Tactical brilliance...

Recommended Videos

SckizoBoy

Ineptly Chaotic
Legacy
Jan 6, 2011
8,681
200
68
A Hermit's Cave
After reading a plethora of responses on my WWII leaders thread, I got wondering...

Question: which battle, in your opinion, displayed true tactical brilliance?

Just the one condition: don't mention the Battle of Cannae, 'cos we all know Hannibal was the grand-daddy of tactics.

Good evening... for now.
 

tunderball

New member
Jul 10, 2010
219
0
0
Another obvious one but Alexander the Great at the battle of Gaugamela has to be up there. Since were not allowed Hannibal I'm going to go with Scipio Africanus who defeated him decisively at the battle of Zama.

Edit: actually there can only be one true example of battlefield genius; Admiral Ackbar at the battle of Endor :D
 

KBKarma

New member
May 14, 2008
189
0
0
Mandatory [http://1d4chan.org/wiki/Creed].

Personally, I'm a fan of Themistocles. Through deception, he got the huge Persian navy to go into the Straits of Salamis, where they'd get in their own way, making them easy pickings. He also came up with an interpretation of a Delphic prediction that ended up working out for the best, which took serious brains.

I'm also partial to Rommel, though I've not studied any of his battles; I just like the guy himself.
 

Kryzantine

New member
Feb 18, 2010
827
0
0
I'm partial to the drainage of Babylon by Cyrus the Great as a great tactic - if it was true, of course.

But my vote goes to Philip the II of France, who managed to take an impenetrable fortress by having a soldier crawl up its toilet chute. That is something the enemy must not be expecting.
 

Chappy

New member
May 17, 2010
305
0
0
Battle of Red Cliff, Huang Gai's fire ship surrender ruse pretty much won them the battle.
 

Nerdstar

New member
Apr 29, 2011
316
0
0
personally in honer of the past 4th of July I'm going to say the battle of bunker hill While the result was a victory for the British, they suffered heavy losses: over 800 wounded and 226 killed, including a notably large number of officers. The battle is seen as an example of a Pyrrhic victory. Meanwhile, colonial forces were able to retreat and regroup in good order having suffered few casualties. Furthermore, the battle demonstrated that relatively inexperienced colonial forces were willing and able to stand up to regular army troops in a pitched battle.


 

TNightmare

New member
Mar 2, 2011
36
0
0
I'm gonna go with Saladin's Battle of Hattin. Leading an army into the desert and cutting off every water supply they have, and later on burning the grass to create smoke to make your enemy even thirstier (while fighting in a desert ofcourse) proves Saladin was a very capable tactician.
I know everything beforehand was a basic Flavian strategy, but knowing what to do and executing it and annihilating the entire Crusader army with minor losses to your own troops are two different things in my opinion.
 

Redlin5_v1legacy

Better Red than Dead
Aug 5, 2009
48,836
0
0
Do naval tactics count? Cause Nelson kicked ass. Trafalgar FTW!

In terms of ground warfare, I admire Rommel's abilities but realize his weakness was in logistical support. Montgomery was very flexible and despite not being given credit for it, he was responsible for taking German armor away from the American breakthrough at Normandy.

Genghis Khan was a military genius too...
 

R MAN 77

New member
Mar 26, 2011
36
0
0
Ceasar at that one place where he beat Pompy

Or Points for whomever gets this reference the British at the abttle at Talavera during the peninnsular war
 

SckizoBoy

Ineptly Chaotic
Legacy
Jan 6, 2011
8,681
200
68
A Hermit's Cave
tunderball said:
Another obvious one but Alexander the Great at the battle of Gaugamela has to be up there. Since were not allowed Hannibal I'm going to go with Scipio Africanus who defeated him decisively at the battle of Zama.
I found Zama to be disappointingly... mundane, and I was thinking of including Gaugamela in my 'condition' since it showed the importance of flank cooperation and timing.

Redlin5 said:
Do naval tactics count? Cause Nelson kicked ass. Trafalgar FTW!
True as that may be, check out Adam Duncan at the Battle of Camperduin, which was about ten years earlier and the same tactics.

R MAN 77 said:
Ceasar at that one place where he beat Pompy

Or Points for whomever gets this reference the British at the abttle at Talavera during the peninnsular war
Pharsalus... though that was less a tactical masterstroke and just intuitive deduction of troop quality and cavalry advantage (plus fighting at the river bank was clever too). *meh* Fair enough...

And say what you will about Wellington, I love the Battle of Salamanca most... largely because at the time, neither commander wished to fight. THAT, was tactical opportunism at its finest!

I'ma gonna go for: the Duke of Marlborough, John Churchill at Ramilies (even though I acknowledge he's not the best tactician that lived). When you can fool your enemy into thinking your armies still sitting on a hill, when they've in fact shifted three miles to the left and and are currently kicking your arse over there, you've got to be doing something right.

Honourable mention: Napoleon at Austerlitz...
 

ChupathingyX

New member
Jun 8, 2010
3,716
0
0
Chappy said:
Battle of Red Cliff, Huang Gai's fire ship surrender ruse pretty much won them the battle.
Dammit, I really wasn't expecting to be ninja'd on that one.
 

dyre

New member
Mar 30, 2011
2,178
0
0
Battle of Tsushima (Russo-Japanese war) was pretty cool

Trafalgar and the Nile were pretty sexy too

ChupathingyX said:
Chappy said:
Battle of Red Cliff, Huang Gai's fire ship surrender ruse pretty much won them the battle.
Dammit, I really wasn't expecting to be ninja'd on that one.
As awesome as that was, was it really tactics? It seemed more like weather-reading skills, mostly >_>

I guess that could be called strategy
 

Shadow Druid

New member
Mar 18, 2011
35
0
0
Battle of Bannockburn, 1314

A starved, outnumber and ill-equipped Scottish army managed to defeat a larger well-equipped English force.
Tactically: because the are where the Scottish the English heavy cavalry got bogged down and were easy for the Scottish archers to pick off, the cover at Bannockburn also allowed the Scottish troops to get close to the English with miniamal casualties from the English Longbowmen.

So not to be bias

Battle of Agincourt, 1415

English beat the Frech even though they were outnumbered 6 - 1, in no small part to Henry V using the Longbow to full advantage.
 
Mar 30, 2010
3,785
0
0
Question: which battle, in your opinion, displayed true tactical brilliance?
I'm gonna sound like a total douche (more than usual) by saying this, but if there had been a true display of tactical genius there wouldn't have been a battle.

[sub]Sorry...[/sub]
 

Rabish Bini

New member
Jun 11, 2011
489
0
0
Grouchy Imp said:
Question: which battle, in your opinion, displayed true tactical brilliance?
I'm gonna sound like a total douche (more than usual) by saying this, but if there had been a true display of tactical genius there wouldn't have been a battle.

[sub]Sorry...[/sub]
So tactical brilliance can't occur in the middle of a battle then?
 

SckizoBoy

Ineptly Chaotic
Legacy
Jan 6, 2011
8,681
200
68
A Hermit's Cave
Grouchy Imp said:
Question: which battle, in your opinion, displayed true tactical brilliance?
I'm gonna sound like a total douche (more than usual) by saying this, but if there had been a true display of tactical genius there wouldn't have been a battle.

[sub]Sorry...[/sub]
I will attempt to out-douche you and say that being able to win without fighting a battle is more strategic brilliance than tactical.

Tactical, by definition, is maneuvers performed as a result of contact with the enemy. Deciding where and when to engage is strategy (or rather, operations in modern doctrine) (as opposed to the how in tactics).

[sub][sub][sub]So nurr... =P[/sub][/sub][/sub]
 

Hero in a half shell

It's not easy being green
Dec 30, 2009
4,286
0
0
The German Blitzkrieg of France was conceptual genius. (codenamed Operation Sichelschnitt)

France knew Germany were going to attack them, so they created a massive fortified line from the South coast to some impassible mountains, to stop the Germans being able to attack from there. Above the impassable mountains were Belgium, Luxemburg and Holland, so the French kept a large force pointed in that direction, if Germany came that way they would have to invade those countries, get all their supplies and munitions through them, and France would have time to form a defencive line.

Germanys generals knew exactly what the French were doing, so they built up forces beside Belgium, and invaded them, as a distraction but at the same time had a large motorised force gunning it through the impassable mountains:- a manoevre thought impossible. They appeared behind enemy lines, and stormed through the countryside, getting about halfway to Paris before word got to the French generals that they were under attack.

It caught everyone by surprise, and cemented the idea of the previously formidable French army as being surrender monkeys, for over half a century and beyond.