Breeble's Art of War
Moderator: Forum Moderators
-
Breeblebox
- Posts: 209
- Joined: October 27th, 2004, 8:24 am
- Location: New Zealand
Breeble's Art of War
Those who have read Sun Tzu may have come to the conclusion (as have many others), that so profound a military strategist was he, that even in the world of computer gaming his tennets hold true.
His most famous work The Art of War has been used as reference by many generals, modern and ancient alike.
At the time of my first reading I was acutely aware of the tremendous impact his teachings had on the way I played games. Chess, Risk, Axis & Allies, C & C (the first one, you know, with the Mammoths =] ), Empire Earth, Gettysburg, Blitzkrieg, Homeworld, Shogun TW, and Wesnoth are a few that spring to mind.
Now, I must firstly note that these are not guarantees that you will become some kind of l33t pwn3r in Wesnoth, simply that you will definitely become a better strategist taking them to heart.
Finally, before we get to the part I wrote this darned thread for, I suggest if these appeal, go read the whole thing. Get it out from the library, cos Mr Sun is well gone, and buying it only benefits the publisher.
Without further ado; excerpts of 'Sun Tzu - The Art of War' pertinant to Wesnoth...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*) All warfare is based on deception. Hence, when able to attack, we must seem unable; when using our forces, we must seem inactive; when we are near, we must make the enemy believe we are far away; when far away, we must make him believe we are near. Hold out baits to entice the enemy. Feign disorder, and crush him.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*) If your enemy is secure at all points, be prepared for him. If he is in superior strength, evade him. If your opponent is temperamental, seek to irritate him. Pretend to be weak, that he may grow arrogant. If he is taking his ease, give him no rest. If his forces are united, separate them. If sovereign and subject are in accord, put division between them. Attack him where he is unprepared, appear where you are not expected.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*) The art of using troops is this:
......When ten to the enemy's one, surround him;
......When five times his strength, attack him;
......If double his strength, divide him;
......If equally matched you may engage him;
......If weaker numerically, be capable of withdrawing;
......And if in all respects unequal, be capable of eluding him,
..........for a small force is but booty for one more powerful.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*) the general who wins a battle makes many calculations in his temple ere the battle is fought. The general who loses a battle makes but few calculations beforehand. Thus do many calculations lead to victory, and few calculations to defeat: how much more no calculation at all! It is by attention to this point that I can foresee who is likely to win or lose.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*) He who wishes to fight must first count the cost. When you engage in actual fighting, if victory is long in coming, then men's weapons will grow dull and their ardor will be dampened. If you lay siege to a town, you will exhaust your strength. Again, if the campaign is protracted, the resources of the State will not be equal to the strain. Now, when your weapons are dulled, your ardor dampened, your strength exhausted and your treasure spent, other chieftains will spring up to take advantage of your extremity. Then no man, however wise, will be able to avert the consequences that must ensue... In war, then, let your great object be victory, not lengthy campaigns.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*) Though we have heard of stupid haste in war, cleverness has never been seen associated with long delays.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*) Bring war material with you from home, but forage on the enemy... use the conquered foe to augment one's own strength.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*) To fight and conquer in all your battles is not supreme excellence; supreme excellence consists in breaking the enemy's resistance without fighting.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*) Thus the highest form of generalship is to balk the enemy's plans, the next best is to prevent the junction of the enemy's forces, the next in order is to attack the enemy's army in the field, and the worst policy of all is to besiege walled cities.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*) He will win who knows when to fight and when not to fight. He will win who knows how to handle both superior and inferior forces. He will win whose army is animated by the same spirit throughout all its ranks. He will win who, prepared himself, waits to take the enemy unprepared. He will win who has military capacity and is not interfered with by the sovereign.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*) If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*) The good fighters of old first put themselves beyond the possibility of defeat, and then waited for an opportunity of defeating the enemy. To secure ourselves against defeat lies in our own hands, but the opportunity of defeating the enemy is provided by the enemy himself. Thus the good fighter is able to secure himself against defeat, but cannot make certain of defeating the enemy.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*) The victorious strategist only seeks battle after the victory has been won, whereas he who is destined to defeat first fights and afterwards looks for victory.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*) In all fighting, the direct method may be used for joining battle, but indirect methods will be needed in order to secure victory. In battle, there are not more than two methods of attack - the direct and the indirect; yet these two in combination give rise to an endless series of maneuvers. The direct and the indirect lead on to each other in turn. It is like moving in a circle - you never come to an end. Who can exhaust the possibilities of their combination?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*) Whoever is first in the field and awaits the coming of the enemy, will be fresh for the fight; whoever is second in the field and has to hasten to battle will arrive exhausted.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*) The clever combatant imposes his will on the enemy, but does not allow the enemy's will to be imposed on him.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*) Hence that general is skillful in attack whose opponent does not know what to defend; and he is skillful in defense whose opponent does not know what to attack.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*) If we wish to fight, the enemy can be forced to an engagement even though he be sheltered behind a high rampart and a deep ditch. All we need do is attack some other place that he will be obliged to relieve. If we do not wish to fight, we can prevent the enemy from engaging us even though the lines of our encampment be merely traced out on the ground. All we need do is to throw something odd and unaccountable in his way.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*) Should the enemy strengthen his van, he will weaken his rear; should he strengthen his rear, he will weaken his van; should he strengthen his left, he will weaken his right; should he strengthen his right, he will weaken his left. If he sends reinforcements everywhere, he will everywhere be weak.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*) Military tactics are like unto water; for water in its natural course runs away from high places and hastens downwards... Water shapes its course according to the nature of the ground over which it flows; the soldier works out his victory in relation to the foe whom he is facing. Therefore, just as water retains no constant shape, so in warfare there are no constant conditions. He who can modify his tactics in relation to his opponent and thereby succeed in winning, may be called a heaven-born captain.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*) So in war, the way is to avoid what is strong and to strike at what is weak.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*) Do not interfere with an army that is returning home. When you surround an army, leave an outlet free. Do not press a desperate foe too hard.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*) The art of war teaches us to rely not on the likelihood of the enemy's not coming, but on our own readiness to receive him; not on the chance of his not attacking, but rather on the fact that we have made our position unassailable.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*) If we know that our own men are in a condition to attack, but are unaware that the enemy is not open to attack, we have gone only halfway towards victory. If we know that the enemy is open to attack, but are unaware that our own men are not in a condition to attack, we have gone only halfway towards victory. If we know that the enemy is open to attack, and also know that our men are in a condition to attack, but are unaware that the nature of the ground makes fighting impracticable, we have still gone only halfway towards victory.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*) On dispersive ground, therefore, fight not. On facile ground, halt not. On contentious ground, attack not. On open ground, do not try to block the enemy's way. On the ground of intersecting highways, join hands with your allies. On serious ground, gather in plunder. In difficult ground, keep steadily on the march. On hemmed-in ground, resort to stratagem. On desperate ground, fight.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*) If asked how to cope with a great host of the enemy in orderly array and on the point of marching to the attack, I should say: "Begin by seizing something which your opponent holds dear; then he will be amenable to your will." Rapidity is the essence of war: take advantage of the enemy's unreadiness, make your way by unexpected routes, and attack unguarded spots.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*) Move not unless you see an advantage; use not your troops unless there is something to be gained; fight not unless the position is critical. If it is to your advantage, make a forward move; if not, stay where you are. Anger may in time change to gladness; vexation may be succeeded by content.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
At some point in the future when I have time, and if anyone is interested, I would be happy to provide an analysis with respect to Wesnoth on each of these excerpts. It is by no means comprehensive, feel free to add your own.
His most famous work The Art of War has been used as reference by many generals, modern and ancient alike.
At the time of my first reading I was acutely aware of the tremendous impact his teachings had on the way I played games. Chess, Risk, Axis & Allies, C & C (the first one, you know, with the Mammoths =] ), Empire Earth, Gettysburg, Blitzkrieg, Homeworld, Shogun TW, and Wesnoth are a few that spring to mind.
Now, I must firstly note that these are not guarantees that you will become some kind of l33t pwn3r in Wesnoth, simply that you will definitely become a better strategist taking them to heart.
Finally, before we get to the part I wrote this darned thread for, I suggest if these appeal, go read the whole thing. Get it out from the library, cos Mr Sun is well gone, and buying it only benefits the publisher.
Without further ado; excerpts of 'Sun Tzu - The Art of War' pertinant to Wesnoth...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*) All warfare is based on deception. Hence, when able to attack, we must seem unable; when using our forces, we must seem inactive; when we are near, we must make the enemy believe we are far away; when far away, we must make him believe we are near. Hold out baits to entice the enemy. Feign disorder, and crush him.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*) If your enemy is secure at all points, be prepared for him. If he is in superior strength, evade him. If your opponent is temperamental, seek to irritate him. Pretend to be weak, that he may grow arrogant. If he is taking his ease, give him no rest. If his forces are united, separate them. If sovereign and subject are in accord, put division between them. Attack him where he is unprepared, appear where you are not expected.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*) The art of using troops is this:
......When ten to the enemy's one, surround him;
......When five times his strength, attack him;
......If double his strength, divide him;
......If equally matched you may engage him;
......If weaker numerically, be capable of withdrawing;
......And if in all respects unequal, be capable of eluding him,
..........for a small force is but booty for one more powerful.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*) the general who wins a battle makes many calculations in his temple ere the battle is fought. The general who loses a battle makes but few calculations beforehand. Thus do many calculations lead to victory, and few calculations to defeat: how much more no calculation at all! It is by attention to this point that I can foresee who is likely to win or lose.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*) He who wishes to fight must first count the cost. When you engage in actual fighting, if victory is long in coming, then men's weapons will grow dull and their ardor will be dampened. If you lay siege to a town, you will exhaust your strength. Again, if the campaign is protracted, the resources of the State will not be equal to the strain. Now, when your weapons are dulled, your ardor dampened, your strength exhausted and your treasure spent, other chieftains will spring up to take advantage of your extremity. Then no man, however wise, will be able to avert the consequences that must ensue... In war, then, let your great object be victory, not lengthy campaigns.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*) Though we have heard of stupid haste in war, cleverness has never been seen associated with long delays.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*) Bring war material with you from home, but forage on the enemy... use the conquered foe to augment one's own strength.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*) To fight and conquer in all your battles is not supreme excellence; supreme excellence consists in breaking the enemy's resistance without fighting.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*) Thus the highest form of generalship is to balk the enemy's plans, the next best is to prevent the junction of the enemy's forces, the next in order is to attack the enemy's army in the field, and the worst policy of all is to besiege walled cities.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*) He will win who knows when to fight and when not to fight. He will win who knows how to handle both superior and inferior forces. He will win whose army is animated by the same spirit throughout all its ranks. He will win who, prepared himself, waits to take the enemy unprepared. He will win who has military capacity and is not interfered with by the sovereign.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*) If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*) The good fighters of old first put themselves beyond the possibility of defeat, and then waited for an opportunity of defeating the enemy. To secure ourselves against defeat lies in our own hands, but the opportunity of defeating the enemy is provided by the enemy himself. Thus the good fighter is able to secure himself against defeat, but cannot make certain of defeating the enemy.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*) The victorious strategist only seeks battle after the victory has been won, whereas he who is destined to defeat first fights and afterwards looks for victory.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*) In all fighting, the direct method may be used for joining battle, but indirect methods will be needed in order to secure victory. In battle, there are not more than two methods of attack - the direct and the indirect; yet these two in combination give rise to an endless series of maneuvers. The direct and the indirect lead on to each other in turn. It is like moving in a circle - you never come to an end. Who can exhaust the possibilities of their combination?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*) Whoever is first in the field and awaits the coming of the enemy, will be fresh for the fight; whoever is second in the field and has to hasten to battle will arrive exhausted.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*) The clever combatant imposes his will on the enemy, but does not allow the enemy's will to be imposed on him.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*) Hence that general is skillful in attack whose opponent does not know what to defend; and he is skillful in defense whose opponent does not know what to attack.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*) If we wish to fight, the enemy can be forced to an engagement even though he be sheltered behind a high rampart and a deep ditch. All we need do is attack some other place that he will be obliged to relieve. If we do not wish to fight, we can prevent the enemy from engaging us even though the lines of our encampment be merely traced out on the ground. All we need do is to throw something odd and unaccountable in his way.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*) Should the enemy strengthen his van, he will weaken his rear; should he strengthen his rear, he will weaken his van; should he strengthen his left, he will weaken his right; should he strengthen his right, he will weaken his left. If he sends reinforcements everywhere, he will everywhere be weak.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*) Military tactics are like unto water; for water in its natural course runs away from high places and hastens downwards... Water shapes its course according to the nature of the ground over which it flows; the soldier works out his victory in relation to the foe whom he is facing. Therefore, just as water retains no constant shape, so in warfare there are no constant conditions. He who can modify his tactics in relation to his opponent and thereby succeed in winning, may be called a heaven-born captain.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*) So in war, the way is to avoid what is strong and to strike at what is weak.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*) Do not interfere with an army that is returning home. When you surround an army, leave an outlet free. Do not press a desperate foe too hard.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*) The art of war teaches us to rely not on the likelihood of the enemy's not coming, but on our own readiness to receive him; not on the chance of his not attacking, but rather on the fact that we have made our position unassailable.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*) If we know that our own men are in a condition to attack, but are unaware that the enemy is not open to attack, we have gone only halfway towards victory. If we know that the enemy is open to attack, but are unaware that our own men are not in a condition to attack, we have gone only halfway towards victory. If we know that the enemy is open to attack, and also know that our men are in a condition to attack, but are unaware that the nature of the ground makes fighting impracticable, we have still gone only halfway towards victory.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*) On dispersive ground, therefore, fight not. On facile ground, halt not. On contentious ground, attack not. On open ground, do not try to block the enemy's way. On the ground of intersecting highways, join hands with your allies. On serious ground, gather in plunder. In difficult ground, keep steadily on the march. On hemmed-in ground, resort to stratagem. On desperate ground, fight.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*) If asked how to cope with a great host of the enemy in orderly array and on the point of marching to the attack, I should say: "Begin by seizing something which your opponent holds dear; then he will be amenable to your will." Rapidity is the essence of war: take advantage of the enemy's unreadiness, make your way by unexpected routes, and attack unguarded spots.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*) Move not unless you see an advantage; use not your troops unless there is something to be gained; fight not unless the position is critical. If it is to your advantage, make a forward move; if not, stay where you are. Anger may in time change to gladness; vexation may be succeeded by content.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
At some point in the future when I have time, and if anyone is interested, I would be happy to provide an analysis with respect to Wesnoth on each of these excerpts. It is by no means comprehensive, feel free to add your own.
-
Elvish_Pillager
- Posts: 8137
- Joined: May 28th, 2004, 10:21 am
- Location: Everywhere you think, nowhere you can possibly imagine.
- Contact:
He says so much about war that you can't write a reasonable wargame without matching a bunch of what he says, that's all 
It might be very interesting to design a simulation explicitly to contradict what Sun Tzu says, though. You'd have to come up with a whole different model of combat.
It might be very interesting to design a simulation explicitly to contradict what Sun Tzu says, though. You'd have to come up with a whole different model of combat.
It's all fun and games until someone loses a lawsuit. Oh, and by the way, sending me private messages won't work. :/ If you must contact me, there's an e-mail address listed on the website in my profile.
-
Breeblebox
- Posts: 209
- Joined: October 27th, 2004, 8:24 am
- Location: New Zealand
Firstly, writing about a subject in vast volumes does not an expert make. Being the most verbose, the most prolific, the loudest does not an authority make. Surely those commentators of little substance are quickly forgotten. (Sorry for sounding like Yoda here.)
Secondly, contradicting Sun Tzu on matters of war is contradicting 2000 years of impirical evidence from people to whom real war was a career. Sure you can say that WINR, but fundamentally it is built on realistic warfare principles such as strategy, tactics, economics, and terrain. If you were to simulate a contradiction of Sun Tzu, you would be simulating a parallel universe where chickens turn into eggs and people used their meals to eat their utensils...
Secondly, contradicting Sun Tzu on matters of war is contradicting 2000 years of impirical evidence from people to whom real war was a career. Sure you can say that WINR, but fundamentally it is built on realistic warfare principles such as strategy, tactics, economics, and terrain. If you were to simulate a contradiction of Sun Tzu, you would be simulating a parallel universe where chickens turn into eggs and people used their meals to eat their utensils...
-
Elvish_Pillager
- Posts: 8137
- Joined: May 28th, 2004, 10:21 am
- Location: Everywhere you think, nowhere you can possibly imagine.
- Contact:
Well, I didn't say that what he said wasn't expert advice, just that there was lots of it. Since it was almost all correct, that's why it actually applies to stuff. And if you have a huge ton of description that applies to all different stuff in one general area, then anything in that general area will be described.Breeblebox wrote:With all respect EP, you are completely incorrect.
Firstly, writing about a subject in vast volumes does not an expert make. Being the most verbose, the most prolific, the loudest does not an authority make. Surely those commentators of little substance are quickly forgotten. (Sorry for sounding like Yoda here.)
That's the point, although your examples are wrong, since a direct opposite wouldn't work.Breeblebox wrote:If you were to simulate a contradiction of Sun Tzu, you would be simulating a parallel universe where chickens turn into eggs and people used their meals to eat their utensils...
It's all fun and games until someone loses a lawsuit. Oh, and by the way, sending me private messages won't work. :/ If you must contact me, there's an e-mail address listed on the website in my profile.
Project Gutenberg has a copy of the Art of War that can be read for free.
http://www.gutenberg.org/etext/132
http://www.gutenberg.org/etext/132
-
Polaris
- Posts: 104
- Joined: March 25th, 2004, 3:30 pm
- Location: Invincible Cyclones Of FrostWinds
- Contact:
I really like Sun Tzu (and Machiavelli's Prince) too... Because their ideas can successfully being abstracted to deal with *almost* every matter.Breeblebox wrote:Firstly, writing about a subject in vast volumes does not an expert make. Being the most verbose, the most prolific, the loudest does not an authority make. Surely those commentators of little substance are quickly forgotten. (Sorry for sounding like Yoda here.)
Secondly, contradicting Sun Tzu on matters of war is contradicting 2000 years of impirical evidence from people to whom real war was a career. Sure you can say that WINR, but fundamentally it is built on realistic warfare principles such as strategy, tactics, economics, and terrain. If you were to simulate a contradiction of Sun Tzu, you would be simulating a parallel universe where chickens turn into eggs and people used their meals to eat their utensils...
Standing With So Cold A Heart... Watching The Death Of The Sun...
There really isn't alot of it, either. Only a couple hundred pages, if memory holds.
Gandalf-"I am a servant of the Secret Fire, wielder of the Flame of Anor. You cannot pass. The dark fire will not avail you, flame of Udun. Go back to the Shadow. You cannot pass!"
AT- "That sounds like more trouble than it's worth."
AT- "That sounds like more trouble than it's worth."
Personally, when it comes to matters of combat, my preferred style is this:Do not fight an enemy unless you so incredibly outclass him that you need not expend any real effort, or sacrifice anything in defeating him.
When you do fight him, expend a real effort, and utterly remove him from the face of the world.
When I played Civilization, I had a most peculiar style. First, I would expend an astronomical effort in the acquisition of technology and expansion of resources. Then, when I fought enemies, I would never capture a city - instead, I would meticulously erase every city the opponent ever made from the map.
If I ever did lead a real war, I would prefer to succeed in the same way that the robots in "The Matrix" did - winning not by tactics, or any sort of chance trickery, but rather winning by simple, empirical superiority. Winning not because I'm a better tactician, but simply because I'm better in every way something can be. It's the same way the Trow kicked everyone's ass in Myth: The Fallen Lords.
It's elitism at it's finest, but it feels the most honest when you win. Beating someone through better tactics has always felt cheap to me.
-----
Of course, putting my pipe away, I can obviously say that such situations are obscenly rare, and I make a bloody good use of tactics all the time. Sun Tzu had a pretty good idea of those.
However, in a childish way, I just happen to enjoy perpetuating a "Vulgar Display of Power."
As stated in the Oath of the Vidmaster:
"Never shoot when you could use grenades."
Or for Marathon Evil:
"Never use the pistol when you could use the nuclear mortar unit."
We need a vidmaster's oath for wesnoth...
Go Rin No Sho
Another good source for use in strategem is Go Rin No Sho, (The Book of Five Rings), by Miyamoto Musashi. Personally, it is my favorite strategy book, followed closely of course by The Art of War. (Which, by the way and alittle off topic, I thought was a pretty good movie.)
It, as well as The Art of War as was mentioned by Polaris, can be used for things outside of war, and war game strategies and tactics. For both, Go Rin No Sho and The Art of War, are required reading for most if not all of the business schools in Japan.
Also, I would disagree Jetryl, victory through strategy and tactics is not cheap. Strategy and tactics are equalizers, the level the playing field when opposing someone that is in other ways more powerful then your forces.
-JK
It, as well as The Art of War as was mentioned by Polaris, can be used for things outside of war, and war game strategies and tactics. For both, Go Rin No Sho and The Art of War, are required reading for most if not all of the business schools in Japan.
Also, I would disagree Jetryl, victory through strategy and tactics is not cheap. Strategy and tactics are equalizers, the level the playing field when opposing someone that is in other ways more powerful then your forces.
-JK
Take care at the end as at the beginning
So that you may avoid failure. - Tao Te Ching
-----
"Immature strategy is the cause of grief." - Shinmen Miyamoto Musashi
So that you may avoid failure. - Tao Te Ching
-----
"Immature strategy is the cause of grief." - Shinmen Miyamoto Musashi
-
Doc Paterson
- Drake Cartographer
- Posts: 1973
- Joined: February 21st, 2005, 9:37 pm
- Location: Kazakh
- Contact:
Re: Go Rin No Sho
[quote="Khaos"]Another good source for use in strategem is Go Rin No Sho, (The Book of Five Rings), by Miyamoto Musashi. Personally, it is my favorite strategy book, followed closely of course by The Art of War
Ever read "Musashi" by Eiji Yoshikawa? 1000 or so pages. Quite amazing.
How much would you love to see Musashi in Wesnoth?
Shinmen Miyamoto Musashi
Movement: 6
HP: 55
Leadership, First Strike
Daisho 9-5
Oar 13-3
And of course he'd be super tough to hit.
Sasaki Kojiro would be amazing too....
What we need is a Musashi campaign.
Ever read "Musashi" by Eiji Yoshikawa? 1000 or so pages. Quite amazing.
How much would you love to see Musashi in Wesnoth?
Shinmen Miyamoto Musashi
Movement: 6
HP: 55
Leadership, First Strike
Daisho 9-5
Oar 13-3
And of course he'd be super tough to hit.
Sasaki Kojiro would be amazing too....
What we need is a Musashi campaign.
I will not tell you my corner / where threads don't get locked because of mostly no reason /
because I don't want your hostile disease / to spread all over the world.
I prefer that corner to remain hidden /
without your noses. -Nosebane, Sorcerer Supreme
because I don't want your hostile disease / to spread all over the world.
I prefer that corner to remain hidden /
without your noses. -Nosebane, Sorcerer Supreme
Re: Go Rin No Sho
And with the recent addition of the new Japanese translation to CVS, this has even stronger resonance...Doc Paterson wrote:What we need is a Musashi campaign.
This quote is not attributable to Antoine de Saint-Exupéry.
Well, yes, and because the copyrights have expired ages ago, I got a cheap Penguin paperback copy. No money going anyware, in other words.ebo wrote:Project Gutenberg has a copy of the Art of War that can be read for free.
http://www.gutenberg.org/etext/132
Amor omnia vincit.
-
Big Bad Joe
- Posts: 258
- Joined: January 26th, 2005, 11:07 pm
- Location: You really do not want to know
It's not that hard. You have more manuverability then him. I always use feints against people like that, and it usually worksBig Bad Joe wrote: Just try to hold oponent with one stick against his two...
Try fighting someone with a short spear in one hand, and a short sword in the other. That can get complicated I speak what's on my mind.
Which is why nothing I say makes sense.
Which is why nothing I say makes sense.