This is a theoretical paper on campaign planning. The paper examines the processes and principles involved in campaign plan formulation and modification within the context of all three levels of war. A series of theoretical models are used to describe the nature of war, the development and role of doctrine, and the ends, ways and means of war at the strategic, operational and tactical levels. The paradigms postulated describe war and operational concepts based primarily on an analogy using the physical concepts of energy and power. The proposed analogy differs somewhat from the Clausewitzian-Newtonian model which was based upon force and mass. The postulated models discriminate between the three levels of war and portray the role and influence that commanders at each level have on battle outcome. The paper uses past and present theorists to develop the theoretical framework used in the analyses. When appropriate, various historical examples are woven into the discussion to illustrate specific concepts or phenomenon. Appendices are used to further elaborate on conceptual models and to provide more detailed historical illustrations of the concepts being examined. The paper develops paradigms defining the nature of war and the spectrum of conflict (low-medium-high intensity warfare). The role of doctrine is examined at all levels of war and levels of conflict together with an analysis of the dynamic nature of doctrine development and fielding. The means, ways and ends of war are examined at each level of war. Specific relationships are developed relating attrition to force ratios and the form of war (offense or defense) employed. The critical role of strategic guidance and the practice of strategic art is also analyzed with its relationship to the operational level of war. The majority of the paper focuses on the operational level of war and related concepts. The concepts of center of gravity, decisive points, selection of objectives, battlefield geometry and offensiv