Tactic's

We currently are surrounded by vast supremely coordinated forces bent on destroying us, and even though most of us do not wish to answer to anyone in a military manner, a certain amount of organization is needed if we wish to survive. I don't think that anyone that does not wish to partake in the organization need worry, as all this organization is about is simply deciding who people should listen to in large battles, which is necessary for our survival. Beyond this simple mechanic of who to listen to in large battles I would say that this command structure would have absolutely no more power, and honestly does not even need titles.

Basically what I am saying is making a short list of who to listen to in large combats is no where near making this into an army, and is only being suggested out of the necessity of the lives we live - being in constant danger and the first line of defense against the Corrupt incursions. I just hope we all can cooperate with one another when it comes to the large battles so we can be strong and nimble, and so we are not crushed by the hordes of the better organized Corrupt.

Also in smaller quests this whole concept is unnecessary and thus not needed there. This is only to matter when we have everyone fighting together and when chaos starts to ensue.

-Thorador Boulderfist
 
I think having someone up near the front in charge that contingent and someone in charge of the rear guard, along with a couple of runners who help coordinate communications between them would be an excellent idea for large fights. This would allow us the ability to function as one larger fighting unit, and if necessary, act as two smaller units for more mobility. Of course, this tactic should give us the advantage of being able to rotate the injured or fighters that need refitting between the the two groups as needed.

- Tazoulti Strongbeard
Master Blacksmith & Guardian of Hope's Reach
 
You over think.

We have Sheriff, he is good in battle, have him make plan.

You follow plan, it not matter if you hurt or not have enough armor. I fight with only one arm, it no matter. If you no want to get hurt do not fight. We all fight for one reason or nother. To protect, to gain reward, to satisfy blood lust. Make plan and stick with. That make us strong, and our spirit is stronger than courrupt.

Quextzalli
 
tazoulti said:
I think having someone up near the front in charge that contingent and someone in charge of the rear guard, along with a couple of runners who help coordinate communications between them would be an excellent idea for large fights. This would allow us the ability to function as one larger fighting unit, and if necessary, act as two smaller units for more mobility. Of course, this tactic should give us the advantage of being able to rotate the injured or fighters that need refitting between the the two groups as needed.

- Tazoulti Strongbeard
Master Blacksmith & Guardian of Hope's Reach
Click to expand...

I agree quite hardily with your suggestion good Tazoulti. Communication on a battle field is key, and your proposal would eliminate a lot of confusion and allow for much more adaptability and flexibility in large combats.
 
I like the idea, but we tend to get carried away in battle. If we are going to have someone be a field commander as such, they should be out of combat most of the time so they can think clearly and survey everything.

for the record I am with gorka on this one, I don't want any more authorities in the area. I hate authority as it is now. There are orders, no appreciation for those who follow them even though there is nothing binding 'em to it. I don't like leaders who won't appreciate the people who WILLINGLY follow them.

maybe I am wrong, and I admit, I am biased against oligarcal and monarchal systems with one or a few people in power who don't answer to anyone

but to properly survey the battlefield, I think a commander should only have to worry about the troops, not him/herself

-james the inconcievable of harbors far
 
I agree James, the person giving orders should have a position where they are able to truly asses the current situation. Also I agree that though we speak of orders and commanders, that in reality this person has no real power, just our confidence in the persons ability to lead, and definitely no power outside of combat thats for sure.

-Thorador Boulderfist
 
Duh,

So who other than Sheriff?

Quetzalli
 
Pokethulu said:
So who other than Sheriff?
Click to expand...

If I take James' intent correctly, I think he'd rather it not be the sheriff but someone else who is trusted. Is that correct?

- Tazoulti
 
don't take my disdain for autocratic authority as a good indicator as who should be leader. i try to offer constructive things inside the rants.

as long as sheriff could stay out of the battle and keep a cool head, that's fine with me.

i only just met the dude, so of course i can't say one way or the other. i'm not really for the idea anyways, but i could offer something constructive.

-James the Inconceivable of Harbors far
 
No matter who leader be, need Purify spells and potions for protect mind of leader. This big problem in last big fight.

For who leader be, me think he already prove self and me trust with me life: Aeudis

-Cho Ko Nu
 
Last edited:
If I may,

I have been part of a few battles and witnessed others. Many try to face the enemy head on, which is often times put them in a hard place. However, some prefer that and are much more built for that type of war. May those continue to do so, but may they be careful. My favored style is an ambush style, surrounding the enemy- which I know others favor- and we should make more use of it.

Perhaps groupings of those with similar skills should switch off; the main war party approaches from the center while those skilled in the ways of stealth and quickness approach and cut through the ranks of the rear. I remember many of us were in battle together, a few (including myself) approached from the rear and it worked well. However, the rear of our main party was vulnerable. With our numbers growing, perhaps we can fool them with our numbers for some time and slowly throw in more and more attachments as the battle goes on.

Indeed, for large numbers this may not always be the case. Nor for ambushes, however from many I have been part of- as I say again- this tactic has been quite valuable. I feel with this, we keep a decentralized group of leadership- as admired by James- while still having valuable communication, which is well heard within core groups.

I also hear the number of Archers in the area has grown. Excellent news to hear! Volleys of arrows in concentrated groups are never a bad idea.

Hopefully my words are well heard and agreed with.

Roven
 
I believe the sheriff has said on several occasions that he does not want to be the leader in these matters, Although he does give orders he does not do so because he wants to lead but to help keep people alive.



-Captain York
Deputy Sheriff
Captain of the Order of the Black Wolves
 
If he not want lead, he not give orders. Only leader give orders. He need choose path.

-Cho Ko Nu
 
Last edited:
I appreciate the healthy debate that has been presented so far! It is encouraging that many are taking an interest in working together for the greater good and that they are willing to stand with the citizens of Hope's Reach and our struggle against the corrupt!!!

Many have spoken of wanting to lead or needing a leader. Firstly, let me say that not everyone can or should lead others in battle. I myself have seen many a battle during my seasons of life, however that does not qualify me as a tatitician, nor do I aspire to be one. While I can manage a small group that works together, I tend to get too caught up in the fury of battle to adequately command or give orders to an entire force.

What has worked well in the past is that we have had one person that was able to freely float between several battle lines (front to back to side, etc.). When the entire town has sallied forth into the corrupt lands, we typically had three leaders who worked together. One stationed in the front, one in the middle, and one in the rear. The leader in the middle relayed status updates to both front and back lines allowing the lines to ebb and flow as needed to keep everyone alive.

The middle leader has typically been Guardian and High Wizard Kovu as he was free to disengage himself at will without a line faltering. From his location and vantage point he was able to have a unique perspective on our current status and had the authority to reposition individuals between the lines to reinforce as necessary.

The goal with this strategy is to ensure that we have a safe central core from which to repair/refit and heal.

During our most recent foray into the corrupt lands, we ran into a situation where there were no defined front and back lines, as we had to fight in a circle. I must commend Aeudis for his calm under pressure as we had to circle our wagons to protect the center. I must also commend everyone for working together. There were situations where some fell, but because everyone was mindful of their surroundings we did not lose a man or woman.

There were some internal challenges to our foray as well. There was some confusion as some wanted to work only with certain others, there was lack of communication/listening, and many adventurers who have only experienced a short season of adventuring.

Despite these external and internal challenges, we were successful in our goal. I also believe that many of these internal challenges will resolve themselves as we come together as a community.

When next we all gather, I will make a point of making myself available to any and all who would like me to accompany their groups to act in an advisory capacity as we all learn together what it means to make our stand against the corrupt.

Regards,

McGregor
Guardian of Hope's Reach
 
I do like the idea of instead of trying to coordinate the whole group as one have there be groups that you fight with that are coordinated in smaller groups , that way each group can watch our for each other and instead of having communication throughout the masses, there can just be essentially squad to squad communication.

I think that this would play out really well. If each subgroup or squad was made up of a few fighters, a caster/ healer and other complimentary adventurers everything would be easier to keep track of instead of a few people trying to take care of the coordination of the whole group.





-Roman
An observer of the happenings in Hope's Reach, and one who plans to make homestead in the area for the cause.
 
There are some very good ideas in here. I think a leader is somebody everybody trusts who can freely move about the battle directing and rallying people in their jobs. I'd also like to take a moment to remind everyone that many people want to be a leader, if you want special privileges or to be elevated above everyone else, look elsewhere. I'd also like to remind people that we aren't the militia, nor does anyone enjoy being conscripted.
 
ledhead383 said:
I think that this would play out really well. If each subgroup or squad was made up of a few fighters, a caster/ healer and other complimentary adventurers everything would be easier to keep track of instead of a few people trying to take care of the coordination of the whole group.
Click to expand...

If we could coordinate this next time we were all together, perhaps we could find fellow adventurers to join together to match skills for the certain groups.

-Roven
 
I offer a summery of this topic.
Two general strategies have been outlined.

The first strategy we form units which watch each other and work together in a tightly nit fashion. Then we combine these groups together to form a cohesive whole.This strategy can be likened to an extended battle buddy system. The groups should have a balance of folk with varied skills, covering atleast three of the four major professions in battle: someone who is tough and resilient and probably has heavy armor on, someone who can use Earth magics to heal his/her allies, someone who can deal significant blows to the enemy, and someone who has skills or magics to disable enemies. More can be discussed about this strategy but this is the general jist of it.

The second strategy is very similar to what we have already have done. Mainly shields in front, healer's and re-fitter's in the middle and a rear guard, with the formation changing as needed. In addition it has been suggested that to perform this strategy properly you need a leader that remains out of combat, for the most part, and surveys the battlefield then giving directions to the front and back of the group. It has also been pointed out that their needs to be back up leaders if the leader falls prey to some debilitating magics or monster abilities. I suggest a list of 4 people would be adequate, as the leader should stay out of combat it is less likely they will be targeted with debilitating magics.

Now I feel that I should suggest a combined option. Meaning that we form small units, but also have one or two folk who are in charge of directing the small groups to where they need to be. Also the person directing the groups and cooling watching the flow of the battle should be the one in charge for calling a retreat. So as to not break morale too much.

Lastly I would like to remind people that these different structures for strategy are not absolute and should always remain open for adaptability to the situation. And at the end of the day these structures are in place for us to be successful in battle and should not extend beyond the battlefield, at least in any official manner. (note: these strategies in of themselves are not even official).

-Thorador Boulderfist
 
Summary sound good. More talk here only repeat, now need action and test ideas.

-Cho Ko Nu
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top