[Ansteorra-archery] on the use of archers

Mon Feb 16 18:50:37 PST 2009

Another thing to consider is that in a resurrection battle, a kill is 
not the important thing.  The important thing is the scenario 
objective.  In the ravine, that means capturing / holding the flag.  So 
even if no arrow kills an opponent, but it creates an opening for others 
to take the flag, then those arrows were well spent.

That being said, I don't think volley fire is quite what we want.  Most 
people think of volley fire as a large group of un-aimed arrows shot in 
an arc.  I think what would work well is coordinated direct fire shot en 
mass or in waves.  If we are getting ready to make a big push to take a 
flag, then an archery unit (say around 10 archers) could work with the 
local area commander to mass all fire to a certain area right before a 
charge.  It's a tactic that I would certainly be willing to look into, 
but it's going to take good coordination between the different commanders.

Donnchadh
NR Archery Commander

Brandon McDermott wrote:
> I think the that it is a misconception to say any one threw away their 
> hard work (read arrows) unless the volley is simply at random. The 
> idea is to temporarily blind/confuse/frighten a unit/army into making 
> a mistake that others may capitalize upon. Heavy fighters consider it 
> a kill for themselves every time the spear men they are protecting 
> kills an enemy soldier. For the archers the thought process should be 
> the same. 10 archers fire a single bolt  (in unison) and in doing so 
> allow one of our units to over run a flank, then each of those ten 
> arrows may "kill" 1 foe, 2 foes, 3 foes........It may collapse the 
> entire flank.....It may win the battle....It may win the war....It may 
> be wholly and utterly ineffective.....We wont know if we don't try. 
> Also, I personally don't think it should be used every time, I believe 
> that would be a waste of resources. I would ask that that we try it, 
> see when it works, if it works at all?
> So archers practice a unified volley. Heavy fighters practice with 
> them to make a less than obvious charge hitting just after the volley 
> strikes. This may work just as well with five archers as fifteen. Food 
> for thought so we might as a Kingdom become more dominant on the melee 
> field.
>
> Gramercy,
> Lochlan
>
> P.S.
> Just a thought....... But would this be a good tactic for the 
> disposable heavy fighter cross bow volley attack?
>
> --- On *Mon, 2/16/09, jack spinks /<jlspinks at sbcglobal.net>/* wrote:
>
>     From: jack spinks <jlspinks at sbcglobal.net>
>     Subject: Re: [Ansteorra-archery] on the use of archers
>     To: "Archery within the Kingdom of Ansteorra"
>     <ansteorra-archery at lists.ansteorra.org>
>     Date: Monday, February 16, 2009, 6:52 PM
>
>     I believe the good gentles are correct.  It is only those good
>     kills from that perfect shot that the archers live for just as
>     fighters live for those good kills that they get one on one. And
>     those archer kills are increasingly hard to come by with the
>     slower arrows (APDs and additional foam) and the trend toward
>     limiting arrows carried into battle.
>      
>     I dont usually shoot combat any more for a variety of reasons. 
>     But how many archers are you talking about?  When I hear the term
>     "volley" I tend to think of a hundred or more in the air.  But how
>     many archers are in a battle- 10?  20?   I just cannot visualize a
>     volley of 20 inaccurate arrows being that effective.
>      
>     And since the trend is toward shooting slower and slower arrows
>     (additional foam in addition to the APDs) plus limiting the number
>     of arrows that can be carried to 15 or so, I would tend to agree
>     with the archers about "throwing an arrow away" in a volley of
>     fire where the object is simply to get the enemy to react.  If you
>     want the archers to support such you will have to make it
>     worthwhile for them to do so in some way.   I have always
>     considered 50 arrows to be the minimum to go into a battle with. 
>     That is $150 worth and considerable time per arrow for those of
>     you that have not considered such. So why would I want to throw
>     one of those arrows away on a poorly aimed "volley" that might or
>     might not hit someone that might or might not call it?
>      
>     Jaque
>      
>      
>      
>
>     --- On *Mon, 2/16/09, Sir Morgan Buchanan
>     /<morganbuchanan at hotmail.com>/* wrote:
>
>         From: Sir Morgan Buchanan <morganbuchanan at hotmail.com>
>         Subject: Re: [Ansteorra-archery] on the use of archers
>         To: ansteorra-archery at lists.ansteorra.org
>         Date: Monday, February 16, 2009, 3:40 PM
>
>         I've ruminated on this post since I read it, and before I really respond,
>         I'd like to know if this is is a widely held belief.  I want Robin to know I
>         have every respect for his opinion, but I like to hear from a larger portion of
>         a group to get a representative sample rather than just take for granted that
>         someone is speaking for "most" of a group.
>
>         Morgan
>
>
>         ----- Original Message ----- 
>         > 
>         > Success in a tactic isn't predicated on the kills that each individual
>         > potential killing shot has, but on the success of the whole attack.?
>         > 
>         > Oh but if only you know how hard it is for that
>          one simple lesson to be
>         learned!!
>         > ?? Most SCA fighters are basically megalomaniacs and that includes
>         archers. Trying to get an archer to shoot at an area or a mass of men is met
>         with a great deal of resistance. Archers like other fighters want to have their
>         own kills acknowledged. They want to see their arrow hit someone and get credit
>         for it. It is extremely satisfying phsychologically. Shooting at a group or an
>         area "FEELS" like you're throwing an arrow away. And that arrow
>         took time to make and money to buy the materials and once it is used in a battle
>         you can't get it back. Compare that to a sword or spear shot. Once
>         you've made the weapon you have almost unlimited shots to take.
>         > ?? I think your views on using archers are on target but you need to look
>         more closely at the difficulties in getting the results you want.
>         > Again back to retirement
>         > Robin
>         >
>          
>
>         _______________________________________________
>         Ansteorra-archery mailing list
>         Ansteorra-archery at lists.ansteorra.org
>         http://lists.ansteorra.org/listinfo.cgi/ansteorra-archery-ansteorra.org
>                           
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     Ansteorra-archery mailing list
>     Ansteorra-archery at lists.ansteorra.org
>     http://lists.ansteorra.org/listinfo.cgi/ansteorra-archery-ansteorra.org
>               
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ansteorra-archery mailing list
> Ansteorra-archery at lists.ansteorra.org
> http://lists.ansteorra.org/listinfo.cgi/ansteorra-archery-ansteorra.org
>   
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ansteorra.org/pipermail/ansteorra-archery-ansteorra.org/attachments/20090216/78260c75/attachment-0002.htm>