Profile of CrackBarbie

The loss of SY upgrades and global veterancy is indeed sad- all you can do is grow your army, vetting them up happens anyway and is generally of little significance, due a) because it takes no skill to get high levels of vet anymore and b) the vet itself isn't very interesting.

The way that veterancy was earned and the effect it had on the game was indeed interesting, however the effects of veterancy weren't really...

Albeit the new upkeep system being in need of quite a bit of tweaking and tuning, I actually see potential in it. I think it introduces an interesting dynamic, which either punishes a player for over-investing into an army or rewards him/her for creating one that is well-balanced. That being said, I think that adding an associated manpower income (i.e. +2mp) to all sectors would further improve the system, as it would allow a player to attempt to off-set his/her increased upkeep through dominant map-control. However, this can just as well backfire if his/her opponent manages to mount a comeback and said player finds him/herself at their base with an army that (s)he are no longer able to reinforce due to the territory, and consequently manpower income, that (s)he has lost. It would be a very compelling comeback mechanic all in itself.

I was told that the code has been completely overhauled for the UI, making future tweaks far easier. The only reason Relic would do that is to allow for UI adjustments.
Also, afaik the UI wasn't a chief concern until recently.

@Kafrion: I agree about the crits. They need to happen less freqently and more predictably. Just the other day I destroyed the engine of a PIV with a single AT-nade. As for firepits, I think Joshua's suggestion is good. In addition, tanks should just avoid firepits unless forced to traverse over them.

@Joshua: I thought about what you said about German's gaining cold resistance as well. I honestly don't think that it's required in their design, being the more static and strategic nation, but nevertheless it might become a problem in the latter stages of the game when both sides are scrambling for VPs. My suggestion is to give German units cold resistance with vet. I.e. Vet 2 -25%, Vet 3 -50%.
Also, the upgrade for Russians shouldn't be great coats, simply because it would require too much modeling work (maybe in the future change the model). I'd suggest survival training of some sorts (boy scouts? ) and add an icon somewhere that displays that the upgrade has been purchased.
As for AT, I don't mind the SU76 being used as Arty from the get-go. However, an ATG should be primarily used as AT (this is a design principle), and so I think it's only logical that the arty barrage requires vet 1. It would really help competitive play where every teching mistake counts.

@Joshua: "Why not make the russian supply yard upgrade the summer map alternative to the theoretical cold-tech upgrade, assuming manpower could remain balanced in both formats. On winter maps soviets can take advantage of small windows of opportunity to turn the tide, and on summer maps they can offset(presumably changed upkeep costs) and add more field presence." This would over-complicate the game and make it too difficult to balance. It's frankly not worth it.


"People complain a lot about the excess russian artillery in 2v2, though not so much in 1v1. Maybe a small upgrade that could be teched in the support building should be required to unlock the arti abilities of at guns and the mobile at platforms."
I would just associate a munitions cost to it and/or make it a vet 1 ability. I think this should definitely be the case with ATG barrages, since a player should be punished for incorrectly anticipating an early armor rush. Right now, it's like, "oh, he didn't get a t-34... Whatever, I'll just use the ATG as light artillery support."

@Sojourner: Thank you.
No, I haven't. That place is a garbage heap, to be honest. I hope Relic finds it in them to frequent these forums like they used to.