Who's the best tactician?

jaeger115 · Post by **jaeger115** » 2003-01-05 12:19am

The title says it all.

Thrawn won't be here cause he'll assrape all the others

Master of Ossus · Post by **Master of Ossus** » 2003-01-05 12:23am

Admiral Ackbar, of course. Picard came up with exactly one tactic that worked exactly one time. Sheridan, while superior to Picard, has never shown the kinds of abilities that Ackbar has. Sheridan defeated ONE Shadow battlecrab with a larger number of ships and an advantage of being able to scramble his enemy's most powerful ships. Against the Minbari, he won by laying a minefield. Ackbar defeated an Imperial fleet with an outnumbered force of inferior ships. None of the other two have shown to be able to do that. Moreover, Ackbar's victories were repeated. He also formulated a plan to defeat the Yuuzhan Vong, the Shadow Academy Fleet, and numerous smaller threats to the New Republic.

Master of Ossus · Post by **Master of Ossus** » 2003-01-05 12:24am

jaeger115 wrote:Sorry. Double post. Can someone close the one that only has three options?

It is done.

BlkbrryTheGreat · Post by **BlkbrryTheGreat** » 2003-01-05 12:35am

Ackbar defeated an Imperial fleet with an outnumbered force of inferior ships.

I would point out that Ackbar would have lost this battle if not for the in-sight of Lando, who suggested that the Alliance Fleet close to point-blank range with the Imperal Cap ships. (If they had not, the cap ships would have been picked off one by one until the death star exploded.)

Master of Ossus · Post by **Master of Ossus** » 2003-01-05 12:42am

BlkbrryTheGreat wrote:
Ackbar defeated an Imperial fleet with an outnumbered force of inferior ships.
I would point out that Ackbar would have lost this battle if not for the in-sight of Lando, who suggested that the Alliance Fleet close to point-blank range with the Imperal Cap ships. (If they had not, the cap ships would have been picked off one by one until the death star exploded.)

Ackbar wanted to retreat. Lando wished to fight on, and convinced Ackbar of his plan. Ackbar, however, was always in charge of the fleet elements of the battle for the Alliance, and was clearly seen directing Alliance forces later in the battle, in spite of his earlier hesitation.

Pablo Sanchez · Post by **Pablo Sanchez** » 2003-01-05 01:51am

Ackbar only faltered because he realized he would lose a random ship of the line every few minutes, with little possibility of returning the favor. Any commander would counsel retreat in such a situation.

jaeger115 · Post by **jaeger115** » 2003-01-05 03:44pm

What about Calrissian (sorry it just popped up after I did this poll) because of his suggestion that the fleet engage the ISDs point blank to avoid the DS superlaser in ROTJ?

Exonerate · Post by **Exonerate** » 2003-01-05 04:46pm

Ender Wiggin?

jaeger115 · Post by **jaeger115** » 2003-01-05 05:25pm

Ender Wiggin?

Oh damn, I forgot about that!

Exonerate · Post by **Exonerate** » 2003-01-05 05:37pm

Actually, maybe Bean. It was my understanding that Ender was more of a strategist, and Bean was a tactician.

Dahak · Post by **Dahak** » 2003-01-05 05:44pm

Just out of pure fun: Honor Harrington.

And Miles Teg

jaeger115 · Post by **jaeger115** » 2003-01-05 05:46pm

And Miles Teg

Who?

Captain Cyran · Post by **Captain Cyran** » 2003-01-05 06:01pm

Dahak wrote:Just out of pure fun: Honor Harrington.

And Miles Teg

Hehehe...Honor Harrington

But anyway, I must agree with MoO, Ackbar wins this hands down, honestly I think he has very few equals and fewer better tactictians, but I don't know enough Sci Fi worlds to say that with to much confidence.

Dahak · Post by **Dahak** » 2003-01-05 06:26pm

jaeger115 wrote:
And Miles Teg
Who?

The Warrior-Mentat from Dune.

Sir Sirius · Post by **Sir Sirius** » 2003-01-05 06:39pm

Sheridans tactic in "In the Beginning": Nuke'em.
Sheridans tactic in "Z'ha'dum": Nuke'em.
Sheridans tactic in "Into the Fire": Nuke'em.
Sheridans tactic in In "Thirdspace": Nuke'em.

Is it just me or does Sheridan have some special affection towards nuking people?

Exonerate · Post by **Exonerate** » 2003-01-05 07:41pm

Ender Wiggin and Bean are kids under ten years old who are considered on par with Thrawn.

Ender · Post by **Ender** » 2003-01-05 07:46pm

Exonerate wrote:Actually, maybe Bean. It was my understanding that Ender was more of a strategist, and Bean was a tactician.

Other way around. Ender kicked ass at the individual battles, he beat out something like 5000 to 1 odds at the final one. But it was Bean who was able to look at the big picture back on earth and help Peter organize everything.

And Yes, Andrew "Ender" Wiggen has the best demonstrated tactical aptitude shown in Sci Fi.

Ender · Post by **Ender** » 2003-01-05 07:47pm

Exonerate wrote:Ender Wiggin and Bean are kids under ten years old who are considered on par with Thrawn.

No, Ender was 13, and he has a far superior track record to Thrawn.

Ender · Post by **Ender** » 2003-01-05 07:49pm

Dahak wrote:Just out of pure fun: Honor Harrington.

Honor is like Achillies rfrom the "Shadow" saga. She wins because she does something unexpected at the last second, not because she has some overall grand tactical plan.

Exonerate · Post by **Exonerate** » 2003-01-05 08:03pm

Ender wrote:
Exonerate wrote:Actually, maybe Bean. It was my understanding that Ender was more of a strategist, and Bean was a tactician.
Other way around. Ender kicked ass at the individual battles, he beat out something like 5000 to 1 odds at the final one. But it was Bean who was able to look at the big picture back on earth and help Peter organize everything.

And Yes, Andrew "Ender" Wiggen has the best demonstrated tactical aptitude shown in Sci Fi.

No, the reason they made Ender commander was because he was a better strategist, while Bean concentrated on a smaller group of ships better. IIRC, in Ender's Game, it was stated that Bean could use the ships like a scapel (sp?). Bean was just better at paying attention to details and catching things that other people didn't notice.

Stormbringer · Post by **Stormbringer** » 2003-01-05 08:37pm

Ender while a good commander (not Thrawn good by any means) is also one of the most over-rated commanders in Sci-fi. He's unstable and is prone to nervous breakdowns. He folds when the pressure is on; he's done it every time. A real and sustained campaign would probably leave him a gibbering wreck.

Bean is good but is likewise not as good as Thrawn.

HemlockGrey · Post by **HemlockGrey** » 2003-01-05 08:39pm

Remember that in Shadows of the Hegemon Bean commanded an elite 200 man Thai unit, thus reinforcing the Ender(strat) and Bean(Tac) balance.

Currald · Post by **Currald** » 2003-01-06 02:51am

Ender never lost. We don't know what his real limit is. Thrawn lost more than once, and eventually died for it. Thrawn never had to fight under the stressful conditions that Ender had to. He just sat around, looked at his art, launched an attack every couple of weeks. Ender fought 1-2 battles per day and drilled his subordinates constantly. Thrawn might not have lasted long under similar conditions, but we'll never know, because he failed to instill loyalty in his closest bodyguards! Don't get me wrong, I like Thrawn a lot. I read the books; I bought the action figure; but I think that Ender would mop the floor with him, all things being equal.

Stormbringer · Post by **Stormbringer** » 2003-01-06 03:01am

Currald wrote:Ender never lost. We don't know what his real limit is. Thrawn lost more than once, and eventually died for it. Thrawn never had to fight under the stressful conditions that Ender had to. He just sat around, looked at his art, launched an attack every couple of weeks. Ender fought 1-2 battles per day and drilled his subordinates constantly. Thrawn might not have lasted long under similar conditions, but we'll never know, because he failed to instill loyalty in his closest bodyguards! Don't get me wrong, I like Thrawn a lot. I read the books; I bought the action figure; but I think that Ender would mop the floor with him, all things being equal.

Thrawn's fought real war. Ender cracked when fighting a real war. And he cracked ever goddamned time he was under pressure. Thrawn didn't face those conditions, true, but then again Ender started going batty even before that.

Face it, put pressure on him and Ender folds every goddamned time.

tharkûn · Post by **tharkûn** » 2003-01-06 08:45pm

Frankly few sci-fi leaders use actual tactics, most often it's a trick that is easily turned if not one-hit-wonder. Picard is an emminent example, he uses a complicated trick to rape his enemy and then a relatively simple counter was improvised on the spot by Data. Relying on technobabble to save your ass is no substitute for actual tactics.

Thrawn has been overrated in my book. I read the Zhan trilogy years ago and Thrawn struck me as overrated, he is good, but not a mind boggling brilliant tactician. For instance Thrawn comes up with the brilliant idea of having cloaked ships under the enemy sheild and firing directly on top of them. This falls under the easily turnable trick ... just fire at the source of the beam ... hell its bloody amazing that the defenders didn't realize that all the energy (momentum) being put out by the ships in orbit was being absorbed/deflected by their sheilds. He further over exploits the secret cache of ships/weapons/technology. Is Thrawn a better tactician than most military leaders? Sure. I remained unconvinced that he is some great tactical master, his enemies and compatriots seem to be blithering idiots (i.e. why in hell did it take forever to develop the Thrawn Pincer? It is essentially a controlled crash which is an old concept even today, and even that is potentially fatal if the enemy expects it). Maybe I've forgotten some wonderful tactic he developed, but it seems to me his tactics are just playing with what should be one hit wonders.

Ender is a good tactician. First off unlike so many other tacticians in Sci-Fi he gives his men initiative. One man controlling the show down to the minutest detail sounds good, but it sucks royally in the real world. The fact that Ender can lead human beings and not just automatons blindly following orders definately gives him an edge. Likewise real military leaders do not do it alone, even the geniuses. Lee had Longstreet, Stuart, and Jackson; Napoleon had Davout, Saint Cyr, Bessieres, Victor, etc. ... people who go it alone are inherently disadvantaged. Ender does not rely heavily upon one hit wonders, sure when faced with massive disadvantages he used tactics that are easily defeatable ... but that is when they are to be used. Relying upon quick cheap tricks is a good way to lose big time when one of them flops. Further unlike so many sci-fi leaders Ender's opponents were both skilled (as shown by their actions back on earth later) and taught by Ender himself. It is one thing to beat the enemy when you have discovered a weakness ... it is another to do it when you are daily teaching your enemy how you beat him.

Finally there is the BS notion of Ender cracking under stress. Frankly few Sci-fi tacticians have ever been put through that level of stress. He was forced to kill with his bare hands and was then telepathically assualted by his enemies. He fought daily battles under his direct control (which few if any real leaders have had to manage) and watched his friends crack under him, there is a reason real world generals get R&R and cakewalk assignments every now and again. Maintaining peak performance for prolonged and near continious combat is frankly impossible. Frankly Ender folds only after he has kicked the living crap out of his opponents.

Bean has the promise of upping Ender, but I don't think he has done so yet. His tactics are good, but he has yet to show Ender's grasp of command and innovation.