The moment that I hate most in a battle

[FierceKitty]

For me, it may be the realisation that I'm looking at the reason why I should have kept a second-line reserve, however small.

Yours?

[flamingpig0]

For me, it may be the realisation that I'm looking at the reason why I should have kept a second-line reserve, however small.

Yours?

It is when I realise that the dice Goddess has decided they fancy my opponent.

[Ithoriel]

Realising I have kept a reserve for a future my army didn't have.

[Heedless Horseman]

When, having got thinking about ACTUALLY DOING a, (solo), fight...I realise that I have only painted and finished less than 10% of the figures bought... with no artillery or cavalry assets and with a ratio of 3:1 in one sides favour!   Probably a good 'real world' scenario, really!  
Sadly, ain't got time at the present.  

[FierceKitty]

It is when I realise that the dice Goddess has decided they fancy my opponent.

I thought everyone knew that even before the declaration of war!

[FierceKitty]

 

Realising I have kept a reserve for a future my army didn't have.

[paulr]

When you realise those options you thought you had have all slipped beyond your grasp

Or the moment you realise what you should have done two or three turns ago

[Steve J]

When you realise that your inital deployment is poor/wrong and it's highly likely you won't be able to rectify things before you're comprehensively defeated .

[FierceKitty]

Or as above, but the opposition have made a critical blunder which you realise is probably going to win the battle for them!

[steve_holmes_11]

For me, it may be the realisation that I'm looking at the reason why I should have kept a second-line reserve, however small.

Yours?

Serious question: Are reserves worthwhile?

My own experience shows that many games have mechanisms that blunt the value of a reserve.
* Reaction checks when friends break.
* Brigade morale, meaning the rearmost half / third of the force push off when the going gets tough (It never comes to the Triarii).
* Lack of (or heavily restricted) march movement rules meaning the reserve can't get to the gap.
* Unwieldy interpenetration rules reducing any "passage of lines" to a shambolic mess.

Which rules defy these popular conventions and allow a traditional reserve (Usually Veteran infantry) to behave as they did in the battle reports.

[FierceKitty]

Serious question: Are reserves worthwhile?

My own experience shows that many games have mechanisms that blunt the value of a reserve.
* Reaction checks when friends break.
* Brigade morale, meaning the rearmost half / third of the force push off when the going gets tough (It never comes to the Triarii).
* Lack of (or heavily restricted) march movement rules meaning the reserve can't get to the gap.
* Unwieldy interpenetration rules reducing any "passage of lines" to a shambolic mess.

Which rules defy these popular conventions and allow a traditional reserve (Usually Veteran infantry) to behave as they did in the battle reports?

In my innocent little way, I prefer to trust reality. Friends should be less likely to break if supported (even in DBx, you can nibble at a flank attacker and extend the lifespan of the front line); morale for being supported should be steadier; mobile light units are a clear choice for such jobs; and rules, whether for interpenetration or for other functions, are written by people and can be rewritten by people.

You do point a useful finger at the value of being ready to negotiate with literate friends and work out house rules that give results resembling reality, as far as we can determine it.

[Steve J]

When playing Honors of War, having a reserve is valuable and a must, to help plug gaps that appear etc. We ignore Brigade morale etc and go with what seems logical at any given point. It makes for, dare I say it, more fun and realistic games.

[Dave Fielder]

For me it's pressing send on the email to the PBEM Umpire with orders for the next set of moves.

[Steve J]

For me it's pressing send on the email to the PBEM Umpire with orders for the next set of moves.

[paulr]

Serious question: Are reserves worthwhile?

My own experience shows that many games have mechanisms that blunt the value of a reserve.
* Reaction checks when friends break.
* Brigade morale, meaning the rearmost half / third of the force push off when the going gets tough (It never comes to the Triarii).
* Lack of (or heavily restricted) march movement rules meaning the reserve can't get to the gap.
* Unwieldy interpenetration rules reducing any "passage of lines" to a shambolic mess.

Which rules defy these popular conventions and allow a traditional reserve (Usually Veteran infantry) to behave as they did in the battle reports.

Spearhead, If The Lord Spares Us, Volley & Bayonet, For King & Parliament, DBA (to some extent), the homegrown Napoleonic & WWII sets all allow reserves to be effective i.e. all the ground rule sets we use

Note that our reserves tend to be separate brigades/battalions so avoiding the "Brigade morale" problem described above

Reserves have to be deployed carefully so they are close enough to be of assistance but not close enough to be impacted by morale failures of the front line, particularly for Volley & Bayonet and For King & Parliament

[Duke Speedy of Leighton]

Or Black Powder...

[steve_holmes_11]

Or Black Powder...

I'd have thought the rule about all your brigades becoming demoralised when (forgotten fraction) are would mean that the reserves never get a go.

Unless you're wining...

[steve_holmes_11]

In my innocent little way, I prefer to trust reality. Friends should be less likely to break if supported (even in DBx, you can nibble at a flank attacker and extend the lifespan of the front line); morale for being supported should be steadier; mobile light units are a clear choice for such jobs; and rules, whether for interpenetration or for other functions, are written by people and can be rewritten by people.

You do point a useful finger at the value of being ready to negotiate with literate friends and work out house rules that give results resembling reality, as far as we can determine it.

I'm one of those odd folks who read a chunk of history, then read mostly wargame rules, and have recent;y returned to reading history.

I have a somewhat unique opinion.
A large proportion of the rules I have read do a better job of simulating the previous decade's wargame rules than they do the battle reports.

I still play a number of these rules, and quite enjoy the games.
I find them far more enjoyable since abandoming hope that I'll one-day see Friedland on my dining table.

[Last Hussar]

One of the things I like about Blucher is the fact that on their first move in a game a unit might be able to move 3/4 of the table width in the right circumstance (6x normal speed).  It means you can actually have reserves and not have to worry about them being too slow to be any use.

[FierceKitty]

I've said it before, but it's relevant; for me the headache with reserves is that they contract the line and expose the flanks.