Whenever a new weapon or tactic comes on the line it gets copied. Shouldn't a high priority be to find a way to avoid this.
For instance.
No large European power managed to get the full potential of the composite bow. Why? Because Europe didn't have a economic or social structure that allowed horse archery on a large scale. Conversely. Until the Meji restoration, all top naval powers were either Mediterranean or Atlantic(there were a few naval powers in the Indian Ocean, none of them never really tested at their prime). Probably this is because Europes many penensulas encouraged water trade, and the mountains hindered overland. Not to mention the political instability(the sea was always unstable, but the land was sometimes controlled by large empires, outside of Europe).
By contrast Gustav Adolph built a tactical system for Sweeden that carried it through the Thirty Years War. The problem? Anyone could copy it and once it was copied, numbers would once again assert themselves. This is why the asscendency of the Vasa Family was so short.
These are historical examples. But my point is for the present. A new technique should be hard to copy and this should be a consideration in procurement. |