This isn't a question, it's an incomplete sentence... That said, it is hard to say that Roman tactics are explicitly better than Greek ones, just are different. They were both infantry heavy armies that relied on orderly ranks of troops, but there were significant changes made by the Romans.
The Greeks relied heavily on the phalanx formation including the hoplites. These units were slow moving, hard hitting powerhouses that emphasized lots of soldiers in a small area, meaning they could outnumber troops on the front line who spread themselves out more thinly.
The Romans did away with the phalanx formation, allowing their infantry to move more quickly than more traditional Hellenic formations. At the same time, Roman units were more concentrated than many northern armies which often did not keep their troops in orderly ranks, giving them the same advantage over them the Greeks had. They were able to maintain their fighting capabilities when crunched into these tight formations by using the Gladius Hispaniesis, a sword which was thrust at the enemy instead of swung, allowing Roman soldiers to fight shoulder to shoulder. Roman foot soldiers also carried a few Pila, or javelins to throw into the enemy ranks before charging in order to injure and demoralize. All of this adds up to a mobile, but still well protected and powerful military unit, well trained and able to execute complex tactical maneuvers at the general's command.
While not developing their military as an intentional improvement upon the Greek military tradition, Roman generals did in fact improve on Greek military tactics in several ways. For one thing, they improved upon the Greek tactic of utilizing small, tightly packed formations of soldiers covered by skirmishing units by organizing tiered lines of such formations which used the short sword as their primary weapon: this innovation enabled greater flexibility in the heat of battle. For another thing, they made use of advanced Roman engineering in order to bring fearsome new "machine-weapons" onto the battlefield, which proved to be a significant advantage in combination with their legions of foot-soldiers.
. . . superior tactics and armour .
Macedonia conquered it through superior strategy and tactics.
Which battle - there were many, but the Greeks won by superior strategies and tactics.
Brilliant non-linear military tactics, an amazing personality, lots of luck, and the degradation of the Persian empire which made it easy to conquer. To be clear, Alexander didn't 'build' a large empire, he replace the old rulers via military conquest, and slowly but surely lost the entire empire over time. He really had very little empire 'building' skills, was just good at leading people in war. Because he died young its hard to know how good he could have become though.
Artemis is the goddess of wisdom, and she created many arts and crafts. She also had a lot of strategy and tactics.
He left the tactics to his admirals and generals.
As President, he was Commander-in-Chief, but he had no experience in military command. He taught himself military strategy and tactics from the Library of Congress to be able to converse with his generals.
This question is aqward since he did not do alot with the military exept for deciding where to attack. Many of his generals had diffrent tactics. Some where head on balls to the wall, and others were more secretive and were hard to find. That is what i have gotten from studying military tactics but it might be wrong so double check.
well besides from their RUBBISH tactics they did nothing
Arthur L. Wagner has written: 'Organization and tactics' -- subject(s): Military art and science, Tactics 'Questions in organization and tactics' -- subject(s): Military art and science, Tactics 'The service of security and information' -- subject(s): Tactics, Military reconnaissance, Military art and science, Guard duty, Military intelligence
Military tactics are defined as strategies of organizing the army, ways of using the weapons in the best possible course and to optimize the use of military units in order to be successful in a battle. Military tactics also involve maintenance of equipment and daily training of military units.
He was a student at the French Military Academy where he received instruction in Military History, Military Science, Mathematics. Gunnery, Logistic's, Tactics, the social graces and Military Discipline.
You have to train them with military tactics
The employment and ordered arrangement of forces is called tactics. In the military tactics are used by various military units to achieve an objective.
Arthur Lockwood Wagner has written: 'The service of security and information' -- subject(s): Military reconnaissance, Tactics 'Organization and tactics' -- subject(s): Military art and science, Tactics
Don't die
Military strategy and tactics.