What makes a game more strategic than tactical?

[uneducated]

In my view, there are almost no strategy games, even at Slitherine. The games are all tactical. I believe this is a gaping and unnoticed hole in the games market.

By strategic, I mean that the consequences of play have ramifications beyond the battle in which you are fighting. The outcome of the battle, whether it be fewer or greater losses, the types of resources consumed etc. has an impact on what follows. Also, in a strategic game, you will be fighting battles, but where you fight and what units you have to deploy are a deep part of the game. Also, the choices made about the locations defended or attacked have ramifications at the strategic level.

As far as I can see, the strategic layer of wargaming is very thinly or weakly modeled. Panzer Corps II is a great fun game, and there is some strategy there, which is enjoyable. (For example, how many losses to incur, whether to replace units with elite troops, etc.) There is far too little of this in our games though.

One way to view the strategic element is to see it as establishing and organizing the initial deployment of assets and then clicking a button and letting the battle sort itself out automatically while you sit back and watch it unfold.

I hope Slitherine could examine the richness of strategic decision making and propose to development studios that they create some truly strategic games which take into account factors like doctrine, industrial supply chains, philosophy of war, and other higher level concerns. I would like deeper games and I think Slitherine are about the best place to have them made.

[jeannot le lapin]

The series of Strategic Command games are as their name indicates strategic games.

[RangerJoe]

In my view, there are almost no strategy games, even at Slitherine. The games are all tactical. I believe this is a gaping and unnoticed hole in the games market.

By strategic, I mean that the consequences of play have ramifications beyond the battle in which you are fighting. The outcome of the battle, whether it be fewer or greater losses, the types of resources consumed etc. has an impact on what follows. Also, in a strategic game, you will be fighting battles, but where you fight and what units you have to deploy are a deep part of the game. Also, the choices made about the locations defended or attacked have ramifications at the strategic level.

As far as I can see, the strategic layer of wargaming is very thinly or weakly modeled. Panzer Corps II is a great fun game, and there is some strategy there, which is enjoyable. (For example, how many losses to incur, whether to replace units with elite troops, etc.) There is far too little of this in our games though.

One way to view the strategic element is to see it as establishing and organizing the initial deployment of assets and then clicking a button and letting the battle sort itself out automatically while you sit back and watch it unfold.

I hope Slitherine could examine the richness of strategic decision making and propose to development studios that they create some truly strategic games which take into account factors like doctrine, industrial supply chains, philosophy of war, and other higher level concerns. I would like deeper games and I think Slitherine are about the best place to have them made.

Head over to Matrixgames and look at the games there.

https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/view ... hp?f=10127

And this game:

https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/view ... hp?f=10683

[Sadvids]

It's mostly my opinion, but I think of strategy as requiring something unknown and tactics as calculated.

Looking at a real-world battlefield, strategy is someone standing over a map saying, "Well, deploy people here because we expect the enemy to do x," whereas tactics is looking at the battle and making specific moves in response.

So games where you make snap decisions based on current information without looking ahead are tactical as well, because it's about knowable outcomes, but I wouldn't call it "strategic" unless it's an overarching strategy that may or may not pan out.

In any case, personally.