85s in this game.

...
And how T34 vs P4 bonuses are similar?
How SU-85 vs Panther bonuses are?

I think vipper is not pointing out faction units veterancy is unbalanced or inconsistent but he used the panther/su85 example to show how some units come earlier in the game and have even less xp requirements and have even better vet bonus than others than came later.

I do agree with OP that some vet bonuses are confusing with regards cost/benefit. And sometimes its not clear wether its consistent with a faction design or just the result of consecutive nerf/buffs without taking account the rest of the game.

JP4 FeelsBadMan

As another example, one can see how better grenadier and conscripts vet bonuses where designed
since in vet 3 Grenadier got 23% RA while Conscripts got almost double that at 40% (currently lowered and bit but split between vet 1 and vet 3, an improvement probably that should by applied in other units also. Although I would probably change their vet 0 target size to 1).

Grenadier where designed to rely more in fire power, Conscripts where designed to rely more in tenacity.

But cons are also getting higher accuracy vet as well with extra 10% at vet3.

Cons are exceptional unit as they are denied weapon upgrades and boosting their vet was supposed to compensate for that. How it turned out we can all see by (lack of) con usage in all game mode.

But cons are also getting higher accuracy vet as well with extra 10% at vet3.

Cons are exceptional unit as they are denied weapon upgrades and boosting their vet was supposed to compensate for that. How it turned out we can all see by (lack of) con usage in all game mode.

According to https://www.coh2.org/news/81260/gcs2-game-stats-with-siphon-x#sov_meta
they are most used unit and Cons-heavy build orders correlate with higher win percentage.

According to https://www.coh2.org/news/81260/gcs2-game-stats-with-siphon-x#sov_meta
they are most used unit and Cons-heavy build orders correlate with higher win percentage.

Ppsh docs?
There is nothing wrong with them when used with Ppsh.
Its when they do not use it when they are pos.

There is a reason why Guard Rifle Combined Arms Tactic is most used doc and cons see the use with it.

Ppsh docs?
There is nothing wrong with them when used with Ppsh.
Its when they do not use it when they are pos.

There is a reason why Guard Rifle Combined Arms Tactic is most used doc and cons see the use with it.

Yeah, probably PPSh, that explains it.

This is an interesting question. Should all units have similar percentages of strength gain with veterancy? Should more expensive units get better vet, or by simply having higher stats out the gate, be more benefitted by having the same vet bonuses as weaker units? What about across factions, should vet be applied based purely on unit cost and role, or be tweaked to help individual factions with different niches?

These are all questions that come down to game design. As the game is currently, vet bonuses have nothing to do with balance based on cost, but more to do with a unit's role, faction flavor, and overall faction strength. Medium tanks are the best example of this. All factions have medium tanks, but the vet varies drastically based on the factions. Axis armor gains defensive bonuses though armor at vet 2, whereas Allied armor gains offensive bonuses through DPS.

TLDR: Looking at vet balance based purely on unit cost or numbers is the wrong way at conceptualizing it. Unit vet is more broadly related to faction flavor, unit role, and faction relative strength.

This is an interesting question. Should all units have similar percentages of strength gain with veterancy? Should more expensive units get better vet, or by simply having higher stats out the gate, be more benefitted by having the same vet bonuses as weaker units? What about across factions, should vet be applied based purely on unit cost and role, or be tweaked to help individual factions with different niches?

These are all questions that come down to game design. As the game is currently, vet bonuses have nothing to do with balance based on cost, but more to do with a unit's role, faction flavor, and overall faction strength. Medium tanks are the best example of this. All factions have medium tanks, but the vet varies drastically based on the factions. Axis armor gains defensive bonuses though armor at vet 2, whereas Allied armor gains offensive bonuses through DPS.

TLDR: Looking at vet balance based purely on unit cost or numbers is the wrong way at conceptualizing it. Unit vet is more broadly related to faction flavor, unit role, and faction relative strength.

For infantry the increase in stats is almost always ~70% with a couple of units being exceptions.

For vehicles its not really so easy to estimate, P4 bonuses steamroll over T34 bonuses so hard its not funny for example, from vet ability to the stats.

-All units are not supposed to fight in a vacuum. Vet can and will affect the match up between units more towards specific units.

-Not all units scale in the same way.

This first 2 points are there just to emphasize that changing values are not an easy task to balance.

-But the point i'll agree and i think it's easier to implement is the xp value required to vet.

1- No single unit should have an impossible to achieve vet requirement. This mostly applies to light vehicles with low AI such as the Kubel or the M3 itself. Either lower the requirements or let them get part of passive xp gaining.
There are other exceptions like the Sturmtiger.

2- Similar units, with similar roles and similar cost should have similar vet requirements.

Ex: AEC, OH Puma, OKW Puma.