Welcome to GameHourz.com!
FAQFAQ      ProfileProfile    Private MessagesPrivate Messages   Log inLog in

Tactical vs. Strategic - Where is the line?

 
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3
   Game Forums (Home) -> Historical War Games RSS
Next:  Napoleon in Italy - review  
Author Message
Mike Kreuzer

External


Since: Oct 20, 2007
Posts: 38



(Msg. 31) Posted: Wed Feb 06, 2008 1:10 pm
Post subject: Re: Tactical vs. Strategic - Where is the line? [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: comp>sys>ibm>pc>games>war-historical (more info?)

<pproctor69.DeleteThis@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:a6bafe83-b09b-4181-8862-212a60b90017@d70g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
>
>> And I think that's exactly what it is: operational strategy. I think
>> Guderian's Blitzkrieg also counts as operational strategy, so I don't
>> think it's just the Russians that had this concept, although they may
>> have been the first to give it a different name.
>>
>
> There is actually quite a bit of writing on this topic. Matt Cooper
> ("The German Army") says the Germans lost Russia because they ignored
> Guderian's insistance that they should use panzer drives to reach
> Moscow to the exclusion of all else. Shimon Naveh ("In Pursuit of
> Military Excellence") says that blitzkrieg lacked any operational
> logic at all, and rather was just penetration for its own sake. Bryan
> Fugate ("Operation Barbarossa") says the russians were thinking in
> detail about how to match tactics to strategy before the Germans were
> even sure they were ever going to invade.
> [snip]

The operational level can be summed up in just two words: middle management.
The tactical guys do all the work; the strategic guys make all the
decisions; the operational guys worry about the cost of dry cleaning
uniforms. <g>

Niklas Zetterling wrote a lengthy critique of Naveh's book. (I haven't read
the book & only skimmed the critique. Sounds dire.)
http://www.militaryhistory.nu/critiques/HTML/naveh.html

There's quite the tradition in this field of folks lauding every drab Soviet
pronouncement. Glantz is the principal offender, but Fugate's
another. Naveh sounds similar. As chroniclers of totalitarian propaganda
they're vaguely but unintentionally interesting, but I wouldn't recommend
them to anyone. Bring back Alan Clark!

I liked your own summary of why Russia won just fine.

Regards,
Mike Kreuzer
www.mikekreuzer.com

 >> Stay informed about: Tactical vs. Strategic - Where is the line? 
Back to top
Login to vote
Giftzwerg

External


Since: Mar 23, 2005
Posts: 728



(Msg. 32) Posted: Wed Feb 06, 2008 1:10 pm
Post subject: Re: Tactical vs. Strategic - Where is the line? [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

In article <47a9171a$1@dnews.tpgi.com.au>, mike.RemoveThis@FIRSTNAMEkreuzer.com
says...

> There's quite the tradition in this field of folks lauding every drab Soviet
> pronouncement. Glantz is the principal offender, but Fugate's
> another. Naveh sounds similar. As chroniclers of totalitarian propaganda
> they're vaguely but unintentionally interesting, but I wouldn't recommend
> them to anyone. Bring back Alan Clark!

All we're missing here is John Moser asserting (in a tendentious 300
page tome) that - contrary to ignorant conventional scholarship -
Germany actually kicked Russia's butt.

Here's my theory of the Eastern Front. It's like if you asked me to
knock our Lennox Lewis. I'd have one chance; pick up a heavy object,
sneak up behind him, and clobber him so hard that he's unable to get up
again. But if the second round of our bout starts with Lewis standing
there rubbing a knot on his head, and me waving a folding chair, the
remainder of the contest is kinda preordained. Yeah, I might manage one
or two more diminishing rushes with my chair ... but if the first one
didn't work, when I had all the advantages...

Klonk. Down I go. Sooner or later.

--
Giftzwerg
***
"Baghdad got hit by two bombers today, but neither of them committed
suicide. The al-Qaeda attack involved strapping remote-controlled bombs
to two girls with Down's Syndrome, and detonating the devices when they
walked through the market."
- Ed Morrissey
"Retards led by sadists; The Religion Of Peace(TM) in action.
- Giftzwerg

 >> Stay informed about: Tactical vs. Strategic - Where is the line? 
Back to top
Login to vote
Gandalf Parker

External


Since: Oct 06, 2005
Posts: 271



(Msg. 33) Posted: Mon Feb 18, 2008 3:49 pm
Post subject: Re: Tactical vs. Strategic - Where is the line? [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

BP <reply DeleteThis @newsgroup.please> contributed wisdom to
news:cid9q3tsa3a517e98abdn66audo8udmdf6@4ax.com:

> What would y'all say are the dividing lines between tactical games and
> strategic games? Is it just scale and unit size, or is there something
> more?

That comes up in forums Im in fairly often.

To ME the difference goes like this......

Strategy is what you come up with before hand. Before the battle, before
the war, even before entering the game. You develop strategies.

Tactics are what you do in response to changes. You develop tactics and
store them in a metal "toolbox" to use in case something opens up.

A good player should be abit of both. I have seen players who were too
much one or the other.

The dedicated strategist has his plans so totally laid out in his head
that the game is already played. Like a chess game AAR. And if something
random occurs to throw him off he sweeps the pieces off the board and
goes home. They tend to prefer "fair" maps (sometimes to the point that
the map is simply mirror-imaged to each player). And if possible, turning
off all random events.

The expert tactician tends to love randoms. They prefer maps with lots of
randomly placed choke-points, random events both good and bad, 3rd party
enemies which are as likely to attack him as to attack the other side.
They might even enjoy games where their own starting settings (nation,
army, pieces) are randomly selected so that he has to work with what he
is given.

The division is easy to see in forums where the game supports both styles
(such as my present favorite Dominions 3). As I said, most gamers are
abit of both which is what makes the definition of them a problem. We
tend to see both, and be both, in the games we play. Altho... in all
truthfulness I think I lean more toward tactician than the average
player. Hmmmm come to think of it, Id have to say that its also how I
live my life. Interesting thought. I will need to dwell on that abit.

Gandalf Parker
--
I was asked "Do you think playing games is a life?"
And I responded "Dont you think living life is a game?"
(and by the way, Im winning!)
 >> Stay informed about: Tactical vs. Strategic - Where is the line? 
Back to top
Login to vote
eddysterckx

External


Since: May 13, 2005
Posts: 1293



(Msg. 34) Posted: Mon Feb 18, 2008 3:49 pm
Post subject: Re: Tactical vs. Strategic - Where is the line? [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

On 18 feb, 16:49, Gandalf Parker
<gand... RemoveThis @the.dead.ISP.of.Community.net> wrote:
> Altho... in all
> truthfulness I think I lean more toward tactician than the average
> player. Hmmmm come to think of it, Id have to say that its also how I
> live my life. Interesting thought. I will need to dwell on that abit.

That's an interesting question. IRL I tend to be a planner. I'm not
anal retentive about it but I like it when things go smoothly because
the needed preparations were done. However in my games I'm the guy who
goes for the long shot, the surprises, someone who can decide to
switch flanks without even thinking about it, on a hunch.

Compensational behaviour ? Smile

Greetz,

Eddy Sterckx
 >> Stay informed about: Tactical vs. Strategic - Where is the line? 
Back to top
Login to vote
Display posts from previous:   
Related Topics:
Strategic command II - Hi, So what do you expect from it? Definitively a middle of the road between World at War and Hearts of Iron II. I would say it can be an interesting game, for whose who regrets the grand scale of WaW, but (as me) are bored of the mammoth game of..

Strategic Command 2..First Impressions - Played the D-Day scenario. Noticed that the Germans had ranged artillery units. If that's the case, why are BB and CA units restricted to firing from a coastal square and no farther inland? The AI was brian dead. I dropped the US paras directly east of..

The Tactical 3D future is here - Hi, The original Kriegspiel games were all tabletop games and it took until the fifties for AH to start the boardgame revolution which provided a cheaper (in money, space and time) alternative. As the computer era dawned hardware limitations made..

Tactical wargames for ancient/medieval battles? - Hi I have tended to play FPS. I have no PC wargames. I am interested in playing PC games which recreate historical battles using faithful/realistic geography and weaponry. 3d would be nice. Time period - ancient to 1700. I basically want to be able...

TBC Fast Package(1-70) - Any Class Free 2000G - Wow level50-60&#65292;30g per level level60-70&#65292;150g per level. Dear Sir or Madam Hot Sale!For all of our customers,the news and olds,www.game-powers.com are some Special Package! We now provide Powerleveling measured by..
   Game Forums (Home) -> Historical War Games All times are: Ekaterinburg, Islamabad, Karachi, Tashkent (change)
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3
Page 3 of 3

 
You can post new topics in this forum
You can reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum



[ Contact us | Terms of Service/Privacy Policy ]