Author Topic: Great Armies, which was your favorite?  (Read 42005 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Newkirk

  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 2709
  • 27th Relic
    • View Profile
  • Nick: Old Mr. Kirk
  • Side: Confederacy
Re: Great Armies, which was your favorite?
« Reply #360 on: October 17, 2013, 03:44:22 pm »
Everyone has their own opinions I suppose. The last definition I received of Total War was waging a war on things like infrastructure, agriculture, etc. Knocking the supports out from under an army to weaken it, so it can be more easily defeated.

Offline Tali

  • First Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 747
    • View Profile
  • Side: Neutral
Re: Great Armies, which was your favorite?
« Reply #361 on: October 17, 2013, 03:48:40 pm »
Quote
a war which is unrestricted in terms of the weapons used, the territory or combatants involved, or the objectives pursued, especially one in which the accepted rules of war are disregarded.
- Oxford Dictionary


Quote
Total war is a war in which a belligerent engages in the complete mobilization of all available resources and population.
- Wikipedia

There's no universal definition of the term.

Offline Archduke Sven

  • Brigadier General
  • *
  • Posts: 6012
  • I have over 1000 warning points, be careful.
    • View Profile
  • Nick: regimentless sven
  • Side: Union
Re: Great Armies, which was your favorite?
« Reply #362 on: October 17, 2013, 03:49:44 pm »
Everyone has their own opinions I suppose. The last definition I received of Total War was waging a war on things like infrastructure, agriculture, etc. Knocking the supports out from under an army to weaken it, so it can be more easily defeated.

Yep, thats another part of it. In contrast, in a limited war, the home front usually wont notice that there is a war going on, since the war is only on the frontlines.


told that bih don't @ me