I was wondering if I could offer some ranking structure for the mages. They are more ranked in terms of magic aptitude and battle experience.

Initiates-0 to 2 years and are the lowest magic users
Novices- 2 to 8 years
Adepts- 8 to 15 years
Masters- 15 years and over (this could be further subdivided if need be)

Regarding actual command or rank perhaps it could be a Bleach sort of structure i.e. First seat etc?

Also, perhaps rank symbols could be based on their robe color?

Initiates-white
Novices-grey
Adepts-brown
Masters-black

Stripes on their sleeves could denote rank

I suppose that could work. While knights are basically the fighting elite ki users in the military, battlemages of varying skill levels could be found just about anywhere, so it makes sense that they have a ranking system to decide who should go where depending on the situation. Low level threats for lower level mages and higher level threats for seasoned veterans. Only thing I'd change is to shorten the years for the novice rank, because I reckon 8 years is way too long to be doing something and still be considered a novice. Maybe rename it to apprentice instead? Or maybe just add apprentice as a rank between novice and adept, and split the years between them. What do you think?

Throughout history the military has always defined ranks, it would only logical to assume that even the common soldier would be able to tell who the officers and commanders would be, especially because in the heat of battle, when all is in disarray one cannot go around shouting, 'hey who is leading us?'
They commanding officers would usually display differences in outfit or symbolism to show rank.

However, we might assume that Arn simply isn't familiar enough with the knights and their officers, since they might be kept and trained separated, only seeing each other on the battlefield.

Throughout history the military has always defined ranks, it would only logical to assume that even the common soldier would be able to tell who the officers and commanders would be, especially because in the heat of battle, when all is in disarray one cannot go around shouting, 'hey who is leading us?'
They commanding officers would usually display differences in outfit or symbolism to show rank.

However, we might assume that Arn simply isn't familiar enough with the knights and their officers, since they might be kept and trained separated, only seeing each other on the battlefield.

To be fair I asked what sort of rank insignia the two of them had. Even in today’s military it’s hard to see the rank unless they are up close. I can work that in but I was never told. That being said, how would the rank structure of the knights and regular soldiers be arranged or what titles? Also what insignia would each rank have?

Personally I'd say for sake of visibility how about differences in capes.
The shorter half cape, that is draped/covering only one shoulder.

First of all, I just wanna say nice post @deia876lat. Always good to see some HEMA in action, but there's just one thing. You mentioned Arn starting the match without @Omni5876 writing that in their own post yet, so Omni, does deia have your permission to do that?

As for the insignia thing, I suppose if the non-standard equipment and the emblems on their armour aren't enough, we could say that all knights wear a crest in the shape of a shield somewhere on them, each symbol unique to the wearer and based on their knightly name. For example, Leo could have a white spider on a solid black background for his crest. Tyrhallan could have something like that, which he apparently already does. A swallow tailed kite.

Knights don't really have a rank structure since all of them would be equals except for their Knight Captain, which is more of a title than a rank. Similar to how everyone just knows Barristan Selmy is the Lord Commander of the Kingsguard in Game of Thrones, so would it be assumed that everyone knows Tyrhallan is the leader of the knights. If knights did have an official rank structure though, it'd go something like: Knight apprentice (squire) > Knight > Senior Knight > Knight Captain.

As for the regular soldiers... I'll have to think about that.

I'm fine with that, though it would have to be visible. I'd suggest it being dead center on the chest, as for differences in rank:
Display one sword for a fighter/soldier.
The Apprentice/Squire: A small shield, having to earn a Knight's Shield (thus being a shield for the nation)
Knights: A Shield with possible insignia

To possible leadership positions we could add an extra shield on the shoulder pauldron.

Senior Knight: Shield and downward sword in the center (was either in command & now in an advisory role for the younger Knight Captains or slowly rose up in the ranks, we could even alter sword positions for that if need be.)
Knight Captain: Shield with two blades crossed upward.
Knight Commander: Shield with three blades displaying the three sections (Vanguard, Midguard, Rearguard) falling under his command.
(Which I think you should add, who takes on the role of a General overseeing the battlefield and stay close to the king)

Also I didn't really want to take Omni's character, but figuring he was going to eventually start the match off as Arbiter, I might as well include it in the post. I tried to not take hold of the character and to write around it, but if I overstepped here by not asking you @Omni5876 I apologise.

Oh and thanks for the compliment, why did you think I was posting that late? I was going through moves and swordfighting video's to at least get a bit more bearing, Tyr has been properly trained and all, have to do some reading to make him a believable Knight Captain.

@TheMerlin@deia876lat no issue at all with you assuming I had started the match. I will post immediately so that you can continue and get started. this is basically you guys battle so I will be more on a spectator role. So take you time and I will post every now and then to provide some background and audience vibe.

Just remember guys, consent is absolutely important if you want to control another person's character in your post. Even for minor things, don't just assume they'll be cool with it. Ask first, either here or in a pm and if you're not okay with what someone else makes your character do, don't hesitate to say it even if it's me. Just like anyone else, I can make mistakes too sometimes so point it out if it happens.

As for the knight ranking thing, I was kinda just speaking hypothetically, but honestly @deia876lat's idea isn't too bad. There's just a few things I'd like to add. For the knight apprentice, I think a blank shield would be best. The idea being to show that though they're training for knighthood, they haven't earned their knightly name yet so until that happens, they remain nameless in a sense. They'll mostly be found training in knight academies or under the direct tutelage of a full fledged knight, but they won't be officially knighted until they've passed a rigorous number of tests and a final evaluation of their skills through a duel with a knight.

Some soldiers however, such as my character Leo, can rise up from the ranks and earn knighthood by gaining enough merits through battle, allowing them to skip the apprentice rank entirely (with the king's approval). Unlike apprentices, such people didn't train specifically for the role of knighthood, but gained their skills and experiences through their time as soldiers. The difference between soldiers and knight apprentices being that most soldiers are just ordinary people serving in the military whereas knight apprentices specifically train to be ki users from an early age.

As for the other ranks higher than knight, no need to add an extra shield. Just have the sword(s) positioned behind the shield and there's your rank. Personally, I think blades crossed downward would look better for the knight captain. For the knight commander, it ought to be basically a combination of the senior and captain rank insignias, so crossed swords with one in the centre. I'll also say that the job of the knights isn't to command, that'd be the general's job, though they can give orders to anyone of lower rank if they want. The most valuable asset about a knight is their fighting ability, so their only job is, well, to fight. As the most powerful ki users in the military, each knight is basically a one man army so they're only ever called upon to protect someone or something very important, or destroy a particularly dangerous individual or group. Think of them as special forces and artillery rolled up into one.

All of that is pretty much a long winded way of saying the knight commander wouldn't be in charge of commanding the army. Just the knights.

As for the other ranks higher than knight, no need to add an extra shield. Just have the sword(s) positioned behind the shield and there's your rank. Personally, I think blades crossed downward would look better for the knight captain. For the knight commander, it ought to be basically a combination of the senior and captain rank insignias, so crossed swords with one in the centre. I'll also say that the job of the knights isn't to command, that'd be the general's job, though they can give orders to anyone of lower rank if they want. The most valuable asset about a knight is their fighting ability, so their only job is, well, to fight. As the most powerful ki users in the military, each knight is basically a one man army so they're only ever called upon to protect someone or something very important, or destroy a particularly dangerous individual or group. Think of them as special forces and artillery rolled up into one.

@TheMerlin

No problem, I agree with you on how it looks, it is just the symbolism I looked up, with blades down means the fight is over...
(weirdly enough) And I was thinking more in terms of visibilty when in the heat of battle the blood and dirt cover the armour, you might want something else as an indicator. (Not to fight you on this, but to show you my reasoning for giving the suggestion to include it)

Whilst the Knights don't command perse there has always been this 'special treatment for them' through history most of the time because they were nobles, lesser lords to their own lord (the king). Very similar to 'the Bannermen' in GOT.
They would usually command their own people, those that lived on their lands or lived nearby.

I suppose it'd make sense for some knights to have their own retinue of sorts, particularly if they belong to a noble family. Friends, relatives, vassals, servants and retainers, that sort of thing. If that's what you want for Tyrhallan, that's fine. Just be sure you can keep track of your side characters like Sergeant Firenze somehow. Maybe add their names to the extra section of your cs or make them a full character with their own cs if you want. Or just save them to a text file, idk. Although now that I think about it, that's probably something I should also keep track of myself... Perhaps it's about time I make a proper lore thread for the roleplay.

Careful...I might have to unleash my creativity in creating your court/families ect. I do that stuff for fun...

Also I have an edition for your soundtracks:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O_49H_N43jQ

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LpVNNC52Q_o

@TheMerlin@deia876lat are you both DMing or was that just world building etc? Also, does tryhallan basically have tactical command hence his ability to just pull Arn into this operation? Not that I care was just wondering so I can build my reply

Just world building and as for following Tyrhallan, that's actually up to Arn. Part of the rivalry between knights and mages is that neither likes being bossed around by the other, so you're free to make this interaction as interesting as you like.

Exactly, you never have to...but Tyr is no idiot, he would prefer to have some firepower closeby, hence trying to use his rank on Arn.

@deia876lat So this is going to be a bit awkward, but I only had enough time to skim through your post before going to work. Now that I'm on break however and have the chance to give a proper read, I got a question to ask.

Everyone on the hill (except for Arn) are all knights? I thought they were just regular soldiers this whole time, that's why I've been calling them soldiers. Was this a mistake or intentional?

If you want them all to be knights, that's fine. We could even say that they're Tyr's Vanguard Battalion and that Arn was assigned to them in the first place, that way there's no question about who's in charge. I just need to know whether I have to go back and edit all my previous posts to replace any mention of soldiers with knights instead.

If that does turn out to be the case, then Sergeant Firenze will have to become Senior Knight Firenze as knights don't have sergeants. That's a rank for the regular army.

As far as I am concerned I only refer to 'my men' or those who are under my command, hence why he informed Firenze about his battle beforehand. My men followed me there, (they start betting), so naturally I'll address my men after receiving my marching orders.
If you have soldiers there aswell they'll have their own captains so they'd ignore my orders especially is there not vanguard.

Since the Vanguard often were made up of elite forces (it being a position of honour) I went on to assume that my battalion basically exists out of Knights.
The soldiers there would not fall under me and thus would not be feeling addressed by his call 'his brothers & sisters'.
I've changed the ranking sergeant to senior knight.

Ah, okay. So there's a mix of groups gathered on the hill. Guess I don't need to change anything then.

So yeah, now that we've got that all straightened out, the answer's still the same @Omni5876. It's all up to you how Arn responds.

Ok, I am not as quick on my posting as you but I will try to get something up as quickly as I can.

That's alright, there's no need to rush. We're all free to go at our own pace here.

Anyways, I meant to write a bit more in my post just now about the situation with the refugees, but didn't have enough time. Guess it can wait til the next one.