Profile of Gbpirate

veterancy is stupid, nothing but flares and capping points with vehicles.

...veterancy is a core mechanic of the game.

As those of us who play all five coh2 factions know, veterancy works the same way for every faction and for every unit. Your unit does or takes damage, it gets veterancy. It kills models or tanks, it gets veterancy, etc.

Those of us that played coh1 know that the veterancy systems were different from each faction.
For those that don't know...
Veterancy was only added when a model or tank was killed, not damage.
U.S. faction had more or less the current vet system
Wehrmacht had purchasable veterancy
PE had veterancy like U.S., but values were shared to nearby units and options were given to the player
Brits had veterancy attached only to officers.

So, anyway, I see a lot of talk about purchasable veterancy and how people miss it.
Why is that?
While it made sense historically, to bring in veteran/crack/elite troops from the Eastern Front, it seems, from a gameplay perspective, that this system does not aid in unit preservation and instead forces players to choose between new units/tech and veterancy bonuses. Why do some people want this/think it's a good system?

Do people think the PE system of veterancy was/would be a good model to use in the future? It was cool to get vet on non-combat units like kettenkrad.

The British vet system seemed a bit silly as well. Veterancy adds another dynamic level to unit preservation that builds on the limited resources/weapon upgrades that promote unit preservation.

In general, though, it seems silly to drastically change things that aren't broken. But why do some people do want to change the veterancy systems for some or all factions?

I think the maxim is doing what its suppose to be doing, a suppression platform with some nice dps and good setup time. The MG42 can suppress in a huge arc, and can load incendiary rounds to really burst people down.

Nobody wants the old Maxim that was a piece of garbage while the MG42 has always been great.

If anything you need to look at the durability of a maxim, 6 man crews I think is a bit excessive. Brits, OKW, USF and OST all have 4 man crews on their MG's so why is the maxim a 6 man? I'd drop it to 5 or even 4 and see how this is. It's the durability that gets me, 2-3 rifle nades and this thing just keeps firing away and pinning all your squads. 75 Munitions should be enough to decrew this bad boy and yet it is not.

Old Maxim? One of the reasons it wasn't so great was because of vet 2 grenadier rifle nade range. Rifle nade could be fired from beyond sight/maxim range, which in itself isn't necessarily bad, but the fact that models tend to stack up, it led to the vetted maxim squad being wiped instantly with a 30 muni ability.

maxim has always been able to beat MG42 1v1. Maxim wasn't terrible but it's certainly in a better spot now.

The reason why soviets have so many men in their squads is to reflect the vast amount of manpower that the soviets had throughout the war.

Perhaps you should rely less on rifle nades and more on various other tools for wiping maxims, eh?

If this is actually intended, it's the worst implementation of the feature that could possibly be done.

You've got a pop counter, which is the hard cap for every single team in the game, including USF. However, IF the USF player gets out of the vehicle, it lowers the pop-count (not explained anywhere in-game), allowing for more units to be made. It's then possible to get back into the vehicle, exceeding the pop-cap (also not explained in-game), resulting in the UI for the pop-cap to turn RED (i.e. bad), as well as display a value over 100%. All of this is without any consequence (which the red UI would suggest).

If this was actually intended, it would be explained either in a tutorial or via the UI, and the pop-cap wouldn't simply turn red. Further more, there would be some downside for exceeding the pop cap, as a trade-off of being able to exceed it in the first place.

No, my bet is that the feature was added, and this was an unintended consequence to which they don't really have a good solution to.

USF crews are intended designs in the game. I'm not sure if you're aware of this, but there is no multiplayer tutorial for USF. Maybe, by some slim chance, there's some info in Ardennes Assault, but other than explaining the basic mechanics of the game, there are no tutorials for each faction, unfortunately. That's something that you've just got to deal with.
There is a consequence when you go over popcap. For every 1 popcap, you lose 1.5 manpower, I believe. If you're at 150 popcap (god forbid), your mp income is 75. Those numbers could be wrong, but the mp income relative to popcap stays the same no matter what popcap you're at. It's a linear equation. m=-1.5p + 300.

Leave it, but implement a MP and Fuel penalty for every 10 over the pop cap. It is just dumb when they can consistently reinforce 8 squads of RE while having 8 M10s on the field and fuel for replacements at the ready in a few minutes.

There's a mp penalty, as explained above.
If it's dumb that your opponent can replace tanks rapidly and reinforce squads, you've done something wrong. You've lost. You've been outplayed.
Sure, it might seem easier, the game may go on longer if your opponent was at 120 popcap, but they had the resources to spend on that shit and they're maintaining enough mp to keep that shit on the field and deny you the ability to recapture territory. You. Have. Lost.


In 4s, it's definitely a different story.
With Calliopes/Priests, it's possible to just popcap abuse. I do that but only if I have a solid fighting force first. I have 2 jacksons, LMG rifles, maybe an AT gun. If your opponent has 12 calliopes and a couple of fresh rifles, they're not a good player or you and your team suck enough that your opponent can have no frontline armor or infantry and still kick your ass.

this is it. when the shreck fires, the game rolls to determine hit or miss. if it's a hit, the projectile HAS to hit, regardless if the line of fire is no longer applicable, hence the "homing" effect.

if a miss is rolled, the projectile still fires where aimed with horizontal and vertical scatter taken into account. the game then computes the collision detection... if the projectile intersects the vehicle, a hit is still scored.

that's why it's literally always better to keep vehicles moving, since it eliminates the chance for a rolled miss to become a hit.

also, FYI, the way the collision detection works, scatter that is long (beyond the target) will still generally produce a hit, so if you're using attack ground you can increase your chances of a hit by aiming just beyond what you're shooting at.

I'm pretty sure that units have an accuracy penalty against moving vehicles as well, effectively compounding one's chances of dodging handheld AT when you're keeping your vehicles moving.

That's probably why kiting is so effective, especially at max range.