Galatia Forums

Prologue: A Teaching Moment
Recently a well-respected knight stopped a fight in an attempt to have a teaching moment. He inquired from the Celts what their plan was and why they were so effective in thwarting the Kingdom's plans. I heard a myriad of comments, most complete bravado and flattery.

I'm sorry, but their plan was doomed from inception and worse it was poorly implemented. Charging six to eight shieldmen to their death never works; what little ground they gain is quickly reassumed once the net snaps back.

Rattling the Picket Fence
When I look at a line of Kingdom Folk, I see a picket fence. They are an obvious barrier; pointy, rigid, and planted. Throughout the wall there are the clear posts that hold the whole thing up. I've heard my compatriots say that we target those posts and once they fall, the whole line falls apart.

However, I suggest the entire opposite is true. I think we keep the better fighters at bay while we make quick work of the chaff. One by one we unceremoniously kick out the pickets in the fence until it ceases to be any form of resistance. Then we overwhelm what remains with everyone at once and tear down any remaining posts. Furthermore, it seems like once the cohesion of the wall is lost, it is rarely regained. Perhaps, the fence can not be repaired under fire.

Casting a Wide Net
The Celts fight differently. We fight more like a net. There are connected rings to our formation that happen organically. Throughout our line are synergies of dyads, triads, and quadads that link together like chain mail. If you can stop a charge with two fighters running oblique, then only two go. When the spears move up, they move up in mass, not one by one. When a shield is not on the line, he or she is running interference for the archers. No one is standing still, flat footed.

You can attempt a brute force attack, but the net simply flexes and surrounds the impact.

There is a Spartan proverb that cautions against relying on champions, "the reed beside the staff," meaning that a chain of fighters is made stronger by an unproven link. Our net or skirmish formation protects our less experienced fighters by giving them room to bend but not break. It is around this tender underbelly which the Celts build a protective armor. With our skill and experience we compensate for their weaknesses, capitalize on their strengths, and most importantly keep them from forfeiting their lives too quickly. We know if it is a battle of attrition, we will win.

So how do you beat us?

You may be tempted to answer, “target our weak links,” but you don't trawl by punching the ocean. Instead you slowly pull the net in, drawing the corners together, making a concave shape convex, and compressing it until there in no room to move. There is your teaching moment.

I've never seen (other than the bog) the Sca truly fight as a unit. They have many great one on one fighters who work well together. Grim and Falk come to mind, but when side by side there still individuals not a tandem. On a scale of 1 to 10 there are several 10s in the scadian ranks but a lot of 2s and 3s. I don't think there's a 10 in all of the bog. Certainly some high 9s (arunedor I'm sure I misspelled). But there's a lot of 6s and 7s. We are more than the sum of or parts.

I feel this has come from not just years of fighting besides each other but the quality of the time together. We are family both on and off the field. When I see jeff or even Barry alone and about to be overwhelmed , there's a sinking feeling that I must help him not just oh damn they took that side I guess we lost this one. This may all be just for fun but the brothers on the field make it more real. If you don't have that in you you'll never be great at melee and will only be an individual on a field where the team wins not you.

Committed to the Bit
I continue to dwell on one thought, a carryover from the teaching moment: What is with the six-man "let's push them back/off the bridge" charge? It doesn't work, it's never worked, and yet people continue to do it over and over again. What result do they expect?

I once attended a show where the band and their friends were dressed as Luchadors. Throughout the show, impromptu wrestling matches would break out. Someone got the wild hair to smash an acoustic guitar over the head of the champ. And so the champ was struck in the manner that I'm sure they practiced; the attacker pulling his swing and the champ getting his forearms up to take the blow. However, the result was an unconvincing "bump" and everyone knew it. But in wrestling you don't stop and apologize to the crowd, you double down and go bigger.

Despite the weak blow, the champ decided to act stunned anyway, and take the next blow directly to the head. Only too late he realized that his partner was swinging for the fences. The champ flinched and instead of catching the flat back of the guitar, he was caught by an edge. There was a crunch, but it was not the guitar. Despite the blood the novice free-fighters soldiered on, with the champ taking blow after blow, both actors anxiously awaiting the momentous destruction of the guitar.

At some point, the band stopped playing to watch the unfolding spectacle that seemed to be taking forever. Frustrated, the drummer got up, grabbed a folding chair, and hit the attacker from behind. Taking his cue, the attacker fell down "unconscious" and the referee dragged over the champ for the quick pin. There was an audible sigh of relief.

The outcome, though memorable, did not to meet their expectations. They thought they knew what they were doing, but in fact were ill-prepared for the reality, guitars don't explode. Once they committed to the bit, they we incapable of changing their trajectory.

So where are we committed to the bit?
Is there anything that we are blindly committed to doing, and have not said something because we can not provide a explanation or a guaranteed better outcome?
Where we forgoing better ideas in place of "this is how we've always done it?"
How much does tradition dictate what we choose to do?
What other blind spots and repetitive behaviors do we have?
What blind spots and repetitive behaviors do our enemies have?
Does the Kingdom’s focus on tourneys commit them to being good at tourneys and bad at melee?

Movement and Charging
Let us return to charging. Conceptually, the expectation is that through charging you can quickly occupy the space that was previously held by the enemy. Functionally, this is accomplished by placing your body in that previously occupied space, generally with momentum. However, the reality for a successful charge is different, because taking space and keeping space are not the same thing.

I believe that most Kingdom fighters value space on the melee field different than a Celt. Perhaps the society's focus on tourneys blinds them from seeing the depth of the battlefield and so they undervalue of movement. In this case, I mean movement both in kinesthetic intelligence and in location proximity.

With charging, I feel there are good and bad concepts and fundamentals; good and bad timings and mechanics. However, to explain them, I need to work backwards.

Part 1: Mechanics
The mechanics of a charge are simple: Move. When you charge, commit to a location, move through space quickly, and avoid dying on the way. You may also want to prepare for a sudden stop at the end.

When you move, you shift your weight and balance forward and lower, and use your legs like levers driving your body upwards as gravity pulls you over. As you push your mass through space you create momentum. The lower you get your center of gravity, the easier it is to use your momentum and leg leverage to shove someone out of the way. However, the lower your center of gravity, the harder it is to run as your legs have less time to pump and counteract gravity. With practice you learn how to run at a comfortable pace in the weight of your gear without sacrificing leverage.

However, charging should not be confused mechanically with attacking.

When you attack, you evenly distribute your balance over your hips and create a tripod of stability. With your balance in your center, you can freely twist and transfer your weight from one side of your body to the other, thus using your legs like a spring. Like a mouse trap, this coiled energy transitions from your back foot forward as you plant your front foot. The efficiency of this weight transfer directly affects the energy generated in a blow.

It is impossible for your balance and weight to be in two different places at once or to use your legs two different ways at the same time. And yet people try it. A fighter needs to be aware of when they are fighting the enemy and when they are fighting inertia. If you are off-balance or traveling with too much momentum a wary enemy will use it against you. It takes discipline and practice to shift you balance quickly in a melee, and the only way to learn this, is to melee. So charging is probably the worse thing you can do with unpracticed troops as you are essential robbing them of their balance and stealing their ability to swing stick effectively.

Part 2: Timing
I believe where commanders and fighters get the timing wrong is when they see charging as an offensive action; one in where you surprise the enemy with a lightning attack. As we covered, charging is not attacking. Charging is a delivery method, which should target at a specified location, and following a successful arrival, only then should an attack can be launched.

Why charge?
Timing is driven off need, before you commit to a charge you should be able to answer, "Why do you NEED to charge?"

You may see a need to charge at the following times:
Charge at the beginning of a battle to take valuable spaces that you can hold or are needed to win the scenario.
Charge, whenever possible, to gain numerical superiority, and don't commit to contact until you have it.
Charge, whenever possible, to exploit a weakness or to put pressure on an area.
Charge, whenever possible, with the entire unit or group, not just one troop type, e.g. Shields.
Charge to get out of a bad situation.
Charge at the end of a battle when you see an opportunity that will secure victory.

Conversely, be aware of bad times to charge:
Don't charge if you need to announce when to engage or provide a count down.
Don't charge if you need to announce your plan, such as "Push them off" or "Kill the King."
The prior two assessments should tell you that your troops are not trained well enough to accomplish the task. Select a smaller core group to accomplish directed sorties.

Also, avoid:
Don't charge because you are bored.
Don't stand and wait for someone else’s call.
Don't charge when you are outnumbered and the enemy is expecting it.
Again, don't charge unless you NEED to.

Finally:
Always look for a reason to charge.
Always have a way to communicate the charge without being obvious.
Always plan to charge and only stay your movement when there is a valid reason not to charge.

When To Charge:
I can feel it coming, the question; "But can you tell me EXACTLY when should I charge?"

Charge when you NEED to change the parameters of the battle. Generally, this is a BAD idea when you are winning and a GOOD idea when the battle is static or you are losing.

So even though it may seem counter-intuitive, charging into the enemy can turn a win into a loss and likely does more often than we like to admit. Perhaps, instead of charging through an enemy, there is an alternative way to charge around the enemy. Remember, you are looking for opportunities to take advantageous space, not just kills. Moreover, following this logic, running away and reforming is a charge away from the enemy and a tactic that might win you a battle.

Like chess when you move, do so to set up the next move; so when you charge, do so to put yourself in a good position for what comes next. If there isn't a plan for a next move, then caution against the charge and be secure in the knowledge it is not the right time. A plan is simply that, a decision made to be acted on when the time is right.

Always ask, do you need to charge and what will you do when you arrive at the destination?