Shock vs Deliberate Attack?

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

Shock vs Deliberate Attack?

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Uncommon Valor - Campaign for the South Pacific >> Shock vs Deliberate Attack?

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Shock vs Deliberate Attack? - 2/19/2003 3:55:42 PM

Veer

Posts: 2231
Joined: 6/25/2002
From: Excuse me
Status: offline

I have a question: Whats a difference between a shock attack and a deliberate attack? Other than shock resulting in higher losses for the attacker, I don't get how it is better/worse/different from deliberate attack.

_____________________________

In time of war the first casualty is truth. - Boake Carter

Post #: 1

.. - 2/19/2003 4:21:53 PM

Odin

Posts: 1052
Joined: 1/3/2001
From: Germany, Wanne-Eickel
Status: offline

Hm, a deliberate attack is a normal attack, a shock attack is like overrun attack...could be devastating to the enemy, but its best used against a weakened enemy or when you have a significant advantage in troops.

(in reply to Veer)

Post #: 2

Good question - 2/19/2003 4:22:38 PM

Bradman

Posts: 47
Joined: 10/25/2002
From: Sydney, Australia
Status: offline

I have been trying to work it out myself, I'm sure many more have, any answers?

(in reply to Veer)

Post #: 3

- 2/19/2003 6:23:15 PM

Raverdave

Posts: 6520
Joined: 2/8/2002
From: Melb. Australia
Status: offline

Much like Odin said, but to put it into some other words so that it may help explain. Look upon a shock attack as being a John Wayne movie, everyone bunched up and just rushing forward, OTH a deliberate is like a Saving Pvt Ryan Movie, much more thought is put into it.

In my army days there were two types of attack, the quick attack, which is when you see an advantage either with terrain, fire power or even numbers over the enemy, and typically would take about 30 Mins to plan and get the orders out.

The second kind of attack was the deliberate which could take days even weeks to plan, with rehearsals and detailed maps and even models of the ground that you would be moving across, arty co-ordination, airsupport, even start lines that you would have to move of from at the allotted time.

Hope this helps.

_____________________________

Never argue with an idiot, he will only drag you down to his level and beat you with experience.

(in reply to Veer)

Post #: 4

- 2/19/2003 7:46:14 PM

Veer

Posts: 2231
Joined: 6/25/2002
From: Excuse me
Status: offline

Very good, but what actual difference does it make in UV? I never use shock attack anymore as it just results in lots of dead men while giving you the same results as deliberate attack.

So i guess a better question would be: When to use shock attack and when to use deliberate attack?

_____________________________

In time of war the first casualty is truth. - Boake Carter

(in reply to Veer)

Post #: 5

- 2/19/2003 7:59:27 PM

Sonny

Posts: 2008
Joined: 4/3/2002
Status: offline

My take on it is this (dont know if it is correct) - a battle which might take a week to win with deliberate assault will take only 3 days to win with shock attack, but with higher casualties. So when the enemy invades you want to use shock attack to get rid of the enemy before the next wave lands. If you use deliberate attack you may not get the job done and then the first wave is joined by the second wave and you have more to contend with.:)

(in reply to Veer)

Post #: 6

- 2/19/2003 8:32:20 PM

Mr.Frag

Posts: 13410
Joined: 12/18/2002
From: Purgatory
Status: offline

For the purposes of the attack, your combat strength is doubled, If you win, great ... if not, the casulties are going to hurt bad.

In the event of a sure thing, it gets it over with fast. If you calculated wrong it may just turn a win into a loss due to the extra losses on your side.

Deliberate whittles them down safely over time.

Shock attempts to kill them all at once, but can backfire.

Think of it that way...

(in reply to Veer)

Post #: 7

- 2/20/2003 1:02:45 AM

crsutton

Posts: 9590
Joined: 12/6/2002
From: Maryland
Status: offline

When facing an invasion, I try a shock attack right away in the hopes of catching only a portion of the enemy on the beachead and throwing them into the sea. Other than than, only when I am in a hurry or have overwhelming odds.

_____________________________

I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg

(in reply to Veer)

Post #: 8

- 2/20/2003 3:54:37 AM

siRkid

Posts: 6650
Joined: 1/29/2002
From: Orland FL
Status: offline

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Sonny
[B]My take on it is this (dont know if it is correct) - a battle which might take a week to win with deliberate assault will take only 3 days to win with shock attack, but with higher casualties. So when the enemy invades you want to use shock attack to get rid of the enemy before the next wave lands. If you use deliberate attack you may not get the job done and then the first wave is joined by the second wave and you have more to contend with.:) [/B][/QUOTE]

I think Sonny hit the nail on the head. If you know its going to be a long fight, use deliberate attacks to wear the enemy down. You have a better chance of winning a deliberate attack. If you need to displace the enemy quickly and know you have the strength to overrun him, use shock attack.

I typically use shock attack on raids or to repulse landings before they get too many troops on the beach. I use deliberate attacks until I see the odds swinging in my favor 3:1 or higher then I go for the kill. I also take into account fortifications. If the enemy has 4 or higher, I use deliberate.

Rick

_____________________________

Former War in the Pacific Test Team Manager and Beta Tester for War in the East.

(in reply to Veer)

Post #: 9

- 2/20/2003 5:13:05 AM

Snigbert

Posts: 2956
Joined: 1/27/2002
From: Worcester, MA. USA
Status: offline

I remember reading something way back about one of the attack types being less negatively influenced by fortifications. I think the shock attack doesnt suffer as much from the fortification level.

_____________________________

"Money doesnt talk, it swears. Obscenities, who really cares?" -Bob Dylan

"Habit is the balast that chains a dog to it's vomit." -Samuel Becket

"He has weapons of mass destruction- the world's deadliest weapons- which pose a direct threat to the

(in reply to Veer)

Post #: 10

- 2/20/2003 6:46:42 AM

dpstafford

Posts: 1910
Joined: 5/26/2002
From: Colbert Nation
Status: offline

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Snigbert
[B]I remember reading something way back about one of the attack types being less negatively influenced by fortifications. I think the shock attack doesnt suffer as much from the fortification level. [/B][/QUOTE]
I would have guessed it was the other way round......

_____________________________

(in reply to Veer)

Post #: 11

- 2/20/2003 7:08:30 AM

siRkid

Posts: 6650
Joined: 1/29/2002
From: Orland FL
Status: offline

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Snigbert
[B]I remember reading something way back about one of the attack types being less negatively influenced by fortifications. I think the shock attack doesnt suffer as much from the fortification level. [/B][/QUOTE]

I don't remember anything like.

_____________________________

Former War in the Pacific Test Team Manager and Beta Tester for War in the East.

(in reply to Veer)

Post #: 12

- 2/20/2003 11:28:34 AM

Snigbert

Posts: 2956
Joined: 1/27/2002
From: Worcester, MA. USA
Status: offline

[B]I don't remember anything like.[/B]

Maybe it was another one of those 'intrusive thoughts' my psychiatrist was explaining to me.

_____________________________

(in reply to Veer)

Post #: 13