PSU - Sanctuary of the NC? - Page 2

Buck · 2003-02-07, 07:26 PM

Originally posted by Dio
Yep, mature serious gamers...

Honestly does anybody really think their empire will have better or more mature players than an other? Every empire will have every type of cool and lame player, it's just a question of how many of them will there be.

But i do think TR will suck, except the CDL part of it.

I agree with you 100%

Camping Carl · 2003-02-07, 07:34 PM

Honestly does anybody really think their empire will have better or more mature players than an other? Every empire will have every type of cool and lame player, it's just a question of how many of them will there be.

That's true for NC and TR, but vanu? I don't think so.

They attract more 14-year-old wannabe snipers than anybody else!

MrVulcan · 2003-02-07, 08:11 PM

Buck:

AHHH THE PAIN, THE PAIN!!!!! =P

Oh I beg to differ; Sun Tzu had a very different approach to assaults than Patton. You TR troops must learn how to see the subtle but important differences between tactics. It helps. =P

Though I will admit that Patton studied Sun Tzu, he also studied (and thought he was) just about every other major general in our history and took the best of everything he found. He even used 1 of the German�s tank formations in a battle if im not mistaken.... (can t remember where/when for sure, sorry, been too long since I studied Patton�s battles)

Sun Tzu had very similar ideas about capturing the enemy and using them to work for you though. As well as getting the job done quickly, and not to linger in your assaults in general.

But I find that the major difference in their styles is how they did individual battles, and assaults on cities/fortified positions. Patton would not shy away from fortified positions, and yet Sun Tzu does. Now this does make some sense for Sun Tzu, and Patton had tanks, and artillery/air strikes, but my point is still valid. You must not ignore the fortresses, you must crush them. Also, the way they would deploy their troops in general was different. Not completely again, but different. (wont get into details tonight, ill see if I can find some specifics in the morning)

Their the basic PHILOSOPHY however was very in general almost identical. I am not disputing that, I am only disputing the details.

BTW: I truly enjoyed reading those links you gave, and this piece in particular:

�....we use what we term �mission tactics;� orders are not written out in the minute detail, a mission is merely
given to the commander. How it shall be carried out is his problem. This is done because the commander on the
ground is the only one who can correctly judge existing conditions and take proper action if a chance occurs in the
situation. There is also a strong psychological reason for these �mission tactics.� The commander who can make
his own decisions within the limits of his mission, feels responsible for what he does. Consequently, he will
accomplish more because he will act in accordance with his own psychological individuality. Give the same
independence to your platoon and squad leaders.
�
It is of the same ideals that I completely agree to, and so did both Sun Tzu and Patton.

My main point however (I AM NOT SAYING that either avoided battle, quite the contrary), is that Patton loved direct confrontation more than Sun Tzu. And In general, when it came to going after targets of opportunity, and waiting for his own troops, etc, Patton would take the initiative more often. (yes that can be argued both ways, but in general)

(If I had more time, I would look up some sweet references for my point too, but I don�t, sorry. Your references are very nice though! I thoroughly enjoyed reading them. You wouldn�t happen to have nay more military docs would you?)

In the end, yes Sun Tzu does share many of the philosophical traits and trends towards war that Patton does, im not arguing that, but Patton takes his aggressiveness up a notch to two.

You have been iced. Feel the chill. =P

-MrVulcan

P.S.
I think that we both agree on the same basic style (Attack Now, and Attack Again 5 min ago�.. etc) so all is cool =) Just debating the differences in the detail.

Buck · 2003-02-07, 08:35 PM

Mr. Vulcan, Sir.

I retract my flame. (minus one thing Im NC like yourself not TR)
A quality post deserves proper credit, and I must say I enjoyed your retort and its substance. I will enjoy meeting you in-game to discuss tactics and whatnot. I do have many military docs on hand to share with you, though Im getting ready to tune into the shoutcast. I'll post them in short time.

Discussing tactics is one of my favorite things, I look forward to working with you after reading your latest post. Well thought out and executed.

here are a couple links as a peace offering, how they relate to the game Im not sure, they're off the top of my head.

http://www.adtdl.army.mil/atdls.htm
This link is to the US Army Training and Doctrine digital library

http://carlisle-www.army.mil/usawc/P...tumn/henry.htm
this link is to a subsection of the Army War College, which presents some counter ideas to Sun Tzu and highlights several stand-out military theorists. Mainly focusing on Military theory and Information warfare. This site, with enough digging, can produce just about anything you want.