diff --git a/plan/strategies.md b/plan/strategies.md
index 1e2d92d..531a551 100644
--- a/plan/strategies.md
+++ b/plan/strategies.md
@@ -19,8 +19,8 @@ the drift rate once it moves - facets of stubbornness, and splitting them invite
 tuning them against each other. Already built and tested against `Intent`; it
 carries over unchanged.
 
-- [ ] Rows of `M`: `direct_engagement`, `destroy_weakest`, `gun_line`, `flanking`,
-      `fighting_withdrawal`, `crossfire`, `cripple`, `bait`, `screen`, `overrun`
+- [ ] Rows of `M`, **three to start**: `direct_engagement`, `cripple`,
+      `fighting_withdrawal`. One per objective we can actually fit
 - [ ] Port `Commitment`/`Grit` from the intent simplex to the strategy simplex
 - [ ] Force-level assignment: greedy per-unit argmax, then swaps that improve the
       force-level features. Crossfire is not expressible per unit
@@ -28,3 +28,50 @@ carries over unchanged.
       theatre - that is Princess's disease measured rather than read
 - [ ] Composition operator as a hyperparameter: the power mean spans min,
       geometric and arithmetic in one `p`
+
+## As many strategies as there are objectives, and no more
+
+A row of `M` is a weight vector. A weight vector comes from a fit. A fit needs a
+label. So if ten rows are fitted from two labels, `M` has effective rank two and
+eight of the names are decoration - blending `flanking` with `gun_line` would
+produce something that is not between them, because they are not independent
+directions.
+
+This epic already carries the test that catches it: "**SVD check on `M`.** If
+effective rank collapses, the named strategies are theatre." Declaring ten rows
+today would fail that check, and would fail it because of the label count rather
+than anything about the strategies.
+
+So the rule: **a strategy is named when it has an objective to be fitted
+against.** Three to start, matching the labels being built:
+
+| strategy | objective | what it should look like |
+|---|---|---|
+| `direct_engagement` | damage inflicted | efficient bracketing - get to the range band where our weapons work and trade at the best rate |
+| `cripple` | BV loss inflicted | take what makes them dangerous: legs, guns, the locations already open |
+| `fighting_withdrawal` | damage taken, negated | keep what is left and make them pay for the ground |
+
+These three are behaviourally distinct rather than three names for aggression,
+which is the point. `direct_engagement` and `cripple` diverge exactly where
+damage and battle value diverge: chipping armour is damage and barely moves BV,
+while a destroyed gun is little damage and a large BV drop.
+
+`cripple` is the one that needs features we do not have. Hit location is rolled,
+not chosen, so "go for the legs" is expressed through kicks, through preferring
+targets whose locations are already breached, and through called shots where
+the rules allow them. That makes `cripple` wait on the melee features, and on
+`target_breach` being crossed with location rather than taken whole.
+
+### Waiting on a label
+
+`destroy_weakest` (kills secured), `gun_line`, `flanking`, `crossfire`,
+`screen`, `overrun`. Each is a real thing a force does; none has a number to be
+fitted against yet. `crossfire` additionally cannot be expressed per unit, so it
+needs a force-level label.
+
+### Waiting on more than a label
+
+`bait` is not blocked on an objective, it is blocked on [beliefs](beliefs.md).
+Baiting means acting on what the opponent will do in response, and nothing in
+the bot models an opponent's future choice. Naming it before that exists would
+be naming a behaviour we cannot compute.