New insights

 The method I have invented is about absorbing mates and tactical patterns of all sorts. You noticed that I'm optimistic about it for quite some time now. Which is a good thing, since I haven't been optimistic for more than a few months after any method that I tested the past 23 years.

Besides that, you might have noticed that I'm toying with the other aspects of the game lately. I have given those aspects only scarce thought so far, but now my attention is no longer divided between developing a method to get better at tactics and these other aspects, I can dive a bit deeper.

I thought that absorption of positional patterns would work the same way as tactical patterns. That is not the case. It works totally different. I studied a few positional problems. What I noticed, is that there are always tactics involved. For the very reason, that tactics deliver the force which makes the execution of a plan possible.

Somehow, that is a relief. I was afraid, that absorbing positional patterns would take the same amount of effort as tactical patterns. But it suffices to just deepen the tactical skills.

I have been able to summarize all positional rules in just one rule: increase your piece activity. With a very definite addition: a piece can only be active when there is a target around against which the action is directed. For instance, there is a positional rule that a rook must be placed on an open file. That can be summarized as "increase the activity of the rook". Of course that only makes sense when there is a target at the end of the line of attack. The same is true for outposts, diagonals et cetera.

But the relation between "improve the LoA landscape" and both the center and the initiative remained vague.

The center is vague because it isn't clear how occupying the center effects the LoA landscape precisely and thus the  pawns in the center block the lines of attack. Pushing them changes the LoA landscape. On the other hand, pawns in the center can protect attacking pieces.

The initiative is vague, since it introduces the element of time. And time and geometry are interchangeable in chess.

Currently, I'm reading a Chessable book about the initiative by GM Oleksiyenko. Which is extremely clarifying.

A plan is only a plan, when it involves a pawn push. If it doesn't involve a pawn push,  it is just manoeuvring around.

Step one: find all good looking pawn pushes that are logical in the position. Decide which pawn push plan can be executed with force. That is where tactics come in. No tactics, no force. Say that there are three good looking pawn pushes. h4 for a kingside attack, d5 for a chance to create a passed pawn in the center and a4 for a minority attack on the queenside. Adopt the pawn push that is accompanied with the the most forceful moves as your plan. If there is no trustworthy plan,  you will have to adopt step two: manoeuvre. Improve your worst piece.

So it is actually very simple. Albeit the calculation that is involved might be not.