  Quite some work in the ATL-tradition uses the differences between various
types of strategies (positional, uniform, perfect recall) to give alternative
semantics to the same logical language. This paper contributes to another
perspective on strategy types, one where we characterise the differences
between them on the syntactic (object language) level. This is important for a
more traditional knowledge representation view on strategic content. Leaving
differences between strategy types implicit in the semantics is a sensible idea
if the goal is to use the strategic formalism for model checking. But, for
traditional knowledge representation in terms of object language level
formulas, we need to extent the language. This paper introduces a strategic
STIT syntax with explicit operators for knowledge that allows us to charaterise
strategy types. This more expressive strategic language is interpreted on
standard ATL-type concurrent epistemic game structures. We introduce rule-based
strategies in our language and fruitfully apply them to the representation and
characterisation of positional and uniform strategies. Our representations
highlight crucial conditions to be met for strategy types. We demonstrate the
usefulness of our work by showing that it leads to a critical reexamination of
coalitional uniform strategies.
