The Flanking Position and a 4 on 2 Fight

We had a recent practice that I sat out due to a broken thumb.  It was, however, actually a very valuable experience as I got the chance to watch the rest of the army fight.  Overall I thought it was a good practice, and that most of the fighters are gelling fairly well.  At this point its all about tweaking lots of little concepts, which is sort of what I try to attempt to do here.

For this post I thought I'd pick on a single example I saw in a field battle.  And for anyone reading, no,  I certainly don't intend to give away any military "secrets," which is why I'm picking on a small general concept to expand on.  =)


4 on 2 on the Flank

In one of the early field battles, both sides had sent out flankers.  The red team (I'll call them here) sent out two fighters to cover the left flank while the green team answered with 4 fighters (both sides with another 7-9 fighters on their team (not completely shown below)).

So the first question is, which side has the better flanking position?  Neither of them do, actually.  They've both gone wide and neither side has given up the outside position.  One might be inclined to say that green has the better position, but I would disagree with that statement.  Green has the numbers advantage on the flank, but they don't have the flanking advantage until the two red fighters are no longer there to slow them up.  What is pictured above are a bunch of fighters who are fighting straight on.

There is, however, great potential for a flanking advantage.  Its one I talked about in my analysis of last year's unbelted champions battle, and here it is.

Remember, you have two jobs when in charge of a flank.  Either a)  roll the flank or b) prevent the enemy from rolling yours.  When the two green fighters break off to attack the main unit, they'll likely succeed in rolling the flank of that unit.  If they stay intact with the "flanking unit," then they are preventing the enemy from rolling green's flank.

Red is in an interesting position.  Because of the 4on2 disadvantage (assuming similar ability levels), they have no chance of rolling green's flank, so their job is to protect red's flank.  In this position they actually want to stall the engagement.  Their goal is to, ideally, stay alive.  If they can't accomplish that goal, they should attempt to live as long as possible (full defense, back pedal, etc.), using just two fighters to tie up four green fighters.  FWIW, red did a very good job prolonging the fight in this scenario.

Okay, since green did not split off to attack the flank of the main unit, they are performing the job of holding the flank.  The problem is they are using up 4 fighters to do this, meaning that red now has a 7 on 5 advantage in the main unit (they had a 2on2 matchup on the other flank).  If green doesn't split, then they are obligated to win the engagement as quickly as possible, ideally without losing any fighters so that they can quickly rejoin the main unit that is undermanned.


The 4on2 Engagement

In prior blog posts I've covered the 2on1 as well as the 3on2.  I'd not considered covering the 4on2 as it should be a pretty straightforward fight with the team of 4 having a large advantage.  However, there is a difference between wining the engagement and winning it quickly.

The secret to this fight is "lanes."


What are Lanes?

If you've ever watched a football game, every so often one team kicks the ball off to the other team and then runs down the field and attempts to tackle the man with the ball.  When they do this, they are taught to maintain their "lanes."  What this means is that they run down the field and try to keep the entire field covered and not crossing over each other's lanes.  If they all run straight to the guy with the ball, they will obstruct each other and then leave parts of the field open that the ball carrier can freely run to.

When approaching a 4on2, the same concept applies.  One thing I've noticed as a pole fighter is that most aggressive shieldmen will move straight at their target without considering where the pole intends to move.  More often than not, they will move to a position that is slightly to the right of their opponent in an attempt to throw flat snaps and wraps at his shield side.

Notice, for example, what happened in this particular engagement.

Had they maintained their lanes, this is what the attack would have looked like.

Notice now that no one crosses in front of anyone else to get to the spot of the attack.  The two fighters in the middle stay in the middle while the fighters on the ends attempt to turn the corner on the red team.  No one should be thinking about going toward the fighters, but rather going toward their desired end position within the context of the group.

In order to do this, communication needs to happen up front.  The green team had plenty of time to see what they were facing.  I'll say this over and over again, move like a pack of wolves.  Be quick, but be smart about it.  This is one of the reasons why we do a lot of 2on1 drills in our practice.  Every now and then we'll get a new fighter who doesn't understand how to fight with a partner.  We'll call "lay on," and I'll literally stand in my spot and never engage the enemy just to see what my partner does.  More often than not, they run off without me, never once realizing that I wasn't with them anymore.

Small unit tactics requires everyone in the group to move and fight with a good understanding of what the others around them are doing.


How Could Green have been More Effective?

First of all, they should have gotten an idea of what their formation was going to be and who was going to do what job.  A simple, "Who's going to cover the outside?  Who's going to be in the middle?" once the battle was unfolding would have made a big difference.  Shields need to move in a manner that does not cut off other fighters.  Poles need to move in a manner that make the shields understand what they are doing.

As a pole, I personally like to lead out in front of the shields in this scenario.  I'll either go fast and hard to the right while throwing multiple blows at the back of the head and the kidney, or I'll pepper thrusts at the face to blind the opponent.

Another option, especially against the pole, is for the first person there to tie up the opponent's weapon while the other comes in for the kill.

If the poles aren't as experienced, they can also follow behind the shields, but still being aware of what their lanes are going to be.  Who's left?  Who's right?  Who's middle?


Concluding Thoughts

I've put a lot of thought into this scenario and have decided, if the fighter levels are even, that ultimately its best to split two fighters off to attack the flank of the main unit than to attempt to fight the 4on2.  Though the 4on2 should be a guaranteed victory, if the 2 go on full defense, they can really drag out the fight.  On the other hand, two fighters can instantly move on the flank of the main unit and force the fight to happen immediately.

One last piece that I noticed was that fighters were not attacking on the 45s aggressively enough.   The goal always needs to be to turn the corner on the opponent.  That really means to get out and around on them.  You should start at 45 degrees and then continue all the way around to their backs.