user109: What is the difference between a Tactic and a Combination?  For reference, here is a game I played as white and I think I had a nice combination from move 16, but I am not sure if it is classified as a combination or tactics.  This what my thought process from move 16 was.  There are probably multiple mistakes made in the game, but I am not looking for a complete analysis.
16. Bc2 - staring down the diagonal
17. Ned4 - I am hoping he will take it so I can advance my pawn to e5.
18. exd4 - He takes the sacrifice which is what I was hoping for.
19. Qxh7# - Apparently, he didn't notice the open diagonal and probably was concentrating on me attacking his bishop.
[FEN ""]
1. e4 d6 2. Nf3 g6 3. d4 Bg7 4. Be3 Nc6 5. Bb5 Bd7 6. O-O e5 7. d5 Nce7 8.
   Qd3 a6 9. Bc4 b5 10. Bb3 f5 11. Nc3 f4 12. Bd2 Bf6 13. a3 Nh6 14. Ne2 g5 15.
   c4 O-O 16. Bc2 Qe8 17. Ned4 exd4 18. e5 dxe5 19. Qxh7#


user70: I think this is subjective, but your combination is the entire sequence starting with Bc2.  Your tactics are a knight sacrifice and a double attack (Qxh7 and exf6).  Kudos for forming a plan and executing it. But out of curiosity, how would you handle 17. ... bxc4 ?

user8309: Books on tactics generally cover a number of standard devices that are in the toolkit of every strong player - checkmate, discovered attack, discovered check, double attack, double check, forks, interference, overloading, pins, removing the defender, skewers, stalemate, x-rays and the like. The tactic itself may only be one move long, and both players may have foreseen the move in advance.
Combinations require somewhat deeper calculation, and there is an element of surprise usually brought about by a sacrifice followed by a series of forced moves after which the position changes in the attacker's favour. Combinations have an artistic element.  One player seems to conjure up magic from what seemed like a straightforward position.  Games with beautiful combinations often win brilliancy prizes.

user885: A combination is a more general term for a tactic. While both offer the player an advantage (when they're sound!), a tactic offers a very concrete advantage, such as material/mate. Whereas a combination is just a sequence of (sometimes) forced moves that doesn't necessary offer a very concrete advantage. It tends to be more positional in nature (i.e. a series of exchanges in the center may leave one player with a sizable space advantage, which can both support outposts for knight and also block in one's own bishops).
But really, it all comes down to semantics. To me, they are one and the same. But the connotation (to me) of tactics would be Tal and that of combinations would be Capablanca.

user912: Here is the way that I see the difference, and the way it has been explained to me:
A tactic is generally a short-term attacking sequence with little connection to the positional strategy. It is used to score points and gain an advantage.
A combination is typically a longer sequence and can involve a number of tactics. It also generally is connected to the positional strategy.

user757: The United States Department of Defense Dictionary of Military Terms defines the tactical level as:

The level of war at which battles and engagements are planned and
  executed to accomplish military objectives assigned to tactical units
  or task forces. Activities at this level focus on the ordered
  arrangement and maneuver of combat elements in relation to each other
  and to the enemy to achieve combat objectives.

Your ultimate combat objective is to checkmate, and for that you'll have to assign specific tasks to the tactical units you have deployed in order to achieve the desired objective.
For example:
17. Ned4 - Tactical sacrifice, in order to allow e4 pawn to advance.
18. e5 is merely the completion of the tactical maneuver.
From the moment you are considering the diagonal b1-h7 as one of your attacking strengths you are considering a "strategy" which is to checkmate on h7, or in other words you are considering the "combination" of the specific techniques (tactics) involved in accomplishing such objective.

109: <p>What is the difference between a <code>Tactic</code> and a <code>Combination</code>?  For reference, here is a game I played as white and I think I had a nice combination from move <code>16</code>, but I am not sure if it is classified as a <code>combination</code> or <code>tactics</code>.  This what my thought process from move <code>16</code> was.  There are probably multiple mistakes made in the game, but I am not looking for a complete analysis.</p>

<p><code>16. Bc2</code> - staring down the diagonal<br>
<code>17. Ned4</code> - I am hoping he will take it so I can advance my pawn to <code>e5</code>.<br>
<code>18. exd4</code> - He takes the sacrifice which is what I was hoping for.<br>
<code>19. Qxh7#</code> - Apparently, he didn't notice the open diagonal and probably was concentrating on me attacking his bishop.</p>

<pre><code>[FEN ""]
1. e4 d6 2. Nf3 g6 3. d4 Bg7 4. Be3 Nc6 5. Bb5 Bd7 6. O-O e5 7. d5 Nce7 8.
   Qd3 a6 9. Bc4 b5 10. Bb3 f5 11. Nc3 f4 12. Bd2 Bf6 13. a3 Nh6 14. Ne2 g5 15.
   c4 O-O 16. Bc2 Qe8 17. Ned4 exd4 18. e5 dxe5 19. Qxh7#
</code></pre>
 70: <p>I think this is subjective, but your combination is the entire sequence starting with <code>Bc2</code>.  Your tactics are a knight sacrifice and a double attack (<code>Qxh7</code> and <code>exf6</code>).  Kudos for forming a plan and executing it. But out of curiosity, how would you handle <code>17. ... bxc4</code> ?</p>
 8309: <p>Books on tactics generally cover a number of standard devices that are in the toolkit of every strong player - checkmate, discovered attack, discovered check, double attack, double check, forks, interference, overloading, pins, removing the defender, skewers, stalemate, x-rays and the like. The tactic itself may only be one move long, and both players may have foreseen the move in advance.</p>

<p>Combinations require somewhat deeper calculation, and there is an element of surprise usually brought about by a sacrifice followed by a series of forced moves after which the position changes in the attacker's favour. Combinations have an artistic element.  One player seems to conjure up magic from what seemed like a straightforward position.  Games with beautiful combinations often win brilliancy prizes.</p>
 885: <p>A combination is a more general term for a tactic. While both offer the player an advantage (when they're sound!), a tactic offers a very concrete advantage, such as material/mate. Whereas a combination is just a sequence of (sometimes) forced moves that doesn't necessary offer a very concrete advantage. It tends to be more positional in nature (i.e. a series of exchanges in the center may leave one player with a sizable space advantage, which can both support outposts for knight and also block in one's own bishops).</p>

<p>But really, it all comes down to semantics. To me, they are one and the same. But the connotation (to me) of tactics would be Tal and that of combinations would be Capablanca.</p>
 912: <p>Here is the way that I see the difference, and the way it has been explained to me:</p>

<p>A <em>tactic</em> is generally a short-term attacking sequence with little connection to the positional strategy. It is used to score points and gain an advantage.</p>

<p>A <em>combination</em> is typically a longer sequence and can involve a number of tactics. It also generally is connected to the positional strategy.</p>
 757: <p>The United States Department of Defense Dictionary of Military Terms defines the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tactic_%28method%29" rel="nofollow noreferrer">tactical</a> level as:</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>The level of war at which battles and engagements are planned and
  executed to accomplish military objectives assigned to tactical units
  or task forces. Activities at this level focus on the ordered
  arrangement and maneuver of combat elements in relation to each other
  and to the enemy to achieve combat objectives.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>Your ultimate combat objective is to checkmate, and for that you'll have to assign specific tasks to the tactical units you have deployed in order to achieve the desired objective.</p>

<p>For example:</p>

<p><code>17. Ned4</code> - Tactical sacrifice, in order to allow e4 pawn to advance.</p>

<p><code>18. e5</code> is merely the completion of the tactical maneuver.</p>

<p>From the moment you are considering the diagonal b1-h7 as one of your attacking strengths you are considering a "strategy" which is to checkmate on h7, or in other words you are considering the "combination" of the specific techniques (tactics) involved in accomplishing such objective.</p>
