I've been collecting ideas for a few months now and decided to just make this a big brain dump. I think there's a lot of good stuff here.
Exploiting Range Advantages
I noticed that some of our newer fighters don't understand the value in exploiting a range advantage. With 1-2 years experience, they have managed to figure out mostly how to key off of the veteran fighters, which is a good thing. Being the least experienced people on the field generally means that they are going to lose most 1 on 1 engagements, so they have learned to let the veterans set up the situation, stay alive, and then come in and help when needed.
What I've noticed they are now missing is understanding when they have a clear, safe advantage regardless of experience level.
Two examples stick out in my mind. "Rygus, start throwing shots at him. You have a 7 1/2 foot pole arm, he's fighting with a 6 footer. Throw some shots. Don't worry, he won't charge while I'm here. Okay, you still aren't throwing shots. You should have thrown 5 shots by now." Rygus just would not attack.
The second was an interesting battle where they only allowed great weapons. Spears were allowed only if you didn't bring a great weapon (made me wish I left my pole at home). We were in a situation where we were facing nothing but poles and we had one spear and he wasn't throwing any shots. After some cajoling, he finally threw a shot, and it hit a pole fighter in the arm. "See? The worst that can happen is that you actually hit someone."
As a veteran fighter, I generally won't throw spear shots unless I see something I think I have a good chance to hit. However, there's usually enough targets that I think I can hit that the shots will come often enough. Also, I know how to make things happen on a field even when not throwing anything.
Less experienced fighters, on the other hand, don't often have those tools. They can either attack, or wait. Waiting accomplishes nothing. Attacking does a few things:
1) It might kill someone
2) It makes the enemy concerned that an attack is coming
3) It might blind them for a second
4) It might make them throw a defense which then tells you something about their defenses
5) It might set up one of your veterans for an attack of opportunity
Containing His Majesty King Amos le Pios
We fought some 5 on 5 battles at War of the Wings. In one of the battles we faced Mountains Keep, who brought a variety of fighters, however Amos was the only knight who chose to fight in this scenario. Amos was certainly the most experienced and effective fighter on their team and was fighting with a Dane axe. I believe the other 4 had shields.
We, on the other hand, had two shields, two spears, and one pole (me). The field had a boundary on one side (our left) and was open on the other.
Our initial plan was to have our strongest shield (and probably our strongest fighter) on the open side, and our other shield on the inside (in this case the left). The spears were in between, with the pole floating in the back. Our set up was to initiate the attacks with the spears expecting them to charge at the spears, and then the other three of us would have to react. We also thought that we might be able to keep Amos out of the fight because he wouldn't want to face 2 spears and a pole.
Amos, however, being very melee savvy, made an adjustment before the battle began and moved onto the open flank and took a shield with him. At lay on, they both moved around our right flank. Our right shield went out to meet him with our right spear staying beside him.
I made a quick read on the situation and thought that I was better suited to fight Amos with my pole. I didn't need to win, only to contain him, while freeing up our most dangerous fighter to go and kill the rest of his team. I moved to the outside and told our team "I'll get Amos."
Why did I feel I was the better match for Amos? Generally speaking, the shield should have the advantage on an axe in a 1 on 1. However, the shield needs to close. In this situation the shield would have to close on an axe and a shield, which puts him at a disadvantage. Or, this might free up the shield to run down the spear. More importantly, Amos is almost a duke and has far more experience fighting Dane axe vs shield than our shieldman does. I, on the other hand, fight great weapon on great weapon all the time.
After making the switch, our shield ran off and attacked the others, Amos made a B line for our spear and I chased, placing him in the center of the fighting and a bad position.
Learning Other Weapons Forms
One might ask, "Why were you fighting with a pole instead of a spear?" Of the five people on our team above, four of us are best with spear, but four spears and a shield is not a very good 5 man team weapons mix. With that said, some people need to pick up other weapons to make it a better mix, and there's an art to figuring out whether its better to use the weapon that you are better fighting with, or the weapon form that is better for the occasion.
With this mix of people, Titus is the second best shield and the shield is a critical piece to anchor the left flank, so he took shield. Out of what's left, I'm the best pole, so that's what I took. Had we been in a larger melee, El Kabong might have taken a pole and I'd move to spear based entirely on the different dynamics of larger fights.
Additionally I've been working on left hand center grip shield over the last two years. Had Titus not been there, I may have taken a shield to try to secure the left flank. I'm not great with a shield, but I'm good enough to neutralize most average / slightly above average fighters.
Avoiding Fair Fights
Whether I'm fighting pole against King Amos, or shield against a decent shieldman, I have no intentions of fighting any of them 1 on 1. The odds just aren't good enough for me to do so. I focus more on holding the position, and trying to draw them into a 2 on 1 fight. There's no need to put myself at risk.
In most scenarios you need to identify if you are a killer, or a supporter. A spear in a line facing a bunch of poles is a killer. A great fighter against a bad fighter is a killer. Two people against one are killers. A shield running down a spear is a killer.
A shield with 2 years of experience against another shield? That's a supporter.
Having said that, the Bog was very successful at Battle on the Bay last month. As observed by an East Kingdom friend who fought with us for the first time, "I don't think I ever saw you guys engage with someone unless you had a 3 on 1 advantage." We are constantly looking for those kinds of advantages!
Bridge Battles
Bridge battles have become much more fluid over the years. There was a time when we would just dominate bridges because the prevailing philosophy was to keep the spears behind the shield wall. We'd bring all of ours to the front and literally decimate the other side. Every now and then they'd mount a charge, and we'd just fall back behind our shields, let the carnage happen, and then come back out and pick them apart.
Now it seems that at least in the East and in Atlantian, most battles turn into meat grinders with a constant back and forth between the shields and spears. Two walls will charge at each other resulting in deaths and fatigue. Once things settle down a bit, bodies pile up, and people get tired from the push, a few spears start to trickle out to fight over the gap. Once one side finds that they are at the range disadvantage, or they start losing ground, they will mount a charge.
Its been a while since I've seen two full ranks of spears going at it for any length of time.
The most successful units are the ones who can get organized. If the spears are fighting, get the shields out of the way. No spears should be standing around in the second rank. If a shield is not actively fighting in a press, he should be giving up his spot for a 3rd rank spear. etc.
3 on 1 Drill. Spear to the Front Wins
I did a drill a while back that was a 3 on 1, with an experienced shield being in the 1 position. On our side we had a veteran spear, and two relatively new fighters (a lefty shield on the left, and a pole on the right).
The single shield had only one goal; get to the backfield and touch the spear (spear could move but not run).
We did 3 scenarios:
1) Spear behind shield and pole
2) Spear even with shield and pole
3) Spear ahead of shield and pole
Most people tend to think that 1) would be the most successful and 3) the least successful, but the opposite was actually true (as I knew it would be). The thought is that you want to bring all three fighters into the fight at the same time, and that a spear out front is unprotected.
What they don't realize is that in scenario 3, the spear forces the shield to commit a good 6 feet further than he does in scenario 1. It also forces an angle of attack that is much easier to adjust to for the team of 3. The spear doesn't get run down because he only needs to take a step or two back while the others take a step or two forward to meet the opponent.
In scenario 1), the single shield made it around the flanks every time. In scenario 3), the shield said that the scenario seemed unwinable no matter what he tried.
2 on 2 Rez Battle with 360 Degree Friendly Engagement
Keeping the rez points close, we did this 2 on 2 fight, with one catch. If anyone gets hit from behind, that person has to run a lap. The point of the drill was to promote situational awareness while also trying to get people to think about getting behind the enemy.
Another great lesson was learned, however. At one point my partner was killed. As he began to jog back to the rez point, the enemy turned to face me. They paused for a beat or two, and then watched me as I jogged behind my dead friend and met him at the rez point.
Never fight a 1 on 2 fight when you can easily make it a 2 on 2 fight.
No comments:
Post a Comment