Celt Wars - Dealing with terrain features, positioning of shields on flanks, etc.

We had a fun melee event this weekend with great weather, good fighting, and all around fun times.  Galatia was gracious enough to host it this year which offered new terrain features and a different variety of scenarios.

photo by Ursus

The fighting was mostly done on a relatively steep hill and all of the scenarios were resurrection battles of some form or another.  We began with a woods battle (which was more like a maze battle in paths cut out of thick brush), an open field rez battle, a control point town battle with obstacles, a bridge battle, and then two fort battles.

We had a total of 20 fighters, but most battles were probably closer to about 15-18 fighters on a side, not always with even numbers.  Our side consisted almost entirely of Anglesey while the other side had our remaining Bog Celts (Galatia, Concusare, Prechain) plus some tuchux and a handful of SCA kingdom fighters.

There was a pretty wide range of fighter experience and age, but virtually every one had at least a solid 20-30 melee events and practices under their belts, so as one Atlantian guest commented, "there was no chaff on the field," that you normally expect at a melee event.

Unlike most standard SCA melee events, at least in this part of the country, neither side had more than 50% shields.  Anglesey had more spears, while the other side had a mix of spears and archers (normally three archers) which probably made the biggest difference tactically.


Woods Battle

 I don't really have much to comment on this one.  The woods were paths between thick brush with one team on the uphill side and the other on the downhill side.  When I fought, the other team had the uphill side.  With three archers on their side, there wasn't much we could really do other than try to create kill pockets and try to spear around the corners rather than to stand directly in front of the archers.  We may have stood a chance if we were a unit of only shields, but even then we'd have been charging up a fairly steep hill, and they would have been smart enough to form kill pockets at the path intersections.

The nice thing about resurrection battles is that they are almost always fair fights as the front line just gets pushed away from the resurrection point of the better team until an equilibrium is reached, so despite being a little overwhelmed, it was still a very good fight and a lot of fun.

One valuable lesson to take away from the fight is that if you are in a battle and have the option to avoid that situation, I would recommend avoiding it.


Open Field Rez Battle

One of the keys to open field resurrection battles is that the flanks absolutely must be controlled.  In the Pennsic Allied Champions Battles that I've been part of, most points are scored from the right flank.  The opponent is whittled down by spears on the right, hopefully faster than your left flank is losing ground, and then shields will occasionally capitalize on a weakness in the line before making a push for the flag.  While it doesn't hurt to have a strong middle, pushing up through the middle only pushes your side into a kill pocket.

Now those are capture the flag battles.  This weekend we fought a four life attrition battle, which has some similarities but also some differences.  Pushing toward the other side's backfield doesn't accomplish the same goal if there is no flag to capture.  What you are trying to do is find opportunities where a small number of your fighters can overwhelm and out position a smaller number of their fighters, pushing them into kill pockets, and then capitalizing on it with either range attacks or closing with the shields, all the while being aware of enemy combatants returning from the resurrection point.

This battle had a pretty interesting feature being that we were fighting on a slant.  To our left was a significantly steep incline, which would have been to our opponent's right.  Both resurrection points were at the bottom of the hill.  Most of the fighting, as I said, seemed to take place on the flanks.  I was on the uphill side trying to curl their left flank but found myself to be, in my opinion, outmatched by the quality and mix of fighters that they had also trying to take the hill.  Meanwhile we did a great job pressing on our right flank at the bottom of the hill, leading with our best shieldman, but the other side was doing a great job of countering by pulling their line back toward their resurrection point.

The other side won the scenario decisively due to good fighting and good tactical decisions, but also having an advantage in weapon types (three archers).  More importantly, at least from a tactical perspective and understanding terrain, I think that having the rez points at the bottom of the hill, and having the hill on their right flank worked to their advantage.  The right flank typically has an advantage on either team, but adding a hill advantage once they turn their right flank, and a rez point effectively "defending" their left flank were additional features that were difficult to overcome.

If there's anything I would have tried differently, it would be to have assigned one of our better defensive shieldmen to protecting our left flank, or possibly even moving our best shieldman up the hill to see if he could use it to his advantage.

 Comment on resurrecting in groups:  This was recommended by several people and it is something I actually don't agree with.  There are already groups of people out there.  Why wait at your rez point for two more fighters to join up with when you can just walk out onto the field and find two fighters to join up with?  And if you find yourself in a situation where you are outmatched by a group of fighters and are all by yourself, then just walk backwards toward your rez point until others join up with you.

Waiting to join up with others only keeps your fighters out of the fight for longer periods of time, IMO.


Town Battle
This was a timed unlimited resurrection battle on a hill with a control point.  A stop was called every few minutes and whomever controlled the point was awarded a point.  The buildings were small (a few feet by a few feet) wooden structures that could be fought over and around.  Again, the team with the high ground had a big advantage, this time being us.

The biggest lesson from this fight is, again, the flanks are the key to the fight.  Pushing up the middle gets you into a kill pocket, while working the flank can push your opponent into a kill pocket.

On both flanks we had newer (a few years experience) shieldman who didn't fully understand how to hold the position.  They were actually doing something that most SCA shieldman are taught, and it is  100% wrong.

Both extreme flanks, with rare exception, should have a shiledman on that flanking position.  His job is to defend that flank itself, not his teammates on the flank.  That means that his foot should be on the boundary line, regardless of where his teammates are (unless, of course, there are no opponents to defend the flank from in that position).

Additionally, not only do I want our shieldmen to understand the importance of holding that position, but also that they should be looking for it on the field when they come back from rez point.  If there's a gap on either flank, it needs to be filled.  Furthermore, the job is only to defend, unless you have a clear advantage, rather than to attack.  In one case we had a newer fighter engage the shieldman in front of him, in this case the shieldman being someone with three decades of experience.  The odds of winning that fight are low, and the consequences of losing is the dismantling of our previously secure flank.


Taking Ground and Falling Back

In any control point or objective capture rez battle you have to balance the pros and cons of moving the line forward.  The benefits, or course, are getting closer to your objective, or pushing them further away from theirs, which means that if they can break the through the line or make a big push, your side will of time to adjust.  The down side is that you will be further away from your rez point and they will be closer to theirs, which means that they will be feeding reinforcements much more quickly and fatiguing themselves from less required walking.

Another factor to consider is terrain features and overall line consistency and shape.  Pushing from the flanks is generally a better option than pushing up the middle and into a kill pocket.  Pushing to fortifiable positions is generally better than pushing into an open field, or worse, into a position where they can surround you, or have some sort of terrain advantage like up onto a hill.

Never be afraid to fall back.  This is a problem that a lot of tourney fighters have.  Tourney fighting requires you to stand up to the biggest of challenges and to do your best to win the fight.  In the melee, on the other hand, it is often better to avoid those fights.  As I wrote in my last blog, one of the best things you can do tactically is to be able to identify what you will have a hard time beating.  On the field, you avoid these fights, or attempt to drag them out.  In a rez, you generally want to fall back closer to your rez point.  If professional football players can punt, heavy fighters can fall back.

This weekend I felt like we had a good fortifiable position to push up toward, so whenever we had the chance, we did.  We never got beat from this position, but I did call many withdrawals (fallbacks) when I saw that the other side had the advantage at our position.

Controlling Areas with a Spear

You've likely heard that you aren't fighting the guy in front of you with your spear, but rather the guy next to him.  Well, that's half right.  You are fighting both, but more importantly, you are really fighting to control an area.  Simply moving in an out of positions and pointing your spear at people poses a threat that they have to deal with.

Other Thoughts on the Day

In the remaining battles, we had some small bridges and breaches to get through.  The other team had superior archery to ours, so it was clear that we had to push through the breaches.  Not only did coordinated charges need to be called, but the entire unit needed to follow the charge through the breach to support the chargers and to make sure that we don't lose our opportunity.  I've found that this requires a "Go! Go! Go!  Get through the breach!" to be called.  This sends the message to everyone what our objective is.  I can tell you as an old, undersized spearman, I do not like charging it to the enemy if I'm not certain I'll have the support of my unit with me.  Hearing this command called fills everyone with confidence and makes the charge more effective.

Being on the other side of the breach gave us a much better chance than standing there and getting picked apart by archers.

East Kingdom Southern Army Practice

We had a great practice Sunday in New Jersey.  I don't remember all of the details, but I think we had roughly 15-20 fighters on a side at our biggest.  There were a handful of knights present and fighting, but most of the work seemed to be done by the unbelts. 

Throughout the day there were discussions on some of the kingdom objective this year, some specifics on different weapon types, followed by a bunch of fighting.  The battles began with several capture the flag resurrection (on a timer) field battles, single death bridge battles, and then a lot of small team fights (3v3 up to 5v5). 

For the most part I'll give my perspective on the fighting.


Notes on General Tactical Philosophy

If you follow military history and/or watch sports, you'll notice that there's many different ways to be effective in a team competition, though there are even more ineffective ways.  There is no single best method, but there are methods that work better given a scenario or given the way your unit is built (ie  Experienced?  New?  Big and heavy?  Small and fast?  Barn door shields?  Spears and archers?  Weekly localized practice?  Spread out and only get together at the big events?)

I like to put the general flow of a unit and how it determines to follow through on tactical decisions into two camps;  the "Organized American Football Offense" camp and the "Pickup Ice Hockey" camp.  Now I have learned the hard way that sports analogies are not the best to use with fighters, but the examples do serve as a good model for how two completely different systems can both be successful.

Generally speaking, American Football Offensives use "plays."  They come up with a plan before the action begins, everyone gets into their position, and when they "hike" the ball (call lay on) everyone executes the plan, often with a quarterback (the commander) giving directions, the offensive line (shield wall) pushing people around the middle of the field, and a few wide receivers (flankers) running around the outside.  When the play is over they get in a huddle (call a reform) and run the next play.

In order to do this, everyone needs to know the plays and work on them together in practice.  The more consistently a group practices together, the more complicated the plays can be, and the more effectively the plays will be run.  The less consistent they are, the simpler the plays must be.

Pick Up Ice Hockey, on the other hand, does not use plays at all.  A player shows up during the open ice time, pays his $15, puts his pads and skates on, and then joins a bench with 10-12 strangers also in pads and skates.  Each player is expected to know the fundamentals of the game.  Big guys who are good at skating backwards play defense and stay in the back on offense.  They keep the puck in the offensive zone, pass, and take slap shots when the goalie is screened.  Keep the shots low so that they bounce off the pads if the goalie blocks the shot.  Offensive players need to go to the net to get a rebound shot.   If the other team's defense gets the puck, they need to focus on clearing the zone.  Always pass along the boards and never across the middle.  Dump and chase.  Stay spread out.  Keep your head up.  Dump behind the net.  Etc. etc. 

Likewise a group of fighters who don't know each other or don't get to practice together very often can fight well together provided that they share the same understanding of fundamentals. 

Ultimately having a plan that can be effectively executed is best, but there becomes a level of complexity, inexperience, and lack of time practicing together that can make a plan fall apart, at which point having sound fundamentals serve as a really good safety net.


My Fundamental Cheat Sheet for Celt Style Skirmish

When I say "Celts" I'm specifically referring to the Bog Celts that occupy much of Northern Atlantia and the Southern Region of the East Kingdom (D.C. and Philly to be specific) including Anglesey, Galatia, The Concusare, and a handful of other friends of ours.

The fundamentals can be remembered through the following mnemonic:

F.L.A.N.K.S.

Flanks; secure them
Leg 'em and leave 'em
Assess which side has more range weapons
Never fight a fair fight
Know who are your killers and who are your supporters
Spread out your weapons and your talent (ie don't bunch your new guys or all of your spears in one spot)

I'll reference elements from this list below.

Capture the Flag

I find that the flow of rez battles lend themselves more toward fundamental fighting and less toward play maker fighting just given the nature of a slower pace, a longer format, and the constant changing of players on the field.

Overall I was impressed with how people were fighting fundamentally, especially compared to previous years.  The mid-XP and low-XP fighters, in particular, were doing especially well.  I saw no easy kills at all, and that's pretty rare.

At least by the time the field was full of fighters, I found the flanks to be well secured and no one was wasting time with legged fighters.  People also weren't getting sucked into 1v1 or 1v2 fights, but were rather trying to play the "chess match" of trying to find advantages and exploiting them.  All of that was good.

Some areas that could use improvement;  In one battle in particular we had 80% of our shields on our right and 80% of our poles and spears on our left.  This leaves our left side very vulnerable to a charge.  In fact, something similar happened in the Allied Champions battle last Pennsic, and ONE shield on our right flank was able to run into a cluster of 5 spears, disrupting their flank and leading us to our first flag.....and then to our second flag before our opponent made an adjustment and put some shields over there.  They failed F. (Flanks, secure them) and S. (Spread out your weapons and talent) from the cheat sheet listed above.

Anyway, the only reason why we survived the imbalance on our side yesterday was because our opponent never exploited our weakness by mounting a charge.  Bad on us, but also bad on them.

Now you might be wondering, "If you are fighting off of fundamentals instead of plays, how do you charge?"  Either someone needs to vocalize the call to charge, or someone needs to take the initiative to lead the charge and everyone else needs to know to follow suit.  This is exactly how it happened at the Allied Champions battle, but I've also seen fights where a lone man charges and no one responds.  Experience reduces the odds of that happening.

The other big area of needed improvement is that more communication is needed on the field.  If a battle like this is to be taken more seriously (we used it as a warmup), there needs to be a small number of "safeties" guarding the flag, and maybe a commander or two near the middle of the field. 


Bridge Battles

For a while I've been saying that bridges are won with a combination of basic fundamentals and good unit organization.  The biggest problems I've seen with single death bridge battles is the bunching of the wrong weapons in the wrong positions, not having enough spears on the front, having too many spears on the front, not charging at the proper moments, general over crowding, and hogging the front line.  Also critical is being able to execute full charges, column charges, and pulse charges quickly and effectively.

Back in the 90s it was a staple tactic to place a tight shield wall in the front rank with spears in the second rank firing over the shield wall.  The idea was to combine the ranges to have double the attacks on the front line.  The bog celts were ahead of the game at this point, largely because we were used to face thrusting from another organization, while the mainstream SCA groups had only recently adopted it.  We would fight with all of our spears a few feet out in front of the rest of our unit, able to attack the enemy shields in front of us and step in and out of their spear range at will.  At the time, charges took such a long time to organize that we could always prepare a retreat before they came. 

Over the next two decades much of the rest of the SCA had brought their spears out in front.  In recent years I've begun to notice a new dimension of the fight, which is to say that people are beginning to organize their charges much more quickly.  In addition, where as in the 90s "to the last fighter" attrition bridge battles have been partially replaced with control point bridge battles, its become too much of a risk to have an entire front rank filled with spears (even if they can retreat and survive, their side will lose ground in the process).  I now believe that a hybrid front rank is usually more effective.  Place enough spears on the front rank to maximize your killing, but mixed in with shields to more quickly execute charges, or repel charges.  If the other side has fewer spears, kill away but prepare for a charge.  If they have more, then its time for your side to charge.


Spear Columns

One of the things I saw in yesterday's bridge battles on our side was an organization for how to feed spears into the front line.  I believe it was Galvin who recommended this, but we had a column of spears on the far right flank and one on the far left flank.  Everything in the middle was shields and poles.  On the front line we would have three spears.  The left and right spears would feed in from the line as the ones on the front line would die off.  The middle position would be fed from either line as the spearman would just weave through a couple of fighters to get to his position.  I really liked the way this flowed and kept spears from clogging up the middle.  It also created a nice queue to get into and patiently wait your turn, rather than to try and cut in line and get to the front fearing that you may not get your chance to fight if you don't. 

Communication.  Charging a Mob of Spears.

Our opponent's bridge appeared to be fairly well organized throughout most of the battles, but not so much in the first battle.  At one point I noticed that they had three spears bunched up in the front rank on their left flank.  I pointed it out to our commander and told him that that was a charge opportunity.  He disagreed so we waited.  The group of three became a group of five, and I communicated it again.  This time he called for a charge, we charged, and I believe were successful.  In this case, the opponent was violating my F. and S. fundamentals and we followed the A. fundamental capitalizing on a weakness.  Specifically, they had a weak (F)lank (yes, a bridge has a flank, too) because of the bunching of the spears as a result of not (S)preading out their weapon types.  We (A)ssessed the range advantage that our opponent had, and charged to negate it.

Some other key takeaways from this battle are the ideas of communicating to the commander and following command.  While I don't believe that every fighter needs to be micromanaged at all times on the battle field, bridge battles do require a lot of coordination.  A couple of us thought we needed to charge and told the commander.  He said no, so we listened.  Once he did call a charge, a few of us echoed loudly, "Charge! Go! Go! Go! Go!".   A nudge in the back is also a helpful tool.

Finally, there was a point toward the end of one of the battles where the opponent appeared to be whittled down pretty far.  Through experience I've learned that when I see that to take a quick look at our side, estimate the numbers of poles and shields we have, and if we outnumber them by 25% or more (depending on talent), to call a charge.  I've gotten better at assessing this.  I've called a few in the past only to realize later that we were charging with mostly spearmen.  Oops.  Anyway, this time it worked out. 

Spear Communication

One point that I wanted to cover yesterday that we didn't have time for was for how spears should be communicating with the shieldmen who are in the position that they wish to occupy.  Ideally a spear should be able to recognize a spot on the line where a spear could be effective.  Even if someone says, "let the spears up," a shieldman on the front line can't see what's going on behind him, so he is hesitant to give up his position until he's certain that the line integrity won't be compromised.

It's the spear's job to communicate to the shielman that he or she would like to take his position.  To do that, walk up behind the shieldman and place the spear tip past his helmet so that he can see that a spear is coming up.  Then simply say, "Shieldman, can I trade places with you.  I have a spear."  I've never had a shieldman refuse because, truth be told, standing there waiting for a face thrust is not a very fun job for a shieldman.  They are more than happy to step out and take a break.


Pulse Charges

I'll admit I don't know much about these so I picked some brains at the end of the day.  We attempted some pulse charges in two of the later bridge battles, and neither were especially pretty, so we talked a lot about how to improve.

One thing I do know about charges is that everyone has to go at the same time.  Yelling "Charge!" out of nowhere is too much of a surprise.  Yelling, "Hey everyone, we are going to charge.  Get ready.  Are you ready?  Okay, on my count.  Three.  Two.  One.  Charge!" gives the enemy way too much time to adjust (remember what I said about the 90s?).  For full charges, I find it to be effective that once you make the decision to charge, you tell people close to you, "Okay, I'm going to call a charge," giving them a chance to warn you not to do it, or to prepare to echo your commands and nudge the fighters in front of them.  That's followed by a loud, "Everyone, we're going to charge.  Ready?  Charge! Go! Go! Go! Go!"  That seems to give just enough time to get your unit to commit to charging together, but not so much time that the other side gets a chance to react.  It won't surprise them, but it will catch them before they can reorganize, and ideally you are charging because you are in a better position than them to do so.

Now, ideally if your unit trains together often, you can come up with secret commands, and codes, etc. to pull these off in quicker fashion.  But we don't always find ourselves in ideal situations.

Now the pulse charge is a little trickier.  The fighters need a clear understanding that its a pulse charge, what that means, how long to attack, who is going to charge and who isn't, and when to pull back after charging.  So the first key is coming up with the command.  If it is called from a commander in the back, there needs to be some kind of clear communication to everyone what the command will be.  Much like the charge command, there must be the right amount of pause to allow all involved in the charge a chance to get ready in order to execute together (on three or after three?).  There also needs to be an understanding of how long the charge will last.  Three swings and out?  Or fight until someone calls "Back out!  Back out!"

Another way to approach this is to have a pole pair up with two shields to call it.  A commander can send a message up to him if necessary, but this would be an easier way to execute the charge without having to worry about the rest of the unit getting confused by the commands.  Sir Ryu had suggested a "three swings and out" (or the time it takes for three swings) while the pole takes two swings.  I've also had another knight tell me that you can stack two shields in a column.  The back one points out the target to the front one and then calls the charge.  Again, three swings and out. 

Pulse charges should likely target spears in the front rank.  I've heard some say that they should always be done on angles. 

A final thought on this is that if you have too many ranks involved in a pulse charge, then the back ranks will probably get in the way and prevent the front ranks from being able to pull back out. 

Sometimes I've seen full units do "pulse charges" in mass, but I believe this is really a different kind of charge.  I'd call these full charges with commands to back out, followed by full charges.  These would follow the same rules as the full charge, followed by commands to "Get back!  Get back!  Get back!"


Small Team Tactics

This is an area where the celt approach and the kingdom approach probably differs most.  The kingdom prefers to use the classic shield wall where everyone sticks together, picks a focus point, and charges hard, hoping to get momentum as well as a small numbers advantage at one point on the field.

The celt approach is generally to spread out wider than the opponent, put all of the fighters on the front line, exploit small advantages, and avoid fights where we are at a disadvantage.  Again, this is the difference between thinking of it like an American football offense, or a pickup hockey game.

The advantages to the kingdom approach is that it can be learned much more quickly, its better at capturing an objective, and really well suited for big shieldmen who are good at killing what is directly in front of them.  The advantages of the celt approach is that it is better suited for smaller, faster fighters with fewer shields, most kingdom units are not used to fighting against it, and if well practiced, it will ultimately beat the shield wall charge simply because it is designed to do so, but I've found that it takes at least 20 events or practices to get someone well integrated into the system.

Kingdom Approach:  Red Shield Wall Charge

Celt Approach:  Green Skirmish Line

Our 5 Man Team

We actually used a hybrid of the kingdom and celt approach in our battles and did quite well with it.  We had three shields and two poles, with Vashir (Colin) being the other pole.  Though Vashir is a solid kingdom fighter and can follow the kingdom tactics, he is very mobile, has a ton of melee experience, and excellent at floating on a flank.  We decided to let the shields pick their plan, and instead of supporting them from behind, I floated wide right and Vashir floated wide left.

Sir William gave us some feedback and thought that we had floated too far and left our shields exposed, and commented on particularly how we left our knight (Sir Harold) in a 1v1 fight against another knight (Sir Arn) who has currently been fighting better at tourneys and ultimately killed Sir Harold in the engagement.

Ironically, Sir Arn got feedback that he shouldn't have let Sir Harold drag him away from the rest of the fight to fight a 1v1.

What answer is correct?  I think it all depends on who the players are on the field.  This goes to fundamental K.  (K)now who are your killers and who are your supporters.  In a field battle like this, Vashir and I are almost always "killers" because our our mobility and experience.  Having said that, if I am with a shield of equal or better mobility and experience, I will switch roles and let him take the lead while I follow in support.

In this battle, Sir Arn won the engagement with Sir Harold, but then he turned and had to face a 1v3.

Again, there's no one right answer, but I do think there is a lot of value in understanding the pros and cons of any tactical decision or team strategy.  I think Vashit and I did the right thing, but had we lost, maybe I would have had a different opinion.



I hope you enjoyed reading.  Until next time.......

Tuchux Philly Practice - Effective Charges, Weapon Choices, Learning from Different Scenarios

We had a nice practice this weekend, with a total of 15 fighters, which consisted of seven super veterans, three very new fighters, and then a bunch of well practiced fighters in the 1-3 year range.  After doing some singles work, we fought a few rounds of 3-life broken field rez battles, and then a few rounds of single death field battles.  Teams were mixed levels and mixed weapons, with a little less than 50% shields. 


Broken Field Rez Battles

The gym was about the size of a basketball court, give or take, and we broke it up with a "pond" outlined with a rope in the middle.  Each side had three lives.

I don't have a whole lot of specific tactical advice that I can offer in a scenario like this, other than that there is a lot of value in practicing it.  There are a lot of little nuances that involve a constant chess match that is in constant flow as people die, return from rez, press, retreat, press from the other channel, move a spear from one position to the next, etc. that can only be learned through experience.

Sir Ryu' of Ironskies was at this practice and we had many conversations during and after the fighting about overarching philosophies involving tactics.  You can only focus so much on specifics, but I find that they breakdown when your situation no longer presents itself in the ideal  hypothetical that your specific tactical rules were built around. 

Consider the scenario above.  Should you use triads built of two shields and a pole/spear?  The green team only has two shields.  What do you do with the other four fighters?  Both teams have seven fighters.  You can't divide seven by three.  What if you had six fighters and two just died?  What if you have your triad and two come back from rez?  What if your fundamental approach is five fighters, then what?

That's not to say that there's anything wrong with these approaches, but that they will ultimately breakdown at some point, and a battle like this is a very fast, constantly changing flow of situations that can only be learned through experience.

A few things we learned from this scenario:

-  Longer weapons gain more and more advantage with more and more lives.  The side with more shields tended to get an early advantage with an early charge, but as the battle wore on, the longer weapons racked up more kills.

-  Keeping track of fighters coming through the other gap and into the backfield was an issue for a lot of fighters and something worth improving through practice.

-  We had some issues with engaging from behind once pushing through a gap.  Again, something worth improving through practice.

The only lesson I can really give other than to practice this scenario often is to consider weapon choices when fighting these types of battles.


Single Death Field Battles

We fought four of these with 12 fighters, and then a few more smaller ones.  Our first two was a unit of five Anglesey members with 1-3 years of experience against a mixed group of seven fighters consisting of three new fighters and four super veterans.  After the team of seven won twice, I moved over to the Anglesey team and we took one fight and lost one.

There were a few things that jumped out at me in these battles.

In one of the early scenarios the Anglesey team had two spears next to each other on the flank.  This is almost always a bad idea. We were a bit slow about moving in on them, and they did manage to kill a new fighter before we could press, but once Vashir knocked one of the spears out of the way and began to move in, I knocked the other one out of the way and followed.  With them pressed up against the edge of the room, they had nowhere to escape and we managed to kill them fairly quickly.  I wasn't able to watch our right flank, but it appeared that they responded pretty quickly to our move, or possible pressed at the same time.

I could be wrong, but my gut feeling tells me that our younger spears need to be more actively engaged in the fight.  By this, I mean simply throwing a lot more shots.  I don't personally do this, and neither does our other super veteran spearman Steiner Von Breitenborn (aka Kelly).  We tend to be more calculated with our shots than what I'd recommend that the newer guys do, but I think we have good reason for that.  a)  We can find more opportunities to land something because of better being able to identify openings and better accuracy but also, b) we're old and have to manage our energy a little more. 

I personally like to see younger fighters throwing a lot more because it keeps the other side occupied and can open up shots for some of the veteran fighters.  So where as an old fighter might want to only throw if he's got a greater than 50% chance of killing, I think a younger fighter might be better served if he just threw shots to force fighters to have to defend.  Or another way to say it, if you can't find something to throw at every 3-6 seconds in a battle that will last under a minute, then you need to just throw at something.

Finally, our last battle was lost ("our" being the Anglesey team after I joined) because Sir Ryu initiated a successful charge on our left flank that we did not respond well to.  We talked about this afterward and I pointed out that charges are often good ways to win an engagement, but they must be done intelligently.  Charges don't guarantee victory, but they do guarantee a quick end to the engagement, so if you are going to charge, make sure its winnable.

Given the specifics of that scenario, they way I typically like to deal with a charge like this is to roll away from it and press hard on the other side.  Imagine the chargers being a bull and your unit rolling out like a matador.  If they can pull this off (provided there's no banner behind them to defend), they are in a better position.  If they freeze, they get rolled over and die.





Needless to say, we failed to do this and, instead, got pressed into the corner and died.

Tactical Analysis of a 5v6 Vets vs Newbs Battle (Newbs Win!)

After putting so much thought into my last blog (please read that first if you haven't already) and the mistakes that the newbs made to lose that battle, it occurred to me to examine the fight that they won, overwhelmingly in fact, and see what they did correctly.  And truth be told, despite a lack of individual skill relative to the veterans, they mastered the tactics!


The Scenario

The battle was 5 veterans (5-30 years experience) vs 6 Newbs (0-3 years experience) for a single death in a 35'x50' rectangular gym.  The vets had three shields, a pole arm, and a long spear, while the Newbs had four shields, a dane axe, and a long spear.


The Vet's Plan
There are a few ways to handle a battle like this.  One is to stack up all of the veterans and charge at, and hopefully around, one flank hoping to get a quick numbers advantage on that flank while also hoping that the fighters on the opposite flank are slow to join the fight.

There were a few reasons why we wouldn't have adopted that strategy:
-  We had two long weapons and would be charging into mostly short weapons
-  There was no room to get around a flank
-  Anglesey trains for this scenario and are not usually slow to get into the fight from an unengaged flank

The other method is to secure both flanks with strong shields, try to control the fight with the long weapons in the middle, and hope to spot tactical opportunities or capitalize on mistakes.  That was the plan we chose.


Squad Tactics
Okay, so the first thing I see here is that the Newbs put a left handed shield on their left flank and a large right handed shield on their right flank to prevent any strong veteran shieldmen from getting around them and into the backfield.  Instead of putting their spear in the middle like the Vets, they had him off to one side in a position to still counter the Vet spear (that's me, BTW) while being able to put pressure on the left flank.

The biggest thing that stands out is that two fighters whom I scored quick early kills in earlier battles are set up in great positions.  Both of them are about 18" behind their spearman, and the shieldman in particular has his sword right in front of his face.

Now lets' look at the first few seconds of the fight.

The Newbs basically split into three distinct groups.  They intelligently press the fight and they all move together.  Remember the last video with two solo Leroy Jenkins charges?  That doesn't happen here.

Left Side:  Instead of charging, the left most shield is there mainly to do his job and keep the enemy shield off of his spearman.  He and the spearman work together.  At this point the spearman does a good job of threatening the face of the enemy shield, causing him to pause and throw his shield high and exposing his leg to the lefty, as well as pushing back the Vet pole arm fighter due to the extra length.

Right:  The big round shieldman on the right flank found himself in a one on one against a much more experienced fighter, so he did his job and defensively secured the flank while staying alive.  If in a one on one against a superior opponent, you almost always want to stall the engagement, which he was doing well.

Center:  Here you have a group of three with two shields leading and a dane axe following.  With the two shields working together, the Vet spear didn't have a good shot and was driven toward the back of the gym.  The right handed shield on the left side of this triad was able to protect them from the Vet pole (along with the spear who was holding her back) as they shot through the gap.  You can even see that shieldman skip a little bit as he's making sure not to get hit by the pole.

Note:  an actual gap is created on the Vet team because of the pole being pushed back on the left side of the screen, and the shield on the right side being left handed.

Next....

Left Side:  With the pole driven back, the Newb shield and spear manage to double team the Vet shield and score their first kill with a stab to the gut.

Center:  The Vet spear is driven back and has to bail on the fight, hoping to reengage on the other side.  If he's lucky, someone will pick up his attacker or the attacker will give up.   As luck would have it, one of the shields of the triad stayed on the chase.  The other two fighters double up on the middle shield and work toward scoring the second kill of the fight.

Right: The round shield is doing a good job as staying alive while keeping the Vet shield occupied.

Next....

Left Side:  The spear has just scored his kill and is now trying to move into position and kill the pole who is attacking the lefty shield.  The Vet pole takes out the shield for their first kill.

Center:  At this point they have broken through the middle and circled around to the right.  They scored their kill on the Vet's center shieldman and immediately move back into the fight.  The other shield in the triad continued to follow the spear and scored a kill on him at the other side of the gym.

Right:  The Newb round shield (now in the center and backing away toward the left) keeps the Vet's lefty shieldman occupied while also fending off a shot from the spear who is trying to get a desperation kill before it is too late.

Next.....

At this point the battle that began as a 5v6 has been reduced to a 2v5, so the 20% numbers advantage is now a 150% numbers advantage.  As long as the Newbs continue to work together, this should be an easy victory.

The lefty Vet shield finally scores a kill on the Newb roundshield, but only after three of his teammates have died scoring only one kill.  Amongst the chaos, the Newb spear takes out the Vet pole.  At this point the four remaining newbs surround the remaining Vet and back him into a corner (not shown) and the fight is called.

Good job Newbs!

Final Thoughts

After reflecting on this a bit, I guess the real mistake that the Vet team made was putting two long weapons next to each other.  I actually violated one of my fundamental tenets, and this video is a clear example of how a weakness in a line can be exploited.  If I could do it all over again, the center shield would have been between the pole and the long spear.


Full Video

Tactical Analysis of a 4v6 Vets vs Newbs Battle

This weekend I attended the monthly Tuchux Philly practice (which was awesome).  We had a lot of new fighters, and a number of veterans, did some singles, as well as melees.  The goal here is mainly just to keep people involved over the winter months, and give new people the opportunity to get into the activity.

I proposed an idea to the Tuchux dog running the practice and he allowed me to implement it.  That being several single death field battles where we put all of the veterans on one team (5, 5, 10, 20, 25, and 30+ years of experience) and the newbs on the other team (some brand spanking new fighters and some with up to 3 years experienced).  From there we played around with the numbers to get competitive fights.  In this case, it seemed like the newbs needed about a 1-2 fighter numbers advantage


Why the Imbalance in Experience?

I prefer this for several reasons:

-  It forces the new fighters to own the fight.  They need to think, come up with their own plans, and figure out how to get kills.

-  The new fighters can't just watch the veterans fight.  They get to (have to!) score their own kills.

-  The veterans have to figure out how to win battles when they are outnumbered.

Here's the thing.  I don't need a new fighter to be able to kill a veteran.  I need two of them to be able to kill a veteran.  Likewise as a veteran, its not my job to get a kill.  Its my job to get lots of kills, and get them quickly.

When the experience levels and numbers are evened out what tends to happen is the veterans get two kills a piece in every battle while the new fighters just die.  That isn't to say that there isn't value to fighting that format, only that it teaches people how to best fight at their current level, but doesn't really help develop them to the next level.  Its the difference between fighting a tourney using your strengths in your best effort to win that fight, or with a weakness that you are trying to develop into a strength.


4v6 Scenario

As said above, the newer fighters were on the team of 6, while the veterans were on the team of 4.  The battle was a single death field battle in a gym that was (best estimate) 35 feet wide, and 50 feet long.  I would describe this as a semi-limited front.  There's not much room for flanking, but still enough room for some limited mobility.

The team of 4 had two shields and two spears (one short and one long).  The team of 6 had four shields, a long spear, and a two handed Dane axe.

EDIT:  it was a pole, not a short spear.

The Plan

The team of 6 had to come up with their own plan and execute it.  Given what we presented them, they decided on three main objectives:

1)  Press the attack when they had a clear numbers advantage

2)  Initiate the attack on their left flank where the smaller team had two spears stacked up

3)  Target the long spear (that's me) and take him out of the fight as soon as possible

IMO, this was an excellent plan.  They hit on a number of key elements while making the plan simple enough to execute.  Having said that, every tactical plan, and every execution of that plan has room for improvement, which I'll talk about below.


The Red Team

We didn't really have a plan, but instead intended to wait and react.  With a stronger long spear, and more range weapons, its generally best to use that range to kill the other side before they can press, and then react to that press. 

At this point in the fighting I feel I would have done better with a pole arm, but the fights were competitive with the spear so I kept it.  Stacking our spears on one side was not a great idea.  The short spear had just entered the fight and I mistakenly thought it was a pole.  Our center shield did say that he intended to shift right once the battle began, so I left our set up alone.  if I could do it all over again, the shield would have been on our far right.

EDIT:  Just realized she had a pole arm.


Leroy Jenkins Charge 1

One of the biggest issues we notice with new guys is that they tend to either stand in the back and do nothing, or they do solo charges and get themselves killed.  That's perfectly fine as everyone goes through this phase.  It can essentially be trained out with one of two methods.  The quicker method is to give them a rigid structure like fitting into a shield wall, which is the more typical kingdom level approach.  The more long term approach is to keep fighting scenarios like the one covered here and slowly offer advice, let them gain experience on their own, etc.  The latter method takes anywhere from 5-15 practices to get a decent sense of timing and coordination with fellow fighters.  The advantage to this approach is that after the 5-15 practices they will likely have surpassed the shield wall fighters in terms of overall melee effectiveness.

Anyway, the very first move was a solo charge by the left most green shield man.  He managed to get a leg shot on the pole, but got stabbed and killed by the long spear and hit in the head by the shieldman in the process.

Now the charge was not entirely ineffective.  He was left handed so he was in a great position to make something happen on the left flank, and he did manage to leg a veteran fighter and take her out of the fight.  I do think, however, that the charge would have been more effective if the shield next to him would have moved in at the same time offering support.

In addition, the spear kill was only possible because of an earlier shot thrown at green's spear who then backed out behind his line in an effort to dodge.  I also think this would have been a great opportunity to jump the spear (that's me, again) but would require the two on green's right flank to support.  Also, had the green spear been more confident with his defense, he could have stayed on the front line keeping pressure on red's spear preventing him from getting a kill on the lefty shieldman.


Leroy Jenkins Charge 2

A beat after the first shield charged, a second one did the same, this time straight into a veteran shieldman.  This resulted in taking a leg shot from the long spear and and head shot from the shieldman.

You can see both charges in the gif below:

Gamble on the Long Spear that Works Out

At this point in the fight, what began as a 4v6 is now down to a 3.5v4.  The numbers advantage for green is dwindling.  When thinking about numbers advantages, in general you want to think about percentages.  So if a green fighter can sacrifice himself to take out a red fighter, the 6:4 advantage becomes 5:3.  Or rather, 50% more fighters becomes 67% more fighters.  If they can sacrifice a second fighter, it becomes 4:2 which is 100% more fighters.  This also works if you can successfully tie up a fighter by chasing them, getting them to follow you out of the fight, or by tying up their weapons.

What happens next in this fight is that the center green shield charges the long spear and the two fighters on green's right flank support by doubling up on the left handed shield on the red team.  The reason why I say this is a gamble is that it leaves their spear completely unprotected.  At this point he has one chance to survive and that is to take out red's right flank shieldman with a face thrust.  Fortunately for him, he landed the face thrust.  At that same moment, green's center shield killed the long spear giving green a 4v1.5 advantage.

I'd like to add that these three fighters moved together very well at this point.  Look at the timing of the charge in the gif below.  They did this by reading each other's body language rather than waiting for a commander to tell them what to do.  This comes with lots and lots of practice.

3v2 Timing Mistakes

Once the three fighters jumped red's left flank, they had a 3v2 fight for a very brief moment.  Initially they were set up perfectly with two shields on the flanks, the pole in the middle, and they had us surrounded in a kill pocket.  The left shieldman pressed hard on the spear to eliminate the range advantage.

My rule of thumb for the 3v2 is balancing out the following two factors:

1)  Play to your weapons' range strengths

2)  Win the 2v1, stall on the 1v1 if you don't have a range advantage (long or short) or significant skill advantage

The left shieldman did a great job by closing the distance on the long spear and going for the kill.  That leaves the other two fighters to decide if they are going to double up on red's shield, or stall the fight with one fighter while doubling up on the spear for a certain quick kill.

Unfortunately what happened was a timing issue.  The axe originally started fighting the shield and then shifted to the spear, reaching the spear after he'd already been killed.  At this point the right green shield found himself in a 1v1 against a better fighter.  He should have pulled back and gone full defense, but instead got killed in the exchange.  The axe may have been able to turn to get a quick kill on the occupied red shield but was slow to return from the engagement with the long spear.

Ultimately it was not a bad exchange.  They went from a 3v2 to a 2v1, which increased their advantage from 50% to 100% on this side of the field.

3v1 Bad Positions, Dragging the Fight in the Wrong Direction

At this point of the fight, the red shield did a great job of moving to try to into 1v1 situations.  The green spear moved into the fight, but he gained too much momentum and run into the red shield.

This is actually another common problem among newer melee fighters.  There is a level of controlled aggression that must be used to win small team melees.  Most fighter fight at 20% aggression or at 100% aggression.  Being too aggressive can cause one to get themselves into bad positions before their teammates can react.  (Again, for a great example of that controlled aggression, look up two gifs to see the three fighters moving together)

After the spear ran into the shield, he tried to back out of the fight, but in doing so, dragged the fight away from his teammates.  It would have been better to either wheel around back toward his teammates, or to attempt to tie up the shieldman in place.

Finishing the Battle

At this point the red shield had managed to kill the spear and leg the axe.  The red pole who had been legged in the beginning limped her way over to the fight, and now red has a large skill and experience advantage in an even number fight.  They finish off the remaining green fighters and end in victory with 1.5 fighters remaining.

Just before this happened, the green team had a hard time figuring out how to engage the red shield from behind.  I don't consider that a tactical mistake, but rather an area of individual skill to improve upon.

The Full Fight

Green Winning an Overwhelming Victory

Final thought in this post.  Green did very well on the day, winning about half of the fights.  I picked the fight above because it showed some very clear areas where the newer fighters could improve.  The following video shows an example where green kicked our butts!

Hope you enjoyed.  I look forward to this practice again next month!

The Three Best Practice Scenarios: Reflection on the 2018 Fighting Season

As we have closed out the melee fighting season (which in the East is April - November) I've seen a lot of growth in our local group.  We had roughly 15 practices with attendance ranging from 5 to 12 fighters.  This was in addition to roughly 8 melee events.  To quote our newest fighter who attended his first event this past November, "I felt prepared for every scenario except the bridge battle."

What our newer fighters lacked that your typical SCA fighter would have had was solid one on one skill.  What they had, on the other hand, was great field awareness, an understanding of how to work together, how to solve problems on their own, take initiative, finish fights quickly and move through the enemy, and maintain the integrity of the line.  Our spears were especially strong this year.


Three Practice Scenarios

I'm sure I've written on each of these in the past, but I'm pretty confident that these were my favorites.  Each one focused on a critical aspect of melee aspect of melee fighting, and just as important, they were all very fun.  One of the main differences between the way I run practices and most of what I have seen in the SCA is that I don't spend much time drilling.  Instead, every scenario is a game.


1 - Broken Field Rez Battle

I try to size the field to the number of fighters that we have, but essentially I take a few lengths of rope and create "Llama Pits"  (pits full of flesh eating Llamas that cannot be crossed).  We put a resurrection point on either side and we would either fight unlimited resurrections or allot a set number of lives.  Objectives can be used as well (I now use small colored blocks of wood.  Each side is assigned a color and has to try to collect all of their wood before the other team gets theirs.  Blocks are placed about 2/3 of the way across the field).

What I like the most about these battles is that it clearly defines a simple tactical decision that a fighter must make.  When they come back from rez point, they have to decide, "Do I go to the left of the pit, or do I go to the right of the pit?"  Instead of just seeing a mob of guys and returning back to the same spot they were in when they died (as is very common among fighters), they look and see what the situation is on the left, and what it is on the right.  Even if they don't make good decisions, at least they are thinking tactically.


2 - Orcs and Goblins Battle

We normally do these as single death field battles.  The goal is to put all of the best fighters on one team, and all of the worst fighters on the other team.  The KEY to this battle (which I heard was a piece missing from a recent event up here) is that the numbers must be set such that the less experienced team has more fighters.  What typically works for us is 3 on 5, but as our newer fighters got better, we had to make the teams 4 on 4, with the 3 best fighters teaming up with a brand new fighter, while the other team had four newer, yet experienced fighters.

What makes this scenario great for training is that it forces the new fighters to take ownership over the results of the battle.  The key to winning any unbalanced scenario for the larger team is to create small numbers advantages, and seizing those opportunities quickly.  Meanwhile the fighters who end up in one on one situations have to learn how to identify that they are at a disadvantage and simply try to stall the fight and survive.  Often times newer fighters will either stand around and wait for someone else to do the killing for them, or they will do heroic solo charges at one or more fighters and die horrible deaths.  These battles force them to make smart decisions.

I'd also like to note that these fights were also very fun and valuable for the experienced fighters who had to learn how to win fights while being on the smaller team.  I've also thought about doing this scenario as a broken field battle in order to make the advantages and disadvantages more pronounced.

One way where I saw this pan out well was at our Norse War in several single death field battles.  A couple of times a knight on the other team would fan out wide on their left flank.  Two of our newer fighters would match him on our right flank.  As soon as they recognized the advantage, which usually didn't take long, they'd jump him, get the kill, and then immediately turn into the back field, which normally lead to a quick victory.  Keep in mind, these battles had even numbered sides, so they had graduated to the point where they could take ownership of the fight even though there were better fighters on their team.


3 - 2v2 Unlimited Rez Battles with a Fighter Waiting at Rez

This is a very simple battle.  Two versus two, with one person waiting at the resurrection point.  As soon as the first person dies, he goes to rez and forms a new team with the person waiting.  They immediately join the fight.  At this point it might be 2 on 2 on 1, or maybe another person died and it can be 2 on 2 or perhaps 2 on 1 on 1.  The key to this fight is to move quickly and keep the pace fast.  The entire purpose of the fight is to make quick decisions.

The real value of this scenario is that it trains you to see things and make decisions quickly.  Often times newer fighters are trained to wait for commands, or to follow the more experienced fighters.  This scenario forces them to make quick decisions on their own, which is what you'd want from any fighter when, say, a knight breaks through your ranks and gets into the backfield.

All in all I was very happy with how well everyone progressed, but at least as important, everyone had a fun year and were motivated to keep returning week after week!

Thanks for reading.  - Bari of Anglesey

That's a Terrible Plan (yet everyone does it)

We fought at an event this weekend and finished off the day with three single death field battles.  One side was a unit of ~9 fighters who practice together somewhat regularly and consisted of a range of experience.  On the other side (our side) we had one unit of 5 who practices together regularly (myself and 4 fighters from the Philly practice ranging between 1-3 years of experience) and 6 unaffiliated fighters with limited experience. 

The organized team of 9 had 4 shields, 4 great weapons, and 1 archer.  Our team had 4 shields, 3 spears, 2 great weapons, and 2 archers.  Despite shield being my worst form, I took it as my biggest concern was getting run over by an organized heavy unit who likes to charge, especially given that we were fighting in a small rectangular field with no room for mobility (~15 yards wide).


"That's a Terrible Plan"

When I showed up someone had already come up with a plan.  It had something to do with dividing ourselves into left and right flanks and funneling the army into the middle, which I wasn't opposed to.  But then when we lined up, he wanted all of the shields to form up in the middle with everyone else behind them.  I took one look at them and said, "That's a terrible plan."  Yes, I was being a jerk.  I didn't mean to say that out loud, and truth be told, maybe there was someway to implement what he was thinking that would have worked, but we just weren't able to figure it out in the 30 seconds of strategizing that we did.


What was Wrong with It?

There were two main problems.  The first was that it was confusing.  Complicated plans NEVER work, not within the context of a mixed group of fighters who don't practice together, and the ones who do only get together a couple or few times a month.  People who come up with these crazy plans need to understand that they aren't commanding a bunch of troops in a tabletop miniatures game.  While they may understand what is going on, in order to execute it, you need 100% of the people involved to understand it as well, and then you need the enemy to cooperate. 

The second is something that a vast majority of heavy units do wrong.  Unless you are protecting a specific objective point, never turtle your shields up in the middle of the field.

Why?

This isn't to say that shield walls aren't effective, but the lack of protection on the flanks is a major weakness.  To make a shield wall work, either the flanks need to be well protected either by strong fighters floating out away from the wall, or by a boundary like a castle wall or thick woods.  Or they need to be moving quickly at their target so that they can run the target over before the weak flanks can be exploited.


The Other Issue
I've said this a billion times.  There are two ways to win a game of rock, paper, scissors when the other team throws rock.  You either throw a bigger rock, or you throw paper.  In the first battle we met their rock with our rock.  We had two archers and three spears while they had one archer and no spears.  We had young, fast, mobile guys, while they had big, old guys.  We had a bunch fighters who don't practice together (and the ones who do fight skirmish style) they had an organized unit who has years of experienced running people over with a shield wall.

We could have run that scenario fifty times and would never have won a shield wall versus shield wall battle.


The Fix;  Spears to the Front

If you ask heavy fighters what would happen if you put your spears in front of your shields when facing an impending shield wall charge, 9 out of 10 of them are going to tell you that the shield wall will just run them over.

Yet this is exactly what we did, and we won the last two battles (again, that's not to say that we were the better unit.  We still had a numbers advantage) despite losing badly in the first battle.


How Does it Work?

The spears run out in front, way out in front, so that everyone else in the unit is at least 5 full feet behind their spearmen.  Best case scenario, the spears get get a kill or two before the enemy can initiate their charge.  Worst case scenario, the enemy begins their charge 15 feet away from the main unit.  As they are worried about face thrusts from the spears, they have to charge blindly, allowing the rest of your unit to freely maneuver into good killing positions while your spearmen backpedal out of harm's way.

As a shieldman, instead of being on the front line, I sat in the back on the right flank making sure that no one got into our backfield.  I then looked for opportunity kills, and they did present themselves.