Applied Principles: Maneuver and Cohesion

We’re starting to push up against the limits of these simplified principles, but we can go a little further.

In a melee, units form into lines precisely because it is a very safe formation (at least, at first glance). It’s hard for anyone, on either side, to attack effectively, so everyone is pretty safe.

Cohesion

This is largely a result of the line’s cohesiveness – it’s ability to position fighters effectively and to maintain that position. If a dispersed line meets a well-ordered line, the dispersed line is subject to lots of unilateral 2v1s, because of Range.

This might encourage us to pack in as many fighters as possible. But recall that a line fight is, really, just a lot of 2v1s. In a 2v1, remember, the pair does not want to be too close together – that makes it easy for their opponent to take away Opening. Additionally, as we saw in the 2v2 example, if fighters cannot move freely or are moving up against one another, they risk surrendering Awareness or Readiness (by bumping into one another, fouling each others’ blades, etc). They have to be more finely Aware of one another’s movements to maintain Readiness.

We might reason that packing fighters in tightly works well for shield walls or pike blocks. Perhaps shield walls work because they deny their opponents any Openings? Perhaps pike blocks just out-Range their opponents?

Nah. These historical formations require drilling to maintain cohesion – one guy out of step, or one guy who panics, can throw off the whole unit. And all drill goes back to Attention and Awareness.

In theory, we could pack more tightly than our usual units, but we’d need to practice a lot more and make most of our movements – even our attacks and defenses – essentially rote and standardized. This perhaps explains the prevalence of shields, which can defend the body passively without requiring any Attention, in medieval and ancient combat.

The point: cohesion is a factor of Awareness – knowing where your friends and enemies are, and what they’re doing, well enough to optimally position yourself.

Advantage and Disadvantage

So if a line is standing against another line, each with good cohesion, how does one side gain the advantage and win?

Let us consider a few scenarios.

First, a 1v1: a skilled fighter (Provost) against a relatively unskilled fighter (Scholar). Who is likely to win? The Provost, obviously; he’s better able to use Range/Readiness/Opening to win. Greater skill is an advantage.

Second, two Scholars against one Scholar. Who is likely to win? The pair, of course; the single Scholar is no more able to use the principles to assist him, so he is not likely ever to be safe. Greater numbers are an advantage.

(The astute reader may remember that skill and numbers were factors of Mass.)

Third, two Scholars who cannot move their feet against two Scholars who can. Who is likely to win? The mobile team, naturally; they are better able to create unilateral 2v1s by controlling Range and Opening in a coordinated way. Maneuver can create an advantage.

Of course, each of these situations can be ameliorated if we heap more advantage on the beleaguered party. A Provost fighting two Scholars instead of one is much less assured of victory; an immobile team of three has better odds against a mobile team of two; etc. Skill, numbers, and maneuver can also mitigate the other team’s advantages.

Let’s go back to the previous post. Consider that 3v3. It can break up in many different ways – but there’s no reason it has to stay, say, a 1v1 & 2v2 until someone’s dead. Indeed, if a fighter in the 1v1 can make his opponent flinch or retreat (losing Readiness or Range), he may be able to sprint back to the 2v2 and turn it into a momentary 3v2 – which will, of course, break down into a favorable 2v1 somewhere.

Smart fencers will use skill, numbers, and maneuver to their advantage, if they have the requisite Awareness and Attention. We’ll see how in the next few posts.

Static vs Dynamic

When numbers and skill are equal, or difficult or impossible to change, the team that’s best able to change the battlefield dynamically, and react to those changes, has a significant advantage. Interpreting the battlefield and reacting accordingly are facets of Attention and Awareness.

This is what maneuver is – an attempt to change the odds in our favor, to make a unilateral 2v1, momentarily, out of a 2v2 or 3v3 (or to make a 1v1 out of our opponents’ 2v1).

If one team is at a disadvantage (in numbers or skill), then, all else equal, the only way to make up the difference is maneuver. Static fights play to the hands of the team with an advantage.

So if the fight is even, we maneuver to create an advantage.

If we’re losing, we maneuver to get back on even ground.

If we’re winning and the other team maneuvers, we need to maneuver to keep our advantage.

The only time we’re static is if we’re winning and our foes are too dumb to know it – or if maneuver is impossible, such as in a limited-front engagement.

Maneuver and Cohesion

The problem, of course, is that maneuver and cohesion seem diametrically opposed. How can we keep good order when everyone’s moving about? If we try to gain an advantage via maneuver, but lose cohesion, haven’t we just shot ourselves in the foot?

Yes, provided our opponents take advantage of our poor cohesion (many untrained fighters won’t, because maneuver strains Attention and Awareness; it takes them too long to recognize and react to the vulnerability).

But we need not surrender cohesion to maneuver. A unit can successfully maneuver while maintaining its cohesion.

Because the problems of cohesion are mostly about communicating where we are and what we’re doing (problems of Awareness), a simple strategy is to reduce the size of the unit. If fewer minds and bodies need to be moving in sync, it’s easier to do. This is where the other common formation, skirmishers, comes from.

Lines are large but generally static, usually using simple numbers to win; Skirmishers are dynamic but relatively few, so they must use skill and maneuver to win.

But larger units – even lines – can still maneuver while maintaining cohesion (otherwise medieval warfare would look very different). It just takes practice to make it all automatic, to keep everyone on the same page, to free up Attention and Awareness for actually fighting at the same time. Static lines don’t place particularly large demands on Attention and thus do not require drilling to effectively maintain.

Of course, our practice time is limited. So what should we drill? We’ll tackle this soon.

Addendum: Unit-level Principles

We’re just about done with Range, Readiness, and Opening at this point – most everything else will focus on higher-level phenomena. Awareness, also, is going to be considered as the broader acquisition and movement of information rather than simply knowing where people are. But before we leave these dear concepts behind, I want to pose a question for the reader: can they be applied to units, rather than just individuals? Can we speak intelligibly of a unit’s Readiness or Openings?