Page 1 of 1 [ 13 posts ] 


Where you are stronger?
in tactics 34%  34%  [ 11 ]
in tactics 34%  34%  [ 11 ]
in strategy 16%  16%  [ 5 ]
in strategy 16%  16%  [ 5 ]
Total votes : 32

ruudvandrago
Yellow-bellied Woodpecker
Yellow-bellied Woodpecker

User avatar

Joined: 29 Apr 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 60
Location: Lithuania

05 Oct 2006, 3:27 pm

Where you are stronger - in tactics or in strategy? And last of all, what is tactics and what is strategy? And what's the difference?



Emettman
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Dec 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,025
Location: Cornwall, UK

05 Oct 2006, 4:56 pm

One definition to separate the two:

Tactics is knowing what to do when you have to do something.

Strategy is knowing what to do when you don't have to do anything.

(Originally in th econtext of playing chess)

Tactics would include ensuring your squad of riflemen knew what to do with their weapons.
Strategy would include ensuring that they had them, and food, and transport, and were in the part of the world they should be...



lowfreq50
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 1 May 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,536
Location: Gainesville, Florida

05 Oct 2006, 8:14 pm

Strategy is a long-term plan of action that includes broad goals. A tactic is an action at any given time that works toward fulfilling the strategy.



diseased
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Sep 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 870
Location: Victoria, BC

05 Oct 2006, 10:03 pm

Simply put, tactics is winning a battle; strategy is winning the war.
That said, I'm far better at tactics. Give me an objective and turn me loose.



SamuraiSaxen
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Sep 2006
Age: 38
Gender: Female
Posts: 3,465
Location: Mexico

05 Oct 2006, 11:35 pm

I'm better at strategy



Scrapheap
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 1 Nov 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,685
Location: Animal Farm

06 Oct 2006, 12:57 am

Emettman wrote:
Strategy would include ensuring that they had them, and food, and transport, and were in the part of the world they should be...


Actually that's called Logistics


_________________
All hail Comrade Napoleon!! !


One-Winged-Angel
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2006
Age: 32
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,860
Location: Under your bed, in your closet, in your head

06 Oct 2006, 1:00 am

74(7|(2

tactics


_________________
You have your way. I have my way. As for the right way, the correct way, and the only way, it does not exist.


TheMachine1
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Jun 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 8,011
Location: 9099 will be my last post...what the hell 9011 will be.

06 Oct 2006, 1:18 am

Well who knows if I'm good at either. But based on Emettman's defining the two words.

I am clearly better at tactics because of my ADHD. If a crazy situation appears I can find
a solution if I'm under real pressure. If under no pressure I would do nothing(as I have
done most my life avoiding all conflicts).

I guess the best example would be repairing oil field equipment that the boss said was
unfixable and the customer saying he will have to buy a complete new system otherwise.
I feeling sad for the rich oil companies and for the fact we did not sell the equipment
they needed took the job and fix the same systems many times. Oh the real pressure I was under here is making the boss(my father) money.



Emettman
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Dec 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,025
Location: Cornwall, UK

06 Oct 2006, 2:09 am

Scrapheap wrote:
Emettman wrote:
Strategy would include ensuring that they had them, and food, and transport, and were in the part of the world they should be...


Actually that's called Logistics


It is if the munitions, food and transport have been thought about enough to be there to be assigned. If they're not there at all, it's not just a logistics failure.

But that's been going on for centuries...
The Crimean cartoon:

"Well Jack, here's good news from home. We're to have a medal."
"That's very kind. Maybe one of these days we'll have a coat to stick it on."
http://www.historyhome.co.uk/forpol/crimea/patient.htm

I don't think soldiers are quite so polite about it these days, if they ever were.




(Or should we divide logistiscs into tactical and strategic? With a fuzzy border, naturally)







.



Scrapheap
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 1 Nov 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,685
Location: Animal Farm

07 Oct 2006, 7:00 pm

Emettman wrote:



(Or should we divide logistiscs into tactical and strategic? With a fuzzy border, naturally)







.


Well, obviously, Strategy, Tactics and Logistics all slightly overlap with fuzzy borders.

I think what you said that "ensuring food, transport and in the part of the world they should be" lies primarily within logistics. DECIDING how much how much food, ammo and transport would be strategic.

Genericly, I'd say that

Tactics.. concerned with small units up to Company size.
Grand tactical.. units up to Divisions.
Stategic.. units up to Corps.
Grand Strategy.. whole army groups.

What are your thoughts??


_________________
All hail Comrade Napoleon!! !


Emettman
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Dec 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,025
Location: Cornwall, UK

08 Oct 2006, 1:56 am

Scrapheap wrote:

Tactics.. concerned with small units up to Company size.
Grand tactical.. units up to Divisions.
Stategic.. units up to Corps.
Grand Strategy.. whole army groups.

What are your thoughts??


That works well within the pure military context. But there's a different layering of strategy,
the politico-social-industrial-economic world:
What army should we have, what equipment can we afford?
What will the public support or stand for? (And can that be manipulated?!)
Who should our allies be, what are our objectives before and during conflict?

Grand-grand strategy, down to almost tactical levels: what sort of new rifle should be developed/bought? High-tech vs reliability vs cost...



Scrapheap
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 1 Nov 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,685
Location: Animal Farm

09 Oct 2006, 9:04 pm

Emettman wrote:

That works well within the pure military context. But there's a different layering of strategy,
the politico-social-industrial-economic world:
What army should we have, what equipment can we afford?
What will the public support or stand for? (And can that be manipulated?!)
Who should our allies be, what are our objectives before and during conflict?

Grand-grand strategy, down to almost tactical levels: what sort of new rifle should be developed/bought? High-tech vs reliability vs cost...


Very true!! As the Chinese Genaral Sun Tzu said "The whole purpose of the state is to create the capacity to engage in warefare" It's just as true today as it was then.


_________________
All hail Comrade Napoleon!! !


CRACK
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Nov 2005
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 765

15 Oct 2006, 7:03 pm

I do fine with tactics when I have a good feel for the situation

But I'm bad at strategy and absolutely terrible at logistics. As an example, I have always been bad at chess. When I say bad I mean I know how the game and all of the pieces work, obviously. But the best I can hope for is to achieve a stalemate, even if I play against somebody new that has no idea what they are doing. And I am terrible at computer games like Starcraft, Medieval: Total War, etc. Again, I can learn every mechanic in the game inside and out but I cannot apply any of that knowledge to any immediate situation effectively. My mind just doesn't click.

Of course some of that might stem from my inability to multi-task.