Veterancy System Rework

[Guest]

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever

Login with username, password and session length

[Vermillion_Hawk]

So the system of Europe in Ruins and veterancy (and by extension, the progression system in general) is inherently flawed. As it is, the best players will be able to raise tons of high-veterancy units and use them to destroy new players, or players who have a poorly-experienced army. The theory that players will "hold back" precious veteran units is in practice fairly untrue, as right now it's the veteran units leading the charge and crushing the enemy most of the time. This poses a problem, and the current solution to that is periodical wipes, which will evidently increase in frequency with the introduction of the warmap.

Now, first of all, the system of periodic wipes should NEVER be a permanent solution to this type of problem. It's a lazy fix for a problem that can be creatively overcome with a bit of hard work. I know that many players and myself find the idea of having our hard-earned units and company abilities vanish in the blink of an eye to be quite perturbing. I kind of feel betrayed with this system, as the website's front page clearly advertises "Complete persistency, All units retain vet, and continue to use it in their next battles."

My hypothetical solution to this problem is a simple change in the way veterancy works: make veteran units increase in resource cost and/or pool cost by increments per level. This solves the problem of players being able to load up on superior units that they've trained with no repercussions. Now players would have to choose: a small but elite group of highly trained specialists, or a horde of rookie units? This also opens up opportunities for additional levels of veterancy to be added to units, as with incremental costs it wouldn't be a complete benefit with no backlash.

An so that's my idea. I personally think it's a good idea but by all means, I encourage you people to criticize and comment.

[EIRRMod]

So picture this.

An army with 'tons of high-veterancy units' - including 2x Vet 3 Tigers in it, loses one or both Tigers.

The penalties to XP due to 'tons of high-veterancy units' - would make the new replacements so much slower to get back to Vet 3, unless said player removes (disbands or doesnt use for a while) some other high-vet units.

[DarkSoldierX]

A increase in cost totaly destroys the point of veterancy.

We do do wipes just that we are waiting until doc's come out and warmap is released. But those things arn't going the desired speed right now.

[Poppi]

I actually dont mind wipes as much as other players. I mean when i lose a vet 3, alot of EIRR players tell me not to cry about it. So i guess EIRR players shouldnt care. unless their hypocrites.
BUt me being some sort of sociopath in some sense. Like the idea of having everyone wiped to zero, and equal playing field. I wish more games werent afraid to do it.

But second idea sounds cool too. And i was thinking about that as well. But im more concerned about spams than vets.

[panzerman]

vet requirments should be doubled for all elite units and tanks.

would make vet 3 actually and acheivment as it doesn't seem to be atm.

[AmPM]

Picture this, vet is already barely worth getting on many units, things like infantry benefit you as much if you let them fight to the last man or more, fight till they die. Retreating a vet 3 that is 20% more damaging at 2 guys gives less performance than letting the remaining guys fight till they die.

Why would you ever make your army less efficient by paying for vet?

[EIRRMod]

A increase in cost totaly destroys the point of veterancy.

Increase of cost in relation to total Vet-ups in company?  Do tell?

[smurfORnot]

dont be attached to vet,I dont care about vet,on 95% of stuff,and win most of the time...and facing vet is also not such big problem...when you learn to play better,you will find that to be true.

[Demon767]

nahh chill its his rookie mistake

there is no such viable tactic in eirr for "small but elite group" that explanation has been said over and over and over again and it bears no water.

infact, vet doesnt even help you basically, its benefits are so meagre that you trully dont ever notice it, espicially on infantry.

It is already proven to be far more effective for every unit on the field to be used to the last man, than retreating units thast are down totheir last 2 mans. fact.

[spinn72]

Vet shouldn't be held on to, you really shouldn't try to keep it alive at the expense of losing a game. The mental thought of 'oh shit, i'm going to lose a 600xp KT' is enough to make most players throw games. Seasoned players try to use this against newer ones that are still obsessed with vet!

[smurfORnot]

or sometimes u can win,cuz other team wants to KILL that vet 3 KT so bad,that that they will throw everything on it,and die in process...

[panzerman]

or sometimes u can win,cuz other team wants to KILL that vet 3 KT so bad,that that they will throw everything on it,and die in process...

pretty sure thats why ampm kt is over 1000xp lol, everytime i have played with him he starts with it and the game ends up defending the thing from the middle of the map...

[Vermillion_Hawk]

So picture this.

An army with 'tons of high-veterancy units' - including 2x Vet 3 Tigers in it, loses one or both Tigers.

The penalties to XP due to 'tons of high-veterancy units' - would make the new replacements so much slower to get back to Vet 3, unless said player removes (disbands or doesnt use for a while) some other high-vet units.

Perhaps in this case a system could be implemented alongside the one I mentioned, where Veteran units can be "revived" for a PP cost that is dependant on the unit type and level of veterancy?

[AmPM]

pretty sure thats why ampm kt is over 1000xp lol, everytime i have played with him he starts with it and the game ends up defending the thing from the middle of the map...

This. KT is epic hardpoint. Ive had so much suicides at it.

[brn4meplz]

and you want a second one...

[Vermillion_Hawk]

Also, I disagree with the theory that veteran units are completely useless compared to regular units. My vet 3 riflemen are much more survivable against infantry than my other riflesquads, and output much better damage too. Veteran tanks can also be quite potent, what with recieved penetration bonuses and penetration/damage bonuses.

And if the general consensus among many experienced players is that veteran units are not that good, perhaps they should be! You should be rewarded for getting a vet 3 unit, and if they add in new veterancy levels like I mentioned in my original suggestion, it would make them all the more better than the average unit.

[TheIcelandicManiac]

You should see vet 3 TankBuster Squads with Stalingrad Vets while in Buildings, The enemy thinks it can beat it but nope, If the rifles dont kill them the zrecks will.

[Vermillion_Hawk]

You should see vet 3 TankBuster Squads with Stalingrad Vets while in Buildings, The enemy thinks it can beat it but nope, If the rifles dont kill them the zrecks will.

Hey, I wasn't saying veteran units are bad, I was just stating that the community's general consensus seems to be that they are only marginally better than regular units. I personally like veteran units over regular units, and they can be greatly improved over the originals in some situations.

[AmPM]

Its not that vet does nothing, its that unless you fight to the end with your vet you often counteract its bonus. This spokes mostly to infantry.

Vet 3 grens have slightly higher health, accuracy and damage. You want to keep the squad alive to retain vet, retreat at 2 guys if under fire.

Vet 0, never retreat. Fights for 2 times as long, provides cheap 1 pop gut to hold sectors, etc. He fires till he is dead.

You get more combat power and utility out of the vet 0 squad all said and done.

Tanks are a different matter, they do the sesame damage until dead. However the willingness to throw a tank away to break the enemy wins games.

[Tymathee]

it seems the general consensus that vet units aren't as great as vet 0 unit yet and still vet hunting exists. I even played a game where I saw the user of a tank switch it's gun to fire at a vet 3 recon tommy rather than fire at the vet 1 bren tommy which was coming to button it. It got the shot off and killed 2 yet got buttoned and destroyed.

If anything, Vet is a handy distraction

I think Vet is best on tanks and artillery, infantry is okay if you get it great, it can be useful if you lose it, oh well, you can get more.

Worst on support units and light vehicles while easy to get, also very easy to lose.

Last thing. Vetted infantry also kinda use their effectiveness in another point, since they are vet, they become huge targets thus you spend a lot of time dodging fire with those units cuz they're being chased while an unvetted unit wont get that same treatment.