there are different strategies but positionally speaking you put your pieces on good squares and if you do that better than your opponent chances are tactics will appear .
chess strategy is like setting the stage and placing the actors, while chess tactics are the captivating performances that steal the show!
@rodtel said in #1:
> I am having some difficulty to distinguish between tactics and strategy on a game.
In chess, they are hard to be distinguised because the board is rather small, and after a tactical win, the game ends rather quick.
But to simply explain. Tactic is a certain tool/maneuver/ move(s) to gain a small advantage in a particular battle.
Strategy is poking small holes over time to reveal a huge weakness and exploit it over and over until it the opponent succumb to it.
Fir instance, Rommel used a lot of tactics in yhe African campaign. He mostly was getting intel from the enemy's position in advance, and was dividing the attacking forces so he could attack in both fronts with a flaking maneuver. Those are tactics. Maneuvers in small skirmishes to win advantages and win that small battle.
The allies were aware they couldnt win direct battles, as their resources were allocated in other parts.
Their strategy was to give him a few easy targets, but a bit too far to make him overextend a bit and attack the supply convoys on the back.
Rommel was only getting a fraction of the resources needed, gas and ammo in particular, over time, he had less and less mech and weapons he could use.
The allies didnt really beat his army. But they managed to stop ot to a crawl until he couldnt fight anymore. So, the strategy is a long overall plan, not to win the battle, but to win the war.
Strategy is positional while tactic involves sequence of moves to gain decisive advantage immediately.
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.