Combat Archery: Why is it so hated?

Diglach Mac Cein · Post by **Diglach Mac Cein** » Sun Mar 29, 2009 7:46 am

For most folks, the shot to the face is pretty clear. shots to the body, not so much.

But even with a good stiff wind at their back, I doubt the typical combat archer can approach what most people consider excessive with a singlehand thrust.

Chris G. wrote:
Dilan wrote: My suggestion is simple - 1) Make them hit like a single hand thrust.

A single handed thrust to what/where? The force for a face thrust is not equal to the force for a body thrust.

I don't believe there is a simple solution to the problem of combat archery when there isn't even agreement to what the problem is. But you are probably on the right track, at least offering a solution to what you see as the problem rather than just complaining about some nebulous issue.

There isn't enough control on the part of the archer to truly regulate the force an arrow will hit with. For the same reason that a single hand thrust can become "excessive" when a fighter steps into it, the varying ranges and conditions of the field (i.e. wind) will make it nearly impossible for all shots to hit with the same force, even if poundage, arrow weight, spine weight, balance, and all other factors were made equal.

Ludial · Post by **Ludial** » Sun Mar 29, 2009 10:02 am

Vladimir wrote:
Ludial wrote: instead of simply going for the realistic thing...

You mean like letting Aaron (or any other plate clad fighter) walk up to you ignoring your arrows and tent peg you? After all, you are only firing a 30-35 pounder.

I for one would be fine with "if an arrow strikes a ferrous plate of metal, or an area backed by a ferous plate of metal, ie a brig, it does not count as a strike" Of course, my brass isn't ferrous, so it would (unfortunately) not count, but a steel lamellar would. I'm fine with that, no change for me. But it would neatly avoid the whole "aluminum is metal) argument.

It would be simple to implement, Fighter gets hit by an arrow. He looks and sees that he was hit in his plate legs. Fighter continues. Fighter gets hit again, this time in his leather torso, fighter has to go res.

Agree with that. Although I wouldn't stand and wait for him to come and peg me, I'd either run or fight.
They should also increase the poundage of the bows, so people would actually feel the shots. Cuz right now it's ridiculous - I saw this video yesterday made by an archer at Gulf Wars 2008. People would flinch from a face-shot and keep fighting!

Jehan de Pelham · Post by **Jehan de Pelham** » Sun Mar 29, 2009 11:50 am

It's not hard to get a lot of arrows off if you're beating a zone with them.

Russ had problems hitting a breastplate at thirty paces at CiT, not charging him and under calm and sober conditions, so accuracy is trickier than one might think.

The steppe bows and shafts that Russ gets 18 a minute off with are lighter as well, so I'm less confident that they could do anything against armor, but I will state again--as I always do--that they are artillery and meant to be used as an area effect weapon and in mass.

As far as combat archery, I always considered the possibility of having three arblasters as a personal security detachment to protect against goobers running up on my blind side, spearmen trying to take advantage of my sword and shield, and archers, but I'm doubtful that I could generate the interest and I'd likely have three arbalests collecting dust.

John
Jehan de Pelham, ecuyer and servant of Sir Vitus
www.mron.org

Russ Mitchell · Post by **Russ Mitchell** » Sun Mar 29, 2009 12:34 pm

One thing notable about the accuracy problem, Jehan, is that this isn't a "method" thing: it's a "Russ has a bad habit" thing. I tend to turn my torso when I draw unless I really watch it -- on the release, that means I turn back, displacing the shafts to the left. Rate of fire is the same with the warbow when in practice, however, so the light weight of the bow wasn't an issue. The lighter arrow shafts, otoh, ARE an issue, and a significant one: much more of the mass is up-front in the arrowhead. Against guys in plate, I'd be much more inclined to either shoot up the horse, or else grab my fokos, than I would be to rely upon a bow.

Blackoak · Post by **Blackoak** » Sun Mar 29, 2009 12:39 pm

There are many of us that do not hate CA, we just want one rule set. I do not want anyone to be allowed to shoot or hit someone in the back, period. If archers want to shoot unaware people in the back, then they should be subject to getting hit unawares in the back. I hate the 'more realistic' argument for shooting people unawares in the back. Again, it is realistic to hit in the back with heavy and we don't do that. It is called courtesy.

I would rather got to a mail & plate is proof format to benefit those of us who wear armour that was proof in our time period. I don't want ANY touch kill weapons on the field.

I will call anyone for poor behavior on the field, CA or heavy. It doesn't belong, but we see it on both sides.

Uric

Ludial · Post by **Ludial** » Sun Mar 29, 2009 12:59 pm

If you were "unawares" and got hit in the back, it's YOUR fault, not somebody else's. A real-life enemy would only be happy if you turn your back to them.
Make the rules for realistic plate armor, and I'll hit you square in the back of the head with an appropriate weapon, be it hammer or axe or halberd or crossbow bolt. Stop whining about honor and all that crap already. This is what caused the westerners to lose so much against eastern tribes through the centuries. When they didn't lose, it was because of thinking real, and not because of following some stupid codes.
(to note is that I do make use of courtesy, but I don't think it has a place on a battlefield)

Chris G. · Post by **Chris G.** » Sun Mar 29, 2009 1:17 pm

It is pointless to argue what a "real-life enemy" would do as they were not constrained by rules. In this game you are responsible for your actions.

Iain mac Gillean · Post by **Iain mac Gillean** » Sun Mar 29, 2009 1:22 pm

Blackoak wrote:I would rather got to a mail & plate is proof format to benefit those of us who wear armour that was proof in our time period.
Uric

Thereby eliminating CA as a viable form of combat, because everybody and their mother will claim their armor 'was proof in that time period'. Thing is, nobody can say with 100% certainty that the armor in question actually wasproof...

I've seen it argued in the past, so I've no reason to believe it wouldn't be argued again.

audax · Post by **audax** » Sun Mar 29, 2009 2:34 pm

Ludial wrote:
Saritor wrote:
Ludial wrote:0_o
pffffffHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!
Man, I wish I was one of those archers. This is one of the reasons I want to do CA - I get to pop the posh, honor-blabbering dukes and whatnot without allowing them to get to me
Although, considering my inclination towards blade-dancing and dirty tricks, they won't get to "face" me even in close combat. I pride myself in being a coward and fighting smart.
Honor is for pussies.

Well, there you go.

Seven pages later, a stereotype emerges.

If this were on the front page, think of the time it could have saved us! Or the entertaining flame war it could have provided. Hrm. Tough call...

seriously, I wish more archers were like me. we'd have shooting duels, it's a hell of a lot more fun(and requires much more skill) than a bunch of wannabes bashing at each other for the sake of their own over inflated egos.

As for the late part, I discovered the forum and registered only yesterday

Oh, and MJBlazek, I don't do the happy dance when I get a good shot, I just take a note of it and in the meantime look for my next target.

and I'm not a spoil sport, I just like to win through wits and skill, not by measuring my dick with others, cuz seriously, all this showing off with garb and "look at me, I'm such a MANIMAL!" just pisses off.

You are a chickenshit troll douchebag.

Get back under your rock and be silent, churl.

audax · Post by **audax** » Sun Mar 29, 2009 2:36 pm

Ludial wrote:
Chris G. wrote:
Ludial wrote:you can look historical without being posh.

But why would you want to when you can look fabulous. Sure you may draw a few more arrows, but thats a small price to pay. Besides, fancy duds give you +2 to dodge.

bollocks! less crap to burden me is what helps me dodge! I'm a friggin steppe nomad! GIVE ME LEATHER OR GIVE ME DEATH!
which is why my fav weapons are a bow and a scimitar

I'd be happy to give you death, jerkoff.

audax · Post by **audax** » Sun Mar 29, 2009 2:47 pm

Ludial wrote:If you were "unawares" and got hit in the back, it's YOUR fault, not somebody else's. A real-life enemy would only be happy if you turn your back to them.
Make the rules for realistic plate armor, and I'll hit you square in the back of the head with an appropriate weapon, be it hammer or axe or halberd or crossbow bolt. Stop whining about honor and all that crap already. This is what caused the westerners to lose so much against eastern tribes through the centuries. When they didn't lose, it was because of thinking real, and not because of following some stupid codes.
(to note is that I do make use of courtesy, but I don't think it has a place on a battlefield)

No one can watch all sides of themselves at the same time and you know it.IN fact, you take advantage of this fact. If you shoot someone in the back you are the basest sort of coward and a scumbag to boot.

People like you are why CA is loathed in some quarters. You are not helping your brethren make their case but simply prove that CA has no place on the field with noblemen and women.

You do not make use of courtesy as evidenced by your behavior here. You have come here for the sole puropse of being a troll and a jerk. Please go to hell forthwith.

If you had courage you wopuld list your kingdom of residence, your local group and a method to get in contact with someone who could teach you some proper manners.

Puerile git.

Ludial · Post by **Ludial** » Sun Mar 29, 2009 3:29 pm

I can watch myself all the time in a fight. If YOU can't, that's your problem and only makes my job easier. If you need people like me to remind you to not drowse during a fight, well, you're no challenge. Which means also that you don't have any combat skill whatsoever.

Like I already mentioned, I pride myself in being a coward and fighting smart, for in the end of the day, this is what decides the outcome of a battle much more cleanly than your overrated "bravery" and "courtesy".

And if what I am causes you to think of me as the basest scumbag, then I can only return the sentiment. For there is nothing I despise more in this world than a bunch of mofos who can look down upon on people just because they don't wear flashy clothes and don't have stupid sounding titles and who actually show some tactical acumen when fighting.

If you want to know that much, I live in the Island of the sleeping dragon in the Eastern Kingdom, but I'm not active yet.

And like I already said, with that kind of thinking any of you would get their ass handed to them by any capoeirista(or for that matter by any eastern fighter with just a tad of skill) any day of the week. And you'd get laughed at for a reason. A fight is not won with self-delusions.

Baron Alejandro · Post by **Baron Alejandro** » Sun Mar 29, 2009 3:34 pm

Ludial wrote:If you want to know that much, I live in the Island of the sleeping dragon in the Eastern Kingdom, but I'm not active yet.

Montreal, then.

Russ Mitchell · Post by **Russ Mitchell** » Sun Mar 29, 2009 3:38 pm

Wait. If you're not active yet, why are you posting? Chivalry aside, ya know, you give respect to get respect. Posting like this if you've never played the game is a pretty serious diss.

Ludial · Post by **Ludial** » Sun Mar 29, 2009 3:47 pm

History student+years of Total War/Mount&Blade(have to say, VERY realistic games)+martial arts such as aikido and capoeira+fascination with eastern(in general non-western) culture and medieval tactics(coming in part from my experience with aforementioned games and fighting styles)+relatively cynical view of life(influenced by all of the above).
In general, I despise pretty much everything westerners used to value in the middle ages. While I do have some sort of sense of honor, it's quite different from what you apparently envision and I consider that it has no place on a battlefield.
Cheers, and look out for the lightly equipped Persian with the bow and shamshir in coming years.
Oh, I also had a limited practice with the guys on the island last summer, where my suspicion that western fighting styles are to a great extent half-assed was confirmed.

St. George · Post by **St. George** » Sun Mar 29, 2009 4:01 pm

Dear Ludial-

I don't know how long you have been fighting, but it sounds like you never have. SCA combat is a gem, and like other games has a series of rules and courtesies that are expected on the field. It is NOT a simulator of real combat (although a lot of people try and think it is). Like other sports, our rules make sure that our game is playable, safe, and fun. Just like other sports there are things that you are not allowed to do- in basketball you receive fouls for these, football and hockey you get penalties, etc. In SCA Combat, you either eventually get your card yanked, or everyone thinks you are a real shit, and just won't play with you.

You are well on your way to everyone thinking you are a real shit who no one but other shits will want to play with.

Here are some excerpts from our rules for you to think about. If you don't like them, go and play somewhere else...

From the Rules of the Lists:

"The observance of honor and chivalry and the safety of the combatants are considered overriding elements."

"Combatants shall behave in a knightly and chivalrous manner and shall fight according to the appropriate Society and Kingdom Conventions of Combat."

"Any behavior that takes deliberate advantage of an opponentâ€™s chivalry or safety-consciousness, or that takes deliberate unfair advantage of an opponent, is prohibited."

"A fighter shall not deliberately strike a helpless opponent."

And seeing how HRH Andreas posts and reads here regularly, I hope you and he both take notice of this next one: "All combatants must be presented to, and be acceptable to, the Sovereign or his or her representative."

You have already expressed intent at either not understanding or desiring to break many of these rules. Why don't you learn a little more about the SCA and fighting on the field before you spout off like you know anything.

g-

MJBlazek · Post by **MJBlazek** » Sun Mar 29, 2009 4:05 pm

Ludial wrote:History student+years of Total War/Mount&Blade(have to say, VERY realistic games)+martial arts such as aikido and capoeira+fascination with eastern(in general non-western) culture and medieval tactics(coming in part from my experience with aforementioned games and fighting styles)+relatively cynical view of life(influenced by all of the above).
In general, I despise pretty much everything westerners used to value in the middle ages. While I do have some sort of sense of honor, it's quite different from what you apparently envision and I consider that it has no place on a battlefield.
Cheers, and look out for the lightly equipped Persian with the bow and shamshir in coming years.
Oh, I also had a limited practice with the guys on the island last summer, where my suspicion that western fighting styles are to a great extent half-assed was confirmed.

This post explains sooooo much.

If you think that Eastern Style fighting has only everything to do about winning and nothing to do about honor....you HAVEN'T been LISTENING to your instructors.

From this post, and form the post where you admitted to not having any real SCA combat experience, all of your points on this subject are null and void.

Saritor · Post by **Saritor** » Sun Mar 29, 2009 4:05 pm

Ludial wrote:History student+years of Total War/Mount&Blade(have to say, VERY realistic games)+martial arts such as aikido and capoeira+fascination with eastern(in general non-western) culture and medieval tactics(coming in part from my experience with aforementioned games and fighting styles)

You're not going to go ahead and claim that you're working on your doctorate in history, that you've got a black belt in at least the two aforementioned martial arts, and that you rank at the top of the ladder for the two video games you base your experience on heavily?

Come on, you could at least try.

carlyle · Post by **carlyle** » Sun Mar 29, 2009 4:07 pm

Ludial wrote:... martial arts such as aikido...

Doubtful. None of the adult aikido students I know are anywhere near this egotistical. Proud, yes, but not offensive.

Ludial wrote:I despise pretty much everything westerners used to value in the middle ages.

Truly a remarkable statement for a would-be member of an organization predicated on the noble culture and chivalric virtues of the European Middle Ages.

Ludial wrote:... look out for the lightly equipped Persian with the bow and shamshir in coming years.

You are no threat now and, given your attitude, are unlikely to ever be one in the future. Your blatent ignorance of this sport and demonstrated lack of courtesy are all indications of a juvenile poser. You are only heroic in your own mind; your renown is nothing to me.

Audax, please desist. Pity the ignorant fool. By descending to Ludial's level, you risk your own dishonor.

By my hand in my hall at Water's Edge,

Alfred of Carlyle

Ludial · Post by **Ludial** » Sun Mar 29, 2009 4:11 pm

I'm not going to try anything. The only reason I probably won't be (yet) able to beat any of you is because I don't yet have enough practical experience(something I'm intending to fix over the next few years).
Oh, and I'm pretty sure there are professors who have absolutely the same illusions as you, so it doesn't really make a difference.
And I'm not saying that there is no such thing as honor in eastern culture, but they definitely know how to fight better there.

Like I said, watch out for the Persian with bow and shamshir in future years.

MJBlazek · Post by **MJBlazek** » Sun Mar 29, 2009 4:12 pm

Ludial wrote:I'm not going to try anything. The only reason I probably won't be (yet) able to beat any of you is because I don't yet have enough practical experience(something I'm intending to fix over the next few years).
Oh, and I'm pretty sure there are professors who have absolutely the same illusions as you, so it doesn't really make a difference.
And I'm not saying that there is no such thing as honor in eastern culture, but they definitely know how to fight better there.

Like I said, watch out for the Persian with bow and shamshir in future years.

There is the root of the problem... it is not better or worse... it is just different.

Ludial · Post by **Ludial** » Sun Mar 29, 2009 4:15 pm

carlyle wrote:
Ludial wrote:... martial arts such as aikido...

Doubtful. None of the adult aikido students I know are anywhere near this egotistical. Proud, yes, but not offensive.

Ludial wrote:I despise pretty much everything westerners used to value in the middle ages.

Truly a remarkable statement for a would-be member of an organization predicated on the noble culture and chivalric virtues of the European Middle Ages.

Ludial wrote:... look out for the lightly equipped Persian with the bow and shamshir in coming years.

You are no threat now and, given your attitude, are unlikely to ever be one in the future. Your blatent ignorance of this sport and demonstrated lack of courtesy are all indications of a juvenile poser. You are only heroic in your own mind; your renown is nothing to me.

Audax, please desist. Pity the ignorant fool. By descending to Ludial's level, you risk your own dishonor.

By my hand in my hall at Water's Edge,

Alfred of Carlyle

where have I mentioned that I go by the moral guidelines of aikido?
The SCA is not ONLY about European culture, and it definitely needs some diversification in both looks and fighting doctrines. And please, virtues? There's nothing more base in human history than the European Middle ages.
And where have I mentioned that I think of myself as a hero? And that I rely on YOUR kind of renown?

A bunch of haughty mofos.

Saritor · Post by **Saritor** » Sun Mar 29, 2009 4:21 pm

Ludial wrote:The SCA is not ONLY about European culture, and it definitely needs some diversification in both looks and fighting doctrines.

Governing Documents of the SCA wrote:We sponsor
events such as tournaments and feasts where members dress in clothing styles worn in the Middle Ages and
Renaissance, and participate in activities based on the civil and martial skills of the period. These activities
recreate aspects of the life and culture of the landed nobility in Europe prior to 1600 CE. The dress, pastimes,
and above all the chivalric ideals of the period serve to unify our events and activities.

http://www.sca.org/docs/pdf/govdocs.pdf

Ludial · Post by **Ludial** » Sun Mar 29, 2009 4:24 pm

oh, come on, don't tell me you haven't seen people dressed as samurai and ancient greeks/romans/dacians or as caucasian nomads!

mordreth · Post by **mordreth** » Sun Mar 29, 2009 4:25 pm

Ludial wrote:
where have I mentioned that I go by the moral guidelines of aikido?

.

Then your sensei is an idiot to continue instructing you.

William Lee · Post by **William Lee** » Sun Mar 29, 2009 4:28 pm

Ludial:

The point you appear to be missing is this:

To be involved with any organization, one has to be willing to abide by that group's ruleset.

Most SCA combat rules have one end in mind--the safety of its participants. Even those who dislike the CA ruleset will not deny that. Much of your commentary appears at variance with that very idea. This would very quickly get you booted from SCA combat participation (if not run out of the Society) in short order.

As you consider future involvement in SCA combat (and CA in particular), please bear that in mind.

Ludial · Post by **Ludial** » Sun Mar 29, 2009 4:36 pm

I never said anything against safety. Where did you people infer that from? And wanting to roleplay an honorless raider doesn't mean that I won't comply with the general rules of the SCA, it's the whole nobility thing that I can't stand.

And I stopped practising aikido some time ago - I find the concepts of community and individuality in capoeira much more to my liking(although the idea of you getting hit being you own fault also exists in aikido, so there's no difference).

audax · Post by **audax** » Sun Mar 29, 2009 4:40 pm

Deleted due my profound respect for Alfred of Carlyle.

mordreth · Post by **mordreth** » Sun Mar 29, 2009 4:42 pm

Ludial wrote:erm... this reminds me of some forums(about "realistic" computer games) where there are discussions raging about nerfing this and this weapon cuz they're unbalanced, instead of simply going for the realistic thing... just makes me wonder

I'm glad to see (from other posts) you're in the northern East kingdom,
when you qualify please post the information
when we meet let me know what level of realism you'd like in a fight

be seeing you.

Vladimir · Post by **Vladimir** » Sun Mar 29, 2009 4:48 pm

Oh, I also had a limited practice with the guys on the island last summer, where my suspicion that western fighting styles are to a great extent half-assed was confirmed.

According to S. Matthew Galas in the Journal of Asian Martial Arts, Volume 6, Number 3, 1997, the schools of martial arts from 1350 -1600 Germany were just as well developed and efficient as their Japanese counterparts. Sadly the article only deals with Germany and Japan.

And I'm not saying that there is no such thing as honor in eastern culture, but they definitely know how to fight better there.

There are certainly many examples of tactics typically thought of as "Eastern" defeating tactics typically thought of as "Western". There are just as many examples of battles going the other direction as well. Terrain and strategic objectives are a huge factor. Light cavalry can be a very good offensive tool, but often makes for a poor method of holding ground once it is taken.

Ludial, you would be better served by making your arguments in a more rational manner. With one exception, your posts have had more in common with a screaming monkey than a human being.

Quote professors who support your argument rather than deriding them as a group as deluded. Refer to journals and documents and experts in the field rather than using a video game as source material. Tell us how many years of martial arts experience you have, which schools, rather than + years.

You have stated that you have no interest in the kind of renown many of us here strive for. That is fine, each of us plays a variant of the game in his/her own way. However, please at least attempt to be respectful. Those who lashed back at you have been asked to tone it down and back off a bit. It is your turn to reciprocate.

Ludial · Post by **Ludial** » Sun Mar 29, 2009 4:49 pm

DukeAlaric (George S.) wrote:Dear Ludial-

I don't know how long you have been fighting, but it sounds like you never have. SCA combat is a gem, and like other games has a series of rules and courtesies that are expected on the field. It is NOT a simulator of real combat (although a lot of people try and think it is). Like other sports, our rules make sure that our game is playable, safe, and fun. Just like other sports there are things that you are not allowed to do- in basketball you receive fouls for these, football and hockey you get penalties, etc. In SCA Combat, you either eventually get your card yanked, or everyone thinks you are a real shit, and just won't play with you.

You are well on your way to everyone thinking you are a real shit who no one but other shits will want to play with.

Here are some excerpts from our rules for you to think about. If you don't like them, go and play somewhere else...

From the Rules of the Lists:

"The observance of honor and chivalry and the safety of the combatants are considered overriding elements."

"Combatants shall behave in a knightly and chivalrous manner and shall fight according to the appropriate Society and Kingdom Conventions of Combat."

"Any behavior that takes deliberate advantage of an opponentâ€™s chivalry or safety-consciousness, or that takes deliberate unfair advantage of an opponent, is prohibited."

"A fighter shall not deliberately strike a helpless opponent."

And seeing how HRH Andreas posts and reads here regularly, I hope you and he both take notice of this next one: "All combatants must be presented to, and be acceptable to, the Sovereign or his or her representative."

You have already expressed intent at either not understanding or desiring to break many of these rules. Why don't you learn a little more about the SCA and fighting on the field before you spout off like you know anything.

g-

hrm... point taken.

But that also has me wondering if I want to play by those same rules. I wouldn't strike someone who's helpless, but I definitely will not bow down to a king or something of the sort. I definitely will not miss the opportunity to hit in the back someone who keeps being unaware of his surroundings, but I'm not intenting to endanger anyone's safety(and will do my best to make sure nobody is harmed when I'm around).

What pisses me off is the people who can't take a hit to the back without yapping about honor and such. If someone manages to get me from the back, I can only show respect to them for outmaneuvering and outwitting me the same way any of you would show respect to someone for busting them in face-to-face combat.
I'm thinking the only differences come down to perception.

audax · Post by **audax** » Sun Mar 29, 2009 4:50 pm

Ludial wrote:I never said anything against safety. Where did you people infer that from?

From your words and your behavior. Do you have Tourette's Syndrome?

And wanting to roleplay an honorless raider doesn't mean that I won't comply with the general rules of the SCA, it's the whole nobility thing that I can't stand.

Then get thee from this place. You do not belong here. Go find a fantasy LARP.

And I stopped practising aikido some time ago - I find the concepts of community and individuality in capoeira much more to my liking(although the idea of you getting hit being you own fault also exists in aikido, so there's no difference).

You do not practice capoiera, aikido or even internet ninjutsu. You are a fool and a liar.

audax · Post by **audax** » Sun Mar 29, 2009 4:53 pm

The answer to the question "Combat Archery: Why is it so hated?" is Ludial.

Amanda M · Post by **Amanda M** » Sun Mar 29, 2009 4:53 pm

William Lee wrote:Ludial:

This would very quickly get you booted from SCA combat participation (if not run out of the Society) in short order.

As you consider future involvement in SCA combat (and CA in particular), please bear that in mind.

We should be so lucky. Dudes like this guy are not welcome in our game, imo.

audax · Post by **audax** » Sun Mar 29, 2009 4:53 pm

Isabella E wrote:
William Lee wrote:Ludial:

This would very quickly get you booted from SCA combat participation (if not run out of the Society) in short order.

As you consider future involvement in SCA combat (and CA in particular), please bear that in mind.

We should be so lucky. Dudes like this guy are not welcome in our game, imo.

Definitely not.