Jump to content


Detail Page: Concentration of Fire


  • Please log in to reply
44 replies to this topic

shaneholl #21 Posted Oct 27 2013 - 14:38

    First lieutenant

  • -Players-
  • 21904 battles
  • 874
  • Member since:
    06-01-2011

View PostTreadBreaker37, on Oct 26 2013 - 19:15, said:

So this is why people keep requesting fire during battle??

Personally, I have the "Requesting Fire" button set as my scroll button on my mouse, and I've had it like that for close to two years now. I click it every time before I fire, just out of habit, and by doing that, my team mates close to me know who I'm firing at. Also, I do it in arty so my team mates know who is going to be whacked by a mole...

Azyur #22 Posted Oct 27 2013 - 15:43

    Staff sergeant

  • Beta Testers
  • 19749 battles
  • 448
  • [MOB] MOB
  • Member since:
    01-25-2011

View PostThe_Chieftain, on Sep 18 2013 - 23:54, said:

The effect of a group of tanks concentrating on a single target is greater than the sum of its parts.
Chieftain,
Thanks for addressing this topic. There are many new faces in our community who need insight into these fundamentals. Hopefully, with great, high profile, tutorials like this, game play will become,  both, more challenging and rewarding for everyone!

Kroz1776 #23 Posted Oct 27 2013 - 16:09

    Captain

  • Players
  • 11868 battles
  • 1,402
  • [GANDP] GANDP
  • Member since:
    05-05-2011
This is where TOGS HP pool comes in.  I've had multiple games where I was the last to the fight, but my teammates were all down to low health. Queue the TOG music.  My TOG coming rolling up the hill on campinovka and the enemy stops their focus fire, and instead focuses on me allowing my teammates to slaughter the rest of the enemy team.  This actually seems to coincide with what the TOG was thought to be used for.  Breaking stalemates.  Your team and the enemy seem to be pounding one another without either side gaining ground?  Send in a TOG to rush them.  Have the rest of your team rush them too.  Everyone wants to kill the TOG so you team steam rolls their team.  The only problem is, you better make it up there before your team evaporates!  This is a highly situational tactic.

JJGORDON #24 Posted Oct 27 2013 - 19:23

    Private

  • Beta Testers
  • 7283 battles
  • 1
  • Member since:
    11-26-2010
l guess maybe now my old team mates will realize I was correct and they , the few who thought they knew it all, were sadly mistaken. LOL I doubt any of them will remember that I suggested concentrated fire long ago and some told me it was useless. Guess I was right and they were not.

JJGORDON

AutobotMech #25 Posted Oct 27 2013 - 21:49

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 14346 battles
  • 210
  • [-BDS-] -BDS-
  • Member since:
    03-14-2011

View PostLittleJoeRambler, on Oct 27 2013 - 02:44, said:

Add a tutorial with Chieftain as the narrator telling you how to play the game. Maybe we'd see a more engaged playerbase.

All in favour say "Aye"

Aye !

BuubyTrap #26 Posted Oct 27 2013 - 23:01

    Major

  • Players
  • 28789 battles
  • 3,349
  • [_BOT_] _BOT_
  • Member since:
    04-10-2012

Aye-squared!



WeaponsCrate #27 Posted Oct 28 2013 - 01:07

    Major

  • Players
  • 92 battles
  • 13,207
  • Member since:
    03-02-2011

View PostThe_Chieftain, on Oct 26 2013 - 19:18, said:

Sometimes. It may also be because they have a problem that they can't deal with themselves, at least, not without taking unacceptable damage.
Sometimes it's used in the role of the old relic that is the "t" key, just to tell everyone that "Hey, I'm shooting at this guy." Which I sometimes do when shooting at 400-600m range and it isn't obvious from the minimap that I am engaged in the fighting even though I'm far away.

Frostopper #28 Posted Oct 28 2013 - 05:05

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 17417 battles
  • 850
  • [S0R] S0R
  • Member since:
    08-14-2013

View PostJJGORDON, on Oct 27 2013 - 19:23, said:

l guess maybe now my old team mates will realize I was correct and they , the few who thought they knew it all, were sadly mistaken. LOL I doubt any of them will remember that I suggested concentrated fire long ago and some told me it was useless. Guess I was right and they were not.
JJGORDON
Concentrated fire without being redundant overkill.
.
Usually, a simple KV-1S double-team is enough up until tier 8. For that, we add a third KV-1S, or a KV-2.
..
Ironicly, every time I ping an enemy tank I'm lining-up to shoot with arty, so they can back-away and get out of splash, all the focus-fire on.
-For when I see a threat on minimap, or whatever, I usually ping the gridsquare and tap F7.

Edited by Frostopper, Oct 28 2013 - 05:09.


The_Chieftain #29 Posted Oct 28 2013 - 06:08

    Military Specialist

  • Administrator
  • 10262 battles
  • 9,633
  • [WGA-A] WGA-A
  • Member since:
    09-08-2011

View PostWeaponsCrate, on Oct 28 2013 - 01:07, said:

Sometimes it's used in the role of the old relic that is the "t" key, just to tell everyone that "Hey, I'm shooting at this guy." Which I sometimes do when shooting at 400-600m range and it isn't obvious from the minimap that I am engaged in the fighting even though I'm far away.

I really miss the old "T" key, and I keep telling them to put it back.

I think it's getting lost in the process somewhere.

HeadSplit120 #30 Posted Oct 28 2013 - 06:55

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 13885 battles
  • 667
  • [-CB-] -CB-
  • Member since:
    07-09-2012

View Postmecha_Bill, on Oct 27 2013 - 04:37, said:

As far as I know, modern tank warfare does not subscribe to concentration of fire theory since an M1A1 can usually kill a target with one round anyway.
However, this tactic *was* used by the germans and soviets in WW2. I think it was known as a "PAK Front". A group of 10 or so AT guns were put under the direction of a single officer who decided which tanks to hit with what guns.
You are correct, in todays Armor Branch we don't use concentration of fire.  In a tank platoon, which is made of four M1A2 tanks, uses a platoon fire plan.  It allows the four tanks to engage four separate targets at same time.
In WoT, concentration of fire is important.

Edited by HeadSplit120, Oct 28 2013 - 06:56.


TheChang #31 Posted Oct 28 2013 - 23:04

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 18857 battles
  • 23
  • [-FCF-] -FCF-
  • Member since:
    04-02-2013
Yea! Now when I tell people to all concentrate fire on one tank at a time, they can't tell me that it doesn't make a difference!    :veryhappy:

TheChang #32 Posted Oct 28 2013 - 23:07

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 18857 battles
  • 23
  • [-FCF-] -FCF-
  • Member since:
    04-02-2013

View PostThe_Chieftain, on Oct 28 2013 - 06:08, said:

I really miss the old "T" key, and I keep telling them to put it back.

I think it's getting lost in the process somewhere.
Well it's still been working for me. :amazed:

The_Chieftain #33 Posted Oct 29 2013 - 04:31

    Military Specialist

  • Administrator
  • 10262 battles
  • 9,633
  • [WGA-A] WGA-A
  • Member since:
    09-08-2011
Shouldn't be, unless you only play arty. Unless they  fixed it and nobody mentioned

Luissen #34 Posted Oct 29 2013 - 18:23

    Captain

  • Players
  • 22210 battles
  • 1,407
  • [-M1-] -M1-
  • Member since:
    12-12-2011
I usually just shoot at whatever has the highest damage output : damage capacity ratio...

that means, Scouts with huge guns (I guess, Minimediums) , Artillery, and thinskinned TDs go first...

GillesMartinVincent #35 Posted Oct 30 2013 - 11:14

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 23289 battles
  • 92
  • Member since:
    05-10-2012
I wrote Rules I Play By a while ago, and I included a rule (#6) similar to concentrated fire: http://forum.worldof...ules-i-play-by/

Archived so can't reply. But anyway, even without the math, it just makes sense to concentrate fire on the same target, also with the goal of reducing enemy firepower as quickly as possible. With the math, and using the example for a 15-15 battle, we could take out 5 tanks every 2 salvos, win with 10 tanks remaining. Simplified, but you get the gist. We could complicate things and consider dmg/time potential, then crit/time potential of rapid-fire tanks. If you get hit for HP, you can still shoot. If you get hit with a crit and you lose the gunner, gun, or any other damage-dealing element, your ability to deal damage is reduced or temporarily halted. So, rapid-fire tanks are a priority just for that reason. Recently, I came to realize the new E 25 is the most dangerous tank, bar none. That tiny TD is my priority. Sure, the big tanks can take him out one shot, but it moves like the wind, has a ridiculously high rate of fire, and it's a premium tank so players can be presumed to use gold rounds as well. I dread facing a toon of them.

There's something to be said of taking out the weakest targets first. It reduces the enemy firepower more quickly. But it also reduces the enemy numbers more quickly, and this alone has a significant effect on morale, so the remaning tanks now go into damage control. They start hiding, go off on their own to escape, the team basically loses cohesion, or whatever cohesion was there to begin with. Imagine if after just a few minutes, the enemy team is down 5 tanks. At a glance, it doesn't matter which tanks they lost. What matters is that now their team is clearly outnumbered. However, outnumbered does not mean outgunned. That's just something to remember if it's your team that's now outnumbered.

deathdancer #36 Posted Oct 30 2013 - 16:15

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 5063 battles
  • 515
  • Member since:
    07-09-2011

View PostBrygin, on Oct 26 2013 - 20:03, said:

Nice post.  Maybe people will stop yelling kill stealing and instead realize that it is the concentrated fire that wins games!   :honoring:

Not very likely because you yeild more exp and money just waiting for a tank to be at 5% and kill steal than it is to concentrate fire and do more damage (I focus fire and always in the top 3 on damage)
but if I do 3k-5k damage with 0 kills and another guy does 600 damage but has 3 killing blows he gets more exp/silver than I do. it sucks that people rather do that than work as a team and win but I understand why they do it and WOT rewards them doing it in a way.

Sad_But_Drew #37 Posted Nov 03 2013 - 02:29

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 21332 battles
  • 421
  • Member since:
    06-10-2013
The corollary rule from the same Naval papers was "The Rule of N", which also applies to WOT.

Put simply, it addresses "natural concentration of fire".  If one side is outnumbered, the damage it inflicts will not be linear.

Basic example, 4 versus 2.

The 4 should win (assuming roughly equal firepower).  AND they should only lose 1 of their number (the extra firepower kills quickly and prevents the 2 from "trading off").

The effect "cascades" so a fairly small advantage usually gets bigger as the fight goes on (in WOT it's a lot worse to be down two tanks late in a battle than early).

This is why, in chokes (say the valley in Pearl River), "crowded" forces often do much better than better than better-covered "peeking forces".  Sometimes you have to sacrifice position and/or cover for concentration.  This doesn't work in more open areas.

This is also what people complain about "campers" if you can't shoot into this fight, it often means that when you CAN shoot, you will be outnumbered (and probably die quickly).

The previous bit about a "keyhole" position is how a powerful single unit works around this rule (you try to get shots at ONE target at a time).

Frostopper #38 Posted Nov 03 2013 - 07:17

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 17417 battles
  • 850
  • [S0R] S0R
  • Member since:
    08-14-2013
I see where this post is going about base-campers, and I'd like to add a detail that could frustrate the problem.

View PostSad_But_Drew, on Nov 03 2013 - 02:29, said:

This is also what people complain about "campers" if you can't shoot into this fight, it often means that when you CAN shoot, you will be outnumbered (and probably die quickly).
The previous bit about a "keyhole" position is how a powerful single unit works around this rule (you try to get shots at ONE target at a time).
The goal is to get multiple keyholes lined-up on single targets.
AKA: Interlocking fields of fire / spot & snipe.
.
Doing this while relocating, without exposing your buddies... can be tricky... especially in pubbies or auto-search teams.
-This is why an orderly retreat is deemed one of THE hardest things to do in combat (and the french were indeed awesome at it).

View PostThe_Chieftain, on Oct 28 2013 - 06:08, said:

I really miss the old "T" key, and I keep telling them to put it back.
I think it's getting lost in the process somewhere.
For me it was re-assign to Q, because it's right next to my GTFOOTKZ/Cindy-Crawford zone buttons.
-Long story how my WASD keys got that name...

Edited by Frostopper, Nov 03 2013 - 07:45.


GillesMartinVincent #39 Posted Nov 03 2013 - 09:59

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 23289 battles
  • 92
  • Member since:
    05-10-2012
Here's an example where a keyhole position could be useful. I forget the map name, but anyway town/castle is center with high positions, valley west and river east. Team battle, we used a split strategy where we send a pair or 3 through town, and the rest either side but still as a group, preferably low valley west for speed and options due to the ability to shoot at castle positions from high valley positions. This strat is intended to recon enemy position, then regroup and flank or just flank directly, or engage the enemy to stall them so we can start cap and create an urgency situation for the enemy. We met their full force at their base and ended up out in the open with any one of them able to shoot any one of us from any of their positions. We reacted by trying to flank them without first regrouping or retreating, and we lost this engagement. After the battle, we discussed our reaction, and agreed that a good counter to their defense could have been that we retreated and regrouped, then since we knew exactly where they were, re-engage by creating a keyhole position on either side from west or east. We haven't tried this solution yet, but when we do I expect we'll fare better than last time.

In our after-battle discussion, we realized that we were facing their full force at once, and that our solution was to reduce the number of guns firing at any one of us, while simultaneously increasing our guns shooting at any one of them, and the concept of keyhole position seems to apply here. Obviously, this keyhole position could be used by either team, if they are both present at this position simultaneously. This happens all the time in random battle at common engagement positions for example. However, by regrouping and creating this position on our own initiative, then we have the advantage of initiative, and for a moment at least, we have the firepower advantage at that keyhole position. This is why we often rush to those positions at the start of battle, so that we have the numbers advantage at least for a moment. At least, that's the idea.

This keyhole positions idea is self-evident, such that nobody really needs to be taught how it works, it just seems to be used naturally even by new players to the game. We can see this as players act and react according to the numbers on either side, without any communication between friendly players. But what does need to be taught is that merely creating a keyhole position for cover with a single tank does not necessarily create an advantage even if this position opens the enemy's flank, and that for an advantage to be created, the keyhole position must be taken with at least 2 friendly tanks to create a firewpower advantage as well, and this is where communication becomes important. However yet again, some players just do this naturally, just by following a mate that does this on his own. In those engagements, when we're the ones doing it, we usually win and can read the enemy's complaints "aw, not another crappy team". In fact, this is why one of my rules is to usually follow a mate, so that when we face the enemy, we often have two guns against their one without any particular plan for this a priori, and then concentrated fire takes all its meaning.

The_Chieftain #40 Posted Nov 03 2013 - 17:01

    Military Specialist

  • Administrator
  • 10262 battles
  • 9,633
  • [WGA-A] WGA-A
  • Member since:
    09-08-2011

View PostFrostopper, on Nov 03 2013 - 07:17, said:

For me it was re-assign to Q, because it's right next to ..

It's not the key,  it's the meaning.  Many moons ago, "T"  meant "Targetting",  which has a different purpose to " Requesting  fire." (Arty has remained generally unchanged)




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users