Which is more important in war /k/, Numerical superiority

>>33799338
1.luck
2.doctrine
3.skillz
4.equip
9999.numerical

>>33799338
numerical superiority with adequate equipment

>>33799338
depends on the equipment. not every dodad can negate a 2:1 numerical advantage.

>>33799338
Artillery.

>>33799338
Good generals wine wars sonny boy.

>>33799346
also this

>>33799350
Thermobarics can negate as many ratios as it wants as long as a c130 can fly overhead

>>33799338
Better equipment if you take it far enough

>>33799366
by "equipment" I understood stuff like night vision, IR lasers, optics and personal coms.

>>33799338
take the entire WW2 armies
allied and axis
using only gear they have
tanks, arty, planes
>vs current USA or China or Russia or whatever continent you want taken over
>adjust for inflation however you want
boots on the ground with arty and junker armor is gonna take over whichever nation you want
bullets and arty and armor havent come that far
>granted at a 70% loss rate until the guys on the ground take shit over but still

I mean you take a class of 8th graders and give them 10/22's and go battle royale hunger games vs 1 navy seal with all the gear in the world and I know who my money would be on

>>33799374
>I mean you take a class of 8th graders and give them 10/22's and go battle royale hunger games vs 1 navy seal with all the gear in the world and I know who my money would be on

I would pay good moeny to watch this - if only to see the SEAL get #shreckt and cry like a bitch like they always do....

File: 1467575379975.jpg (74KB, 526x567px) Image search: [Google]

74KB, 526x567px

>>33799338
Training and equipment is the top priority

a platoon of well trained grunts with good equipment will fuck the shit out of a crappy company

>>33799374
counterpoint, the SEAL would disappear into the forest and wait for the 8th graders to die off. survival skills paying off in a big way there.

>>33799374
It's not as cut and dried as that. Remember WW1? The machine gun pretty much proved that gear can be the deciding factor. A few machine gun teams can halt the advance of entire companies of infantry.

The modern day equivalent would be air superiority. There's no way to wage an effective conventional war when every shred of logistics and command and control elements gets bombed out of existence.

Logistics

>>33799374
Im imagining kindergarten cop but its the arnold from predator instead.....
>Let off some steam killed the dinosours be back and what does he do?

>>33799338
Both. It's never a clear cut answer. Logistics, Tactics, morale, replenishment capability, all also play into it.

You can have numerical superiority but if every man only has 1 Magazine worth of ammo he won't last long on the field.

Or take Battle of the Wilderness, boths sides had comparable firearms with Grants Calvary having overwhelming better equipment. Lee had better tactics and defensive terrain but Grants sheer weight of numbers made those points moot. In the End Grant could afford to lose those numbers, Lee couldn't.

When looking at only bare bones Numbers Vs Quality, middle ground for both is the best answer. Now this could be middle ground of standardized average equipment across the whole army, or standardized slightly below-average equipment across the army with a smattering of "elite" units with higher quality equipment. The big thing is reaching a happy medium.

>>33799372
Those are commonly referred to as "Force Multipliers". Weight of arms/numbers is entirely scary in principle but can be effectively countered if prepared for.

>>33799338
Training, experience and equipment will see you a long way.
Experience counts for a lot, it cuts out a lot of the bullshit that doesn't work and sorts out the shit.

In counter-insurgency conflicts, training and tactics count more than any other single factor.

In a conventional war, infantry on both sides are just fodder for the artillery and air power.