|
|
|
Author |
Message |
NigelT
Site Admin
Location: Wellington
|
Posted: Wed Oct 24, 2007 11:24 am Missile combat - What did you think? Where to from here? |
|
|
Thanks to everyone who participated in combat archery at NAAMA 2007. Almost everything I've heard so far has been positive with people asking for more, even when it meant being a target and not shooting back.
So, now that you've all had a chance to digest things, I'd like to start talking about what you liked and didn't like and what you'd like to change about combat archery - while it's fresh in your minds.
I'll start the ball rolling -
I think the following could use some improvement:
* Communication about what the rules of each game are (my fault as marshal for not explaining clearly).
* Clarification about kit and ammunition requirements.
* Tactics - there is a lot of scope to do more with archery, siege, etc. We just need to think of more ways to use it.
I think the following worked really well:
* Volley fire into lightly armoured combatants - no injuries, everyone covered their face, and there were even a few kills.
* It changed the way combatants moved around the field and encouraged a bit more tactical thinking.
* It added an element of realism which was previously missing, and almost everyone loved taking part.
* Unarmoured archers could take part thereby involving many people who would otherwise not have been interested in combat.
Some questions for discussion:
* Should we be allowing direct fire with light armour? Personally I still think no, but with some training we could probably change the way we do volley fire to make it more effective.
* Should we allow speed-blunts as well as flu-flu's? Personally I think yes we could. The safety of flu-flus has to my mind been more than adequately demonstrated, so speed-blunts are only a small step up from there with an increase of perhaps 25% to 50% speed/impact. Speed blunts will travel faster and will hurt more if you get hit at close range. The use of speed-blunts will mean we have to be that much more careful with volley fire not turning into direct fire. It does mean that any SCA archer can bring their speed-blunts along and join any NAAMA battle as an archer (light or heavy) - most SCA people use speed-blunts as apposed to flu-flus.
* Is the armour requirement for light combat working? I think yes, we had no incidents that I'm aware of.
* Is the armour requirement for heavy combat working? Again I think yes. A few of us did some direct shooting both on the field and in the maze and the armour was perfect, no injuries. There is something rather special about being shot in the face and not losing teeth.
* Should we relax the requirement for announcing light-combat volleys? I don't think so. I think everyone did a splendid job of taking up the call 'volley' or 'incoming' and that worked really well to get people to stop and cover their faces until the threat had passed. It's safe and easy and everyone can play. I like it.
So, what do you think? Now that we've all had a chance to play with missile combat let's talk about where to from here. I'd like to collate everyones opinions and make some recommendations about missile rule changes. From there I'd ideally like every group and club in New Zealand to take those on board, and consider incorporating missile combat into their training syllabus.
Regards,
Nigel |
|
|
|
Angel
Site Admin
Location: Wellington
|
Posted: Wed Oct 24, 2007 12:07 pm |
|
|
I thoroughly enjoyed myself. This one of the things which really made my NAAMA. PvP in the maze was a hoot, as was playing chicken in the dark with glowstick-bedecked blunts.
But there were a few problems I encountered as a marshal:
Direct firing - all of the massed combat we did was to be announced volleys only, and there were numerous incidences of direct fire, despite warnings. The perpetrators know who they are. One person has a dent in their face plate from a direct fire shot out of a bow that was significantly higher than 30lb. It's lucky they were wearing more than the minimum required armour...
"Fog of war" is not a valid excuse - it's a very clear indication of lack of control - something that we really don't want on the field.
"It's only practise" is also not an excuse, and we weren't practising at the time, it was normal combat. "It's only practise" and "fog of war" definitely don't go together as excuses - if you lack the control to avoid direct firing during "practise", then how are you going to behave under stress?
"They did it first" is also no excuse. Just because one person screws up, doesn't legitimise you doing the same.
Unannounced firing - There were a few instances of people firing unannounced.
Unapproved arrows - Several arrows came into the fort that met none of the requirements. They were speed blunts without tape. I was grateful to find that at least the target points had been removed.
Reusing arrows - at least a dozen arrows were fired back into the fort that had started the battle inside it. Using arrows that haven't been checked is a BIG no-no, and even if someone actually checked the arrows, it was not included in the rules of the scenario and is considered cheating. _________________ Recognise anyone? Flame Warriors
Last edited by Angel on Thu Oct 25, 2007 11:09 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
|
|
Kath
Location: Naki
|
Posted: Wed Oct 24, 2007 12:41 pm |
|
|
I think it is time to employ the use of air horns by marhsalls to signal commencement or cessation of fighting - would have been particularly useful during the fort battle.
Likewise could signal volley fire in instances where fire was from multiple sides of the fort (there were a couple of times I couldnt hear the call) |
|
|
|
gt1cm2
Location: Wellington
|
Posted: Wed Oct 24, 2007 1:29 pm |
|
|
I also found it a lot of fun, coming from a non combatant to actually doing something to be involve which didn’t including lugging water around for everyone was a great experience!
My comments are – weapons are checked every day for fighters, maybe arrows and bows for the archers should be as well to ensure that no one is getting a higher poundage bow thru onto the field.
The archers were not organised well in terms off knowing what we were allowed to do. I have no idea if there was a practise/training round on Saturday morning but even if there was it shows that the archers need to be gathered together before combat begins to briefly go over the rules. At one stage archers were unsure if we were allowed to do direct hits as we thought we were firing onto heavy combatants but no one actually knew and could confirm.
And have someone in charge of the archers that a) knows what they’re doing and can communicate and b) knows to listen to the field marshal.
Leave the fibre glass tape on the arrows, at least if they break all the bits are kept together meaning the blunts aren’t lost and can be reused. I’m guessing someone will say we should just oil them with linseed but I disagree with that.
I can’t comment on the use of speed blunts, I think only the fighters can as they would be the ones taking the hits.
I think a few workshops are needed like discussed on the bowmen’s thread. _________________ did they beat the drums slowly
did the play the fife lowly
did they sound the death march as they lowered you down
did the band play the last post and chorus
did the pipes play the flowers of the forest |
|
|
|
Kath
Location: Naki
|
Posted: Wed Oct 24, 2007 1:37 pm |
|
|
yeah good comments Cindy.....
Next years NAAMA organisers should appoint a Head of Archery or Archery Marshall.....if they dont we should appoint one...
Nigel? |
|
|
|
NigelT
Site Admin
Location: Wellington
|
Posted: Wed Oct 24, 2007 2:15 pm |
|
|
What? Me??!!!
I'm happy to do it again, but that'll be up to the organisers of NAAMA 2008. I'll keep pushing it along in the mean time anyway since the ball is now rolling.
Nigel |
|
|
|
Grayson
Location: Croydon,Victoria Australia/ Wellington,NZ
|
Posted: Wed Oct 24, 2007 3:10 pm |
|
|
Quote: | weapons are checked every day for fighters, maybe arrows and bows for the archers should be as well to ensure that no one is getting a higher poundage bow thru onto the field. |
On this note if people are using higher poundage bows maybe an identifing bit of tape or sticker on the bow to signify direct fire bows, This can be issued in the morning and checked every so often (possibly every fight) no sticker (or what ever is decided) no direct fire.
easily checked by marshalls and fighters _________________ Do not scorn a weak cub. He may become a brutal tiger |
|
|
|
raven
|
Posted: Wed Oct 24, 2007 3:26 pm |
|
|
Quote: | On this note if people are using higher poundage bows maybe an identifing bit of tape or sticker on the bow to signify direct fire bows, This can be issued in the morning and checked every so often (possibly every fight) no sticker (or what ever is decided) no direct fire.
easily checked by marshalls and fighters |
two colors of tape one to signify that the bow has been checked and one to signify that the bow can be used for direct fire
put tape on upper limb of bow so it can bee seen by everyone
if they only have one color they have to volley
if they have both colors they can direct fire
my 2c |
|
|
|
stephan
|
Posted: Wed Oct 24, 2007 4:17 pm |
|
|
more archers and more free firing from them!
i wasent hit once and it would have ben cool to do more feild work
it was awesome
but i was upset that my helm did not pass specs even though the blunt would not passed through the ocular but apparntly the nocked end could
in all respect to nigel i thought this was a bit over the top and has turned me off from archery combat as i would have to invest in a new helm
i loved the fort battle and watching the arrows flying over the wall was cool
regards stephan |
|
|
|
Angel
Site Admin
Location: Wellington
|
Posted: Wed Oct 24, 2007 4:25 pm |
|
|
Quote: | in all respect to nigel i thought this was a bit over the top and has turned me off from archery combat as i would have to invest in a new helm |
Actually it just means that you'd need to invest about $5 to get some mesh to cover the eyeslits of your helm. Most people just go with a temporary solution that they can remove easily for normal combat. _________________ Recognise anyone? Flame Warriors |
|
|
|
NigelT
Site Admin
Location: Wellington
|
Posted: Wed Oct 24, 2007 5:08 pm |
|
|
Grayson wrote: | On this note if people are using higher poundage bows maybe an identifing bit of tape or sticker on the bow to signify direct fire bows, This can be issued in the morning and checked every so often (possibly every fight) no sticker (or what ever is decided) no direct fire.
easily checked by marshalls and fighters |
We were actually doing that at NAAMA. The trouble was that we weren't clear enough about who could participate in various battles and what was expected. We measured and taped bows at weapons check both on Saturday and on Sunday. There really isn't any need to check bows for light combat as there isn't much to go wrong. If your bow breaks because you haven't looked after it, it's going to be you that it hits, not usually something else. So one tape or ribbon for heavy bows that need to be 30lbs or less should be enough.
Stephan - sorry we couldn't let you do heavy combat with your helmet. You were very close with your kit, but the eye slits were wide enough that a broken shaft could pass through and into your eyes. There were some arrows broken on impact with sheilds/walls/etc. If one of those hit your shield, broke and then deflected off the top and through your eye-slit, you'd be regretting that you hadn't invested that $5 and protected yourself. Direct fire just increases the risks enough that we're not prepared to have permanent blindness on our conscience because we let people wear inadequate protection.
We were allowing people to wear full-face protection with strong safety glasses underneath as a concession to not having mesh, but you still need that eye covering. We weren't allowing people with less than full-face and gorget do this.
Nigel |
|
|
|
adrianf
Location: palmerston north
|
Posted: Wed Oct 24, 2007 7:10 pm |
|
|
as a mobile target in the light armoured section i really enjoyed the atmosphere of marching into fire.
one recommendation i would make is allowing more room (if possible) because in the limited space we had i dont think the archers usually only got 2-3 volleys before they had to stop _________________ surrender to temptation, you never know when it will come your way again |
|
|
|
Stuart
|
Posted: Wed Oct 24, 2007 7:32 pm |
|
|
Greeting all,
A number of issues are outstanding from the combat archery experiment at NAMMA.
Let us remind ourselves that the primary purpose of battlefield archery is to deny the enemy use of fortifications and resources by neutralising combatants.
Did we achieve this at NAMMA ? In short, no.
Neither side (either assaulting or defending the fort ) managed to effectively carry out it’s intended design purpose.
It follows that we must identify strengths and weaknesses so as to allow battlefield archery to flourish, or we continue with the status quo and let it die ( as has happened before ).
Successes.
The idea captured the imagination and most people showed a willingness to participate.
Failures.
Bureaucratic and inflexible rules & procedures that thwarted innovation and frustrated advancement.
Points of concern:
1) Target zoning was wrong. High angle volley shots cannot hit anything and accuracy comes from closing the distance. Several afternoons of target practise showed that archers can early hit shields, stomachs and legs on demand. ( Thanks to Nigel T for being a willing target ). Shots could be called by a specially experienced and dedicated captain of archery. The rule should be closer the target, the lower the shot. I would suggest a minimum range of 8 paces for the close range leg shot.
2) Archers need to train and shoot as a unit before any battle.
3) The head is never targeted and no shot goes higher than the waist/beer gut.
4) Arrows do not fly straight, they describe a parabolic path. A good archer knows that and allows appropriate elevation.
5) During a battle, archer’s fire needs to be directed to targets of opportunity.
6) Crossbows are weapons of close range and are useless as volley weapons.
7) The concept of heavy and light archery is useless on the battlefield. During the smoke and confusion of battle it was impossible to differentiate between different armour classes.
Marshals should consult with captains before rushing to judgement. Ideally, the rank of marshal and captain of archers should be integrated.
9) The captain of archers/marshal should endeavour to teach and try to be inclusive.
10) Horse archers are to be encouraged.
11) Arrow scrurrers and retrievers are to be encouraged.
12) Learn to track incoming arrows. They are not difficult to spot.
13) Stop spreading fear stores. This sort of battlefield archery has been practiced across the world for over 30 years. It`s far less dangerous than personal combat. Harden up. Are you warriors or wimps ?
I want this to be progressive. For that reason I am going to offer a sponsored prize for the best archers at the next NAMMA ( if that is all right with the organisers ?) _________________ A Dane Axe beats two aces anytime. |
|
|
|
Stuart
|
Posted: Wed Oct 24, 2007 8:58 pm |
|
|
opps !, should have typed NAAMA.
Not happy about speed blunts. If archers can`t hit the target with flus at 50 meters, then they sure as hell will be no good with speed blunts at 100 meters. In any case they fly three times as fast as flus and can`t be tracked.
If the SCA wants to try them in a demo contest, then ok. But not for general battlefield combat.
Be a human target with flus verses speed blunts and note the difference in bruses ! _________________ A Dane Axe beats two aces anytime. |
|
|
|
Joel of Old
|
Posted: Wed Oct 24, 2007 11:42 pm |
|
|
Time for my 2 pence... I'm English. You'll remember us, we came 2nd.
I though the combat archery was the single greatest thing I've ever experienced whilst on the field of battle. Aside from using Ninja skills to scale the walls of the fort and clear two walls of combatants... but that ended poorly (forever apologetic, Les )
In response, and sometimes agreeance, with Stuart...
Quote: | Successes.
The idea captured the imagination and most people showed a willingness to participate. |
Hell Yes.
Quote: | Failures.
Bureaucratic and inflexible rules & procedures that thwarted innovation and frustrated advancement. |
Not quite sure what you mean by this... I found the rules Okayish but the clarity of them during battle was a little sketchy.
Quote: | Shots could be called by a specially experienced and dedicated captain of archery. The rule should be closer the target, the lower the shot. I would suggest a minimum range of 8 paces for the close range leg shot.
2) Archers need to train and shoot as a unit before any battle.
3) The head is never targeted and no shot goes higher than the waist/beer gut. |
All this common sense - however, an arrow bouncing off of a shield at close range endangers the face... I'll personally fight under these conditions - but I know some who won't and that indicates there are more that I haven't spoken to.
Quote: | 7) The concept of heavy and light archery is useless on the battlefield. During the smoke and confusion of battle it was impossible to differentiate between different armour classes. |
I agree that there should be no difference - I wasn't aware that the two types were mixed though.
Quote: | 10) Horse archers are to be encouraged. |
This is cool.
Quote: | 11) Arrow scrurrers and retrievers are to be encouraged. |
This is VFCool
Quote: | 12) Learn to track incoming arrows. They are not difficult to spot. |
What happened in 1066...?
Whilst I partially agree I think until there is a higher standard of head/face protection it remains a good idea to get into the practice of covering yourself. However there were a few ballsy bastards who were just walking through arrow fire... unfortunately 7 - 10 archers were hardly blocking out the sun...
although Kudos to them for firing 14 - 20 arrows in one volley
For some thoughts of my own I would love to see the inclusion of 'heavy' archers wearing armour and armed with a backup weapon, mixed units where archers/javelineers lurk amongst sword and spearsmen, and, yes, that would mean direct fire.
All participants in this style would have to have halfway decent occular protection - and arrows would have to be of the appropriate safety standard.
All in all I say bring on more archery/javelins... and the next World Cup. _________________ When they hit you, just smile back with broken teeth and spit them in their face. |
|
|
|
|
|