When the officers are too strong and the common soldiers too weak, the result is collapse.
[Ts’ao Kung says: "The officers are energetic and want to press on, the common soldiers are feeble and suddenly collapse.">[
17. When the higher officers are angry and insubordinate, and on meeting the enemy give battle on their own account from a feeling of resentment, before the commander-in-chief can tell whether or no he is in a position to fight, the result is ruin.
[Wang Hsi’s note is: "This means, the general is angry without cause, and at the same time does not appreciate the ability of his subordinate officers; thus he arouses fierce resentment and brings an avalanche of ruin upon his head.">[
18. When the general is weak and without authority; when his orders are not clear and distinct;
[Wei Liao Tzŭ (ch. 4) says: "If the commander gives his orders with decision, the soldiers will not wait to hear them twice; if his moves are made without vacillation, the soldiers will not be in two minds about doing their duty." General Baden-Powell says, italicizing the words: "The secret of getting successful work out of your trained men lies in one nutshell—in the clearness of the instructions they receive." [3] Cf. also Wu Tzŭ ch. 3: "the most fatal defect in a military leader is difference; the worst calamities that befall an army arise from hesitation.">[
when there are no fixed duties assigned to officers and men,
[Tu Mu says: "Neither officers nor men have any regular routine.">[
and the ranks are formed in a slovenly haphazard manner, the result is utter disorganisation.
19. When a general, unable to estimate the enemy’s strength, allows an inferior force to engage a larger one, or hurls a weak detachment against a powerful one, and neglects to place picked soldiers in the front rank, the result must be a rout.