Middle Earth Ambushes

[Beornmann]

I was mulling over how does the Dunedain execute their mission of disrupting the Enemy with small unit medieval, primitive ambushes. Comparing with modern tactics, I joted down some various notes to start conversation and share thoughts.

1. Initiation of ambush or opening volley: highest casualty-producing device, i.e. machine guns, claymores, or other mines. ME lacks modern equitant. Rock or debris (avalanche) trigger.
2. Missile Fire. Bows have a higher rate of fire over a crossbow. Seven shots to one by some modern timing. Can crossbows be rigged for several to be command fired, similar to Tiger Bow? Still has lower rate of fire than modern weapons.
3. What prevents enemy from overwhelming the assault and/or support element if they contain greater numbers? . Does the Dunedain’s superior weapons training compensate for their smaller numbers?
4. The assault element assaults before the remaining enemy react. Would the Dunedain risk closing in with the enemy and possibly take casualties or would they melt away i.e. Vietcong tactics strike and run?
5. Baited pursuit. Hides small numbers and causes confusion in enemy ranks.
6. Obstacles to avoid enemy in closing in or moving out of kill zone.
A. Channnelization or Movement
1) Terrain
2) Barricade
3) Abatises
B. Wounding
1) booby traps
2) Spike Trap box
3) Barbed Spike Plate
4) Pointed Stakes along route in cover
5) Spike trap pit
6) Spike Board
7) Lassoes
C. Lethal
1) Tiger Traps
2) rolling logs
3) spiked logs
4) boulders
5) Trap Bridge
6) Steel Arrow Trap or Tiger Bow
7) Whip
8 Swinging spiked log
D. Scenarios from:
1) Star Wars: Return of the Jedi – Ewoks Attack
2) Swiss Family Robinson
3) Rambo
7. Historical Examples:
A. Battle of the Teutoburg Forest. Germanic tribes led by Arminius ambushed and destroyed three Roman legions led by Publius Quinctilius Varus.
B. Charlemagne's Spanish Expedition & Roncevalles
C. The March of al-Marzuban to the Rus and His Victory Over Them (332 A.H./943-944 A.D.)
D. Battle of Thurles (1174 AD). Normans Ambushed By the Irish

[Panday]

Feigned retreats were a specialty of the Mongols and Parthians. Mounted Rangers would likely know this tactic. It could work on foot against non-mounted enemies, as well.

[Peter Remling]

With modern weapons it doesn't really matter whether you shoot from in front or behind your opponent, there is zero time to react. In ME/Medieval warfare it does matter. Shooting an arrow or throwing a axe at the front of your opponent means they have time to see it/you and react with either shield or simply dodging.

My point is in this type of warfare the best ambush is from two sides. The first and smallest group attacts the enemies getting their attention . When the enemy has turned to face their attacker, the remaining and larger party attack from behind.

After a volley or two it's time for the ambushers to fade away. Several small traps might be set to deter pursuit, but you'd put most of the emphasis of picking the terrain itself to deter pursuit. A steep incline where some of the ambushers can gather to rain down more shots and again disappear.

Strike, fade, demoralize !

[Eledhwen]

So an 'L' shaped ambush with a delay between the parallel starting the fracas and the perpendicular joining in would work. The 'U' shape would be doable I should think with less chance of arrows getting your own folk than high velocity firearms.

I agree on terrain use...but also with various traps and such to slow and discourage, yep.

Siani

[Cinead]

The ambush style of Francis Marion is well done....

Line a road on each side with warriors......

One side pops up to fire....inflicting casualities.

When the enemy turns to face the threat the warriors on the opposite side of the road pop up to fire into their backs....inflicting even higher casualities.

When have a smattering on warrior hidden at each end of the column.

When the enemy breaks they will be picked of more when they are fleeing...

[Chris Russo]

Hardly Rangers, but I seem to remember a well-executed ambush being pulled off by Hobbits. Of course, they had superior numbers and their goal was to imprison rather than to hit and fade, but several principles remain constant. Use of terrain (high banks w/ hedges lining the road) plus manmade obstacles (wagon barricades, though traps might have been more effective) to channel movement, surrounding with archers on higher ground, ect.


...The ruffians came tramping along the East Road, and without halting turned up the Bywater Road, which ran for some way sloping up between high banks with low hedges on top. Round a bend, about a furlong from the main road, they met a stout barrier of old farm-carts upturned. That halted them. At the same moment they became aware that the hedges on both sides, just above their heads, were all lined with hobbits. Behind them other hobbits now pushed out some more waggons that had been hidden in a field, and so blocked the way back. A voice spoke to them from above.
...'Well, you have walked into a trap,' said Merry. 'Your fellows from Hobbiton did the same, and one is dead and the rest are prisoners. Lay down your weapons! Then go back twenty paces and sit down. Any who try to break out will be shot.'

It ended with seventy of the humans being killed, and nineteen of the hobbit ambushers.

[Oissene]

First consideration is what are U trying to accomplish? Are U trying to delay an enemy advance, wipe out an enemy incursion into your terratory, disrupt supply lines...whats the mission? Delaying and disruption are classic opportunties for hit and run tactics....wipe out missions are much more risky...require a multitude of factors to come together for success. Also, one of the trickiest tactical situations is trying to break off an ambush successfully(especially without automatic bullet launchers and high explosives) Classic Indian warfare is probably the best historical study for woods/forest type warfare.....Also if the mission is sneakin an peekin..the ABSOLUTE last thing U want is contact....

[Greg]

Oissene has his head on straight on this one. GREAT advice.

Planning ambushes is one of my personal favorite things to simply daydream about. I drew up diagrams about ambushes for nerf wars back in elementary school. The habit has stuck in my mind, though not as much on paper.

I see ambushes in two directions. From behind, and from the side. Really, from two sides, but they aren't directly across from each other. Imagine that the following diagram is a trail. The -------- is the trail, the ===== is the party being ambushed, and the RRRRRRR are Rangers. the :::::::: is just filler for the forest around the path.

:::::RRRRR:::::::::::::::::::::::::::
-------------<========-------------
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::RRRRR:::::

The way this works is simple. The party is moving left, as per the arrow. The rangers that are BEHIND them are on the lower line, and they attack first. Being behind and to the side gives them the greatest amount of time before the party has reacted while still providing a substantial field of fire due to being off to the side. The same advantages are then given to the second party of rangers who, as stated by someone else before me, don't attack until the party has recovered from the initial shock, so they can create more chaos. Once the second attack is launched, the first group can make their escape, loosing arrows back towards the party as they do so to further confuse the party and provide the second half with time to make a controlled retreat.