Drexel Fight Practice: 3v5 restricted

Last night we had another great fight practice on the Drexel University campus in Philly.  We did two main battle types, both were 3v5 with the three most experienced fighters on the same team.  The team of 5 had four well trained melee fighters with 1-3 years of experienced each (consisting of 20-30 melee practices or events per year) and a fighter in his 3rd practice (with a bit of hema and fencing background). 


Fighting System

There are many different organizations that do some form of reenactment fighting.  Our main system is the SCA (rattan weapons & armor) but we've also done some Markland (rattan and foam weapons & some armor) as well as Daggorhir (foam weapons, no armor required).  When we created this practice last year, we ultimately chose to go with the Markland system because the lower armoring requirements made it easier to get new fighters suited up on the spot.  I currently have 5 spare helmets and enough hockey gloves, pads, etc. to get people into gear pretty fast (I even just finished making the Dick Flap of Shame for those who don't bring a cup).  Our original intention was to also have a foam only group, but we found that the skills did not transfer to the armored fighting very well, and that very few foam fighters were interested in armored fighting.

This year we made some significant changes.  Though we still use the Markland armoring and weapons system, we've changed to using SCA rules as we found that the Markland rules were creating some bad habits (different rules for engagement and hands are legal targets in Markland). 


Training Philosophy
We use a very different philosophy than most of what I have seen in the SCA.  We focus a lot of effort on making practices fun and give people the freedom and flexibility to try different things.  We do almost no drilling, but rather just run scenarios over and over again and let people experiment with different tactics, and then we discuss what worked, what didn't work, and why. 


Challenges of the 3v5

Again, we put all of the veterans on one team, and the least experienced fighters on the other team.  Normally when we do this, we'll shift fighters back and forth as needed.  Because of the low numbers in this scenario, we left ourselves the option to sit a fighter out if need be.  So if the 5 are overwhelming the 3, one of the 5 could sit out a fight to make it a 3v4.  Also of note, the field size was restricted (due mainly to out lighting situation) which prevents the three from being able to out maneuver the 5.  We may open the field a bit in future variations.

The red team figured out that they would be in bad shape if one of the veteran shields got into the backfield, so they did a good job of securing the flanks.  Spears on both teams tried to control the middle of the field.  The red spear's main job was not trying to get kills, but rather to neutralize the green spear (me).  Occasionally I'd try to make an attack against one of his teammates, and he was really good at countering getting quick kills on me on multiple occasions.  The red team also knew that if their spear died, they had no choice but to charge as they would be facing a veteran spear with no one to neutralize him.  Charging against 3 veterans may feel risky, but at least they'd have a chance.  If they did't charge, they had no chance.

In order for green to win, it is critical to get an early kill.  Usually the early kill would come from the spear, but occasionally one of the shields would find a weakness in the line to exploit. 

Red definitely won most of the battles (more than 2/3 if I remember correctly).  Whenever green won, it was generally because they were able to react more quickly than red once the fight broke down.  In those fights, often red would mount a charge and the green fighters would find a way to rotate out of the fight and to drag red into 1v1 fights. 

Hypothetical:  Green right flanker pivots to outside.  Green left flanker shoots
straight for the spear.  Green spear gets past red spear tip and
only has to defend against pole before reposting in the backfield.

In one case, green was down to a 1v3 and managed to pull out a win by pivoting off of a legged red fighter.

One thing I would have liked to have seen would be for red to charge immediately to overwhelm green.


3v5 Broken Field Battle

The other scenario we ran was a 3v5 broken field resurrection battle.  Those battles tend to play out similarly to the single death field battles, except that the pace slows down a bit, and instead of a straight up 3v5, it often gets broken down into a 1v2 and a 2v3.  Fighters on both teams of to constantly make small adjustments and implement small team tactics on the fly. 

The two most valuable lessons that come from these fights are:

1)  If you are down a fighter or two, you can always back up toward your rez point to reinforce more quickly.

2)  If they are down a fighter or two, you'd better jump on the opportunity, because it won't be long before they reinforce.


The Long View

The biggest benefit we get from these battles is simply a constant reinforcement of sound tactics.  Every time we do one of these scenarios, the team of new people start off losing, and then they get to the point where they are unbeatable.  This is a good thing, because it means that they are figuring out tactics on their own, and that they will take that knowledge to the battle field with them.  If they are constantly told what to do, where to stand, when to charge, etc. they only learn to do what they are told and nothing more.

As I said earlier, the biggest difference between the veterans and the newer fighters, is that the veterans can think more quickly on their feet.  That comes from years and years of experience of doing these kinds of battles.  If we can keep these battles fun, and keep fighters coming out, then the new fighters will gain that kind of experience as well.