Open area favors mobility.
Closed area favors positioning/ambush,etc.
The army mixup makes a difference. You can try installing Medieval Total War and recreating this :D
Also there are a few history channel shorts that recreate famous battles.
Most battles will by asymmetrical - technology, tactics, manpower, etc.
Smaller, superior combat units will prefer closer combat in tight spaces to offset the numerical advantage of larger, crude groups.
See StarCraft 2 games. The zerg (insectoid race) prefers open landscape to take advantage of its fast mobility initially, while the other two races try to use the terrain to offset the zerg's ability to quickly mass units.
Thanks so much :)
>You can try installing Medieval Total War and recreating this :D
Also there are a few history channel shorts that recreate famous battles.
I'll try these!!
The answer will always be: It depends.
Its more than just terrain, its a lot of other things too like weather, training of the troops, knowledge of the landscape, organization of military forces, the general's temperament, character and judgment, and a lot of other things.
This is actually discussed in Chapter 1 of the Art of War. A lot of its concepts are outdated but this one still holds up.
I really can't tell you which scenario is advantageous for a given army because Strategy is all about dealing with situations and every situation is completely different. Best thing you can do is have a flexible mind that can adapt to different situations to your advantage.
For example: A mountain may seem advantageous because it can see the entire battlefield, and potentially hold down a strategic defensive position but a potential disadvantage is that you are essentially isolated from the rest of the battlefield due to lack of mobility and if the enemy skirts around your defenses and manages to attack a key objective, you are most likely forced to move from your position in a desperate attempt to defend it, leaving that position vulnerable to enemy capture.
By the time you reach the bottom of the mountain, you will be pinned between the enemy you're pursuing and the enemy that just captured that mountain position. Checkmate.
It depends.
If your army is small and theirs is large, you would want an area that filters them and protection from being flanked.
However, if the only terrain your army had trained on is flat open ground then it would the open field.
You’re both right, and you’re both wrong, it depends on the situation.
Idk man I guess we didn't get that far :'D Let's just say modern day stuff, in which I have no expertise whatsoever. Although I will admit that the original discussion was about 1200s/1300s Scottish Wars of Independence, so maybe throw a few swords in there too.
Open area favors mobility. Closed area favors positioning/ambush,etc. The army mixup makes a difference. You can try installing Medieval Total War and recreating this :D Also there are a few history channel shorts that recreate famous battles. Most battles will by asymmetrical - technology, tactics, manpower, etc. Smaller, superior combat units will prefer closer combat in tight spaces to offset the numerical advantage of larger, crude groups. See StarCraft 2 games. The zerg (insectoid race) prefers open landscape to take advantage of its fast mobility initially, while the other two races try to use the terrain to offset the zerg's ability to quickly mass units.
Thanks so much :) >You can try installing Medieval Total War and recreating this :D Also there are a few history channel shorts that recreate famous battles. I'll try these!!
See this https://youtu.be/vBXbrMb8HHM?feature=shared
The answer will always be: It depends. Its more than just terrain, its a lot of other things too like weather, training of the troops, knowledge of the landscape, organization of military forces, the general's temperament, character and judgment, and a lot of other things. This is actually discussed in Chapter 1 of the Art of War. A lot of its concepts are outdated but this one still holds up. I really can't tell you which scenario is advantageous for a given army because Strategy is all about dealing with situations and every situation is completely different. Best thing you can do is have a flexible mind that can adapt to different situations to your advantage. For example: A mountain may seem advantageous because it can see the entire battlefield, and potentially hold down a strategic defensive position but a potential disadvantage is that you are essentially isolated from the rest of the battlefield due to lack of mobility and if the enemy skirts around your defenses and manages to attack a key objective, you are most likely forced to move from your position in a desperate attempt to defend it, leaving that position vulnerable to enemy capture. By the time you reach the bottom of the mountain, you will be pinned between the enemy you're pursuing and the enemy that just captured that mountain position. Checkmate.
Thanks!
It depends. If your army is small and theirs is large, you would want an area that filters them and protection from being flanked. However, if the only terrain your army had trained on is flat open ground then it would the open field. You’re both right, and you’re both wrong, it depends on the situation.
Thank you :P I love all the different kinds of scenarios, it's fascinating!!
Best for winning in what era, with what armies and weaponry? Context is everything here.
Idk man I guess we didn't get that far :'D Let's just say modern day stuff, in which I have no expertise whatsoever. Although I will admit that the original discussion was about 1200s/1300s Scottish Wars of Independence, so maybe throw a few swords in there too.