"strategically" & "tactically"...

"strategically" & "tactically"... (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Norm Koger's The Operational Art Of War III

Message

cymloveselva -> "strategically" & "tactically"... (1/26/2008 5:54:21 AM)
Hi all, I'm new here, but I'm not new to TOAW... I keep my faith in believing that TOAW is the godlike wargame of all time... But if somebody feels something not right about this, please share your thoughts[&o] However, until now, I'm still confused with a few things... Let's start with these two terms first: "strategically" & "tactically"... Everyone has their own definitions, so do I. But I'm not too convinced about my definition on differentiate them... [&o]I really need some help... Pleazeeeeeeee...[&o]

el cid -> RE: "strategically" & "tactically"... (1/26/2008 2:05:07 PM)
And don´t forget "operationally". In my view, which might be wrong, Strategic is the top level planing that wins you a war. Say, taking Paris to have France surrender, or taking the oil fields in the South of Russia to have enough oil for the war. Tactical is what you face on the ground. To take that out that Machine Gun move that squad there, while they are covered by that other squad, etc.

macgregor -> RE: "strategically" & "tactically"... (1/26/2008 5:05:20 PM)
This is a good question. I've always known 'strategic' (like el cid said) as top-level planning and includes warfare to cripple the enemy's economy through the destruction of factories and resources. Espionage and even terrorism would be classified as strategic warfare. 'Operational' refers to the movement of military formations as covered in TOAW(invasions to campaigns to achieve specific objectives). Tactical would refer to squad and perhaps platoon level tactics. Tactics being more about 'how' warfare is conducted.

Karri -> RE: "strategically" & "tactically"... (1/26/2008 6:47:55 PM)
Strategic - the long term goal to victory(example, destroy enemy army) Operational - how to achieve the long term goal in the field(example, pincer movement to destroy enemy army group) Tactical - how to achieve the operational goal(example, punch through enemy line and capture road junction).

cymloveselva -> RE: "strategically" & "tactically"... (1/29/2008 2:50:42 PM)
ok, i get the picture... but one thing catch my eyes: "cripple the enemy's economy through the destruction of factories and resources" how does TOAW model such situation...?[8\|]

Karri -> RE: "strategically" & "tactically"... (1/29/2008 3:37:03 PM)
Doesn't really, apart from scenario designer placing hexes which increase/decrease enemy production.

SunCat -> RE: "strategically" & "tactically"... (1/29/2008 5:14:11 PM)
Strategy it is geography. Tactics it is topography.

SMK-at-work -> RE: "strategically" & "tactically"... (1/30/2008 1:44:33 AM)
the 3 G's - Strategy is what governments do. Operations is what generals do. Tactics is what grunts do.

Heldenkaiser -> RE: "strategically" & "tactically"... (1/30/2008 1:19:39 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SMK-at-work the 3 G's - Strategy is what governments do. Operations is what generals do. Tactics is what grunts do. Didn't know that one, but I love it. [:)] Generally, there is sometimes a certain confusion, especially between Americans (or the English-speaking people generally?) and Europeans, over these terms. As one can see from the answers in this thread so far, some people refer to the highest level of military planning as "strategy" and to the government war planning (political, economic etc. aspects of the war included) as "grand strategy". Others--and that's more or less the common European doctrine--see the latter as "strategy" and the former as "operations". Of course, operations can also border on tactics and vice versa. The classic answer to the dilemma was to define tactics as whatever happens ON the battlefield and operations as all that you need to bring your troops TO the battlefield. But of course, where does a battlefield end in modern war ... ?

Foggy -> RE: "strategically" & "tactically"... (1/31/2008 12:43:20 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: cymloveselva ok, i get the picture... but one thing catch my eyes: "cripple the enemy's economy through the destruction of factories and resources" how does TOAW model such situation...?[8\|] There's a awesome scen called DNO - look it up[&o]

el cid -> RE: "strategically" & "tactically"... (1/31/2008 5:59:17 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Foggy There's a awesome scen called DNO - look it up[&o] Is there a version for TOAW3?

cymloveselva -> RE: "strategically" & "tactically"... (2/1/2008 8:06:51 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Foggy quote: ORIGINAL: cymloveselva ok, i get the picture... but one thing catch my eyes: "cripple the enemy's economy through the destruction of factories and resources" how does TOAW model such situation...?[8\|] There's a awesome scen called DNO - look it up[&o] DNO??[&:] I don't seen any DNO scen in my folder...

Curtis Lemay -> RE: "strategically" & "tactically"... (2/1/2008 4:43:59 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: el cid quote: ORIGINAL: Foggy There's a awesome scen called DNO - look it up[&o] Is there a version for TOAW3? Not unless you convert your own ACOW version. Players might want to take a look at my "Soviet Union 1941" scenario in the WWII East Front folder for an example of modeling factories, refineries, oil fields, personnel centers, etc.

cymloveselva -> RE: "strategically" & "tactically"... (2/2/2008 3:38:08 AM)
Not sure if the is any possibilities of having solid "unit" of factories, refineries, oil fields, personnel centers, etc...[8\|]

Raindem -> RE: "strategically" & "tactically"... (2/2/2008 3:43:12 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: cymloveselva Not sure if the is any possibilities of having solid "unit" of factories, refineries, oil fields, personnel centers, etc...[8\|] I model factories so to speak in Campaign for South Vietnam. They are stationary targets (units) that yield an economic result (supply, replacements) when destroyed by bombing. Civilian targets are in the same hex which cause a penalty (victory points) when destroyed.

Foggy -> RE: "strategically" & "tactically"... (2/2/2008 11:37:18 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Raindem quote: ORIGINAL: cymloveselva Not sure if the is any possibilities of having solid "unit" of factories, refineries, oil fields, personnel centers, etc...[8\|] I model factories so to speak in Campaign for South Vietnam. They are stationary targets (units) that yield an economic result (supply, replacements) when destroyed by bombing. Civilian targets are in the same hex which cause a penalty (victory points) when destroyed. DNO is the ultimate model for the Eastern Front in in 1941- maybe it's not the best - but it's damn close :)

cymloveselva -> RE: "strategically" & "tactically"... (2/3/2008 3:01:58 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Foggy quote: ORIGINAL: Raindem quote: ORIGINAL: cymloveselva Not sure if the is any possibilities of having solid "unit" of factories, refineries, oil fields, personnel centers, etc...[8\|] I model factories so to speak in Campaign for South Vietnam. They are stationary targets (units) that yield an economic result (supply, replacements) when destroyed by bombing. Civilian targets are in the same hex which cause a penalty (victory points) when destroyed. DNO is the ultimate model for the Eastern Front in in 1941- maybe it's not the best - but it's damn close :) DNO? I should give it a try then[:D]

Page: [1]

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

7.515625