Welcome
Welcome to Military Power.

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple, and absolutely free, so please, join our community today!

Quality vs Quantity

Discussion of the changes in tactics over time

Quality vs Quantity

Postby Maximus the Destroyer on Mon May 05, 2008 4:59 pm

Which do you think is more important? Quality or Quantity?
User avatar
Maximus the Destroyer
1st Lieutenant
1st Lieutenant
 
Posts: 672
Joined: Sat Mar 22, 2008 10:15 am

Postby General Forestry on Mon May 05, 2008 7:49 pm

Quality is obviously the choice most people would think is correct. However Quality requires more time, money, maintence, and man-power...for anything. Quantity requires quick, cost-effective mass-production. Of course, you can have both at the same time. Take plastic for example. You have a material that can be easily changed on the molecular scale to be strong or weak. This can then be made in massive quantities which are high quality.
~GF

"War...it's fantastic!" ~ Hot Shots: Part Deux
User avatar
General Forestry
General of The Army
General of The Army
 
Posts: 629
Joined: Sun Aug 19, 2007 9:16 pm
Location: Loysville, PA
How did you find out about Military Power?: KnightTemplar
Call Sign: Bowsaw
Current Military Status: Military Hobbiest
Specialist: Firearms, The Battle of Gettysburg

Postby CrazyCatman on Mon May 05, 2008 10:11 pm

Well, WWII showed Quantity over Quality as the U.S. Tanks were honestly a P.O.S. where the German's tanks were high quality. However the U.S. pumped so many out that they just overwhelmed the Germans
I detest life-insurance agents; they always argue that I shall some day die, which is not so.
User avatar
CrazyCatman
2nd Lieutenant
2nd Lieutenant
 
Posts: 424
Joined: Mon Jul 30, 2007 6:57 am
Location: Nashville, TN
Call Sign: Crazy Cat

Re: Quality vs Quantity

Postby Maximus the Destroyer on Sun Feb 08, 2009 2:51 pm

I think that it depends. I mean, the Germans in WW2 no doubt had the most superb weaponry on the planet, yet overwhelming allied numbers simply acted as a deluge that couldn't be held back.

Then you have Operation Desert Storm, where allied forces were outnumber by Iraqi forces...but the allied forces possessed a much higher quality, and in the end...inflicted unimaginable losses to the enemy for an unimaginably small toll.
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." -Thomas Jefferson

"A man-of-war is the best ambassador" -Oliver Cromwell
User avatar
Maximus the Destroyer
1st Lieutenant
1st Lieutenant
 
Posts: 672
Joined: Sat Mar 22, 2008 10:15 am

Re: Quality vs Quantity

Postby General Forestry on Mon Feb 09, 2009 3:36 pm

When technology advances, quality will always out-match quantity.
~GF

"War...it's fantastic!" ~ Hot Shots: Part Deux
User avatar
General Forestry
General of The Army
General of The Army
 
Posts: 629
Joined: Sun Aug 19, 2007 9:16 pm
Location: Loysville, PA
How did you find out about Military Power?: KnightTemplar
Call Sign: Bowsaw
Current Military Status: Military Hobbiest
Specialist: Firearms, The Battle of Gettysburg

Re: Quality vs Quantity

Postby Spazz Maticus on Mon Feb 09, 2009 4:14 pm

General Forestry wrote:When technology advances, quality will always out-match quantity.

emphasis added

We seem to keep forgetting German Tanks in WWII. Technologically they were superior to the Allied tanks in every way (They could blow a hole through a Sherman, the most common allied tank of the war, from distances where Sherman shells couldn't even hit them, let alone do any damage to their much thicker armor), but the allies still won.
The United States Constitution © 1791. All Rights Reserved.
User avatar
Spazz Maticus
Staff Sergeant
Staff Sergeant
 
Posts: 108
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2008 1:32 pm

Re: Quality vs Quantity

Postby Deimenried on Tue Feb 10, 2009 8:18 am

Quality. In many historical battles, outnumbered forces have triumphed due to the quality of both their equipment and their tactics.
"Victorious warriors win first and then go to war, while defeated warriors go to war first and then seek to win." - Sun Tzu
User avatar
Deimenried
Specialist
Specialist
 
Posts: 30
Joined: Wed Aug 08, 2007 2:30 pm
Location: Sheffield, UK
How did you find out about Military Power?: The Forum Directory

Re: Quality vs Quantity

Postby Maximus the Destroyer on Tue Feb 10, 2009 7:24 pm

Deimenried wrote:Quality. In many historical battles, outnumbered forces have triumphed due to the quality of both their equipment and their tactics.

interesting. I hadn't thought about this until you said that, but could "Quantity" be a part of "Quality" of tactics?
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." -Thomas Jefferson

"A man-of-war is the best ambassador" -Oliver Cromwell
User avatar
Maximus the Destroyer
1st Lieutenant
1st Lieutenant
 
Posts: 672
Joined: Sat Mar 22, 2008 10:15 am

Re: Quality vs Quantity

Postby Deimenried on Tue Feb 10, 2009 9:43 pm

I believe so. Quantity has it's uses tactically (it's good for "phsyching out" the enemy, distraction etc.), the real trick being in tactics to make a small force seem larger than it actually is. So in a sense, Quantity is useful, but if you're smart enough you can achieve the same effect with a far smaller force.

Hope that makes sense. It's about 4am and my brain is almost in shutdown :/
"Victorious warriors win first and then go to war, while defeated warriors go to war first and then seek to win." - Sun Tzu
User avatar
Deimenried
Specialist
Specialist
 
Posts: 30
Joined: Wed Aug 08, 2007 2:30 pm
Location: Sheffield, UK
How did you find out about Military Power?: The Forum Directory

Re: Quality vs Quantity

Postby SizarieldoR on Tue Feb 17, 2009 10:08 am

Well,
Quantity is harder to manage and sustain, because the more the troops, the bigger difficulties arise in coordinating them.
However, qualified troops are hard to replace.

I usually have opinions on such matters, but here I have to say that it all depends on how we employ the élite troops and the ordinary troops.

What I like to do is use cheap troops as a meat shield for the quality units. For example, when I play a LotR strategy, I take lots of Orcs and add a champion or two. This way I can retreat the nazgul or whichever if things go bad.

Similarly, the taking of the walls of Constantinople is another example of how both types of armies work. When the Ottomans started their final assault on the walls, Mehmet (their sultan)
first sent forth the "azabs" - the light, poorly equipped Ottoman cannon-fodder - in order to exhaust the defenders. Only after that did he send the better trained and equipped soldiers, who faced less resistance.
Which basically summarizes my opinion.
User avatar
SizarieldoR
Staff Sergeant
Staff Sergeant
 
Posts: 131
Joined: Tue Mar 11, 2008 2:21 pm


Return to Tactics

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests

cron