Strategy

Rating:
Summary: You better reaaaally like military history
Review: The book is good. Personally i'd give it 4 stars, but because i'm thinking of the general public i'll give it 3 stars. My complains are that the maps are absolutely necessary to understanding the subject matter yet almost 100% impossible to read. The maps are so hard to read i can't even tell if the cities mentioned are on it or not.

The strategy is extremely detailed. This is almost more of a reference book to military strategy than anything else. Forget what Hannibal did vs Scipio? Open the book, "Oh yeah, now i remember". Although you can read it without any knowledge of the battles, as I did, you may get annoyed at the fact that the author hardly ever even bothers to mention which side generals belong to. You will be told that Prussia and Russia are at war (a totally made up example) and it will tell you about 2 generals that are fighting each other, but you won't know which one belongs to which side. This is why it is more of a reference manual than an amateur book.

Another BIG complaint that i haven't noticed others mention so far is that the author seems to have a HUUUUGE problem with proper pronoun usage. Specifically, there were way too many times where I felt like i could not tell which side was performing the action i was reading about because the general was ambiguous.

But othere than these complaints, i really enjoyed the book. I felt like i really learned a lot from it and would suggest it to anyone who is interested in military history as hardcore as i am. I specifically loved reading about Belisarius, who i never heard about before this book who, after reading about him, became my favorite general of all time. If you go to your local bookstore at least rip that chapter out of it because i think that EVERYONE would enjoy it.

Rating:
Summary: Pbbbbbt.
Review: The classic strategy book that emphasizes a flexible, decentralized chain of command over the older centralized chain of command.