Matrix Games Forums

ORIGINAL: anarchyintheuk

I'd still put Tzu fu under the title of enlightened common sense rather than anything particularly mind blowing. Telling me that it is wise to keep an enemy off balance is like my dad telling me to brush my teeth before I put my tie on instead of vice-versa . . . good idea but obvious.

Having said that, it's still a must read.

I agree with this.

No way no how could Sun Tzu have forseen the complexities of modern warfare and the interrelationship of combined arms. His greatest contributions were really just enlightened common sense. Speaking of military approaches that were unique to his generalizations is to give too much too much credence to his non-specifics.

Just because it's a good idea to eat a meal every now and then doesn't make me a genius for stating the obvious. It was good common sense (e.g., go where he ain't; avoid rushing headlong into a prepared defense; don't broadcast your likely route of advance) to follow some of his basic tenets.

Which doesn't take anything away from the guy or his teachings. For what he was then, he was brilliant. Remember that some medieval knights felt 'tactics' such as flank attacks, feints and the like were weaknesses to be avoided-battle should only be joined by a full frontal assault, albeit a gentlemanly one. Clearly they could have used a brush up on military common sense.

I believe that his platitudes and generalizations have been supplanted by specifics of combined arms modern warfare in many different ways. Unfortunately, as a species, we have advanced significantly beyond the realm of his expertise and experiences. More recent military strategists probably come closer to hitting the nail on the modern warfare head than Sun Tzu, IMO-his stuff is dated in its scope, scale and applicability.

ORIGINAL: AW1Steve

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

ORIGINAL: AW1Steve




Accepted, and return PM sent. I'm looking forward to "meeting" on the Coral Sea dueling grounds. [:D]

Dude...how many times have you played this scenario now?

As a PBEM? Once or twice. [:D]

Is this more of your Sun Tzu / Navy Seals lies? [:'(]

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

ORIGINAL: AW1Steve

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy



Dude...how many times have you played this scenario now?

As a PBEM? Once or twice. [:D]

Is this more of your Sun Tzu / Navy Seals lies? [:'(]

Me? Lie? [:(] And that's SEAL (Sea Air And Land). Using the acronym incorrectly, like referring to a "Ex-Marine", is a very good way to get you butt kicked , if any of the interested (and offended) parties are within earshot.[:D]

ORIGINAL: AW1Steve
Me? Lie? [:(] And that's SEAL (Sea Air And Land). Using the acronym incorrectly, like referring to a "Ex-Marine", is a very good way to get you butt kicked , if any of the interested (and offended) parties are within earshot.[:D]

Ummmm...yes...that would be you. [:'(]

Good point on the SEALS acronym thing too.

For those SEALs in earshot: Steve told me to write it that way. He's still sore (literally and figuratively) on that whole survival school / paddle to the head bit, so he wanted me to belittle your organization, your esprit de corps and your entire existence. And he thinks your moms have 'extracurricular' earnings. And he wants your sister's phone number to negotiate same with her.

You shouldn't flatter them that way. They like it too much. Besides, we are square. My crew gave them "half" a ride a couple of times.(They took off with us, but ...... found their own way home). [:D]

ORIGINAL: anarchyintheuk

I'd still put Tzu fu under the title of enlightened common sense rather than anything particularly mind blowing. Telling me that it is wise to keep an enemy off balance is like my dad telling me to brush my teeth before I put my tie on instead of vice-versa . . . good idea but obvious.

Having said that, it's still a must read.

Contrary to Chickenboy I disaggree completely, but this is because I view Sun Tzus work in a different context.

In the context of our modern world where infomation about any topic of interest is present in abundance, The Art of War, while not proven wrong, is reduced to a huge collection of
banalities about how to wage a war or how to do battle.

In the context of a book written 500BC, in a time where Europeans were far from contemplating anything remotely at this level of detail and which still is true in its content
2500 years later, The Art of War it is one of the most fascinating reads ever.
If somebody does not find this particularily mind blowing I can only wonder what does. [;)]

Just to avoid misunderstandings, I think you hit the nail with about everything you said, except that you agree with anarchyintheuk... [:D]

ORIGINAL: LoBaron

ORIGINAL: anarchyintheuk

I'd still put Tzu fu under the title of enlightened common sense rather than anything particularly mind blowing. Telling me that it is wise to keep an enemy off balance is like my dad telling me to brush my teeth before I put my tie on instead of vice-versa . . . good idea but obvious.

Having said that, it's still a must read.

Contrary to Chickenboy I disaggree completely, but this is because I view Sun Tzus work in a different context.

In the context of our modern world where infomation about any topic of interest is present in abundance, The Art of War, while not proven wrong, is reduced to a huge collection of
banalities about how to wage a war or how to do battle.

In the context of a book written 500BC, in a time where Europeans were far from contemplating anything remotely at this level of detail and which still is true in its content
2500 years later, The Art of War it is one of the most fascinating reads ever.
If somebody does not find this particularily mind blowing I can only wonder what does. [;)]

In the context of a book written 500BC, it was a phenomenal revelation. I believe I stated that.

However, it has aged and its modern application and primacy are in question. No-not for the vagaries, generalities and concepts, which are still valid in that context-but for application to modern warfare. It's akin to reading the Old Testament of The Holy Bible (in it's original aramaic, of course)-a fine text and language for its day-and using that world-changing text's interpretations on whether to immolate one's target with ICBMs or JDAMs from stealth bombers.

Modern warfare and combined arms make a mockery out of the simplistic generalizations implicit in Sun Tzu's work. I doubt many of the pre-combined arms crowd of military strategists have stood up well either for that matter.

The most brilliant military strategists are those professors of the art that can use what has been learned from old and new and build on those lessons moving forward, developing a new form of warfare. Here, Guderian springs to mind as an example.

Lastly, how do you know how these ideas were perceived in 500BC? Know anyone from that era? Read any NY Times book reviews from 500BC critiquing this book? For all we know, everyone outside of this kingdom may have thought that these writings was commensical and banal at the time too. The fact that we find Sun Tzu's writings revolutionary with our modern views of ancient times doesn't mean that those perspectives were shared by the ancients.

ORIGINAL: LoBaron

Just to avoid misunderstandings, I think you hit the nail with about everything you said, except that you agree with anarchyintheuk... [:D]

Oh, I see....[:D]

Nuff of the nonsense. If Sun works for you, then use him. If he doesn't, lose him. The proof is in the victory. If you lose, then one of you , or both are wrong. If you win, then one of you, or both are right. He's a tool. If you've got only one tool in your tool box, you've got a bigger problem then Sun Tzu. You are a one trick pony. If you have a parthenon of military theorist in your tool box, then the next trick is which tool for which job. That's called generalship (or admiralship). People go to school and practice their whole lives to get good at it. Blaming Sun Tzu for a defeat is like blaming a hammer for a badly built house. While it might contribute, the real problem is the guy using it.

All I can say is Sun works for me (I particularly like the James Clavel version.....it's the simplest). So do a whole bunch of other theorist. I belive in a well filled and chosen toolbox.

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy
Lastly, how do you know how these ideas were perceived in 500BC? Know anyone from that era? Read any NY Times book reviews from 500BC critiquing this book? For all we know, everyone outside of this kingdom may have thought that these writings was commensical and banal at the time too. The fact that we find Sun Tzu's writings revolutionary with our modern views of ancient times doesn't mean that those perspectives were shared by the ancients.

The fact that the book survived, was quoted, commented, and considered a classic for more than 2000 years constitues a proof.

Also, the biography of Sun Wu, compiled several centuries later by Sima Qian, present him as a very unconventional general. He offers his services to a semi barbarian kingdom, proves his competence to the king by organising a battle with his concubines, and then is depicted as the mastermind of a very strange winter naval operation against Chu (modern Changsha). Whether Sun Wu actually existed is unclear (historians have debated this for a long time), but his biography certainly reflects the opinion later historians (notably Sima Qian, in the 1st century BC) had of his works.

Francois

Just an update on the "Duel in the Coral Sea over Sun Tzu" (the working name till someone can suggest a better name) is agreed upon. I'll do an AAR from my point of view. Now if anyone can suggest a link so that I can install a version of the game with update "c" I'd be most gratefull! [&o]

ORIGINAL: AW1Steve

Just an update on the "Duel in the Coral Sea over Sun Tzu" (the working name till someone can suggest a better name) is agreed upon. I'll do an AAR from my point of view. Now if anyone can suggest a link so that I can install a version of the game with update "c" I'd be most gratefull! [&o]

I've a proposed title for your AAR:

"Sun Tzu Coral Sea: 16th time's a charm!" [:'(]

You know CB, outside of playing the AI , I think I've probably played this 8 times.And two of those were in the tournament. I've played The Thousand mile war a lot more. If someone would write another scenario as short as Coral Sea, I'd certainly play it. But there is only what? Three short scenarios? Stuart asked for this scenario, as he didn't have time for the other two.

ORIGINAL: AW1Steve

You shouldn't flatter them that way. They like it too much. Besides, we are square. My crew gave them "half" a ride a couple of times.(They took off with us, but ...... found their own way home). [:D]

Just GREAT. I snarfed my coffee when reading this, is it some sneaky SEAL interrogation method? I know, I know, you can't tell me or I will get killed with a rusty spoon.

ORIGINAL: The Gnome

ORIGINAL: AW1Steve

You shouldn't flatter them that way. They like it too much. Besides, we are square. My crew gave them "half" a ride a couple of times.(They took off with us, but ...... found their own way home). [:D]

Just GREAT. I snarfed my coffee when reading this, is it some sneaky SEAL interrogation method? I know, I know, you can't tell me or I will get killed with a rusty spoon.

No, actually we were their dropship for a parachute drop. [:D]

From a P-3? How'd that go?

Actually very well. SEAL frequently jump from P-3's. They told me that they like the fact that it's impossible to hit anything on the way out. (The tailplane is high and well out of the way). And they are trained to jump out of just about any airplane that it's capable of.[:)]

Clausewitz may have been a good tactician but Sun Tzu had a better recipie for chicken (or was that General Tso?)[:D]

ORIGINAL: RUPD3658

Clausewitz may have been a good tactician but Sun Tzu had a better recipie for chicken (or was that General Tso?)[:D]

I'm always looking for good chicken recipes![:D]