History Main / StrategyVersusTactics

** British strategy from the days of ElizabethI to WorldWarII was truly [[TheBritishEmpire imperial]] in concept depending on the navy for both defense and offense as well as using [[ProudMerchantRace money]] as a weapon and habitually thinking of [[EarthIsABattlefield the whole world as a battlefield.]] They would often buy time in Europe and shore up allies there while using the navy to cut of their enemies (usually France and often Spain , later Germany, Italy, and to a lesser extent Vichy France) from their overseas [[TheEmpire empires]] which they seized as {{Plunder}} using them after the war to build their own empire, or to bargain with at the PeaceConference. Britain also had numerous contacts, allies, and vassals all over the world, which it used as a source of resources and colonial military officers, diplomats, spies, and bureaucrats who could translate their skills reasonably well. Once its enemy had reached a certain point a killing blow would be struck. British tactics were generally reasonable but not dazzling, often little more than a Rocky Balboa style "hit each other until somebody falls". As their personel were usually tough and well disciplined this was often sufficient, especially as they were often used for picking off outposts and only made the killing blow at the later stages. In a way Britain is a curious example of an [[TheEmpire empire]] that habitually uses [[HitAndRunTactics Hit And Run Strategy]] against other [[TheEmpire empires]] on a global scale, but is fairly straightforward tactically.

** British strategy from the days of ElizabethI to WorldWarII was truly [[TheBritishEmpire imperial]] in concept depending on the navy for both defense and offense as well as using [[ProudMerchantRace money]] as a weapon and habitually thinking of [[EarthIsABattlefield the whole world as a battlefield.]] They would often buy time in Europe and shore up allies there while using the navy to cut of their enemies (usually France, later Germany, Italy, and to a lesser extent Vichy France) from their overseas [[TheEmpire empires]] which they seized as {{Plunder}} using them after the war to build their own empire, or to bargain with at the PeaceConference. Britain also had numerous contacts, allies, and vassals all over the world, which it used as a source of resources and colonial military officers, diplomats, spies, and bureaucrats who could translate their skills reasonably well. Once its enemy had reached a certain point a killing blow would be struck. British tactics were generally reasonable but not dazzling, often little more than a Rocky Balboa style "hit each other until somebody falls". As their personel were usually tough and well disciplined this was often sufficient, especially as they were often used for picking off outposts and only made the killing blow at the later stages. In a way Britain is a curious example of an [[TheEmpire empire]] that habitually uses [[HitAndRunTactics Hit And Run Strategy]] against other [[TheEmpire empires]] on a global scale, but is fairly straightforward tactically.

* In WorldWarII the opening stages sometimes seem like a series of opportunistic attacks and desperate reactions called strategy after the fact, or not as the case may be. To some degree this is true; it is harder to develop strategy then it sounds, and the combatants were feeling each other out. As it developed the main German strategy seems to have been to concentrate an offensive eastward. Britain's strategy was to survive and annoy Germany. Russia's was to wear Germany out by attrition until it could start attacking and roll over her(once nicknamed "the steamroller"), allowing Germany the initiative until the middle of the war. When America entered the main strategy of the Allies was to concentrate on Germany as Germany and Japan were to far away to help each other, all the allies could get a chunk of Germany; and Germany had more resources which meant if they ended up only able to subjugate one they could afford to think about Japan later but not vice-versa.

** Germany, which is a valley country with a well organized system of cities and cultivated land concentrated from the nineteenth century onward on the strategy of winning enough victories to scare any enemy into making a favorable peace. This worked as long as they had an enemy like themselves who was willing to make peace which in turn assumed German leadership willing to demand no more then a tolerable adjustment of political hegemony(I.E. someone like Bismark or Wiliam I). It did not work with Hitler who in Eastern Europe wanted his foes to become a slave race and was often fighting in unfavorable terrain. In effect German strategy was the same as it's tactics, or rather the same as it's operations. However it's tactics and operations were ''extremely'' well developed and when used by a leader with common sense against a state like Austria or France they could provide the successes they did in the Wars of Unification.
** British strategy from the days of ElizabethI to WorldWarII was truly [[TheBritishEmpire imperial]] in concept depending on the navy for both defense and offense as well as using [[ProudMerchantRace money]] as a weapon and habitually thinking of [[EarthIsABattlefield the whole world as a battlefield.]] They would often buy time in Europe and shore up allies their while using the navy to cut of their enemies(usually France, later Germany, Italy, and to a lesser extent Vichy France)from their overseas [[TheEmpire empires]] which they seized as {{Plunder}} using them after the war to build their own empire, or to bargain with at the PeaceConference. Britain also had numerous contacts, allies, and vassals all over the world, which it used as a source of resources and colonial military officers, diplomats, spies, and bureaucrats who could translate their skills reasonably well. Once it's enemy had reached a certain point a killing blow would be struck. British tactics were generally reasonable but not dazzling often little more then a Rocky Balboa style "hit each other until somebody falls"; but as their personal were usually tough and well disciplined this was often sufficient, especially as they were often used for picking off outposts and only made the killing blow at the later stages. In a way Britain is a curious example of an [[TheEmpire empire]] that habitually uses [[HitAndRunTactics Hit And Run Strategy]] against other [[TheEmpire empires]] on a global scale, but is fairly straightforward tactically.

** Germany, which is a valley country with a well organized system of cities and cultivated land concentrated from the nineteenth century on winning enough victories to scare any enemy into making a favorable peace. This worked as long as they had an enemy like themselves who was willing to make peace which in turn assumed German leadership willing to demand no more then a tolerable adjustment of political hegemony(I.E. someone like Bismark or Wiliam I). It did not work with Hitler who in Eastern Europe wanted his foes to become a slave race and was often fighting in unfavorable terrain. In effect German strategy was the same as it's tactics, or rather the same as it's operations. However it's tactics and operations were ''extremely'' well developed and when used by a leader with common sense against a state like Austria or France they could provide the successes they did in the Wars of Unification.

** Germany, which is a valley country with a well organiized system of cities and cultivated land concentrated from the nineteenth century on winning enough victories to scare any enemy into making a favorable peace. This worked as long as they had an enemy like themselves who was willing to make peace which in turn assumed German leadership willing to demand no more then a tolerable adjustment of political hegemony(I.E. someone like Bismark or Wiliam I). It did not work with Hitler who in Eastern Europe wanted his foes to become a slave race and was often fighting in unfavorable terrain. In effect German strategy was the same as it's tactics, or rather the same as it's operations. However it's tactics and operations were ''extremely'' well developed and when used by a leader with common sense against a state like Austria or France they could provide the successes they did in the Wars of Unification.

* Because countries [[CaptainObvious can seldom change their geographical position]] and usually don't want to change their culture at least not to much, this often means that both strategy and tactics will take on recognizable similarities through several wars.

* In WorldWarII the opening stages sometimes seem like a series of opportunistic attacks and desperate reactions called strategy after the fact, or not as the case may be. To some degree this is true; it is harder to develop strategy then it sounds, and the combatants were feeling each other out. As it developed the main German strategy seems to have been to concentrate an offensive eastward. Britain's strategy was to survive and annoy Germany. Russia's was to wear Germany out by attrition until it could roll over her(once nicknamed "the steamroller"), allowing Germany the initiative until the middle of the war. When America entered the main strategy of the Allies was to concentrate on Germany as Germany and Japan were to far away to help each other, all the allies could get a chunk of Germany; and Germany had more resources which meant if they ended up only able to subjugate one they could afford to think about Japan later but not vice-versa.

** Germany, which is a valley country with a well organiized system of cities and cultivated land concentrated from the nineteenth century on winning enough victories to scare any enemy into making a favorable peace. This worked as long as they had an enemy like themselves who was willing to make peace which in turn assumed German leadership willing to demand no more then a tolerable political hegemony over the disputed area(I.E. someone like Bismark or Wiliam I). It did not work with Hitler who in Eastern Europe wanted his foes to become a slave race and was often fighting in unfavorable terrain. In effect German strategy was the same as it's tactics, or rather the same as it's operations. However it's tactics and operations were ''extremely'' well developed and when used by a leader with common sense against a state like Austria or France they could provide the successes they did in the Wars of Unification.

Everyone who focuses only on the short-term usually end up screwed in the long term except in media where it is often ignored. However, there are some media that makes the distinction between tactics and strategy and make it a major part of the story. For more detail, close tactics are how to fight a squad, grand tactics are how to fight an army, operations are how to run a campaign, strategy is how to run a theater of operations, and grand strategy is how to fight a war, which is just below policy which is how to decide for a whole nation.

[[folder: TabletopGames]]

[[folder: TabletopGames

* This concept has a special meaning in the context of wargaming. It means "how big of a scenario does your game represent" and has a number of aspects. In a game on the strategic level each counter represents far more soldiers then in a tactical level game(I.E. in the misnamed ''Tactics II'' each counter is a division making it a strategic or operational game, in ''Submarine'' or ''Wooden Ships and Iron Men'' each counter is a single ship making it tactical; ''War at Sea'' has a quirky system that uses individual ships in a strategy game and ItMakesSenseInContext, sort of). Also typical of tactical level games is more detail; terrain forms for instance or types of units. Tactical level games are where you go to get the Tom Clancy style TechnologyPorn, and Strategic level games are for those who just want an abstract battle of wits. Interestingly {{Chess}} seems to be representing a battle rather then a war however it is fairly simple making it another outlier, but it was a staple before the golden age of tabletop wargaming.

** British strategy from the days of ElizabethI to WorldWarII was truly [[TheBritishEmpire imperial]] in concept depending on the navy for both defense and offense as well as using [[ProudMerchantRace money]] as a weapon and habitually thinking of [[EarthIsABattlefield the whole world as a battlefield.]] They would often buy time in Europe and shore up allies their while using the navy to cut of their enemies(usually France, later Germany, Italy, and to a lesser extent Vichy France)from their overseas [[TheEmpire empires]] which they seized as {{Plunder}} using them after the war to build their own empire, or to bargain with at the PeaceConference. Britain also had numerous contacts, allies, and vassals which it used as a source of resources. Once it's enemy had reached a certain point a killing blow would be struck. British tactics were generally reasonable but not dazzling often little more then a Rocky Balboa style "hit each other until somebody falls"; but as their personal were usually tough and well disciplined this was often sufficient, especially as they were often used for picking off outposts and only made the killing blow at the later stages. In a way Britain is a curious example of an [[TheEmpire empire]] that habitually uses [[HitAndRunTactics Hit And Run Strategy]] against other [[TheEmpire empires]] on a global scale, but is fairly straightforward tactically.

** British strategy from the days of ElizabethI to WorldWarII was truly [[TheBritishEmpire imperial]] in concept depending on the navy for both defense and offense as well as using [[ProudMerchantRace money]] as a weapon and habitually thinking of [[EarthIsABattlefield the whole world as a battlefield.]] They would often buy time in Europe and shore up allies their while using the navy to cut of their enemies(usually France, later Germany, Italy, and to a lesser extent Vichy France)from their overseas [[TheEmpire empires]] which they seized as {{Plunder}} using them after the war to build their own empire, or to bargain with at the PeaceConference. Britain also had numerous contacts, allies, and vassals which it used as a source of resources. Once it's enemy had reached a certain point a killing blow would be struck. British tactics were generally reasonable but not dazzling often little more then a Rocky Balboa style "hit each other until somebody falls"; but as their personal were usually tough and well disciplined this was often sufficient, especially as they were often used for picking off outposts and only made the killing blow at the later stages. In a way Britain is a curious example of an [[TheEmpire empire]] that habitually uses guerrilla warfare against other [[TheEmpire empires]] on a global scale, but is fairly straightforward tactically.

** British strategy from the days of ElizabethI to WorldWarII was truly [[TheBritishEmpire imperial]] in concept depending on the navy for both defense and offense as well as using [[ProudMerchantRace money]] as a weapon. They would often buy time in Europe and shore up allies their while using the navy to cut of their enemies(usually France, later Germany, Italy, and to a lesser extent Vichy France)from their overseas [[TheEmpire empires]] which they seized as {{Plunder}} using them after the war to build their own empire, or to bargain with at the PeaceConference. Britain also had numerous contacts, allies, and vassals which it used as a source of resources. Once it's enemy had reached a certain point a killing blow would be struck. British tactics were generally reasonable but not dazzling often little more then a Rocky Balboa style "hit each other until somebody falls"; but as their personal were usually tough and well disciplined this was often sufficient, especially as they were often used for picking off outposts and only made the killing blow at the later stages. In a way Britain is a curious example of an [[TheEmpire empire]] that habitually uses guerrilla warfare against other [[TheEmpire empires]] on a global scale, but is fairly straightforward tactically.

In war, there are many different things to take in consideration in preparing for it, waging it, and winning it. You have to have the equipment, which means good logistics, you need to have good engineering skills, you need to have political power, and you need to have a good strategy and a lot of tactical knowledge. The problem with the latter two is that many people don't [[HollywoodTactics understand the difference]] between the two in and out of media.

Strategy comes from a Greek word that means "general" and involves setting and achieving a goal while tactics refers to a plan, procedure, or expedient for achieving some end. Basically strategy is the goal you want to achieve in the long-term in peace and war time while tactics is the military science to help achieve short term goals that are '''supposed''' to help achieve the overall strategy's goal. In business, strategy is a company's long term goal to building their brand in the long-term while tactics include things like advertising to help achieve that end. Most people forget about the long-term and go straight for the short term.

Everyone who focuses only on the short-term usually end up screwed in the long term except in media where it is often ignored. However, there are some media that makes the distinction between tactics and strategy and make it a major part of the story. For more detail, close tactics are how to fight a squad, grand tactics are how to fight an army, operations are how to run a campaign, strategy is how to run a theater of operations, and grand strategy is how to fight a war, which is just below policy which is how to decide for a whole nation.

Often, this comes in the form of AnAesop along the lines of "he won the battle but lost the war" (or the other way around). Related to WonTheWarLostThePeace. Also, compare HollywoodTactics which shows unrealistic battle plans that, logically, should fail but don't. Strategy itself is often dealt with by TheStrategist who may or may not also be proficient in tactical thinking.
----
!!Examples:

[[foldercontrol]]

[[folder:Anime and Manga]]
* In ''Anime/DragonBallZ'', Goku is a master fighter and one of the best. He succeeds by overcoming his limits and learning about his enemies on the fly during combat. However, several times he needs help from people like Kami, King Kai, and Vegeta when it comes to figuring out about bring back the dead, defeating enemies that are stronger than him, and returning things to normal after everything is all set and done. In fact, at one point, Goku's goal was to have [[spoiler: Gohan go SSJ 2 and defeat Cell, but he didn't take in consideration Gohan's mental limits or the effect it would have on his son.]] Picolo [[WhatTheHellHero calls him out on it.]] This action almost doomed the planet and [[spoiler: got Goku killed when Gohan berserked and started toying with Cell which is also an example of Gohan's lack of strategic thinking.]] They got better as time went on... well, besides in GT where Goku got worse.
* ''CodeGeass'' has the tactician versus strategist conflict at its very core. The MagnificentBastard Lelouch is plotting the downfall of Britannia, but is frequently foiled at individual engagements by the ace pilot, Suzaku. Lelouch mentions the conflict by name during his first internal meltdown, expressing anger that the ace pilot made him lose the battle and thus made him delay the next steps of his larger strategy.

[[folder:Comic Books]]
* {{Nightwing}} is a masterful tactician, but not much for long term planning or politics. In the DCUniverse, he's considered {{THE Leader}} archetype, when it comes to uniting any heroic army (no matter how large). This is often contrasted with Franchise/{{Superman}}, who is very politically savvy and diplomatic, but is more comfortable inspiring than commanding. In the end, Nightwing ''really'' looks up to Superman--following his example more than Franchise/{{Batman}}'s--and Superman often steps aside to let Nightwing take command when needed.
[[/folder]]

[[folder:Literature]]
* Robb Stark in ''Literature/ASongOfIceAndFire'' is a brilliant tactician who is able to score sound victories against overwhelming Lannister forces. However, he strategic decisions are not as good, and several characters comment that it is probably due to his youth.
* At Mindouas in the first volume of BelisariusSeries, the title character is rebuked for putting tactics before strategy in fighting a successful but seemingly needless battle with the Persians. In reality the reason was that he needed to gain an armistice as quickly as possible because a new enemy was looming on the horizon.
[[/folder]]

[[folder:Sports]]
* In ProfessionalWrestling, the tag team of Pretty Boy Doug Somers and Playboy Buddy Rose are versed in different fields. In more than one promo, Rose claimed that they were unbeatable in part because he was a master of strategy and Somers was a master tactician.
[[/folder]]

[[folder:Video Games]]
* In ''Franchise/DeadSpace'', specifically, ''VideoGame/DeadSpace2'', Nolan Stross comes up with a good long-term goal and got Isaac back on track by telling him necessary details. However, he only ever talks about destroying the Marker and fails tactical thinking when he fails to get it together and fight back [[spoiler: due to the Marker driving him slowly insane and letting his guilt consume him.]] If it wasn't for Isaac's and Ellie's tactical thinking, the plan would have failed miserably.
* Pick an RTS game, any RTS game. You have general goals (objectives and missions) which you have solid tactics to win.
* In ''VideoGame/DragonAgeOrigins'', Teyrn Loghain Mac Tir and Arl Eamon Guerrin are the tactician and the strategist, respectively. Loghain is an excellent general in the field, but his abrasive personality and heavy-handed, tyrannical leadership leave him with few allies where it matters most, and the country is fragmented in the face of the Blight. Eamon, in contrast, is well-spoken, courteous, and diplomatic, but nothing is spoken of his skill as a general. The [[PlayerCharacter Warden's]] quests for him in Denerim before the Landsmeet are focused on acquiring political support for [[spoiler: Alistair's campaign for the throne,]] and Eamon is mainly concerned with ending the civil war as quickly as possible to deal with the Blight, which demonstrates his ability to see the big picture.
[[/folder]]

[[folder:Web Comics]]
* In ''Webcomic/{{Erfworld}}'', Stanley the Tool is a genius when it comes to battle. He is an expert fighting and rose from the rank of piker to Overlord of his side. However, he is not a strategist and, though he had success in the short-term, he failed to have a grand strategy and he was very close to being killed by his enemies. That is until [[TheStrategist Parson]] was summoned.
[[/folder]]

[[folder:Real Life]]
* In the Punic Wars, Hannibal was an amazing tactician who defeated Rome armies with ease and slaughtered their forces. The Romans were unable to compete with his brilliance, but they didn't give up. You see, Hannibal had sacrificed his siege equipment to avoid a large battle. Without them, Hannibal was unable to breach the thick walls of major Roman cities. The Romans simply began a war of attrition and cut off Carthage's supply lines to Hannibal using sea vessels that Hannibal could not counter (the last Punic war ended with an agreement that said Carthage had to give up its fleet). Hannibal rushed to his country's aid, but was defeated at the Battle of Zama. He is now one of the best examples when discussing the importance of strategic thinking used in conjunction with tactical thinking.
* In TheAmericanRevolution the British could usually win engagements by their greater tactical skill. However the Americans figured out that they could win strategically just by continueing to exist [[WeWinBecauseYouDidnt until the British got tired of it.]]
[[/folder]]

* In ''DragonAgeOrigins'', Teyrn Loghain Mac Tir and Arl Eamon Guerrin are the tactician and the strategist, respectively. Loghain is an excellent general in the field, but his abrasive personality and heavy-handed, tyrannical leadership leave him with few allies where it matters most, and the country is fragmented in the face of the Blight. Eamon, in contrast, is well-spoken, courteous, and diplomatic, but nothing is spoken of his skill as a general. The [[PlayerCharacter Warden's]] quests for him in Denerim before the Landsmeet are focused on acquiring political support for [[spoiler: Alistair's campaign for the throne,]] and Eamon is mainly concerned with ending the civil war as quickly as possible to deal with the Blight, which demonstrates his ability to see the big picture.