Shock Attack

[herwin]

ORIGINAL: witpqs

ORIGINAL: herwin

No, those are recorded as they occurred, just like the data in the other chart.

In the absence of knowing, I would then presume that you had some variation, although not necessarily much. Anyhow, just be careful with the shock attacks or in some situations they will be very painful.

Yes, if the firepower phase reduces or reverses the AV superiority of the attacker. The threshold where a shock attack seems to become dumb is somewhere below 1 to 1 in firepower, allowing for terrain. 1 to 2 is definitely dumb. 1 to 1 in firepower, allowing for terrain, and up seems to favour shock attacks.

[witpqs]

What I'm trying to say is, keep in mind things like disruption of your units when you attack (they will destroy the odds before you get as far as the calculations that you are citing). I'm using disruption as an example because it seems to be a real killer. And did I mention to watch out for disruption?

[herwin]

ORIGINAL: witpqs

What I'm trying to say is, keep in mind things like disruption of your units when you attack (they will destroy the odds before you get as far as the calculations that you are citing). I'm using disruption as an example because it seems to be a real killer. And did I mention to watch out for disruption?

As long as you're getting AV odds >= 1-1, you should be OK on that!

[witpqs]

ORIGINAL: herwin

ORIGINAL: witpqs

What I'm trying to say is, keep in mind things like disruption of your units when you attack (they will destroy the odds before you get as far as the calculations that you are citing). I'm using disruption as an example because it seems to be a real killer. And did I mention to watch out for disruption?

As long as you're getting AV odds >= 1-1, you should be OK on that!

I'll make one last try [8D] - before the attack you don't know the final odds. If the attacking forces have sufficient negative influences, for example a hurtful level of disruption, they can start out with great odds and end up with horrible odds, getting smashed in the process.

[PresterJohn001]

ORIGINAL: herwin

ORIGINAL: Nikademus

ORIGINAL: Zeta16

I have been playing WiTP and AE since it came out in like 2004, I still do not understand shock attack. I never use it, it only happens when I cross rivers and such. Come someone explain when I should use and why? Any help would be great.

shock attacks double your AV but also give the defender a free fire phase before this goes down. Against an opponent with heavy firepower (like a typical midwar US RCT for example), if your gamble fails you'll suffer horrendous losses. A failed shock in general will incur heavy casualties unless the defender condition is weak. Another factor to consider beyond "casualties" is the effect on disruption. Failed shocks tend to leave the attack disrupted which makes him far more vulnerable to a counter-attack

While the level of variablilty prevents an exact science method (by design), a general rule of thumb is never shock attack if you are concerned about your own positions. For example if you've recently moved a large stack of units into a contested base hex vs. a fortified enemy and fear a counter-attack to try to push you off the hex (and create massive losses since a forced retreat is the most expensive of events for LCU's) A failed shock attack leaves the attacker at his most vulnerable to a counter-attack....esp a counter-shock attack. Joe and I experienced a nasty one at Clark Field once and I did similar to an opponent at Singapore sending the 25th Army's vanguard reeling back north after a failed shock. It basically wrecked his Malayan offensive.

Delib attacks are far safer and forgive mistakes. Often its better to be safe than sorry but there are also times when you have to roll the dice and go for shock if your in a time crunch.

I agree with your points. The game engine ignores the target acquisition process, so that the firepower phase massively inflates a firepower superiority. A shock attack takes advantage of that to convert the outcome to a forced retreat. Attached is an image showing what the game engine does. The following message shows what actually happened in history. LCP is loser casualty percentage, while WCP is the winner's casualty percentage.

Yeah losses all good but i can't predict em. What may be useful is at what AV ratio does shock attack become advantagous. And just as important what effect does terrain and forts have on the calculation as to when shock becomes advantageous. In order to gauge the usefullness of the data collected we have to see the starting conditions.

Where is the zone where shock attacks are potentially useful ? From the attacker pov we know our AV, we know the defender AV and the terrain/forts.. is it a case that you do a deliberate attack, decide if your end av had been doubled it would have made a difference and if so go for it?

[herwin]

ORIGINAL: witpqs

ORIGINAL: herwin

ORIGINAL: witpqs

What I'm trying to say is, keep in mind things like disruption of your units when you attack (they will destroy the odds before you get as far as the calculations that you are citing). I'm using disruption as an example because it seems to be a real killer. And did I mention to watch out for disruption?

As long as you're getting AV odds >= 1-1, you should be OK on that!

I'll make one last try [8D] - before the attack you don't know the final odds. If the attacking forces have sufficient negative influences, for example a hurtful level of disruption, they can start out with great odds and end up with horrible odds, getting smashed in the process.

I'll admit it happens from time to time, but the payoff when it doesn't is so good that the risk is worth taking! And you don't get 3-sigma results that frequently.

[herwin]

ORIGINAL: PresterJohn

Yeah losses all good but i can't predict em. What may be useful is at what AV ratio does shock attack become advantagous. And just as important what effect does terrain and forts have on the calculation as to when shock becomes advantageous. In order to gauge the usefullness of the data collected we have to see the starting conditions.

Where is the zone where shock attacks are potentially useful ? From the attacker pov we know our AV, we know the defender AV and the terrain/forts.. is it a case that you do a deliberate attack, decide if your end av had been doubled it would have made a difference and if so go for it?

A 0.75 ratio in firepower, after terrain and fortifications, is about the minimum, and that's betting on the come. The average division in 1942 has about 400-450 AV and about 8000-10000 firepower. Later war American divisions are more like 600-700 AV and 18000 firepower. You can predict a lot, and if you need data, try a bombardment and generate an estimate based on what you see. If you want to be sure of holding a hex, you need twice the firepower of your opponent. Less than 150% of the firepower of your opponent is asking for it.

[witpqs]

ORIGINAL: herwin

ORIGINAL: witpqs

ORIGINAL: herwin



As long as you're getting AV odds >= 1-1, you should be OK on that!

I'll make one last try [8D] - before the attack you don't know the final odds. If the attacking forces have sufficient negative influences, for example a hurtful level of disruption, they can start out with great odds and end up with horrible odds, getting smashed in the process.

I'll admit it happens from time to time, but the payoff when it doesn't is so good that the risk is worth taking! And you don't get 3-sigma results that frequently.

Hearing that I am quite sure that you have not attacked with high disruption much if at all. Disaster ain't rare, it is normal when attacking with high disruption. You only get away with it against very weak opposition.

[herwin]

ORIGINAL: witpqs

ORIGINAL: herwin

ORIGINAL: witpqs



I'll make one last try [8D] - before the attack you don't know the final odds. If the attacking forces have sufficient negative influences, for example a hurtful level of disruption, they can start out with great odds and end up with horrible odds, getting smashed in the process.

I'll admit it happens from time to time, but the payoff when it doesn't is so good that the risk is worth taking! And you don't get 3-sigma results that frequently.

Hearing that I am quite sure that you have not attacked with high disruption much if at all. Disaster ain't rare, it is normal when attacking with high disruption. You only get away with it against very weak opposition.

I rarely attack when I'm disrupted.

[witpqs]

ORIGINAL: herwin

I rarely attack when I'm disrupted.

You have learned well, my young padawan! [:D]

[Yaab]

I have a question concerning shock attack and command HQ bonus.

Say, you have a division of 400 AV. You shock attack and the division's AV doubles to 800. A fully prepped corps HQ and command HQ are in range of the battle to give their bonuses, which can reach up to 100% of the division's assault value. Does that mean, that theoretically, such division's AV can jump from 400 AV to 1600 AV ( 800 AV thanks to shock attack x 2 thanks to 100% HQ AV bonus) or does the 100% HQ bonus apply to the original 400 AV, thus it gives 800 AV (shock attack) + 400 AV (command bonuses), resulting in 1200 AV?

[geofflambert]

Forget what I posted here earlier. I thought it was funny but many others might not agree, and perhaps an inappropriate subject for this forum.

[Alfred]

ORIGINAL: Yaab

I have a question concerning shock attack and command HQ bonus.

Say, you have a division of 400 AV. You shock attack and the division's AV doubles to 800. A fully prepped corps HQ and command HQ are in range of the battle to give their bonuses, which can reach up to 100% of the division's assault value. Does that mean, that theoretically, such division's AV can jump from 400 AV to 1600 AV ( 800 AV thanks to shock attack x 2 thanks to 100% HQ AV bonus) or does the 100% HQ bonus apply to the original 400 AV, thus it gives 800 AV (shock attack) + 400 AV (command bonuses), resulting in 1200 AV?

You need to reread what I wrote in the HQ thread:

tm.asp?m=3545042

At no stage did I state that the HQ bonus acts as an AV modifier.

AV is only a very rough indicator of strength in combat. It is firepower which is relevant.

The only "combat" value of AV is at the end of combat when the adjusted AV is used to determine whether

• retreat
• fortification is reduced
• base ownership changes

ensues.

Alfred

[crsutton]

I shock when I am pretty darn sure I am going to win. That is all.

[pontiouspilot]

Correlation coefficient!!....WOW. I don't know much about stats but what I will say is that you better be careful if using shock attack. Make sure you know what you are facing first...recon, bombardment 1st, or just know.

My Aussie opponent tried 2x banzaii attacks on Singapore hoping I wasn't ready....he destroyed 2 IJA divisions and never did capture Singapore. He conceded Ap 1st'42.

[HansBolter]

ORIGINAL: pontiouspilot

Correlation coefficient!!....WOW. I don't know much about stats but what I will say is that you better be careful if using shock attack. Make sure you know what you are facing first...recon, bombardment 1st, or just know.

My Aussie opponent tried 2x banzaii attacks on Singapore hoping I wasn't ready....he destroyed 2 IJA divisions and never did capture Singapore. He conceded Ap 1st'42.

I'm confused. How could some one playing the Australians lose Japanese infantry divisions?

[kkoovvoo]

He meant the opponent was Australian, playing IJN side