@@clamlover599Yes. Shooting battlefield medics is a warcrime no matter what they’re doing unless they start firing back. Though the first one is only a war crime because the video depicted them as medics.
@@kv4648not really, most fps games dont encourage you to do any of these lmao, the fact that quick scoping is a thing proves other wise. Games like arma or foxhole might though
@@NeostormXLMAX Only applied for the (almost) realistic military simulation, most fast-pace FPS couldn't use these tactics while middle-pace one could use some.
A creeping barrage: the French determined that the best way to use them required that your soldiers actually be eating friendly fire the whole time. The manuals of the time pretty much said "If you're doing it properly, 10% of your forces in the assault will be casualty due to artillery fire."
The sheer quantity of people in WW1 that died to their own artillery is insane! Not even creeping barrage but all artillery. There was no way to communicate with advanced troops during an assault, apart from sending a runner (who'd often die on the journey). It was so common for troops to capture a trench just for their own artillery to hit them because they didnt expect them to actually be successful. WW1 was hell man
Russians did it better - when attacking with infrantry one creeping barrage was set in front of allied units, and one behinds them. That solved the problem of retreat and not enough entusiastic assaults. Could be combined into multilayer sandwich - aka. second echelon, third echelon, etc, when many waves of units atacked one after another with barrages between them.
You forgot “kiting,” where you orbit around the mythical beast while attacking at range, causing the AI to never get close enough to trigger counterattacks.
Yes, you are so right! Too many channels try too hard and just waste our time with pointless edits and low effort content. I'm glad to see a comment from a like-minded person.
@@Cracked_Kid go to eleven labs and try the LIAM voice. maybe you will change your mind. but it does not matter, the content he makes is top notch. Love these videos.
Very few of these are strategies. Most of the events described would be regarded as being at the tactical end of military planning. Strategy is a general plan designed around overall ends and how to achieve them. For instance skirmish raids, foxholes and trench warfare generally fall at the tactical and operational levels yet strategically they would comprise attritional warfare to the end of outlasting an enemy. Similarly blitzkrieg would comprise of an annihlatory strategy intended to cause massive damage without many friendly casualties. In essence making the war quick and decide to impose surrender terms
@@Gimmegames4free6942 Essentially yes. Military historians such as Hew Strachan have detailed the increasing hollowness of the term within discouse and there has always been some ambiguity over what constitutes the strategic level as opposed to operational and tactical yet it's broadly agreed in academic and military circles strategy is an overall plan, not how a battle is meant to be fought or organised.
Blitzkrieg was just an initial and sensational media name for maneuver warfare, which had already conceptually existed long before WW 2, and had been implemented with foot infantry and mounted cavalry for ages. But the Allies hadn't really come to terms with the full implications of motorized and mechanized transportation in war, doctrinally. Germany, squeezed into a corner by the strictures of the Versailles Treaty, had every incentive to throw all kinds of spaghetti at the wall to find ways around its restrictions (and in the last few inter-war years, they gave up any pretense of adhering to the terms of the treaty). The Allies struggled with coming to terms that Germany could execute merely mundane maneuver warfare so much faster, when they themselves had not bothered to figure out how to. There's nothing fundamentally special or unique about blitzkrieg that magically differentiates it from any other form of maneuver warfare, other than evolutionary improvements like increased mobility due to integrating motorized transportation and radio communications. It wasn't necessarily annihilatory, didn't cause more massive damage, or reduce casualties any more so than any other form of rapid concentration and application of force. These were all concepts that had been known, developed, and evolved from the Classical era through the Imperial age. Napoleon used the same concepts in his wars and battles. You could argue that Genghis Khan achieved similarly rapid and devastating effects with his own "blitzkriegs" across Asia, 700 years earlier. He maneuvered around enemy armies, flanked fortified cities and defensive lines, and created operational dilemmas that compromised his opponents, cut off opposing armies' supply lines, causing them to cede territory or surrender, sometimes without having to significantly confront them in battle at all. And it's not just these two examples. Every era of military history has had its examples of good or even brilliant leaders who understood strategy, maneuver or otherwise. But yes, this video covers only low level tactics in isolation. Child Protective Services called, and would like to have a word about the abuse of the word "strategy".
0:08 This shows the sniper committing a war crime, as he is shooting unarmed enemy medics. *edit, before you guys keep commenting that “wars always have war crimes” I get it, I was just pointing out a small detail, these stick men are fighting a fictional war
There is no mention of non combatants getting shot. Just other enemy units. It is most likley the wounded soldiers squad mates that will try to save him. They are legit targets. To furter the topic, most soldiers are tought to wound, not to kill. As it take more effort to take care of a wounded soldier, then a dead one.
@@LordGeneralOHara It isn't a war crime to participate in a war. It is considered a war crime to intentionally fire at army medics and chefs because they are not considered to be actively participating in warfare (Essentially making them civilians), it is considered a war crime to shoot to kill/injure medics and chefs unless they are also participating in warfare (They CAN and are trained to fight, it is not their main job, that job belongs to infantry). Hope this helps.
The vast majority of the time it’s the normal soldiers retrieving the wounded, and carrying them out of the line of fire to the medics. So, sniping these soldiers while they are retrieving wounded isn’t a war crime because they’re combatants regardless of what they’re doing at that particular moment. Is horrible, but that’s war in a nut shell. War isn’t pleasant in any way.
@@LordGeneralOHara No it's not. Shooting combatants in general is not a war crime, unless they're being shot expanding projectiles (hollow points and soft points) because they cause "unnecessary injuries" that are more difficult to treat than standard full metal jacket, and AP ammo. It doesn't really make a lot of sense because artillery, mortars, tank shells, rockets, missiles, etc. also cause difficult-to-treat wounds, but it's not a war crime to use them against unprotected infantry. Intentionally harming noncombatants is absolutely a war crime though. If you want to know what exactly is, or isn't a war crime you should actually read the Geneva and Hague Conventions.
Games like total war and crusader kings naturally lend themselves to learning the concept of Defense in Depth as you inevitably overextend yourself, and end up saddled with more then you can manage to hold all at once. Mount and Blade 2 and the flaw of a charismatic charmer is that everyone votes to give you every city, keep and stronghold if you provide so much as tangential aid in it’s capture. It’s why I have no choice but to start my own independent claim rather then back anyone else, as the AI refuse to spread out who owns shit. :’)
I realised I often instinctively use Oblique Order in PvP games, skirting off to the side to try and break in behind the enemy team while their attention is focused on the larger concentration of my team pushing one location
funnily enough you dont even need large scale pvp games, rust with a 4 man vs 4 man you get naturally ocurring cover fire, in league you get feigned retreats into a defense in depth counter attack, etc
Who needs stretched amount of details when you can watch something like this, simple yet understandable, no useless intros, no redundant info, no annoying sound effects, etc
Can we all take a moment to appreciate the left visual for salvo. Just look at the water depression from the pressure wave of all of those main guns firing. It's absolutely wild to see how much the water around the ship is depressed from the pressure wave.
3:10 the Inverted Wedge was famously used by Hannibal at the battle of Cannae in the year 216 BC. Defeating a Roman army of 80,000 men, killing and/or capturing over 50,000
peace is a good thing that should always be protected and pursued, but conflict is the natural state of the world and it is impossible to prevent it from ever becoming violent
Worth mentioning that defeat in detail was mostly used by Napoleon and if i remeber the contravallation method with the added circumvallation was used by Caesar in a siege(i think it was Alesia during the gallic wars)
You forgot Shock & Awe, where you throw half of your country's military budget at something and hope it runs away without you having to actually do anything
I love the video coz' no intro, short video, simple explanation, no shouting, simple graphics, educational and not boring. Everything about this channel is just perfect. The straightforward approach and focus on delivering clear, concise information without unnecessary frills make it incredibly effective and enjoyable. Can’t complain one bit at all!
Pretty good but you left out a few key details/bits of reasoning. Suppressive fire is the best example: If I didn’t already know what SF was, I’d have a harder time understanding Bounding Overwatch. For anyone that doesn’t know, suppressive fire is basically spraying bullets at a hiding enemy so they can’t poke their head out and shoot back. It also as the psychological effect of making them nervous and wearing them down.
I can say as an ex army tanker, we didn't transition to a rolling forward offense from a hull/turret down defensive position. We backed up and rolled laterally behind cover to a move advantageous opening. Calls into question the rest of the video.
I learned a lot of things in only 8 mins, the way of your explanation of tactics is just fabulous I focus a lot and enjoy every second of your videos dude.
Worth mentioning that "swarming" is almost always more complicated than it appears at first. To use the USSR "human waves" example, that had more to do with a large number of sudden promotions and incomplete training of NCOs and COs. As a result, communication was often very incomplete and large numbers of troops were committed unprepared. Sieges weren't just throw ladders everywhere you can. It takes a lot longer to setup a ladder than to knock it down. This was generally done only after the defenders were sufficiently starved and combat ineffective, or in combination with diversions. Even stupid officers/nobles are expected to _pretend_ they're thinking. When the enemy can't see what their plan is (either because it was so cleverly concealed or because it fell apart so badly internally), they often presume there was no plan and that's how it goes down in history.
My man really has emotions with the Soviet Union. Here is the US version by your words. [AI generated paraphrasing your word] - LMAO -Half of it was true and half of it was personal feelings same as yours. --------------------------------------------------- Worth mentioning that "Air interdiction" is almost always more complicated than it appears at first. To use the US "Hiroshima" example. that had more to do with finding a largely dense civilian population preferably cities. That have large civilian population and than drop nuclear bombs to eliminate them. The main purpose of this warfare is to eliminate civilian and has only been used by 1 country which is the US in the past 100 years. Countries that often use this tactic often have stupid officers/nobles that are expected to pretend they're thinking. This will eventually lead to them fell apart so badly internally, they often presume there was no plan and that's how it goes down in history.
@@creator-ss7ks The soviets used human wave tactics but not in the way most people believe There are three principle ways that human waves were utilized during the war. In the very early months, the fight was exceptionally desperate and the Red Army often found themselves with no alternative, as they lacked heavy support, and in some cases even enough rifles. Massed charges happened, and there are even accounts of Soviet soldiers charging with their arms linked in solidarity (or to ensure no one chickens out if you are cynical) as they lacked rifles. Wasting trained soldiers on this makes little long term sense though, and it wasn't utilized in latter phases of the war. The second, and more common use at least through Stalingrad, were the citizen levies (Narodnoe Opolcheniye). There weren't soldiers, but civilians pressed into service and thrown against the Germans to buy time. Some were armed, some weren't. In some cases they were forced at gun point. Most members of the Opolcheniye had no training, and survival rates were low, to say the least. those that did you be absorbed into the Red Army eventually. To quote from an instance outside Leningrad: "Altogether over 135,000 Leningraders, factory workers as well as professors, had volunteered, or been forced to volunteer. They had no training, no medical assistance, no uniforms, no transport and no supply system. More than half lacked rifles, and yet they were still ordered into counter-attacks against panzer divisions. Most fled in terror of the tanks, against which they had no defence at all. This massive loss of life-perhaps some 70,000-was tragically futile, and it is far from certain that their sacrifice even delayed the Germans at all on the line of the River Luga."
@@abhinandkrishna3430You're misquoting the facts. The Luga defensive line was manned by two divisions, 1 brigade, 4000ish local war college students and three NO divisions organised from mobilised civilians, around 10 thousand men. The 160 thousand men NO divisions, partisan teams and artillery-machinegun defensive brigades were organised after the defense of Luga, when Leningrad was already cut off and blockaded. Soviet losses were at about 55 thousand, and while the defense was unsuccessful in the end, the Army Group North's advance was halted for more than a month which allowed for Soviet reorganization and regrouping.
You forgot one. It’s called the Fabian strategy. It was used by the Roman emperor Fabian who in the second Punic war avoided fighting Hannibal. The strategy is to basically not fight the main force and instead fight the weaker forces. The coalition used this tactic to devastating effects against napoleon. They avoided fighting him directly after they realized napoleon could only be in one place. That is how they managed to defeat napoleon. By not fighting him
Despite its title, the video doesnt really talk about strategy but tactics. Besides this though, Fabian is just the more official word for scorched earth, which he mentioned
@@phobics9498 sure it might be related to scorched earth tactics but it’s entirely different. Scorched earth tactics is just depriving enemies of vital resources while Fabian strategy is just avoid fighting the main force and go after the weaker forces
reminds me of some dnd 3.5 "take out the minions first" strategy you take out the weaker units first so they can't contribute to the fight then take on the "boss" for lack of a better term. in dnd its effective as it strongly alters the action economy, and in real warfare it reduces the number of enemy units in play against you assuming you can somewhat safely whittle down the weaker units and positions.
The term war-crime is ironic. In times of war, certain strategies are used to fight as effectively as possible with the least amount of casualties. Then there's _''no you can't do that, you shall find a less effective method which is legal''_
War crimes termin just make no sense, like it's table game, starting a war, crime on itself, and then it's glorified and make rules for that to keep it honorable, but it at baseline is absolutely not honorable thing
@@roninyoshida7743 Strategy is the general plan of how you want to achieve your goal. Tactics go into detail about the strategy. For example: you want to climb a mountain and your strategy is what side of the mountain you will climb. Your tactics are what you need to climb the mountain: gear, supplies and etc
@@person9735 What you've described as tactics is logistics. Your example would be better phrased as: "strategy" = I want to get on top of the mountain. "tactics" = I'll avoid the stream on the left, I'll walk through the middle until that rock, then swing around and climb the rest of the way on the right side
Reverse slope defense .fortifying the other side of a hill (while leaving some troops on the front to help break up the attack) Attackers can't see potential targets preliminary shelling would be a waste, Armour would expose its belly cresting a hill
In just 8 minutes, I learned a ton! Your way of explaining tactics is fantastic, and I find myself completely engaged and enjoying every second of your videos.
@@puropulkkinen1580 tribal army, basically when the adult men of a tribe would all go to a campaign, you know, just like in tribal warfare. Nation's army is basically regular conscription but culturally impactful on the nation.
@@jonyprepperisrael60 thanks for answering but i still dont think i get it :D you mean like how a society is shaped by conscription or something? i’d just call it a conscription based army but what do i know, thanks again for answering
@@puropulkkinen1580 in countries that have conscription, especially if its universal and for generations, then those people that served in the army would be influenced by their time there and so would their children who would also serve. best real world example is Israel, best fictional example is Cadia from 40K
Ive been in the defense field for about a decade, This is good as a refresher and was mostly accurate! Many of these maneuvers arent effective on their own and are much better when doubled up with another maneuver or another force. Just like in chess, it is more important to know WHEN to use a tactic.
That’s a pretty good video. But I don‘t think the term „war strategy“ does fit, bc this is about direct combat methods and as such it‘s more like the „tactical“ level instead of the strategic one
About Scorched Earth: It was used mostly by Nazi Germany in WW2, especially after Operation Citadel, when Red Army started offensive in Ukraine. And in 1941 by Soviets when they retreated
You forgot the Fabien strategy. It's when you withhold combat from the enemy while they are in your territory in hopes of decreasing moral and resources
@@markmonoton6224 The reason it worked so well is because since they were trapped inside a new territory, they needed to recruit civilians from the Roman empire to be in their army and the way they kept doing that is by winning them over by beating the Romans in battle and they couldn't do that if the Romans decided not to battle
@@Jimboboo8284 That "strategy" was a failure. For something to be called a strategy it needs to work at least sometimes. That period in 2nd Punic was a disaster for Rome.
Scorching Earth was also used by Russian Empire against Napoleon, which lead to Napoleon's defeat. Napoleon's strategy was actually getting supplies and logistics from locals as they advanced. Therefore, Scorching Earth lead to deficiency in Napoleon's army as they didn't make any supply chains when they advanced.
Blitzkrieg tactic sometimes also called as "tactical unit placement" and "placing the best unit at the right time" rushing a zone before the France defensive line arrived, and sending paratrooper into Soviet rural territory to secure all supply for another massacre. He also forgot to mention the "no mans land tactic" where a conquered territory are turned into a landmine zone or radioactive zone so that the opponent cannot use their own territory for a long time, usually used after retreating. "Indirect fire tactic" is artillery tactic to bombard a certain target without seeing it, for example bombarding enemy across a mountain. "Kamikaze tactic" is a suicidal tactic to eliminate greater target at all cost. "Scientific war tactic" is a inhumane war tactic that involve using hazardous substance, and bio-chemical weapon and test their impact in warfare turning a war into a giant human testing ground, Japanese use this tactic at Chinese civilian in ww2 with a promise to bring scientific breakthrough on medical world. also "kiting tactic".
Here's a video idea, cover every word that describes the form of a word, for example heterogram, palindrome, synonym, acronym, pseudonym..., polysyllable, misnomer, onomatopoeia, autological etc
This was one of the most satisfying videos I've watched in a long time. Title said it had cool information, and the whole video was actually that information. Incredible concept! Truly innovative, the world isn't ready for this kind of thing yet! All jokes aside, though, seriously cool video. Thank you for what you do
There are also other methods called Tactical Retreat, Perfidy (pretending to surrender, and then attacking the opponent), and Pacification (crushing an uprising)
the tactical retreat is a very useful option assuming its used before it becomes a route or forced retreat. a think a good description of it is releasing or retreating from a location or area before being attacked once you decide its not of tactical advantage, or to fallback to replenish resources and address injuries or wounded to try and counter a more attrition based attack.
Air assault is specifically the use of rotary wing aircraft in order to engage enemy forces or to seize and hold key terrain. It's quite similar to airborne assaults as they both are versions of verticle envelopment. Its mainly used to capture terrain thats inaccessible to friendly forces because of the enemy
1. Salvos are still used in modern combat. Artillery is useful employed in salvo - or even time-on-target which is essentially a double or triple salvo. Missiles such as used in naval combat can be intercepted by ships and aircraft, so a salvo helps present more simultaneous threats and overwhelm counter-measures. 2. Hull down is also achievable by creating or using a preexisting depression in the land. Hull down allows a tank or other turreted vehicle to only present *the turret* to the enemy - it does not only present the main gun. Hull down does not mandate that a vehicle stay stationary - this is only true for the use of very small depressions in the land. If situated on a reverse slope, the vehicle can simply reverse further down the slope until it is entirely concealed and then move about freely - this is called terrain masking, and is often used with hull-down so-called "pop up attacks" which is called jockeying (Tank takes up hull down position, tank engages enemy, tank reverses until it is concealed, tank moves left or right a considerable distance, tank repeats procedure - this stops the enemy from anticipating the tank's position and being ready for it) 3. Creeping barrages are less about protecting the advancing infantry and more about enabling an assault on a position. The barrage encourages enemy troops to seek shelter by first falling short of their position. Then the barrage moves onto the enemy position and suppresses the troops there while friendly forces advance. Finally the barrage moves over the enemy position and stops just behind it, cutting of any retreat/reinforcement, and allowing the now very close friendly troops to assault the position before the enemy troops can return to their defenses 4.Blitzkreig is an entire system of war - what is described here is a simple 'thrust' attack. The intent of blitzkrieg is not really to create ever changing frontlines, but rather to allow tanks and mechanized forces to utilize their mobility. By punching through a defensive line, the tanks and mechanized forces can then spread out and flank other enemy forces, thereby circumventing prepared defenses. 5. I don't even know where to start with this. A foxhole is just another name for a dug-out or shell-scrape. It's just a hole in the ground dug by infantry to provide cover. Trenches are just big foxholes. The Japanese used small 1 man foxholes (often known as spiderholes) simply because it provided a good way for singular suicide-charge soldiers to ambush enemy combatants. Panzer-turms, the embeded tank turrets, are not foxholes - they were just a last-ditch effort by Germany to use excess tank turrets and guns, without the means to produce hulls for them and make them into tanks. 6. A single envelopment doesn't need to use a 'decoy'. Many textbook envelopment battles had the primary force in position at the front. A single envelopment is simply a flank on one side - often by cavalry or tanks or similar. 7. A pincer movement is just a double envelopment. It's the same as above, just with another unit conducting a flank on the other side. 8. In an oblique order combat, the weak side doesn't delay the movement as a part of the tactic - it is simply the case that to imbalance the forces one side is usually weakened and as such they are usually unable to hold their ground. If the oblique forces outnumber their enemy, they can simply weight one side heavier than the other, and the 'weak' side may well hold it's ground, or even push through. 9. Again an inverted wedge doesn't necessitate the use of a weak center. It is in-essence the ideal application of a feigned retreat. The center forces withdraw allowing the wings to flank (a double envelopment in essence). 10. Bounding overwatch is slightly misleading in that the bounding team doesn't necessarily reach it's destination. Far more commonly they simply advance a short distance, often to the next terrain feature that can provide reasonable cover. 11. Skirmishing is not so much about being ahead of the main body of troops, nor is it about delaying movements. Skirmishing is about breaking up enemy formations. A cohesive block of men can easily fight another, but have far more difficulty engaging skirmishes who are spread out and take cover. Further, skirmishers have rifles which are accurate at range, while blocks of line-infantry have muskets which are inaccurate. The result is that skirmishers will gradually pick apart troops and eventually break formations unless the enemy commander takes an action. Skirmishers are all about forcing the opponent to play their hand, and throw troops at the problem, which may open up a weak spot or tie-up critical assets. 12. Air interdiction is simply tactical bombing. There is no such thing as strategic air interdiction, as it is all tactical. Bombing on a strategic level is, you guessed it, strategic bombing. 13. Shoot and scoot applies to every ranged weapon ever invented, not just artillery. 14. Centre peel is just bounding overwatch in reverse. There are other forms of peel beyond just center peel, and they are all used for movement and not just retreat. 15. Defence in depth very much does intend to stop an attck, and is not just an attempt to delay. Defence in depth is a specific method of employing defeat-in-detail. Troops hold their ground just long enough to inflinct casualties on the attacking enemy, and then fall back before the enemy can bring it's superior numbers and/or firepower to bear. 16. Scorched earth was also used by the Germans when they retreated. Your video is bad and you should feel bad
Most of these are tactics not strategies. Tactics are a means of advancing your position within a strategy，towards a goal. A strategy is a plan of action consistent with your goal and not inconsistent with your resources. In other words a strategy describes the set of available tactics and when and how to use them in a coordinated manner to best achieve your goal.
@@lun7881 not all medics are unarmed, and your implying that medics would be the ones to come out and help, normally in the army, when your friend goes down you go back and pick him up its not normally the medics job to do that
Watching these as a teenager, I often wondered at the thought of running my own value-driven channel like this one. After a long fascination with animation, I took up the challenge of finally building my own animated storytelling channel, and around 90h of strenuous work finally produced my first ever video just the other day. That's the impact of these masterpieces for me - they expand your horizons and make you seek value within your own self, so thank you for that! :)
The tactic is likely referring to drawing out combative soldiers, too. I immediately thought of the scene from Saving Private Ryan, where one soldier is shot by a sniper and calls out to his hidden comrades, desperate for help as he slowly bleeds out. The other soldiers are faced between leaving him alone to die, or risk losing their own lives to the sniper. Any of them-medic or not-could have stepped out into the open to drag the soldier to safety and try to stop his bleeding, and fell victim to the sniper. I think that medics were likely drawn in this example because they are the most responsible for helping injured soldiers, not necessarily because they are the primary target of the tactic.
You're not _supposed_ to. But it's war; you don't win wars by sparing people, and they can't punish every soldier all of the time perfectly. In fact, the international court justice usually doesn't even try, especially for western and western-backed nations
i'm actually using some of these within war-like games.. sniper trap, recon by fire.. also a reversed version, where i expose seemingly undefended units or where i let units at decoy positions be recognized.. then the barrage while attacking, oblique order or skirmishing.. to attack.. and center peel or even swarming-like counter-attacks to retreat, most likely to buy time for a blitzkrieg-like attack, in an attempt to recover strategic goals. Creating a more unbalanced field, usually creates new opportunities.. which is why i usually try to counter my opponents attempts for creating unbalances by having enough surveillance and espionage stuff running.
Fun fact, Defeat in Detail was one Napoleon Bonaparte's preferred strategies and its how he defeated 52,000 Piedmontese with only 37,000 Frenchmen. It's also a tactic Stonewall Jackson used during his Shenandoah Valley campaign to defeat 60,000 Union soldiers with only 17,000 Confederate ones.
0:00 Double tap 0:13 Spray and Pray 0:36 Head Glitch 1:07 Bomb Run 1:30 Rushdown 1:55 Camping 2:19 Wait is he here? 2:27 Flank 2:36 Double Flank 2:46 Stacking 2:58 Fall back, JK 3:10 Clamp them 3:19 Block line of sight 3:30 Cover our rush 3:49 Sneak Attack!!! 3:56 Annoying 4:09 midnight murder spree 4:36 Big group Attack 4:53 V shape attack 5:10 divide and conquer 5:28 drop a useful Bomb 5:54 Blokking 6:19 hole in wall 6:28 Air Flank 6:38 Tank support 6:51 don't peak the same angle twice 6:59 Cover the approach 7:09 Cover our exit 7:20 Stalling 7:39 Don't let them use s...
I can think of StarCraft games in which I've used every one of these. For the first scenario, Vulcan trap with Siege tanks is also fun. Protoss Carrier Swarm was so good. Defense in Detail, well that's what Micro is. Great video. New sub for sure.
Minor note, but in the inverted wedge the center is often where most of the best trained troops are placed as it is the most critical part of this formation. The center must be well disciplined and resilient to enemy assaults because if there is a breakthrough in the center of your line while performing this maneuver, the wings will be separated, and your army can be defeated in detail. That's why Hannibal was said to have put his most valued infantrymen at the center of his inverted wedge. The wings consisted of lighter armored troops who can move quickly and wide around an opponents position. While their role is important, the wings often have the mobility and space to fall back and regroup if necessary. If the center were to fall back and regroup, it would likely mean the formation would break down.
I honestly love this video because my D&D campaign is going to have a large war towards its end, and this honestly is really helping me make sure that it’ll be a realistic story
this the tactical (inmediate combat) level reccomend you to seek the operational (battlefield) and strategic (big scale) ways used to pursue warfare as well,this channel has a video on war strategies too
A couple notes: As many others have pointed out, most of these are not strategies but tactics Blitzkrieg was never anything official - it was the culmination of German doctrine over decades, compounding with the advent of mechanised warfare. Foxholes weren’t made to act as counters to Blitzkrieg, and had a wide range of applications, especially when artillery fire was expected but in-depth defences weren’t to be dug.
Blitzkrieg isn’t an actual war tactic. It was just a phrase coined by the media. What you’re actually talking about is called maneuver warfare, and it has existed since the collapse of the Polish Lithuanian Commonwealth, the Germans were just the first ones to integrate armor into it
I learned more about war in 10mins than from any military obsessed guy I ever met. Though I had a hard time understanding the Oblique Order and looked that up elsewhere. (I watched it mainly to gain some background knowledge for GMing. Which is how you also know how many of those guys I know.)
Now this will make the paintball game interesting
I play paintball with elite para's often. Realy different game with those guys.
*I love to use Scorched Earth tactics in Paintball*
@@refuze2quit603 flame throwers go wild
@@refuze2quit603 i love using air support tactics in paintball
The enemy team didn't expected to me and my friends under effect of drugs rushing with an tank battalion towards their lines
Thanks, this is the only tutorial that really worked!
My neighbour stood no chance!
😂
WHA- WHAT?
The fuc
Which technique did you used?
Which technique
Starting off with a war crime
Tbf you could use the tactic without hitting the medics by targeting the next troops that want to provide cover or suppression
fr?
@@clamlover599Yes. Shooting battlefield medics is a warcrime no matter what they’re doing unless they start firing back. Though the first one is only a war crime because the video depicted them as medics.
@@equinoxo8813 Medics are allowed to fire weapons if they are defending themselves or patients under their care.
@@SpamMouse Yes, but they lose their protected status when doing so. It's not a warcrime to shoot a medic who is firing weapons.
It's funny that a lot of these tactics are things I picked up from playing real time strategy games as a kid.
3:32 I used this tactic on door kickers 😂
I was part of a lot of these as part of massive FPS games. It's a lot more fun when you don't lose anything
i learnt most of these tactics studying history its suprising how much a bit of historical knowlage helps you in a RTS
@@kv4648not really, most fps games dont encourage you to do any of these lmao, the fact that quick scoping is a thing proves other wise.
Games like arma or foxhole might though
@@NeostormXLMAX Only applied for the (almost) realistic military simulation, most fast-pace FPS couldn't use these tactics while middle-pace one could use some.
A creeping barrage: the French determined that the best way to use them required that your soldiers actually be eating friendly fire the whole time. The manuals of the time pretty much said "If you're doing it properly, 10% of your forces in the assault will be casualty due to artillery fire."
merde...
The sheer quantity of people in WW1 that died to their own artillery is insane! Not even creeping barrage but all artillery. There was no way to communicate with advanced troops during an assault, apart from sending a runner (who'd often die on the journey). It was so common for troops to capture a trench just for their own artillery to hit them because they didnt expect them to actually be successful. WW1 was hell man
Sounds like a Joffre tactic.
Ouf, sacré bleu, c'est trés barbare.
Russians did it better - when attacking with infrantry one creeping barrage was set in front of allied units, and one behinds them. That solved the problem of retreat and not enough entusiastic assaults. Could be combined into multilayer sandwich - aka. second echelon, third echelon, etc, when many waves of units atacked one after another with barrages between them.
You forgot “kiting,” where you orbit around the mythical beast while attacking at range, causing the AI to never get close enough to trigger counterattacks.
Horse archers
Skirmishes/guerilla
He kinda covered it with the "shoot and scoot" one
@@BarbarisIII was going to guess tactical air interdiction
That's a combination of Shoot and Scoot with Defense in Depth
"To confuse your enemy, you have to confuse yourself first"
-Sun,Tzu The Art of War
"Stop posting shit using my name"
-Sun, Tzu The Art of War
Then this Video makes you unable to win by confusing the enemy
the war of art*
is this an actual quote or just another meme?
SUN TZU SAID THAT
Finally, I now understand the HOI4 doctrines
Or real time conflicts
Same
So refreshing to see a video without a pointless intro..
Yes, you are so right! Too many channels try too hard and just waste our time with pointless edits and low effort content. I'm glad to see a comment from a like-minded person.
This is ai
@@phone-ow9jr i dont think so
@@Cracked_Kid go to eleven labs and try the LIAM voice. maybe you will change your mind.
but it does not matter, the content he makes is top notch. Love these videos.
You also make same kind of video. All the best.
Very few of these are strategies. Most of the events described would be regarded as being at the tactical end of military planning. Strategy is a general plan designed around overall ends and how to achieve them. For instance skirmish raids, foxholes and trench warfare generally fall at the tactical and operational levels yet strategically they would comprise attritional warfare to the end of outlasting an enemy. Similarly blitzkrieg would comprise of an annihlatory strategy intended to cause massive damage without many friendly casualties. In essence making the war quick and decide to impose surrender terms
Iirc blitzkrieg isn't really a real strategy, it is just a term coined post war to what the germans did
I guess it's just layman term being conflated into one
@@Gimmegames4free6942 Essentially yes. Military historians such as Hew Strachan have detailed the increasing hollowness of the term within discouse and there has always been some ambiguity over what constitutes the strategic level as opposed to operational and tactical yet it's broadly agreed in academic and military circles strategy is an overall plan, not how a battle is meant to be fought or organised.
Blitzkrieg was just an initial and sensational media name for maneuver warfare, which had already conceptually existed long before WW 2, and had been implemented with foot infantry and mounted cavalry for ages. But the Allies hadn't really come to terms with the full implications of motorized and mechanized transportation in war, doctrinally. Germany, squeezed into a corner by the strictures of the Versailles Treaty, had every incentive to throw all kinds of spaghetti at the wall to find ways around its restrictions (and in the last few inter-war years, they gave up any pretense of adhering to the terms of the treaty). The Allies struggled with coming to terms that Germany could execute merely mundane maneuver warfare so much faster, when they themselves had not bothered to figure out how to.
There's nothing fundamentally special or unique about blitzkrieg that magically differentiates it from any other form of maneuver warfare, other than evolutionary improvements like increased mobility due to integrating motorized transportation and radio communications. It wasn't necessarily annihilatory, didn't cause more massive damage, or reduce casualties any more so than any other form of rapid concentration and application of force. These were all concepts that had been known, developed, and evolved from the Classical era through the Imperial age. Napoleon used the same concepts in his wars and battles. You could argue that Genghis Khan achieved similarly rapid and devastating effects with his own "blitzkriegs" across Asia, 700 years earlier. He maneuvered around enemy armies, flanked fortified cities and defensive lines, and created operational dilemmas that compromised his opponents, cut off opposing armies' supply lines, causing them to cede territory or surrender, sometimes without having to significantly confront them in battle at all. And it's not just these two examples. Every era of military history has had its examples of good or even brilliant leaders who understood strategy, maneuver or otherwise.
But yes, this video covers only low level tactics in isolation. Child Protective Services called, and would like to have a word about the abuse of the word "strategy".
Tactics is literally the bottom rung of strategy, literally being titled “Battlefield Strategy”.
0:08 This shows the sniper committing a war crime, as he is shooting unarmed enemy medics.
*edit, before you guys keep commenting that “wars always have war crimes” I get it, I was just pointing out a small detail, these stick men are fighting a fictional war
wait til you see snipers shooting civilian medics lol. "warcrime" if they see their enemy commit it
It's only a warcrime when the war is over
The Geneva convention? More like a suggestion!
This isn't as rare as we think, Vietnamese snipers did this quite often if I recall correctly
There is no mention of non combatants getting shot. Just other enemy units.
It is most likley the wounded soldiers squad mates that will try to save him. They are legit targets.
To furter the topic, most soldiers are tought to wound, not to kill. As it take more effort to take care of a wounded soldier, then a dead one.
I love how the first example shows a war crime (Intentionally firing at medics)
Isn't purposely wounding anyone for the sake for a war crime with war crimes a combo wombo?
@@LordGeneralOHara It isn't a war crime to participate in a war. It is considered a war crime to intentionally fire at army medics and chefs because they are not considered to be actively participating in warfare (Essentially making them civilians), it is considered a war crime to shoot to kill/injure medics and chefs unless they are also participating in warfare (They CAN and are trained to fight, it is not their main job, that job belongs to infantry). Hope this helps.
The vast majority of the time it’s the normal soldiers retrieving the wounded, and carrying them out of the line of fire to the medics. So, sniping these soldiers while they are retrieving wounded isn’t a war crime because they’re combatants regardless of what they’re doing at that particular moment. Is horrible, but that’s war in a nut shell. War isn’t pleasant in any way.
@@LordGeneralOHara No it's not. Shooting combatants in general is not a war crime, unless they're being shot expanding projectiles (hollow points and soft points) because they cause "unnecessary injuries" that are more difficult to treat than standard full metal jacket, and AP ammo. It doesn't really make a lot of sense because artillery, mortars, tank shells, rockets, missiles, etc. also cause difficult-to-treat wounds, but it's not a war crime to use them against unprotected infantry. Intentionally harming noncombatants is absolutely a war crime though. If you want to know what exactly is, or isn't a war crime you should actually read the Geneva and Hague Conventions.
@@LordGeneralOHara INDIA SUPER CLEAN
so many clones have popped up but this channel consistently outdoes them all
100%
Jesus, so many clones
Hes the original
@@EricTS23 Tho he makes videos about Christianity mainly
@@EricTS23 he has his topic and sticks with it
2:19 I actually use this in large scale shooter games, didn't realise it was a tactic that was used in actual warfare
Games like total war and crusader kings naturally lend themselves to learning the concept of Defense in Depth as you inevitably overextend yourself, and end up saddled with more then you can manage to hold all at once.
Mount and Blade 2 and the flaw of a charismatic charmer is that everyone votes to give you every city, keep and stronghold if you provide so much as tangential aid in it’s capture.
It’s why I have no choice but to start my own independent claim rather then back anyone else, as the AI refuse to spread out who owns shit. :’)
I realised I often instinctively use Oblique Order in PvP games, skirting off to the side to try and break in behind the enemy team while their attention is focused on the larger concentration of my team pushing one location
Circling around the front than going straight through does seem easier@@MasonMcLeodFilms
funnily enough you dont even need large scale pvp games, rust with a 4 man vs 4 man you get naturally ocurring cover fire, in league you get feigned retreats into a defense in depth counter attack, etc
I now am experienced with war
I now am experienced with war
I now am experienced with war
I now am experienced with war
I now am experienced with war
I now am experienced with war
Who needs stretched amount of details when you can watch something like this, simple yet understandable, no useless intros, no redundant info, no annoying sound effects, etc
Can we all take a moment to appreciate the left visual for salvo. Just look at the water depression from the pressure wave of all of those main guns firing. It's absolutely wild to see how much the water around the ship is depressed from the pressure wave.
4:20 "they take them out as quietly as possible" Shows granade
They usually take the sentry out with melee weapons like spades or knives, but yeah if the sentry aren’t sleepy then a grenade is the only way.
3:10 the Inverted Wedge was famously used by Hannibal at the battle of Cannae in the year 216 BC. Defeating a Roman army of 80,000 men, killing and/or capturing over 50,000
Came here for this comment. That victory was like winning a chess game with only pawns.
I love this im gonna use these war strategy tactics in video games now
Get shadow empire
Blitzkrieg
" an ad of foodpanda immediately jumps on my screen "
Fellow filipino, hey there
Same
@@cherriemaesicad8830 foodpanda tapos nakain aa gutom na ako eh
I think everybody got a ad at the Blitzkreig part
Ways to win a war: 30
Ways to reach world peace: apparently 0
bro shut your corny ass up LMAO
As long as there are men there will be war
cringy
It's a Prisoner's Dilemma.
No one can have peace if there's at least 1 participant who wants war.
peace is a good thing that should always be protected and pursued, but conflict is the natural state of the world and it is impossible to prevent it from ever becoming violent
@3:30 "I'm up, he sees me, i'm down"
Caesar liked this video
Ave, true to caesar
Too bad they didn't show his double circumvallation.
@@Ethan11892 We won't go quietly. The legion can count on that.
@@Unknown-jt1jo The battle of Alesia really fascinated me, Caesar is a mad genius undoubtedly.
@@Zestiniaa you really have no idea about history... caesar's greatest battle was hoover dam. read a book damn it.
No bs intro, no shouting, no bs background music. Instant suscribe
Worth mentioning that defeat in detail was mostly used by Napoleon and if i remeber the contravallation method with the added circumvallation was used by Caesar in a siege(i think it was Alesia during the gallic wars)
You forgot Shock & Awe, where you throw half of your country's military budget at something and hope it runs away without you having to actually do anything
That was in part 1
I love the video coz' no intro, short video, simple explanation, no shouting, simple graphics, educational and not boring. Everything about this channel is just perfect. The straightforward approach and focus on delivering clear, concise information without unnecessary frills make it incredibly effective and enjoyable. Can’t complain one bit at all!
Pretty good but you left out a few key details/bits of reasoning. Suppressive fire is the best example: If I didn’t already know what SF was, I’d have a harder time understanding Bounding Overwatch.
For anyone that doesn’t know, suppressive fire is basically spraying bullets at a hiding enemy so they can’t poke their head out and shoot back. It also as the psychological effect of making them nervous and wearing them down.
I can say as an ex army tanker, we didn't transition to a rolling forward offense from a hull/turret down defensive position.
We backed up and rolled laterally behind cover to a move advantageous opening. Calls into question the rest of the video.
Scorched earth was also used famously during napoleon's fall since it was a major factor in why he lost.
Russia be spamming this strategy
0:12 war crimes simulator
Surprisengly, many militias don't do it
Can't be held for war crimes if you haven't signed the geneva convet
@@jeegupopli1871 fr? Did ir4k sign it?
Take notes, take notes people
This is the comment I was searching for
I am proud to say this, I was there when these were made, my older brother made some of these frames and made the icons
DAD WAKE UP, HE UPLOADED ABOUT WARRR
Thanks for the tutorial! I'll use this when I fail art school.
Did you fail it yet? We need TKD and a savior more than ever
@@Regimeducamp Cringe
@@ItsmeInternetStranger shalom
This is getting really unfunny
thanks this will be very useful on october 17 2025
Wait, what are you up to?
if this is true then i will be preprared
@@DoggerMapperww3 starts this day
this will be great
@@izi1902 Ooooh, that makes sense, since humanity will be extinct by 2027
I learned a lot of things in only 8 mins, the way of your explanation of tactics is just fabulous I focus a lot and enjoy every second of your videos dude.
Worth mentioning that "swarming" is almost always more complicated than it appears at first.
To use the USSR "human waves" example, that had more to do with a large number of sudden promotions and incomplete training of NCOs and COs. As a result, communication was often very incomplete and large numbers of troops were committed unprepared.
Sieges weren't just throw ladders everywhere you can. It takes a lot longer to setup a ladder than to knock it down. This was generally done only after the defenders were sufficiently starved and combat ineffective, or in combination with diversions.
Even stupid officers/nobles are expected to _pretend_ they're thinking. When the enemy can't see what their plan is (either because it was so cleverly concealed or because it fell apart so badly internally), they often presume there was no plan and that's how it goes down in history.
The USSR rarely ever used human wave tactics
Most of these reports were written by Nazi generals post war
Not the most trustworthy source is it
My man really has emotions with the Soviet Union.
Here is the US version by your words.
[AI generated paraphrasing your word] - LMAO
-Half of it was true and half of it was personal feelings same as yours.
---------------------------------------------------
Worth mentioning that "Air interdiction" is almost always more complicated than it appears at first.
To use the US "Hiroshima" example. that had more to do with finding a largely dense civilian population preferably cities. That have large civilian population and than drop nuclear bombs to eliminate them. The main purpose of this warfare is to eliminate civilian and has only been used by 1 country which is the US in the past 100 years.
Countries that often use this tactic often have stupid officers/nobles that are expected to pretend they're thinking. This will eventually lead to them fell apart so badly internally, they often presume there was no plan and that's how it goes down in history.
@@creator-ss7ksi agree, but why did you use AI 😭😭😭
@@creator-ss7ks The soviets used human wave tactics but not in the way most people believe
There are three principle ways that human waves were utilized during the war.
In the very early months, the fight was exceptionally desperate and the Red Army often found themselves with no alternative, as they lacked heavy support, and in some cases even enough rifles. Massed charges happened, and there are even accounts of Soviet soldiers charging with their arms linked in solidarity (or to ensure no one chickens out if you are cynical) as they lacked rifles. Wasting trained soldiers on this makes little long term sense though, and it wasn't utilized in latter phases of the war.
The second, and more common use at least through Stalingrad, were the citizen levies (Narodnoe Opolcheniye). There weren't soldiers, but civilians pressed into service and thrown against the Germans to buy time. Some were armed, some weren't. In some cases they were forced at gun point. Most members of the Opolcheniye had no training, and survival rates were low, to say the least. those that did you be absorbed into the Red Army eventually. To quote from an instance outside Leningrad:
"Altogether over 135,000 Leningraders, factory workers as well as professors, had volunteered, or been forced to volunteer. They had no training, no medical assistance, no uniforms, no transport and no supply system. More than half lacked rifles, and yet they were still ordered into counter-attacks against panzer divisions. Most fled in terror of the tanks, against which they had no defence at all. This massive loss of life-perhaps some 70,000-was tragically futile, and it is far from certain that their sacrifice even delayed the Germans at all on the line of the River Luga."
@@abhinandkrishna3430You're misquoting the facts. The Luga defensive line was manned by two divisions, 1 brigade, 4000ish local war college students and three NO divisions organised from mobilised civilians, around 10 thousand men.
The 160 thousand men NO divisions, partisan teams and artillery-machinegun defensive brigades were organised after the defense of Luga, when Leningrad was already cut off and blockaded.
Soviet losses were at about 55 thousand, and while the defense was unsuccessful in the end, the Army Group North's advance was halted for more than a month which allowed for Soviet reorganization and regrouping.
As a war thunder player, i can not fathom how annoying this tactic is 0:36
Dude I love this, thank you so much for breaking down and explaining these concepts in an interesting way. Wishing you a fantastic day! 🙏
No sponsor thank-you-section, no ads, straight to the point. WOW.
You forgot one. It’s called the Fabian strategy. It was used by the Roman emperor Fabian who in the second Punic war avoided fighting Hannibal. The strategy is to basically not fight the main force and instead fight the weaker forces. The coalition used this tactic to devastating effects against napoleon. They avoided fighting him directly after they realized napoleon could only be in one place. That is how they managed to defeat napoleon. By not fighting him
Despite its title, the video doesnt really talk about strategy but tactics. Besides this though, Fabian is just the more official word for scorched earth, which he mentioned
@@phobics9498 sure it might be related to scorched earth tactics but it’s entirely different. Scorched earth tactics is just depriving enemies of vital resources while Fabian strategy is just avoid fighting the main force and go after the weaker forces
reminds me of some dnd 3.5 "take out the minions first" strategy you take out the weaker units first so they can't contribute to the fight then take on the "boss" for lack of a better term. in dnd its effective as it strongly alters the action economy, and in real warfare it reduces the number of enemy units in play against you assuming you can somewhat safely whittle down the weaker units and positions.
The term war-crime is ironic.
In times of war, certain strategies are used to fight as effectively as possible with the least amount of casualties.
Then there's _''no you can't do that, you shall find a less effective method which is legal''_
War crimes termin just make no sense, like it's table game, starting a war, crime on itself, and then it's glorified and make rules for that to keep it honorable, but it at baseline is absolutely not honorable thing
Yeah, in stressful and heated battle soldiers would NOT be thinking about the laws of war.
This has substantially improved my performance in X-COM and Baldur's Gate.
Most of the subjects are tactics not strategy.
What is the difference
@@roninyoshida7743Tactics win battles, strategies win wars.
Listen to 5:32 again
I'm not a native English speaker so they're literally the same to me lol, interesting tho.
@@roninyoshida7743 Strategy is the general plan of how you want to achieve your goal. Tactics go into detail about the strategy. For example: you want to climb a mountain and your strategy is what side of the mountain you will climb. Your tactics are what you need to climb the mountain: gear, supplies and etc
@@person9735 What you've described as tactics is logistics. Your example would be better phrased as: "strategy" = I want to get on top of the mountain. "tactics" = I'll avoid the stream on the left, I'll walk through the middle until that rock, then swing around and climb the rest of the way on the right side
It's crazy how many of these I do in video games without realizing they're actual army strategies.
6:39 Tank Desant. They don't just use the tank as a transportation method, but also... (LOL)
Apparently, me and my dad knew what bounding overwatch was ever since army of two came out because that’s literally what we would do lol
Breaking geneva convention, and not even 15 seconds in to the video! That has to be a new record
Ww2 wasn’t the first time Russia used scorched earth it’s actually the main reason napoleon lost
Reverse slope defense .fortifying the other side of a hill (while leaving some troops on the front to help break up the attack)
Attackers can't see potential targets preliminary shelling would be a waste, Armour would expose its belly cresting a hill
Forgot The Ride of the Rohirrim. It's where you get 6 thousand of your homies and smash your horses into 100k enemies.
Okay I feel like we're done complimenting the lean format of the video guys💀
In just 8 minutes, I learned a ton! Your way of explaining tactics is fantastic, and I find myself completely engaged and enjoying every second of your videos.
maybe do a video on the types of armies that there are: such as militia, mercenary, tribal, nation's army, proffesional etc
i'm curious; would you care to explain quickly what their differences are? i've never heard of a tribal army or nation's army? thank you
@@puropulkkinen1580 tribal army, basically when the adult men of a tribe would all go to a campaign, you know, just like in tribal warfare. Nation's army is basically regular conscription but culturally impactful on the nation.
@@jonyprepperisrael60 thanks for answering but i still dont think i get it :D you mean like how a society is shaped by conscription or something? i’d just call it a conscription based army but what do i know, thanks again for answering
@@puropulkkinen1580 in countries that have conscription, especially if its universal and for generations, then those people that served in the army would be influenced by their time there and so would their children who would also serve.
best real world example is Israel, best fictional example is Cadia from 40K
@@jonyprepperisrael60 ohh i get it now thanks, thats good examples you gave. i guess that goes more into sociology with the affecting there
Ive been in the defense field for about a decade, This is good as a refresher and was mostly accurate! Many of these maneuvers arent effective on their own and are much better when doubled up with another maneuver or another force. Just like in chess, it is more important to know WHEN to use a tactic.
Aren't these tacticts?
Its a mix of both.
Just made same comment
Meh
☝️🤓
"Every war tactic explained"
Did he change the title? I'm very confused.
1:30 raus raus! My Uber charge is ready!
The healing is not as rewarding as the hurting
-Medic from tf2
i love this channel. keep it up man 👍
This is honestly amazing how educational and entertaining this is. Thank you for making this content!
That’s a pretty good video.
But I don‘t think the term „war strategy“ does fit, bc this is about direct combat methods and as such it‘s more like the „tactical“ level instead of the strategic one
About Scorched Earth:
It was used mostly by Nazi Germany in WW2, especially after Operation Citadel, when Red Army started offensive in Ukraine. And in 1941 by Soviets when they retreated
You forgot the Fabien strategy. It's when you withhold combat from the enemy while they are in your territory in hopes of decreasing moral and resources
sounds more like a lack of one
@@markmonoton6224 no. It's a real strategy used by fabius In the second Punic war against Hannibals forces which were trapped inside the Roman empire
@@markmonoton6224 The reason it worked so well is because since they were trapped inside a new territory, they needed to recruit civilians from the Roman empire to be in their army and the way they kept doing that is by winning them over by beating the Romans in battle and they couldn't do that if the Romans decided not to battle
@@Jimboboo8284 That "strategy" was a failure. For something to be called a strategy it needs to work at least sometimes. That period in 2nd Punic was a disaster for Rome.
@@markmonoton6224 don't spoil it I'm still waiting for oversimplified pt 3
Scorching Earth was also used by Russian Empire against Napoleon, which lead to Napoleon's defeat. Napoleon's strategy was actually getting supplies and logistics from locals as they advanced. Therefore, Scorching Earth lead to deficiency in Napoleon's army as they didn't make any supply chains when they advanced.
Thanks again for the useful tutorial my great teacher!!!😊
Blitzkrieg tactic sometimes also called as "tactical unit placement" and "placing the best unit at the right time" rushing a zone before the France defensive line arrived, and sending paratrooper into Soviet rural territory to secure all supply for another massacre.
He also forgot to mention the "no mans land tactic" where a conquered territory are turned into a landmine zone or radioactive zone so that the opponent cannot use their own territory for a long time, usually used after retreating.
"Indirect fire tactic" is artillery tactic to bombard a certain target without seeing it, for example bombarding enemy across a mountain.
"Kamikaze tactic" is a suicidal tactic to eliminate greater target at all cost.
"Scientific war tactic" is a inhumane war tactic that involve using hazardous substance, and bio-chemical weapon and test their impact in warfare turning a war into a giant human testing ground, Japanese use this tactic at Chinese civilian in ww2 with a promise to bring scientific breakthrough on medical world.
also "kiting tactic".
thanks for the info man, i was just looking for some new ideas
Precious information here!
Here's a video idea, cover every word that describes the form of a word, for example heterogram, palindrome, synonym, acronym, pseudonym..., polysyllable, misnomer, onomatopoeia, autological etc
This was one of the most satisfying videos I've watched in a long time. Title said it had cool information, and the whole video was actually that information. Incredible concept! Truly innovative, the world isn't ready for this kind of thing yet!
All jokes aside, though, seriously cool video. Thank you for what you do
There are also other methods called Tactical Retreat, Perfidy (pretending to surrender, and then attacking the opponent), and Pacification (crushing an uprising)
Perfidy is a warcrime, FYI
Perfidy is a war crime, isn't it?
the tactical retreat is a very useful option assuming its used before it becomes a route or forced retreat. a think a good description of it is releasing or retreating from a location or area before being attacked once you decide its not of tactical advantage, or to fallback to replenish resources and address injuries or wounded to try and counter a more attrition based attack.
FYI, perfidy is consedered a warcrime since it gives the enemy a valid reason to shoot surendering ppl (also a warcrime).
Air assault is specifically the use of rotary wing aircraft in order to engage enemy forces or to seize and hold key terrain. It's quite similar to airborne assaults as they both are versions of verticle envelopment. Its mainly used to capture terrain thats inaccessible to friendly forces because of the enemy
Thanks, can't wait to try a few of these out
You have no idea how long I wanted a video like this to come out
1. Salvos are still used in modern combat. Artillery is useful employed in salvo - or even time-on-target which is essentially a double or triple salvo. Missiles such as used in naval combat can be intercepted by ships and aircraft, so a salvo helps present more simultaneous threats and overwhelm counter-measures.
2. Hull down is also achievable by creating or using a preexisting depression in the land. Hull down allows a tank or other turreted vehicle to only present *the turret* to the enemy - it does not only present the main gun. Hull down does not mandate that a vehicle stay stationary - this is only true for the use of very small depressions in the land. If situated on a reverse slope, the vehicle can simply reverse further down the slope until it is entirely concealed and then move about freely - this is called terrain masking, and is often used with hull-down so-called "pop up attacks" which is called jockeying (Tank takes up hull down position, tank engages enemy, tank reverses until it is concealed, tank moves left or right a considerable distance, tank repeats procedure - this stops the enemy from anticipating the tank's position and being ready for it)
3. Creeping barrages are less about protecting the advancing infantry and more about enabling an assault on a position. The barrage encourages enemy troops to seek shelter by first falling short of their position. Then the barrage moves onto the enemy position and suppresses the troops there while friendly forces advance. Finally the barrage moves over the enemy position and stops just behind it, cutting of any retreat/reinforcement, and allowing the now very close friendly troops to assault the position before the enemy troops can return to their defenses
4.Blitzkreig is an entire system of war - what is described here is a simple 'thrust' attack. The intent of blitzkrieg is not really to create ever changing frontlines, but rather to allow tanks and mechanized forces to utilize their mobility. By punching through a defensive line, the tanks and mechanized forces can then spread out and flank other enemy forces, thereby circumventing prepared defenses.
5. I don't even know where to start with this. A foxhole is just another name for a dug-out or shell-scrape. It's just a hole in the ground dug by infantry to provide cover. Trenches are just big foxholes. The Japanese used small 1 man foxholes (often known as spiderholes) simply because it provided a good way for singular suicide-charge soldiers to ambush enemy combatants. Panzer-turms, the embeded tank turrets, are not foxholes - they were just a last-ditch effort by Germany to use excess tank turrets and guns, without the means to produce hulls for them and make them into tanks.
6. A single envelopment doesn't need to use a 'decoy'. Many textbook envelopment battles had the primary force in position at the front. A single envelopment is simply a flank on one side - often by cavalry or tanks or similar.
7. A pincer movement is just a double envelopment. It's the same as above, just with another unit conducting a flank on the other side.
8. In an oblique order combat, the weak side doesn't delay the movement as a part of the tactic - it is simply the case that to imbalance the forces one side is usually weakened and as such they are usually unable to hold their ground. If the oblique forces outnumber their enemy, they can simply weight one side heavier than the other, and the 'weak' side may well hold it's ground, or even push through.
9. Again an inverted wedge doesn't necessitate the use of a weak center. It is in-essence the ideal application of a feigned retreat. The center forces withdraw allowing the wings to flank (a double envelopment in essence).
10. Bounding overwatch is slightly misleading in that the bounding team doesn't necessarily reach it's destination. Far more commonly they simply advance a short distance, often to the next terrain feature that can provide reasonable cover.
11. Skirmishing is not so much about being ahead of the main body of troops, nor is it about delaying movements. Skirmishing is about breaking up enemy formations. A cohesive block of men can easily fight another, but have far more difficulty engaging skirmishes who are spread out and take cover. Further, skirmishers have rifles which are accurate at range, while blocks of line-infantry have muskets which are inaccurate. The result is that skirmishers will gradually pick apart troops and eventually break formations unless the enemy commander takes an action. Skirmishers are all about forcing the opponent to play their hand, and throw troops at the problem, which may open up a weak spot or tie-up critical assets.
12. Air interdiction is simply tactical bombing. There is no such thing as strategic air interdiction, as it is all tactical. Bombing on a strategic level is, you guessed it, strategic bombing.
13. Shoot and scoot applies to every ranged weapon ever invented, not just artillery.
14. Centre peel is just bounding overwatch in reverse. There are other forms of peel beyond just center peel, and they are all used for movement and not just retreat.
15. Defence in depth very much does intend to stop an attck, and is not just an attempt to delay. Defence in depth is a specific method of employing defeat-in-detail. Troops hold their ground just long enough to inflinct casualties on the attacking enemy, and then fall back before the enemy can bring it's superior numbers and/or firepower to bear.
16. Scorched earth was also used by the Germans when they retreated.
Your video is bad and you should feel bad
Please edit your comment to add paragraphs between the lines I can't read it.
This should've been a good comment if the last line doesn't exist
Most of these are tactics not strategies. Tactics are a means of advancing your position within a strategy，towards a goal. A strategy is a plan of action consistent with your goal and not inconsistent with your resources. In other words a strategy describes the set of available tactics and when and how to use them in a coordinated manner to best achieve your goal.
0:01 this one is a war crime
It's not
@@datcheesecakeboi6745 it's a warcrime, killing a non-armed personnel like medics is actually a crime
@@lun7881 not all medics are unarmed, and your implying that medics would be the ones to come out and help, normally in the army, when your friend goes down you go back and pick him up
its not normally the medics job to do that
@@datcheesecakeboi6745medics are depicted in the video. They got the red cross and everything.
@@saveoursquirrels4241 Cool, still aint a warcrime unless they are actually red cross
Watching these as a teenager, I often wondered at the thought of running my own value-driven channel like this one. After a long fascination with animation, I took up the challenge of finally building my own animated storytelling channel, and around 90h of strenuous work finally produced my first ever video just the other day. That's the impact of these masterpieces for me - they expand your horizons and make you seek value within your own self, so thank you for that! :)
I use 1:29 a lot in rts war games
TFW you learn head glitching was a legit tactic for tanks
0:01 but you can't shoot medics in war?
But in war there are almost no rules
@@Elias-lu9zy even the top comment said war crime
The tactic is likely referring to drawing out combative soldiers, too. I immediately thought of the scene from Saving Private Ryan, where one soldier is shot by a sniper and calls out to his hidden comrades, desperate for help as he slowly bleeds out. The other soldiers are faced between leaving him alone to die, or risk losing their own lives to the sniper. Any of them-medic or not-could have stepped out into the open to drag the soldier to safety and try to stop his bleeding, and fell victim to the sniper.
I think that medics were likely drawn in this example because they are the most responsible for helping injured soldiers, not necessarily because they are the primary target of the tactic.
You're not _supposed_ to. But it's war; you don't win wars by sparing people, and they can't punish every soldier all of the time perfectly. In fact, the international court justice usually doesn't even try, especially for western and western-backed nations
Cheese
i'm actually using some of these within war-like games..
sniper trap, recon by fire.. also a reversed version, where i expose seemingly undefended units or where i let units at decoy positions be recognized..
then the barrage while attacking, oblique order or skirmishing.. to attack..
and center peel or even swarming-like counter-attacks to retreat, most likely to buy time for a blitzkrieg-like attack, in an attempt to recover strategic goals. Creating a more unbalanced field, usually creates new opportunities..
which is why i usually try to counter my opponents attempts for creating unbalances by having enough surveillance and espionage stuff running.
I gotta try these in TABS
Fun fact, Defeat in Detail was one Napoleon Bonaparte's preferred strategies and its how he defeated 52,000 Piedmontese with only 37,000 Frenchmen. It's also a tactic Stonewall Jackson used during his Shenandoah Valley campaign to defeat 60,000 Union soldiers with only 17,000 Confederate ones.
7:45 do you have to censor the nazi flag in educational videos now?
Sadly
0:00 Double tap
0:13 Spray and Pray
0:36 Head Glitch
1:07 Bomb Run
1:30 Rushdown
1:55 Camping
2:19 Wait is he here?
2:27 Flank
2:36 Double Flank
2:46 Stacking
2:58 Fall back, JK
3:10 Clamp them
3:19 Block line of sight
3:30 Cover our rush
3:49 Sneak Attack!!!
3:56 Annoying
4:09 midnight murder spree
4:36 Big group Attack
4:53 V shape attack
5:10 divide and conquer
5:28 drop a useful Bomb
5:54 Blokking
6:19 hole in wall
6:28 Air Flank
6:38 Tank support
6:51 don't peak the same angle twice
6:59 Cover the approach
7:09 Cover our exit
7:20 Stalling
7:39 Don't let them use s...
6:59 me running first into site with the negev
I can think of StarCraft games in which I've used every one of these. For the first scenario, Vulcan trap with Siege tanks is also fun. Protoss Carrier Swarm was so good. Defense in Detail, well that's what Micro is. Great video. New sub for sure.
Now i can play some games more effectivley
Minor note, but in the inverted wedge the center is often where most of the best trained troops are placed as it is the most critical part of this formation. The center must be well disciplined and resilient to enemy assaults because if there is a breakthrough in the center of your line while performing this maneuver, the wings will be separated, and your army can be defeated in detail. That's why Hannibal was said to have put his most valued infantrymen at the center of his inverted wedge. The wings consisted of lighter armored troops who can move quickly and wide around an opponents position. While their role is important, the wings often have the mobility and space to fall back and regroup if necessary. If the center were to fall back and regroup, it would likely mean the formation would break down.
I’m no military general but will be keeping the info for the super markets I did like my own comment fight me
I honestly love this video because my D&D campaign is going to have a large war towards its end, and this honestly is really helping me make sure that it’ll be a realistic story
this the tactical (inmediate combat) level
reccomend you to seek the operational (battlefield) and strategic (big scale) ways used to pursue warfare as well,this channel has a video on war strategies too
just the perfect procrastion video I needed
A couple notes:
As many others have pointed out, most of these are not strategies but tactics
Blitzkrieg was never anything official - it was the culmination of German doctrine over decades, compounding with the advent of mechanised warfare.
Foxholes weren’t made to act as counters to Blitzkrieg, and had a wide range of applications, especially when artillery fire was expected but in-depth defences weren’t to be dug.
Almost scary the amount of "strategies" i got from playing RTS games and FPS games etc, also im a bit of a military nerd but either way, great video.
inverted wedge: also known as butt pounding 97k roman soldiers with a carthaginian army of 26k
This is really going to help on my schools Minecraft SMP, (shouldn't of killed Scruffy...) Thanks! :)
Blitzkrieg isn’t an actual war tactic. It was just a phrase coined by the media. What you’re actually talking about is called maneuver warfare, and it has existed since the collapse of the Polish Lithuanian Commonwealth, the Germans were just the first ones to integrate armor into it
What game is this?
No game. It's an actual tactic used in warfare throughout human history.
Life
@@admiraljackiv1176 Idk man, this video looks a lot like bannerlord. It's gameplay looks exactly like it
Shadow empire
@gameman7_xbox pretty sure it's a Minecraft mod
I learned more about war in 10mins than from any military obsessed guy I ever met.
Though I had a hard time understanding the Oblique Order and looked that up elsewhere.
(I watched it mainly to gain some background knowledge for GMing. Which is how you also know how many of those guys I know.)