Originally by: Teki Caldrum

---

1.) Attrition.

---

Originally by: Teki Caldrum

---

Edited by: Teki Caldrum on 04/05/2009 20:19:43

Originally by: Snowden Vel

---

Originally by: Teki Caldrum

---

1.) Attrition.

---

Please take a moment and explain how attrition is not a part of every war.

---

Well, lets first look at what Attrition Warfare is.

Attrition Warfare is: Attrition Warfare is a tactic in which one party in a conflict attempts to wear down the other through use of superior forces in NUMBER. Meaning Quantity.

This will also help you understand:
Most military theorists[who?] and strategics like Sun Tzu have viewed attrition warfare as something to be avoided. In the sense that attrition warfare represents an attempt to grind down an opponent through superior numbers, it represents the opposite of the usual principles of war, where one attempts to achieve decisive victories through manoeuvre, concentration of force, surprise, and the like. On the other hand, a side which perceives itself to be at a marked disadvantage in manoeuvre warfare or unit tactics may deliberately seek out attrition warfare to neutralize its opponent's advantages.

---

Originally by: Teki Caldrum

---

Originally by: Snowden Vel

---

Originally by: Teki Caldrum

---

1.) Attrition.

---

---

Ah, Snowden Vel. Your time in goonswarm has diminished your intelligence.

Remember, the word "attrition" is only ONE part of the tactical designation known as "ATTRITION WARFARE". Congratulations, you have been educated.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attrition_warfare

---

Originally by: Orree

---

Originally by: Teki Caldrum

---

0.0 is about to become a very boring and lonely place.

With these massive power blocks NAPing each other and smashing KenZoku into nothingness, who will be left to hate?

In roughly a year, I wouldn't be surprised to see one alliance controlling all of 0.0. Doesn't this alarm anyone?

---

These laughable assertions never seem to go away, do they?

While I agree (and lament) that the 0.0 game is largely the domain of two power blocs, that doesn't mean that these coalitions are united by anything other than their dislike of the other bloc.

To wit, many of the alliances arrayed against AAA-wagon/TAFKAB are red to each other when not engaged against the other big power bloc. Taking that fact into account, the "big" coalition then becomes a group of smaller, more regional coalitions, many of which have never sought to expand their territories beyond their immediate homes. To an extent, the same is true of the AAA-wagon/TAFKAB side--- at least as far as the likes of AAA and their vassals/allies are concerned.

I'm not sure what's going to break the cycle of the two sides being engaged as they currently are...but it hardly means that we will see one alliance or even one bloc "controlling all of 0.0."

Perhaps most reasonable people recognize this fact and that is why it doesn't "alarm anyone."

---