And you have what reason to believe this is what will happen?
Take a look at our current state of matters. How many realms are trying innovative things and how many are sticking to
inferior strategies of tradition. I do not want to feed that by replacing the inferior strategies with slightly better strategies. I want to motivate the realm to
try different strategies to become better.
Why not just a second post in the same article, but one that clearly identifies itself as not being directly mechanical? What's so wrong about that? It certainly makes more logical sense rather than splitting the same topic into separate threads.
As these articles will eventually be ported to the wiki, I believe that every "strategy article" post should have its own page. Mechanics must be on a different page. I would even venture so far as to say mechanics shouldn't even be in the same thread as strategy articles as they are inherently different. Strategy articles assume that you know the mechanics and present various ways to utilize those. Mechanics explanations should be concise and specific, one explanation for one mechanic. That is what I meant if my wording was not clear.
This separation is very important to ensure that strategy articles
remain just that, discussions on strategy. Mixing the two presents "strategies being mapped one to one with mechanics", which is definitely undesirable. Read my previous post for more detail, so it's the post between this one and the one you responded to.
===
I do not want us to teach people how to play BattleMaster, I want us to inform people about some ways BattleMaster can be played. There is a key difference that must be acknowledged and expressed explicitly here.