"Reserve" status strategies

[Rosseau]

Just curious how many players manually change certain units behind the battle lines to "reserve" status in order to have them possibly commit to a battle. If this is common practice among the experienced players, when do you typically do it?

[FredSanford3]

I'm not an experienced player yet, but I've used the 'reserve' function if I have a thin front of regimental units, backed by a unit with a decent amount of MP's left to act as a 'fire brigade'. I haven't had the opportunity to see how it works though-I've been playing the Road to Moscow as Germans, and the Soviets haven't launched many attacks yet.

One thing I'm not sure of: Is there a penalty if a "reserve" unit is attacked directly?

[Rosseau]

Good question. The rules don't say specifically. But a reserve unit can rout if a defense goes bad. I'm sort of hoping putting units in reserve isn't critical, as there's so much else to do in this game.

[CarnageINC]

I notice that once they commit to one battle they don't commit to another even though they have MP left to use.  This would be a extremely good function to have IMO.

[Zovs]

It depends (or it used to) on how many times they commit. To setup a quick test set the 1943 scenario up with you as the Soviets and the AI as Axis on Challenging. Begin the game and watch the AI, then when it's your Soviet turn watch as you attack the lines where the German AI has placed units in reserve they will be committed, sometimes you'll see a unit (like Viking or another elite unit) being committed more then once, not always but sometimes.

[CarnageINC]

Really, I must watch closer.  So elites will go to multiple engagements sometimes, I suppose that must have to deal with range to the attacks and MP expending in combat.  Its good to hear that this was already incorporated into the game [;)]

[ComradeP]

I don't really use the reserve feature much later in the war as the Axis, as it means the reserve units will fight battles I can't really influence. You can often guess which units might be attacked, so you can plan for that, but the reserve units would change all that as they may or may not be committed.

Let's say you place a Panzer division on reserve. It might cause one hold result instead of a retreat result, or it might get sucked into a battle where the Soviets have thousands of artillery pieces and hundreds of planes and lose most of its strength. It's too random for my liking. Early on, you can place units on reserve as Soviet combat potential is more predictable.

[karonagames]

This is another topic where there will be as many opinions as there are players. As the game is an IGO/UGO structure, the reserve function is one of the few ways you can influence activity during your opponent's turn, and I am ,therefore, a big fan of the reserve function. In the long term, the more combats that you can turn from a "retreat" to a "hold" could make the difference between holding Berlin or not. 4 extra "holds" per turn from 1943 onwards, would be the equivalent of keeping the whole front 4 hexes further east.

Pieter does make a good point regarding getting sucked into an artillery maelstrom, but this is counter-balanced by avoiding the retreat attrition losses if you get the "hold".

[TulliusDetritus]

I'll be playing mostly as the Soviet player. I will follow history. Both the Armies and Fronts had reserves. I guess the former will get one division and the latter perhaps two. But I have to re-read carefully the rules regarding the reserves [8D]

[Rosseau]

Thanks for the comments. I will experiment vs the AI. What a great game...