| Author |
The Art of War |
Captain_Savage
Cadet
Joined: September 30, 2003
Posts: 144
|  Posted: 2005-03-26 00:17
i recently had a discussion in the MV in which there was an individual who claimed that tactics are unessisary, that aparently "skill" and big ships are what win. he mentioned that he was playing for four years, and that he did well. i don't doubt that, but in all honesty, if it took him four years to learn only a fraction of what he could know by simply reading a book(which this thread is named after), that's four years wasted.
The Art of War, by Sun Tzu. you can get it for $9.95 at any bookstore, and the ideas and doctrines it contains have been employed by armies all over the world for ofer a thousand years.
i know what you're thinking, "but that's for war, this is a game."
yeah, it's a game that simulates war. hense, the doctrines of war are just as applicable.
not only that, it can be applied to any competetive activity. champion athletes read the book to put them in the propper mindset of competition and whatnot. buisiness men read the book to learn how to be succesful in the market. even that guy, whose name escapes me, the one who says "You're Fired," on that show. he recommends the book to everyone. as i am doing now. not because he reccomends it, but because i read the book, and after reading it, the blatand shortcomings of players in this game(and all, for that matter) are painfully obvious.
here are some exerpts from the book:
"when ten to the enemy's one, surround him;
when five times his streingth, attack him;
If double his streingth, divide him;
if equally matched, you may engage him;
if weaker numerically, be capable of withdraw;
and if in all points unequal, be capable of eluding him, for a small force is but booty for one more powerful."
"Appear at places to which he must hasten, move swiftly where he does not expect you."
"One who has few must prepare against the enemy; one who has many makes the enemy prepare against him"
"Now, an army may be likend to water, for just as flowing water avoids the heights and hastens to the lowlands, so an army avoids streignth and strikes weakness."
"Now war is based on deception. Move when it is advantageous and create changes in the situation by dispersal and concentration of your forces."
"Know the enemy and know yourself; in a hundred battles you will never be in peril."
this may all be obvious, but remember back when you started, did you know any of this? if not, how long did it take you to figure it out? now remember how long these have been around before you knew about them.
call this BS, call it whatever you like. it's proven fact. and you can buy the book for less than it costs for a one month subscription(if you happen to live in New Hampshire).
you really don't stand to lose any more than twelve dollars from buying this book, or if you're cheap, there's bound to be a copy somewhere in a library. my point is, read the book. it's a good book, and you'll learn things that will help you play the game better, as well as help you in any competetive environment.
if not, i'll let you personally hole my cruiser.
[size=-5]limit one per person[/size]
_________________
|
Coeus {NCX-Charger}
Admiral, I can't read,
Sundered Weimeriners
Joined: February 16, 2004
Posts: 3635
From: South Philly
| Posted: 2005-03-26 02:21
I still use most of the tactics I learned from RTS games when thinking about fleet actions - and I use a blend of action, FPS, and custom thinking when flying for myself... I die a lot.
_________________
Darkspace: Twilight
|
RedDoggy(1)
Fleet Admiral
Agents
Joined: August 14, 2004
Posts: 118
From: Oregon
| Posted: 2005-03-26 04:09
For a while there, unknown to the Kluth of UGTO, there were few ICC on today. Errrr, me, that was it. I used the art of annoyance that is talked about in his book. "When outnumbered...annoy etc."
Good stuff, but there are also quite a few books out there that deal with more military oriented versus more business oriented. Check out amazon.com for some interesting books, and scout around you may find several you may have never heard of. Some crazy stuff like way of the warrior, that takes decades of study and mediation to develop. The kind of writings that you need to read over and over again to get their true meaning. Sun Tzu book ideas are the basics, there are some "Doctoral" books out there as well.
_________________
|
Placebo
Vice Admiral
Joined: September 16, 2003
Posts: 450
| Posted: 2005-03-26 05:24
Quote:
|
On 2005-03-26 02:21, Coeus wrote:
I die a lot.
|
|
Yeah...you do...
_________________
|
Captain_Savage
Cadet
Joined: September 30, 2003
Posts: 144
| Posted: 2005-03-26 08:57
Quote:
|
On 2005-03-26 04:09, RedDoggy(1) wrote:
For a while there, unknown to the Kluth of UGTO, there were few ICC on today. Errrr, me, that was it. I used the art of annoyance that is talked about in his book. "When outnumbered...annoy etc."
Good stuff, but there are also quite a few books out there that deal with more military oriented versus more business oriented. Check out amazon.com for some interesting books, and scout around you may find several you may have never heard of. Some crazy stuff like way of the warrior, that takes decades of study and mediation to develop. The kind of writings that you need to read over and over again to get their true meaning. Sun Tzu book ideas are the basics, there are some "Doctoral" books out there as well.
|
|
exactly. and if you know the basics, you can learn the advanced concepts even easier, and you can employthem with much greater effect.
trust me, i know of those books, and if i had any disposable income, i'd snatch them up as soon as i could find them. ^_^
i also have On War, by A.E. Clauswitz. and i found it less than comprehensive when it comes to actual combat.
my point is, that the book is a great read even ig you're only reading it to play the game better.
_________________
|
Coeus {NCX-Charger}
Admiral, I can't read,
Sundered Weimeriners
Joined: February 16, 2004
Posts: 3635
From: South Philly
| Posted: 2005-03-26 10:26
Quote:
|
On 2005-03-26 05:24, Yoda wrote:
Quote:
|
On 2005-03-26 02:21, Coeus wrote:
I die a lot.
|
|
Yeah...you do...
|
|
Of course, I also play a lot 
_________________
Darkspace: Twilight
|
Banshee
Grand Admiral
Raven Warriors
Joined: August 28, 2001
Posts: 2181
From: Philadelphia, PA
| Posted: 2005-03-26 10:54
The player he is referring to is me, I stated that rarely would anything written in a book apply to actions ingame.
Savages argument was that a Missile boat would utterly destroy any ship from long range, and ofcourse this would be true, but factor in the game mechanics that said enemy ship can jump right ontop of you, it factors out his arguments, and thus I was correct in implying that theory doesnt apply to the ingame fighting.
Id love to drone on about various other comments and remarks he made that solidied our views on his complete lack of knowledge of the game mechanics, but he was rather adequate in making himself look foolish enough without my help.
And with regards to what originally started the whole debate
“No plan survives first contact with the enemy.”
— German strategist Helmut von Moltke
Oh, and should you wish to claim I lack any skills etc etc etc, Feel free to challenge me to as many duels as you see fit, Your "Captain" rank wont be around for long.
Bansh.
_________________
|
Captain_Savage
Cadet
Joined: September 30, 2003
Posts: 144
| Posted: 2005-03-26 11:14
hey there, Banshee.
i never said anything about "a missile dread/cuiser/destroyer." you applied that to the context yourself. i said, "misiles en mass." as in multiple missile ships engaging a single K'luth ship, will kill it. you took me out of context and started blurting out how it's "theory." and that it's somehow better or preferable to engage a superior force without support at close range where their weapons (like those dang leech beams or whatever) have their full effect.
i was stating that as long as you stay outside of their weapons range, you can stike at them all you want with fighters and missiles without being in danger. as in another thread in this exact forum shows.
my argument was for combined arms and coordinated operation, rather than simply jumping to the enemy and engaging them in single combat on their own terms. which has raerly worked well in real life or games.
i know of the game mechanics. i've been playing off and on since this game was a free beta. that was how long ago? five years? time means nothing.
"if you find yourself in a fair fight, you didn't plan your operation properly."
take this as you will. but it has been proven fact, regardles of what is containd withing thousands of lines of data.
now lets get back to talking of this book.
[ This Message was edited by: Captain_Savage on 2005-03-26 11:15 ]
_________________
|
Russian Roulette with Muskets
Grand Admiral
Joined: September 04, 2002
Posts: 393
| Posted: 2005-03-26 11:53
Dont read that book.
Use common sense, safe 9 Bucks.
_________________
- In firepower we trust.
- I'm not buying this!
-we ran out of firepower.
|
Fattierob
Vice Admiral
Joined: April 25, 2003
Posts: 4059
| Posted: 2005-03-26 12:09
yeah.
I should play more MV. show you guys what *tactics* is 
_________________
|
Feralwulf
Grand Admiral
Joined: January 24, 2004
Posts: 1729
From: sitting somewhere drinking beer
| Posted: 2005-03-26 12:38
Wait!........ let me get this straight.
You want to take a fleet of Missile crusiers (with ITs and not flux I assume) against ONE Kluth dread?
1) where are you gonna find just ONE Kluth anything?
2) IF you found just ONE How you gonna fire Missiles at it when it blinks in and out of sight?
3) what do you plan to do when it jumps you?
Once he gets within 220 gu and in disruptor range, and your ITs are just flying around in circles that Dreads going to have a field day with you. and Then your gonna get jumped by a few claws, a couple more dreads, and most likely a Piercer to boot.
HA! For that matter if I saw 4 or 5 Missile Crusiers (and knew they weren't fluxing) I'd jump dead center of em in my EAD.
I've read SunTzu. His tactics would and DO apply here in DS. They infact are used here all the time, whether we realize it or not.
When your playing DS.
Know your ship.
Know its strengths.
Know it's weaknesses.
Know those strengths and weaknesses of your enemies Ship.
No offense Captain Savage but, you should go out and test each ship and each weapon. Find what damage it does, and at what max/min. ranges, and what the energy consumption/charge times are.
Do that and you'll understand why ICC missile ships(alone) won't do against Kluth..........or UGTO for that matter.
_________________
 rnrn
Don't mess with old dudes...age and treachery will always overcome youth and skill!
|
Enterprise
Chief Marshal
Raven Warriors
Joined: May 19, 2002
Posts: 2576
From: Hawthorne, Nevada
| Posted: 2005-03-26 12:40
Holy flame war batman!
Back to the book.
It should be known, that the best things learned are the ones that are taught the hard way.
Example:
[UGTO Noob]Can you land on planets?
[UGTO Vet With a Wicked Side]Sure can.
[UGTO Noob]Okay.
* SERVER: UGTO Noob has been destroyed by Earth!
* SERVER: UGTO Noob has been destroyed by Luna!
* SERVER: UGTO Noob has been destroyed by Uranus!
[UGTO Noob]Hey no you can't!
[UGTO Vet With a Wicked Side]*snicker*.
----------
One of many examples. You learn to avoid planets. Very good example
But, tactics are a different sort. These absolutely cannot be learned from a book, although the general idea can be. The best way to learn to play any game is a great things called Trial & Error. Learning your enemys ships by FLYING them, never hurts.
Learn enemy tactics, learn ways to counter them etc. etc. The best way is hands on. And it takes a while. Even better...is learning the components and modifications of most ships. Scary eh?
Although the book presents many different ways which are valid unfortunately they cannot be applied to a game simply because its a game.
Why? In a game people are much less predicatble, and much more cunning because games allow more diversity than in the time the book was written.
However, I have one philosophy that stands true in every game.
Quote:
|
-The only real loss in a battle, or a war, is giving up. The battle is only done when one side loses the will to go on.
|
|
-Ent
[ This Message was edited by: Enterprise [-GTN-] on 2005-03-26 12:40 ]
_________________
|
Feralwulf
Grand Admiral
Joined: January 24, 2004
Posts: 1729
From: sitting somewhere drinking beer
| Posted: 2005-03-26 14:18
Quote:
|
On 2005-03-26 12:40, Enterprise [-GTN-] wrote:
Holy flame war batman!
|
|
Hey! I'm not flaming
_________________
rnrn
Don't mess with old dudes...age and treachery will always overcome youth and skill!
|
Captain_Savage
Cadet
Joined: September 30, 2003
Posts: 144
| Posted: 2005-03-26 14:49
nor am i.
what is is with people and misunderstanding me?
okay, first off, warfare has not changed in all of history, only the weapons and equipment used, and the dimentions it's fought in. the points it teaches are just as valid today as they were a thousand years ago. this is a game, and it's a game simulating war, even if it wasn't it's still a competetive activity.
aparently there's some misconception about the exact numbers. wether this is on account of my not giving proper explination, or of other's mindset, i don't know, nor does it matter. let's just give a hypotherticalscenario. sound good? okay.
you have a fleet of ICC ships consisting of;
2-3 missile destroyers(or maybe even cruisers, or a mix of the two, let's say two destroyers and one cruiser) armed with IT missiles, Psi missiles, and pulse beams.
2 suppy ships(the larger ones)
1 carrier cruiser(optional) a dreadnought would be too conspicuous.
2-4 ships of the line(i.e. cruisers, heavy or assault, doesn't matter which, although destroyers might work fine.) for the sake of argument, let's say two heavy cruisers loaded with Psi cannons, AM Torps, pulse beams, reactor 1500s, and one destroyer of similar armmament. as in three ships.
1 sensor frigate outfitted with four ECCMs, pulse beams, and two reactors.
1 Interdictor Cruiser armed with CL500s, and AM torps.
3 bomber destroyers with MiRVs.
okay, we have our fleet, so let's just asume that they know what they're doing, and are coordinating with one another. i know that people don't do this in the game, this is hypothetical, as in if they did. and lets also assume they are moving to repel a force of K'luth moving into their space.
let's just say, the fleet consists of four dreadnoughts two cruisers, two transports, one supply ship, and one destroyer. they have just capped a planet, althoguh it hasn't got a shipyard, thankfully. although it does have an interdictor base.
what does this ICC fleet do? do they jump in as close as they can and start zooming amongst the enemy, firing as fast as they can? some do, as in the ships of the line, the sensor frigate, and the interdictor. the rest of the fleet jumps in abot 3000 gu away.
now, what they do next, is rather than engaging whatever ships they feel like, they all fire on one ship at a time. this is what i mean by concentrated fire. the interdictor stays far enough away to avoid direct combat, and the frigate would likewise stay clear of the heavy fighting, but the cruisers and destroyer would have piched a target, one of the dreadnoughts, and are now hammering it with all their might.
what are the other ships doing? they firing their missiles at the same target, and the carrier is sending it's fighters to the battle likewise. the two suppot ships, having two reloads each(the big ones) are resupplying the group, keeping them stocked with missiles. by this time the group has close to within range of their Psi missiles, and are now using those.
the first dreadnought goes down after sustaning a constant barrage of torpedoes and missiles. but in all of this the destroyer takes heavy damage is forced to withdraw along with one cruiser. by this time the K'luth have begun engaging the missile ships and the carrier, because they're not stupid. however, in all the fighting they didn't notice the battle was drifitng away from their planet. which the three bomber destroyers exploit to the fullest. they had jumped in a good ways off on the other side of the planet, and have now begun their cloud bombing, using the MiRVs.
the goal here isn't to reclaim the planet, but rather to destroy as much of it as possible. after exausting their entire loads, and succesfully destroying the inderdictor base, and a few of the surrounding structures, they begin flying around the planet. the k'luth natually break off to protect their prize, but they're hounded but the remaining ICC ships. although the carrier is now dead, along with the two destroyers, two ships that jumped out previousley are now repaired and have returned. the k'luth ships are badly damaged, although the ICC ships are more so.
before the K'luth can engage the bombers, they jump out, and shortly aftarewards, the three ships of the line follow suit.
the invadors have successfully deflected an attack, although their planet is now badly damaged, and they had lost one of the three the Depots. on the planet.
nothing is heard from the ICC ships after that, the K'luth ships continue their campaign, and move to capture the next planet in the system.
as the arrive at the planet, the ICC bombers show up back at the first. in full force, this time accompanied by the frigate and one of the supply ships. they bombe the planet relentlessly untill the K'luth arrive. having destroyed the new interdictor base the ICC ships immediately E-jump out. again, nothing is heard from the ICC for several minutes. by this time, more K'luth ships have arrived, along with a station. however, the ICC have brought in a Jump Cruiser.
this continues, the K'luth attack a planet, the ICC attacks one of their assets, the K'luth retaliate, and the ICC runs. the K'luth succeed in captuing the system, but they are constantly harrassed by the ICC fleet.
i mean, after all, you don't get points for protecting planets, nor do you aquire them from being victorious in battle. you get it from hurting the enemy.
"i have done far worse than kill you, i have hurt you, and i shall continue hurting you..."-Kahn(as in the wrath of)
no doubt about it, the ICC are almost always outnumbered, and to make matters worse, we're always scattered about. if we worked together, and, for just one day at least, use geurilla warfare tactics against the other factions, we could see some seriously good fights, and have great fun.
i say this as someone who studies military history, and i can tell you that these tactics work, regardless of application.
the only reason why tactics don't wok in the game is because nobody makes it work.
[ This Message was edited by: Captain_Savage on 2005-03-26 14:50 ]
_________________
|
Grimith
Grand Admiral
Templar Knights
Joined: August 09, 2003
Posts: 836
From: Your local future farm.
| Posted: 2005-03-26 14:51
On one note, it isn't a requisite to go out and by The Art of War. Many sites offer the entire book to read on the internet, with links to specific quotes for deeper analysis. I read the entire book out loud from one of those sites. Very creepy for me.
Anyway, Sun Tzu's words, while applicable, can not be fully relied upon. Helmut von Moltke, for instance, holds great truth in his words; a plan will surely change and react to the situation of that first contact. If the plan remains static and -doesn't- change... then you have a problem. Furthermore, keep in mind that Sun Tzu can't be entirely converted into DarkSpace terms. Many of us do not play on the scales of generals. There's seldom enough people -on- one side to control in such a fashion. Many of the ships you would imagine seeing in a war exist only in the shadows, to be imagined by the players. The storyline of DarkSpace merely focuses on the -key- people... in this case, the players (although some do not seem so key... I shant name names ).
Nonetheless, The Art of War is a good read. Helps to distract you on a boring night, although what you may learn in its text are things most of you already know to an extent.
_________________
|
|
English
Deutsch
Nederlands
)
