So, what are some of the current paradigms in warfare? Recent history would show us that the era of reasonably equally-matched opposing forces has finished - all recent conflicts have been highly asymmetric and their nature goes a long way toward defining modern warfare. Another 'type' of conflict that rose up during the cold war was large scale espionage - and that's still happening.
In the case of asymmetric warfare, how would advances in material sciences change warfare? At the cutting-edge, it could protect occupying forces by the way of better armour (both personal and vehicular). At the other end of the scale, cheaper and more easily producable weapons makes a guerilla war easier to prosecute. We're already on the path of drone warfare, material advances will increase the durability, range and capabilities of UAVs. While an occupying force may use very high tech drones, we're already seeing drones used to deliver explosives in terror-attacks. Both in terrorism and in espionage, material advancement will allow for harder to detect weapons, and for novel applications of existing weapons.
I think, looking at what I've written, material science advancements, alongside other technological advancement might spell the end of the battlefield as we know it. Violence will, increasingly, be able to made via remote control, far away from the front lines. Infantry will still need to hold ground, but are likely to be increasingly vulnerable to those controlling unmanned weapons systems.