Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I have noticed some friends that prefer exact or historically realistic lists, and some prefer pratical lists. I am wondering what kinda lists does Dakka prefer?

By practical I mean lists are more based on what will work best gameplay wise, or a historical list, that recreates a certain unit or maybe the specific forces of a certain battle. Or a bit of both

I always make historical lists. Historical lists usually have the tools to make effective lists anyway.

As I know very little detailed WW2 history I make lists based on how they play

In most games, I like historical lists. And usually, historical lists usually have the ability to be effective as well (depending on what unit you are making, that is). Although, in a tournament/more competitive setting I will do practical lists.

Well seeing this is FoW, most people might favor practical

I know I do anyways, theres other games which can do the historical part far more satisfying

I prefer historical. For example, the last game my friend and I played was 1000 points. My list consisted of 3 platoons of infantry, 6 pdr AT guns, mortars, and a Sherman platoon.

My friend had two platoons (kampfgrupped into 3) of infantry, a pair of Pak 40s, a pair of StuGs, and mortars.

Nothing super-crazy, or way out there in terms of what may have happened. Though I think some MG platoons would be a good addition.

Historical. If wanted to build lists based purely on how effective they would be in game terms I’d still be playing GW games. I moved into historical gaming because I wanted to escape that mindset.

Probably a bit of both for me, although I am pretty new.

I do want a nice balanced list, and I don't know how to go around and find out what part of my army fought where and against who. I also don't think the whole "make it a 100% historical army" is helpful when you are then facing a non-historical force. That just kills the illusion.

I do try to paint and model historically though, see what companies of tanks supported my main force and paint them accordingly. I do like battles against forces in the same theater as well