Originally Posted by Mawh Camcor
I am NOT saying that they are the same. I'm saying that they are relatively similar in nature.
Whether they know enough about their enemy or not, that doesn't change their similarity. The ability to think and process each situation is essential in both scenarios.
You're right in saying that there are a lot of factors that apply in live combat, but you must realize that they are not unlimited. There is only so much one can do in our world, just like there are certain rules you must follow on the chess board. You're also right in saying that there are many other things besides force composition and movement that affect the outcome of the battle, however in either case it is similar. In chess, the pieces do not think for themselves, if they did it would then need to be treated and controlled as such by the player. The pieces do not think for themselves and so that is not an issue for the player. In war, the soldiers think for themselves; if they didn't the commander would just move them around like in a game of chess with no further thought into the matter. But sinse they do think, the commander must take that into consideration when commanding his forces in the battle field situation. Both are very similar in this regard, however one is more complex and deep.
My point remains the same. The game of Chess and live warfare are not the same, but relatively similar in their own regards. I also think it is immature to dumb down the possible similarities between the two down to just one aspect ("think ahead"), there are "many other factors" you must take into consideration, sir.
But also, in chess, you sacrifice pieces all the time to get the upper hand. In the battleground, nobody would willingly go somewhere to be killed.
Also, in battle, there are other things that affect the outcome, like weather and terrain. Some places, certain units can't go, but in chess they can go anywhere.