Hey all, hope you had a nice holiday! For those not aware, Sir Tanaka has been throwing a wonderful event for many many years now in North Jersey called the 100 Minutes War to close out the fighting season, which in the East Kingdom is typically March - November.
The Format
Before the battle begins, an "Atlantian Speed Tourney" is held among any unbelts who are present and interested in being a team captain. It is a single elimination tourney which, this year, consisted of 48 fighters. The final two become the team captains and pick teams, usually a unit at a time, until roughly half the fighters are committed to each side (normally over 100 fighters per side).
Every year, the terrain is a little different, but the scenario rules are always (I believe) an unlimited resurrection battle that lasts 100 minutes, with a short break and a switching of sides half way through, The winner is the team that accumulates the most kills, which are counted by a number of volunteers positioned at each resurrection point.
General Tactics
Regardless of the specific terrain on a given year, there are some fundamental tactics that apply:
It's a very long battle with unlimited resurrections. Long battles typically favor more spears and fewer shields than shorter, single death battles.
There is normally some sort of limited frontage, which also favors more spears and fewer shields.
It is an attrition battle, rather than a control point battle. Shields are usually very good at holding ground and taking ground, which gives them an advantage in control point battles. This is an attrition battle, so those advantages are not present.
Some sort of command structure should be in place. There are 100s of fighters, a relatively large field, and because of the length of the battle, lots of learning takes place. Some people may decide that charges should occur, while others believe that some other tactic should be employed. When charges occur, they need to be coordinated. A single person charging into a mass of fighters is suicide, while a large mass of chargers may be effective. It's helpful to know who is responsible for making that executive decision so that commands are not conflicting.
100 Minutes War attracts the travelers, which usually means that the average melee experience is going to be higher on the field. Often times tactics can be successful due to the incompetence of the opponent. Where a charge into a disorganized mass on the field can often be effective, battles with higher experience levels tend to have numbers of fighters who can quickly fill holes when they form.
What Happens if You Have Too Many Spears?
Anyone who knows me will know that I'm a fan of spears, but can you have too many? Yes. For example, we had too many spears in the Allied Champs Battle of Pennsic 46, which is a rarity for that kind of battle, but as a result, every time the opposition charged, we didn't have enough shield support to stop them from cutting us all down or pushing us back to the flag.
Even though there's no flag to capture at 100 Minutes, or no gate to guard, ultimately a charging mass of shields will only be stopped by an opposing mass of shields, and mostly only killed by shields and poles. Sure, spears can run away from charging shields, but if there's nothing to stop the charging shields, eventually they'll cut down enough fleeing spears in every charge to collect a mass of points. Don't get me wrong, spears can be effective at assisting the shields in stopping a charge, but they can't do it alone.
And lets be honest, a second rank of spears is completely useless other than to replace dying spears on the front rank. I don't have a formula handy, but if your front is going to be limited enough that you have a few ranks of fighters, then ideally you should probably have enough spears to completely fill the front rank while spears are walking back and forth from the rez points and not one spear more (allowing a little bit of room for exhausted spears needing to recover). Everything else should probably be poles, shields, and archers.
Note: High numbers of archers could change this dynamic as archers tend to be the great spear neutralizers.
Take all of that with a grain of salt as SCA tactics are constantly evolving. It also greatly depends on the makeup of the fighters on a given day, the weather conditions, special terrain considerations, etc. etc. If, for example, the spears are not collecting their usual number of kills, it may be to your advantage to go with a higher number of shields, rather than to just watch your spears get picked apart by archers and mass charges.
Spears and Charges
This video is a good snapshot of the action at the event (that's me on the left team in the green and gold):
Video of 100 Minutes War
The general flow of this year's battle was pretty simple. It was a limited front battle that flipped between periods of static fighting with spears holding the front line and archers and axe throwers as the range weapons, and brief yet frequent moments of excitement with shield charges, usually in mass but typically only a fraction of the total number of shields (For example, a charge may occur on the right extreme of the line, but not the left extreme).
Terrain Considerations
Here's the battle field:
And here's the same field with the terrain features described:
So what are we dealing with?
- Both sides have to walk uphill to the fight.
- A choke point between brambles and a picnic table exists roughly halfway between the two rez points
- The hill peaks roughly half way between the two rez points
- A mud pit forms where most of the fighting takes place (not a bad one, but enough to significantly affect footwork).
In an ideal situation, you would want to fight with your enemy in the choke point, and your team fighting in a more open section (this creates kill pockets on either side of the choke point that your opponent has to fight through), fight uphill from your enemy, fight closer to your rez point than they are to theirs, and fight so that your spears are standing on grass and their spears are standing in mud (this will change as the day moves on).
In the pic above you can see the disadvantage a team has when fighting from inside of a choke point. (Fighters not drawn to scale)
Fight Through Choke Point or Give Up the High Ground?
Looking at the pictures above, the peak of the hill sat just to the right of the choke point. So either side was going to either fight with the uphill advantage, but trapped in a choke point, or outside of a choke point, but on the downhill side, unless of course the uphill team could push through the choke point toward the left rez point.
The choices here (for the right team) are either to attempt to push through the choke point, or to give up the high ground. I fought on the yellow team, which fought on the right side (according to the pictures) for the first 50 minutes. I had floated around the battle fighting on the left flank, right flank, and the middle as well. On both flanks we had attempted to mount charges through the kill pockets, hoping to break through the choke points. In fact, I had noticed several occasions where our opponents had no support behind their spears, which would be an ideal situation to charge through and turn the corner. Not only would that get us out of the choke point, but also create a kill pocket of our own, and possibly mop up an entire flank and score a lot of points.
Pictured below is an illustration of how we attempted to break through the choke point when we saw there was no backup for their spears (we are represented by green in the picture).
Did it Work?
Nope.
Why Not?
For a few reasons.
1 - Choke points are hard to break through as the opposing kill pocket puts more numbers on our shields that are trying to charge through.
2 - There was a level competency that the other team had that allowed them to cover the hole before we could push through. In fact, when in the opposite situation, I was once returning from rez and I head Duke Edward yell "Bari, left! Bari, left!" I looked left, saw the column attempting to break through our flank, and ran over to add support. Both teams had more than enough veteran fighters who could recognize and plug a hole relatively quickly.
3 - Even if we did break through, it would have put us closer to the other side's rez point, which allows them to replenish the ranks more quickly.
None of this is to say that it wasn't a good idea. In many instances it would have worked. We just couldn't manage to get it to work, on either flank.
If You Can't Break Through, Should You Keep Charging?
That depends. Are we trying to win?
I'm actually not being sarcastic. 100 Minute War is a really fun battle with lots of action. It's also a great place to practice charges and counter charges, as well as command. This is a difficult concept for a lot of fighters to understand, but winning is not necessarily the only goal. I do think that battles flow better provided that there is at least some sort of winning objective to work toward. I like having a reason to rack up kills while trying to stay alive. I knew that running to the left when Duke Edward yelled at me was going to help us move closer toward a winning condition. But it is sometimes just as important, if not more important, to train and make sure that everyone is having fun.
Several years ago I analyzed some drone footage of 100 Minutes War and counted up the deaths after every charge. The charging team almost always lost more lives than the team receiving the charge. I'd also analyzed similar footage of an Allied Champions Battle at Pennsic with the same result. All else being equal, assuming that both sides are of at least average competence, the charging team seems to lose more lives if charging without a clear advantage. Charges really need to occur when there is a clear advantage to doing so (ie charging into spears and archers, into a retreating opponent, into a flank, into a lesser skilled opponent, into a smaller unit, etc.)
Again, that is if your goal is solely to win. That's my goal in an Allied Champions Battle on the first day of Pennsic. That is less of a goal of mine in the last battle of the season before the holidays.
And I want to reiterate, that doesn't mean I'm opposed to charges. I recommended some to commanders myself. It's just that they are sometimes difficult to pull them off with success, and everyone needs to try to read those results as they occur on the battlefield and then make adjustments.
Improved Command for the Second Half
Someone had recognized a breakdown in command in the first half of the battle. No one really new who was responsible for battlefield decisions, and that can be problematic at times. In the second half, three commanders were appointed to control the left, right, and middle. If anything, it gives an executive decision maker to run recommendations through. I don't personally like to command, but I do see a lot of things on the field and like to know who to run those observations up to.
Having said that, we had a strategy in the second half that involved staying out of the mud and out of the choke point. It appeared that the opposing team had the same strategy, so neither side engaged at first. Thank the heavens that both sides, more or less, came together in the middle. I've seen battles where both sides care so much about winning that they will both refuse to engage. Those battles sucked! We can still meet in the middle, have a good fight, while both sides attempt to draw their opponents into the kill pockets throughout the fight. You are still applying good tactics while enjoying the fight.
Stick With a Unit or Float?
Most people like to stick with their unit. They often fight better with people they're used to, it's a good way to build unit cohesion over the years, and it's a good way to organize a front line so that no holes develop (ie this unit here, that unit there, this other unit over yonder, etc.)
I'm more of a floater. I tend to see opportunities and act on them. I'm also a veteran with a bit of a reputation, and if I stick to any one spot, people start figuring out ways to beat me (matching me with someone who knows my tricks, putting an archer on me, doubling up, etc.). I also like moving around the front to evaluate the battle and see if there's anything that I can report up through our command structure. Now, if I'm at Pennsic with a unit of 30 fighters, I will always stay within proximity of that unit, rather than float all over the battlefield, but in a battle like this I will float around a bit more.
Having said that, I mostly look for spots in our line where we are weak on spears. Usually it will be a spot where two or three shields are on the front line. I walk up behind them and ask if I can have one of their spots, and they usually allow me in front of them.
Note: regardless of who you are, if someone has you figured out and they keep killing you, whether its a spear god, or an archer, or someone who just has a really good angle on you, it's probably a good idea not to keep returning to the exact same position.
Below is an example of a position I might want to move into.
In that example, I would likely put my spear between the two shields and say, "spear coming up. Would you mind if I take your position for while." They almost always will give up their position to let me fight.
Calibration
Calibration varied at the event. There were periods when it was high (meaning that people required a very hard shot to accept as a kill) and periods where it was lower, usually after Sir Tanaka had stepped in and asked everyone to lower their calibration.
I'd like to talk about this for a bit because I believe there is often a misunderstanding about how calibration is or should be determined, and not everyone reading this will agree with me.
Calibration varies. Some people think that it shouldn't, but it simply does. And it does because it has to given that we have a variety of levels of fighters, many of whom drive hours and hours to events, and some events tend to have a greater focus on inclusion rather than elite competition.
Consider this: many fighters don't have the power generation mechanics to land a "telling blow" that would typically be accepted in a very competitive tournament in some kingdoms. In fact, it's entirely possible that this could represent as many as 1/3 or even 1/2 of the heavy fighters in a kingdom. Do we tell them, "you will never land a kill in any event, ever, for several years until you improve your stick mechanics?" What if two of these fighters see each other in a tournament? How long do you let the two of them fight before someone steps in and says, "neither one of you can land a telling blow and it's beginning to get dark, so lets flip a coin?" And even if they accept the fact that they just aren't going to score kills, are they going to enjoy getting pounded on all day by really heavy blows?
This tends to make a lot of people angry and drives away a lot of fighters. What also makes fighters especially angry is when 99% of the fighters at the event are fighting at, lets say, a medium calibration level, while a small number have determined that they are just going to stick with the same level of calibration you might expect from everyone at a highly competitive tournament. While I think it's reasonable to have some events where high calibration is expected, the nature of our sport makes it difficult to carry that same level of calibration 100% of the time.
Having said all of that, I don't believe high levels of calibration are normally the result of deliberate cheating. Duke Edward once told me that a fight is a really a "conversation" where you hope that the two fighters involved can come to an agreement on whether or not a telling blow was scored. Sometimes a pair of fighters just aren't on the same page when it comes to calibration, and they failed at having that figurative conversation.
Normally in a friendly unlimited resurrection battle with a couple 100 fighters, calibration tends to be on the medium side of things. In the first 15 minutes of this 100 Minutes War, it was very high. In my personal opinion, I think people were so amped up on adrenaline as a result of fighting their first big battle in two years, that they were swinging hard and really didn't want to die. I can fight this way if I have to, but I don't like it for these kinds of battles for a few reasons. I have to wind up more and step into my shots more to deliver telling blows, which means they are telegraphed more, which means they land less frequently. I am also more open when I throw these shots, which means I get hit more. Many of the shots that I'm hit with I won't need to take because calibration is high, but not everyone will agree with this, so people will get angry at me because they think I'm cheating. Some people get annoyed because they can't kill anyone. And some people get hurt because I don't know who is armored up and who isn't, and I end up throwing hard at everyone.
Sir Tanaka read the emotions on the battlefield and stepped in and asked us all to lower our calibration. Calibration may not have been "above the rules," and it may not have been too high for Crown Tourney, but he determined that it was too high for the fun and safety of the event. I did mention to him that calibration issues can't be solved simply by asking people to throw lighter shots. I said, "People aren't taking my lighter shots, so I'm really turning up the power. We need to both throw lighter AND take lighter," and he echoed that sentiment to the group.
It did seem that calibration came down immediately. Ultimately it seemed to creep up again, and he stopped the fighting and addressed it again.
Until Next Time
Hope you enjoyed this post. Time to heal up over the winter and come out fresh and ready in the spring!
Photo credit: Joshua Gershon Feldman
No comments:
Post a Comment