Strategy vs Tactics

CliffNotes:  Sometimes it's a good idea to examine what we think we know.  If you want the bottom line to all this talkie-talkie, just read the lines in BOLD.

I believe that in all areas of life, and if I have a strength it's an almost overwhelming self-awareness... which I earned the hard way.

Don't worry, I won't bore you with the theory; that's my profession and I'm sure the concepts doesn't excite others the way it does me.  Point is, we don't know ourselves or our ideas as well as we think we do.  A good way to test your understanding is to say it out loud or to try to explain it in new terms to another.



Here's an example taken from my neuropharmacology class.  Mike May was blinded at age 3 but a surgery repaired his eyesight.  He can 'see' but can't recognize his wife.  Sight is now a tool for him, "...like my cane or my dog."  Got it?  Now explain it on a neuronal level.  What happened at age 3?  What's happening now?

If you can do it, you know the material!  Obviously that's a pretty extreme example, but I find the story of Mike May fascinating and wanted to share it with you.  Here's some links:

• One
• Two
• Three

Moving on, I had an entertaining conversation with Stelek yesterday... don't worry, it's not drama and there aren't hurt feelings.  I don't deal in E-Drama anymore.  But I had the opportunity to dust off my understanding of Strategy and Tactics.


Stelek said, "(Brent) When I read your tactical articles, I wonder about you as the things you say confuse me greatly."

I'll admit, that stung.  Disagreeing with an article is one thing, and I get that a lot, but blanket statements are an opinion on everything you've ever done!  The only thing worse is damning with faint praise.

Still, I recognized it wasn't personal but rather he was speaking out on the issue as he saw it.  When that happens in life, we may not like it but it's important to acknowledge the difference.

As an aside, I think that distinction, which is hard to make - especially in a media-poor communication tool such as chatting or typing - is at fault for the vast majority of hurt feelings and arguments that have occurred on Yes the Truth Hurts.  Stelek is a blunt person; I don't think he's a mean person.

Still, one thing in all that stuck out.

I don't actually write Tactics articles.

I never have; that was a deliberate decision for a few reasons.

1. Others do it better.
2. People disagree about tactics.  I didn't want to turn readers off.
3. Others do it better..!
4. Tactics can change.  What works today won't tomorrow.  I didn't want to invalidate past opinion, especially when I post using my real name.
5. I don't find them useful.  In general, people only really learn these concepts through playing the game.
6. Others do it better!
7. It's hard work.

Strategy and design are more my thing, but even then I rarely write these types of articles, certainly not on Strictly Average.  Why?  'Cause others do it better!  There's really only a handful of armies I can speak on as an expert, so why confuse the audience?  I strove to make Strictly Average a Personality Driven Hobby Blog.

I think I've succeeded.

So, with that in mind, I assume Stelek is talking about my generalist, strategy articles, which I only really write for Bell of Lost Souls.  My first thought was, "He can't possibly have read all of them!"  My second thought was, "I'd better not make that mistake again!" 

Anyway, all this lead to a conversation about the difference between 'strategy' and 'tactics.'  No need to repeat it here - this isn't really a right or wrong thing, since we may be saying the same thing in different ways.  Let me just say my research validated my understanding of what I thought I knew.

Strategy is a generalist approach, associated with army-wide aims.  Tactics is battle-specific, most commonly associated with maneuvers.

When I say I write Strategy articles for Bell I mean just that, an overall, generalist approach and understanding designed to improve a player's success at the table.  When I say I don't write Tactics I mean just that, because the specific action of units on the table is best learned by playing games.

That last is opinion, of course.

Still, I've said before Bell of Lost Souls isn't the place for an in-depth analysis of of the armies and their potential.  What it does do it does better than any other site on the net!  I still think the best place on the net for that is Yes the Truth Hurts.  Closely followed by 3++ is the New Black.  Stelek's name is loaded, but love him (we'd like to give him a squeeze!) or hate him I think it's important to acknowledge his contribution to Ye Ol' Blogosphere.  He's been on a roll lately, so I wish him continued success.  He's best when he avoids the E-Drama like he's been doing.

Thoughts?  Comments?  Hugs and Gropings?