In my opinion it's a good idea. I also like to analyze the strategy. In LWW I think we have typical offensive. We have some infantry behind the Cavalery (or I'm calling it also Kataphraktoi, because it reminds me of them). It is also a wise in tactical point of view to spred the archers behind the infantry. I think this is more clear in Prince Caspian movie. I didn't see much lancers. The telmarine was well-disciplined, but there is no viraety in it - only infantry and cavalery.

I think the Narnian style of strategy remained consistent between the first film and second, which in a sense also sort of explains how the Telmarines managed to defeat them to the point of taking over. The Narnians seem to have little sense in terms of formation. Most of it is just charge forth behind the cavalry, archers to the rear. Once that's broken it's melee and every soldier for himself which we see in LWW. The Narnians attempted some style of formation thanks to the pincer charge (I always wonder which character might have come up with that strategy) but it didn't last long. We do see the Narnians at their best when the Telmarine cavalry fell into the pit and everything went melee-every-soldier-for-himself briefly. But the Telmarines gained the advantage by staying strict to their shield formation which apparently was good enough to keep centaurs and satyrs from breaking their lines. How the Telmarines developed such a sense of discipline and formation while the Narnians didn't is anyone's guess!

While there is some good strategy in the movies, I have to wince at a lot of it. There's practically no coordination in the Narnian army in PC after the pincer movement. No attempt at making a shield wall, etc. Granted, the Narnians didn't have a lot of time to develop a steady phalanx, what with being hidden all those years. They should have been able to attempt it, at least.

In LWW, same thing. When the Narnians retreated to the rocks, they should have set up some sort of Thermopylae-type phalanx in the pass so that their lesser numbers could be put to an advantage. Archers on the rocks, spearmen at a shieldwall, griffins taking care of air attacks. Granted, I give them leniency on this because the Witch could turn the shieldwall into stone, and I have a hard time seeing Peter ordering Narnians to become a stone shieldwall, no matter the protection it might afford.

I also don't have much fondness for some of the strategic decisions of the nightraid. Particularly, Susan would have been a better character to be in the tower with the torch, because her weapon is a ranged weapon, and she could do more good shooting from the walls than helplessless flinging arrows at people.

Do not get me started on Susan and Lucy going after Aslan. Not the fact that they try to find Aslan, but the fact that they take one horse when they have at least three from the night raid.

And hey, we could even ask why Caspian and the Narnians stole weapons and didn't try burning/cutting down the wooden bridge if they "came like ghosts in the night".

So yah, I try not to think too much of the military strategy, because it annoys me.

While there is some good strategy in the movies, I have to wince at a lot of it.

Exactly. Maybe their strategy is good, but then the enemy's is pathetic. A lot of things are carried out very poorly. So many things are unrealistic. (And this goes for LotR too, not ust Narnia). It's frustrating because I know I am definitely not a general or anything, but this is just insane.

So yeah. That was one of things that I wanted improved in some of the future movies.

Actually, I have more respect for the Telmarines' strategy at least. They follow standard procedures at least: send in the cavalry to harry the enemy. Follow up with steady phalanges (I think that's the proper plural of phalanx) of soldiers, and keep beating them down with their organizational skills. Very Roman of them.

Witch's army was more of a "we'll crush them with numbers" type of thing, which was probably why the Narnians, with the little strategy they had, managed to hold on for so long in spite of being out-numbered until the reinforcements arrived.

I agree with LOTR too, though. Pelennor fields wasn't bad, but Helm's Deep could have been a little better. Still, I felt LOTR did a much better job than Narnia.

The battle in PC is very clever in many ways. the best part is having the army underground! I love how they break the pillars that hold the roof up nad the Telmarines fall into a pit and they are then hit with the archers arrows! it's SO clever!

How do you all know so much about battle strategies?

Actually, I have more respect for the Telmarines' strategy at least. They follow standard procedures at least: send in the cavalry to harry the enemy. Follow up with steady phalanges (I think that's the proper plural of phalanx) of soldiers, and keep beating them down with their organizational skills. Very Roman of them.

I could be wrong on this point, but I was under the impression that the calvary was supposed to be used as kind of an "in and out" thing. They were there to give information to the general/leader and fought skirmishes, but weren't your main attack. But I do agree; I think the Telmarines had a better stragegy.

How do you all know so much about battle strategies?

Not much; but some things stand out blatantly to me, and it frustrates me. Maybe I don't know much about battle strategies, but they sure should. And you don't necessarily have to be an opera singer just to know that the vocalist is off-key.

You're right, Aravis, cavalry was 'in and out'. My thought? The cavalry was sent first, in order to harry the Narnians. Keep them fighting in the center, not able to watch their flanks. Then the Telmarine infantry comes up and traps them in a classic pincer maneuver (which they ultimately do). Pince and encircle. Just classic.

What the Narnians should have done, in my opinion, what not try and trap the cavalry in the collapsed earth. It just allows the Telmarine infantry to walk around the chasm, straight to the Narnians' flank, and of course then the Narnians are encircled because they have a giant chasm in front of them. Instead, the Narnians should have collapsed two pockets on either side of the battlefield, before the cavalry even got there. Give the cavalry a teeny-tiny opening to go through, set up a thick line of pikemen at the only path through the chasm, and mow down the horses. You get a barrier of dead horses and Telmarines, and the infantry can't get through. Then, have part of the Narnian army disappear into the surrounding woods (they've got to be good at that by now) and reappear behind the Telmarine infantry, attacking their flank and back. Make sure Wimbleweather is targeting the catapults. It might not work, but they needed to keep the Telmarines from being able to use thee strength of their numbers.

As for how I know battle strategies, Warrior 4 Jesus, I have an eclectic background. When I went to Appomattox with my Dad and his brother, my uncle (an Army Lieutenant Colonel at the time) explained flanking maneuvers to me using pine needles. I was an undergrad classics major, so I learned a lot about classical battles like Thermopylae, Cannae, and Salamis. And I actually wrote an AU of Prince Caspian, and when it came to writing this scene, and looking up tactics on Wikipedia, it really hit me how bad the tactics are. So I'm mostly self-taught, I suppose you could say.

Okay, thanks. I feel so uneducated when it comes to battle strategies. I think I might have to do some research for the battles in my WIP novel.

I'm a big advocate of researching everything before writing it. I'm sure there are some great books out there on battle strategies that you could check out. Good luck on the novel!

Thanks. Yes. I'm a big advocate of researching for novel writing. I do a fair amount before beginning but some during the process too (otherwise I'd never get any writing done). I'll see if I can keep my eyes open for some appropriate books/Internet resources. Thanks again.