The Elementary Evil vs You /Wights/ Rooting Henry's troops out

They said it was too story-based and broad. Good thing I had that GoT fanfiction idea that instead of season 7, the Night King just dug a tunnel beath the wall, infiltrated Westeros and began a guerilla war on large-scale. It was a nearly perfect fit for Henry, also heavily limiting the scenarios in which the zombies would be encountered. I trimmed back Henry's backstory as well, just enough for people not to nag me about it in the comments.

And no feedback since.

Is the question ready for reopening? If not, why?

  • $\begingroup$ Just reread it. It's still over 90% irrelevant info - how does anon and whomever the sudoer were impact on context? Also, you are asking how a battle may play out or will play out, and that's more about a story than about a world. $\endgroup$ Mar 21, 2019 at 15:47
  • $\begingroup$ @Renan that's one singular paragraph, The rest is spent detailing the zombies, how they're made, what are their capabilities, and what type of war they're waging. Same goes for the We section. $\endgroup$ Mar 21, 2019 at 16:00
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ "The guy has soulless written all over his face but isn't our main concern." "No, we won't negotiate with him!" How do these impact on context? $\endgroup$ Mar 21, 2019 at 16:23
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ And how exactly does the protagonist having a facial tattoo imply or impact on the unique strengths and weakknesses of the zombies? $\endgroup$ Mar 21, 2019 at 16:37
  • $\begingroup$ @Renan What? What do you mean? $\endgroup$ Mar 21, 2019 at 16:46
  • $\begingroup$ You should put your question in the Sandbox. From a initial read. You could summarize the description using the words, What is the best way to engage a necromancer in gorilla warfare. To which the answer is, well you really want to just kill the necromancer. $\endgroup$
    – Shadowzee
    May 30, 2019 at 7:56

2 Answers 2


I put a comment on the minimum list of conditions and questionsz that would have to be answered before a reliable answer on tactics could be given - based on my experience planning law enforcement and military operations. Even with all that information - developing tactics in a vacuum is likely to be opinionated, involves many circumspect decisions, and is otherwise extremely difficult to build on just a single event. Hence, why the military does operational planning then tactical planning then mission or course of action (COA) planning then develops orders (orders are what the individual units use).

The current and continuing problem with the question is: it is looking for the overall strategya and tactics needed to win a war (that very top level planning) and that is just a wide open subject. If you don't understand the military difference between strategy (operational) and tactical, I'll expand1:

  1. Strategy/Operational Planning - far-reaching broad plans: The strategy in later parts of OIF was:
    • "to simultaneously defeat and contain insurgency elements and address root causes using comprehensive military efforts"2.
  2. Tactics/Tactical Planning - are far more specific, there we decide the event specific directions to be given to units (and are based on the operational objectives or strategy)3, high-level examples of these can include:
    • "seek & destroy missions (with targets given or areas assigned)"
    • "selecting areas to provide aid, such as food or medical attention, to"
    • "cordon and search (again would contain specific entity or object being searched for)"
    • "develop diplomatic and economic relations with [important] town by _______"
  3. Developing COAs and orders would just break this down to smaller and smaller units and even more specific actions.

The problem with operational, strategic, planning is: it requires a discussion. And SE is just not built for discussion - its a one question/one answer model. So we come to my suggestion to make it a question that fits in WB/SE model - change it to focus on either only a single battle, single type of operation, or single element of the strategy. Or, basically:

  1. split the question so it is only asking about a single "good zombie trait"
  2. describe that trait and some of the other planning elements (not the story)
  3. give the criteria on how a good answer to that single question will be determined
    • do not focus on "best tactics" but working tactics
    • for instance, requiring established military or historic tactics as a base.

Then (as you find you need): wash, rinse, and repeat for each additional trait in separate new questions. I would also suggest asking the question on the sandbox first as tactic problems are simply hard to write within the model of WB/SE.

1: I provide my own experience here but if you need more depth see US Army Strategist Sukman's piece on these two planning elements

2: From one of the guides they gave me - cover & first few chapters were burnt up so don't know which it was originally

3: Totally from memory but I heard it enough I should have it memorized

a: The question of whether should even be a tag is a separate one. As there are very few non-closed/on-hold or even questions with accepted answers in that tag because of the difficulties I state here.

z: The question that comment was attached to is now deleted but the list is now attached to the strategy tag so I've linked to it instead

  • 2
    $\begingroup$ This is a fantastic assessment, and I would argue that you should add it to the tactics tag wiki. Or, at the very least, to add a link to the wiki back to this answer. Excellent insight and advice! $\endgroup$
    – JBH
    Mar 24, 2019 at 6:12
  • $\begingroup$ @JBH I don't have permissions for a tag edit yet but I put in a suggestion $\endgroup$ Mar 24, 2019 at 23:29

what tactic should these squads employ to reliably defeat zombies

1) That was a long read. It could have been much more concise. Too much information is being delivered in narrative rather than simple bullet lists. Long questions are regularly seen as poor questions. Please remember that the all-volunteer force you're inviting to respond is sharing their limited time. Please respect that and be as concise as possible.

2) We're frequently asked "what tactic(s) should X use against Y?" and the questions are regularly closed. Tactics are, by definition, circumstantial (too story-based). What resources, weapons, forces, logistics, geography, climate, disposition-of-the-enemy, etc., etc., etc., are available to me? All those and more are part of deciding a tactic.

Please remember, worldbuilding (on-topic) is about systems and rules. Storybuilding (off-topic) is about circumstances, choices, and plot. We're here (e.g.) to help you develop the characteristics of your races. We are not here to help you write your story.

  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @Mephistopheles, did you read the tag wiki? It includes the phrases, "the effects of certain circumstances, conditions, or locality changes on war" and "in order to remain answerable, questions with this tag should be as specific as possible." Your linked question did not meet those expectations - obviously the tactic used in a narrow canyon would be different than in an open field. No tactics question asking for the best tactic generally will ever remain open. $\endgroup$
    – JBH
    Mar 23, 2019 at 14:47
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @Mephistopheles mind your conduct. $\endgroup$ Mar 24, 2019 at 4:06

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .