So what am I asking for that is different from the rest of the topics.
Well we are primarily focused with hardware. We blindly admire the humans using the hardware and then promptly forget about him while we concentrate on the hardware and say "OK - JF-17 is far better than F-22 and so you have 200 JF-17s versus 100 F-22s and those Raptors will get shot out of he sky for the loss of 4 JF-17s (as per the report of exercise "Palishmijile 2014") and we have total air superiority.
But my reading tells me that war is about detail and excruciating detail about a thousand individual battles. And the overall effect of winning or losing those individual battles leads to some sort of overall conclusion in the war. the leader who has the best information about most of those individual battles and is able to make arrangements to ensure that the men involved in each of those individual battles have the leadership, initiative and back up they need for unexpected and expected hurdles is the leader who is going to win the war.
In other words I am hoping that we can learn about the excruciating detail of any one or two individual battles - the number of men, the terrain, the time, the weather and what they need to do and what opposition they face. It is like dividing the above example of 200 JF-17 vs 100 F-22s into 150 separate dogfights and describing each of those in detail. 150 reports where 100 F-22s were shot down describes the "air war" to gain air supremacy.
The amount of detail for each small battle which forms 1/10,000th of the whole war can be very detailed and is something we don't even think about on here. Like a platoon of men pinned down needing to silence a heavy machine gun emplacement which is preventing anyone from moving forward. They want mortar support to hit that gun, but the radio has taken a direct hit. So a man has to run back and pass the information. All sorts of things can happen. That man can be killed, or (I have read this) the man can be caught by a senior officer and accused of running from battle who does not believe his "need mortar support" cock and bull story. So battles are about chance. We cannot predict chance events but we can create chance events for other forum people who are making battle plans just to screw them and spite them and stop their plan from succeeding.
For example Bala Vignesh makes a detailed battle plan and then I suddenly come up and say "Sorry I just killed your leader by a chance rock falling from the sky" creating more argument on the thread

But the idea of the thread is to let your imagination run wild with the caveat that anyone is allowed to screw you and your battle plans by counter plans of their own, becoming enemy for one post and ally for the next post.
I don't know if this will work, but thought it might be a fun thread that mixes up knowledge and experience of a few with the imagination and reading of many with the freedom to argue with anyone and know his plans off.
And anyone, at any time can come up with a battle scenario that someone else has to beat. For the heck of it I wil come up with one and I ask others to cook up their own forces and plans. it can range from taking a hill feature to capturing Kraachi. Or New York if you like. The details are important. No details. No scope to argue and screw the other guy. No fun.
And of course is anyone wants to bring in a real battle scenario that he has read about - that is fine. Should make good reading.
I will start by cooking up a scenario in a separate post and ask others to blow that scenario away - or at least say how they will do that. I will of course reserve the right to cook up things as time passes depending on what responses others may make. Let's see if we can get some fun and information out of this.