Comparing Success Rates In Simulated Combat: Intelligent Tactics vs. Force

Publisher Website
Google Scholar
Abstract
Bakan categorized military tactics according to their reliance on "force" or "intelligence" suggesting that tactics that rely on the latter are more effective. Intelligence refers to an emphasis on local creativity, surprise, stealth, and adaption, while force relates to an emphasis on central direction, direct power, and hierarchical structure. Bakan's hypothesis was tested in realistic field exercises (n = 237) that employed tactical engagement simulation of weapons to simulate casualties and record events. The field exercises consisted of platoon-level, light infantry offensive operations. Intelligence was defined in terms of the extent of previous training (in stealth); force was defined by the personnel force ratio, reflecting the degree of numerical predominance on offense. Training in intelligent tactics increased the odds of the offense winning in simulated battle by 30 to 1, compared with the force ratio, which only increased these odds by 3 to 1-highlighting the importance of intelligent tactical training.

This publication has 0 references indexed in Scilit: