Quote

It's always fascinating - and sometimes a little disquieting - when two first-rate critics violently disagree.

You win battles by knowing the enemy's timing, and using a timing which the enemy does not expect.

The future battle on the ground will be preceded by battle in the air. This will determine which of the contestants has to suffer operational and tactical disadvantages and be forced throughout the battle into adoption compromise solutions.

We think we've got it taken care of now. Multiplayer is something that's hard to do in a turn-based game, especially a turn-based game that lasts a long time, like Civilization.

Pick battles big enough to matter, small enough to win.

Some people have a misunderstanding about the Army. Some people think, 'Hey, you're in the military, and everything is super-hierarchical, and you're in an environment that is intolerable of criticism, and people don't want frank assessments.' I think the opposite is the case.

Sometimes by losing a battle you find a new way to win the war.

In the Army, because the stakes are so high - right? - you can't just be a yes-man and say, 'Great idea, boss!' if you don't believe it - right? - because lives are at stake. And the commanders that I've worked for, they want frank assessments; they want criticism and feedback.

Battle is an orgy of disorder.

People hate negative tactics, but the fact is, as the 3 A.M. ad demonstrates, they can be very effective.