Hi there,
it has been a long time since GW invented those "decurion" formations, and I'm curious to know if they are often used ? Did the players, who criticized those formations a lot at the beggining, eventually adopted it ?
Personnally yes when using my marines (but I never played 2 demi comp), not when playing my Imperial Guard.
So, share your experience with DakkaDakka !

With daemons the daemonic incursion is essential to controlling the warpstorm table, I can pump out a list of daemonettes for around 650 to 700 points too and not have too much of a problem. Its also fairly balanced and not too cheesy

Well, since the Ork faction's super formation has a 1200ish point investment requirement just to give you the good benefits......So yeah, I usually don't bother running a useless formation that forces me to squander points on useless units just to get a decent upgrade.

Mainly, no. I've used them before, but they're fairly limiting; I don't have enough foot Guardians to play the Craftworld Warhost without spamming jetbikes, the Space Marine meta-detachments don't let me use the 30k vehicles that make up most of my motor pool, and the Grey Knights don't have one.

Since the codex dropped it's been all Gladius, all the time.

I've experimented with army construction outside of it, and am particularly interested in the Pinion Demi-Company Formation, but I haven't fielded it yet.

It will be the same with my growing Eldar force, expanding outward from a Guardian Battlehost.

Only if it's convinent or if I expect super friends. 24 markerlights = 4 hits in your invisible blob. Woo suddenly bs 5 again on the whole army due to hunter contingent.

I consider a commander to ususally be a tax.

I don't think I've ever used a formation, actually...

Well, i use the Decurion in larger games. Its quite feared here. Recently, i battled 5000 pts Necrons vs 2x 2500 pts Tau and Mechanicus. My opponents were fabulizing about killing the Spyders. But due to terrain they couldnt. It was a pretty tough game (maelstrom Mission) and a draw at the end.

Never used a Decurion. IG don't get one, BT were faq'd to not be able to use gladius (because codex compliance means only you can use a strategy), and my Eldar army is too small.

I play a decurion-style detachment with only one of my armies. I generally bring a Guardian Stormhost Warhost with my Eldar, because I ended up buying a big lot that fit pretty well, so I planned my purchases around getting to that core formation. Other than that, no, my collections dating from around 5th don't fit into the structure and the rules aren't worth additional purchases (orks and guard) or the armies I play don't have decurion detachments even if I wanted them (Harlequins and Admech.)

Didn't have one with Sisters and I don't own a knight, so I'm not gonna be running the one for my Skitarii. I've literally never played one. That said, I wasn't a huge nay-sayer against it from the start. I found Decurion a bit strong, but it also gave Necron a bit of flavour. If just every codex had an equal one, which is what I was hoping, it would have been fine.

Nothing is equal in GW though. It's just made up on the spot with an attitude of "maybe this works?"

I pretty much always do, yes.

That doesn't mean I always use the "cheese" formations, as I can quite frequently just take Flayed Ones, Deathmarks, or use something such as a Deathbringer Flight or an Annihilation Nexus.

And of course if my opponent wants me to done it down further with a CAD, then I will.

Using a mix of a double Demi Company Gladius and a Sternhammer Strike force have been my two main ways to play at the moment. I love the benefits and I feel it fits SM structure the best out of all the factions.

No, but then my main army is Dark Eldar and we don't have one. Neither do Tyranids, Corsairs or Harlequins. My Craftowrld Eldar do and thanks to the Pale Courts Battlehost formation I can run pretty much anything other than Wraithguard in the core slot, just need some Wave Serpents before I field it.

I do, but I don't make it very strong, I use the Raven Guard one, and I do crazy things like giving Scouts sergeants thunder hammers. I wouldn't consider myself a power player by any stretch of the imagination.

I mainly use it for its fluffy outflanking aspects, and the fact I love to feel like special ops deep striking my Storm Raven full of Sternguard into the hot zone. 50% of the time they all die horribly but I love doing it anyway.

I'd love there to be a fluffy nid one for me to use with similar hive mind options like the endless swarm formation. I like the super detachments on the whole when they aren't too powerful, I'd like GW to keep them and tweak them to make them more fluffy and characterful. It would be very easy to push different levels of play. CADs could be tightened for tournament play balancing the game (if GW would release HQs and troops for all the factions such as harlequins and admech etc or TOs would have to make exceptions or house rules all over the place which seems unfair), formations and super detachments could be super fluffy and still remain semi balanced for casual and narrative play. And then you could have apocalypse above that, and even a skirmish level with the release of kill team that's rumoured to be coming up.

I voted “no” but it’s close.

I don’t like fielding bare bones, MSU squads. So when I field a demi-co, it costs around 1,000 points. So for smaller games, it’s a bit unwieldy if I want anything else.

I like the gladius, and do use it for larger games. But not the full company list, as I’m not a fan of that playstyle.

 Nevelon wrote:
I voted “no” but it’s close.

I don’t like fielding bare bones, MSU squads. So when I field a demi-co, it costs around 1,000 points. So for smaller games, it’s a bit unwieldy if I want anything else.

I like the gladius, and do use it for larger games. But not the full company list, as I’m not a fan of that playstyle.

I've never really gone for the full on hard as nails ultramarine list, maybe I should try it, I think I might have enough transports now actually to do a Gladius. Is it fun, or is it as dull as some make out? I've been thinking of trying out the White Scar one where you can jump back in the transports as that looks like a fun one to try. I'm more about the fun than the power really.

My main group and I largely avoid all formations, actually. We don't like the Full-Throttle power shift 40k has undergone, and only use formations where appropriate. For example, my Harlequins only have a single base build when fielding them without a formation, since there's no Harlequin HQ unit a CAD or Allied detachment isn't possible. My past two games I've used both the Hero's Path and Cast of Players formations to get some minimal stuff in.

Even then, the Hero's Path is a lot of bonuses, though for two of the 3 models the inability to join units is a serious enough weakness that it feels a bit more balanced.

Pretty much we only use formations if they feel balanced. If something's just "extra oomph for lulz" we give warning that it's our intention to bring it so our opponent has a chance to beef up their list too.

as a Tau player, I use one anytime I'm over 1850 usually. But honestly separate formations with individual bonuses can yield greater results. Hunter Contingent was fun for a while, then rage table flippers ruined it. Dawnblade was fun for a while till same results. Now I just run riptide wing, Optimized Stealth Cadre, and a CAD with a stormsurge and 6 individual suits. Let them say a contingent is why they lost the game now!

In my games vs harder opponents (Tau or Eldar), the Decurion certainly helps to keep the Necrons alive and kicking. Without it, I felt that my Necrons would have been dead in round 4 or so.

 redleger wrote:
as a Tau player, I use one anytime I'm over 1850 usually. But honestly separate formations with individual bonuses can yield greater results. Hunter Contingent was fun for a while, then rage table flippers ruined it. Dawnblade was fun for a while till same results. Now I just run riptide wing, Optimized Stealth Cadre, and a CAD with a stormsurge and 6 individual suits. Let them say a contingent is why they lost the game now!

No, a Stormsurge and Riptide wing is why they lost the game.

Must be nice to play an army that gets better when you don't use formations.

I have played against tau using my CSM and I want to disagree with you, but I can't.

 General Kroll wrote:

 Nevelon wrote:
I voted “no” but it’s close.

I don’t like fielding bare bones, MSU squads. So when I field a demi-co, it costs around 1,000 points. So for smaller games, it’s a bit unwieldy if I want anything else.

I like the gladius, and do use it for larger games. But not the full company list, as I’m not a fan of that playstyle.

I've never really gone for the full on hard as nails ultramarine list, maybe I should try it, I think I might have enough transports now actually to do a Gladius. Is it fun, or is it as dull as some make out? I've been thinking of trying out the White Scar one where you can jump back in the transports as that looks like a fun one to try. I'm more about the fun than the power really.

I honestly don’t know, I’ve never put the 2xDemi-co gladius with the free transports down on the table. It’s not a play style that appeals to me. If I wanted to play a “I’ve got more bodies then you have bullets” list, I’d play guard. Fun is subjective though, and some people do enjoy it.

One problem when discussing the gladius is that it’s basically two different things. There is the basic one, with a single demi-co and and aux, that just gives the doctrines. Then there is the full company gladius, with the free transports. You don’t hear many complaints about the first one; it’s the free transports that bring out the venom.

For about half the games I play with my Ultramarines I will use a Gladius. Mainly just Demi Company and 1st Company Task force. Have never done double Demi Company however (only having 2 Rhino's/Razorbacks and 3 Drop pods has a bit to do with it), But I just really like the fact that a Gladius gives me 6 Doctrines to use with my Ultramarines.

Otherwise I normally stick to a CAD.

My main army however is Tyranids, who do not have a Gladius style detatchment so usually just play a CAD + Formation (and no I dont just mucolid troops and flyrant spam, only own 1 flyrant). My meta is fairly casual however so dont really need the "netlist" kind of armies.

I swap between the Champions of Fenris supplement Company of the Great Wolf, Ironwolves, Firehowlers and Drakeslayers. I don't have enough Drop Pods to play the Blackmanes and the Deathwolves formation is more restrictive than helpful.

Tyranids don't get...well...anything but the only time they really see the board these days is when I'm introducing groups to 40k. People think they've got talent after using my Space Wolves to brutalise my Tyranids.

 Nevelon wrote:

 General Kroll wrote:

 Nevelon wrote:
I voted “no” but it’s close.

I don’t like fielding bare bones, MSU squads. So when I field a demi-co, it costs around 1,000 points. So for smaller games, it’s a bit unwieldy if I want anything else.

I like the gladius, and do use it for larger games. But not the full company list, as I’m not a fan of that playstyle.

I've never really gone for the full on hard as nails ultramarine list, maybe I should try it, I think I might have enough transports now actually to do a Gladius. Is it fun, or is it as dull as some make out? I've been thinking of trying out the White Scar one where you can jump back in the transports as that looks like a fun one to try. I'm more about the fun than the power really.

I honestly don’t know, I’ve never put the 2xDemi-co gladius with the free transports down on the table. It’s not a play style that appeals to me. If I wanted to play a “I’ve got more bodies then you have bullets” list, I’d play guard. Fun is subjective though, and some people do enjoy it.

One problem when discussing the gladius is that it’s basically two different things. There is the basic one, with a single demi-co and and aux, that just gives the doctrines. Then there is the full company gladius, with the free transports. You don’t hear many complaints about the first one; it’s the free transports that bring out the venom.

Yeah I can imagine it clogging up the board quite a bit too to be honest. I do like the sound of playing all those doctrines cards though, maybe I will try that in my next game for a change from the RG tactics and a chance to throw some rerolls around. Like you say using the single Demi company and an auxiliary is likely the more fun option and allows for much more variety of models. Would also give me a chance to try out a Librarius which isn't an option in the Raven guard detachment.

Tau and Daemons/CSM player

My Tau army is pretty outdated using mostly respecced3rd edition models with the exception of some converted marker drones and a a couple of Riptides that occasionally make the table. It was originally designed around CAD, and doesn't fit into any of the new formations that well.

My Daemons army is much larger and more varied, however, the Daemons formations are all massive and clunky. The smallest require 30 or so models of a very restrictive selection of unit types (or vehicles)- I simply don't have that many copies of the same models. Instead I tend to run CAD with CSM allies at times to allow me to field a variety of models (rather than just spamming Screamers and Flesh Hounds).

I always use it. Not for an advantage (mainly because I really take the full company, and lack enough transports to make it work) but because it's fluffy as hell.

I take full squads of every unit too - no MSU for me.

I can probably count on one hand the number of times I've actually used the KDK Blood Host detachment. The taxes for my core and Heldrake just aren't worth it to me, I'd rather cram in more useful units at the expense of the +1 BT every turn. I'll run Gorepack every so often alongside a CAD, and if I'm feeling cheeky I'll use the Khorne's Hellstorm with the raptors, warp talons, and Heldrake, but that's really it. Also, I like using Bloodcrushers and that Terminator tax in the Blood Host kinda turns me off as well.

No, but not by choice. My codex doesn't have one.

Might want to add a third option of "My codex doesn't have one".

I only run my Necrons in a Decurion if the other person is running their army in a highly competitive formation a la Riptide Wing

I need a maybe option. My Space Wolves use a Deathwolves decurion most of the time because the army I use ends up being a decurion anyway because of what I use.
My Eldar sometimes use the Decurion but I usually find it too restrictive.
My other armies either can't use it or don't have one.

pm713 wrote:
I need a maybe option. My Space Wolves use a Deathwolves decurion most of the time because the army I use ends up being a decurion anyway because of what I use.
My Eldar sometimes use the Decurion but I usually find it too restrictive.
My other armies either can't use it or don't have one.

That's just "Yes, I play it often."

Considering its the fluffiest and most optimal way to use the Ad Mech codecs in conjunction with each other: Yes I use War Convocation quite often

 KharnsRightHand wrote:

pm713 wrote:
I need a maybe option. My Space Wolves use a Deathwolves decurion most of the time because the army I use ends up being a decurion anyway because of what I use.
My Eldar sometimes use the Decurion but I usually find it too restrictive.
My other armies either can't use it or don't have one.

That's just "Yes, I play it often."

No it's "If I play Space Wolves I'll probably play it but most of the time I'm not". Hardly sounds like a yes.

Never used one. No plans to, either.

These are much more useful in larger games, I play smaller games 1850 and down, so not very often.

Even KDK, which is a pretty easy one to run, I'm finding I like a CAD and 1-2 formations instead of it because of the obsec. (Like Charnal Cohort and a CAD full of cultists.)

For Daemons, it is REALLY pricey to run the incursion, blood letters, plague bearers, nurglings, etc just are not useful in those large amounts.

As a GK player, I play either NSF or CAD, neither of which are "super-formations".

SJ

For the armies of mine that have them, I dont run them, I largely seem them as crutches, or in some ways condoned cheating. Not a fan of them at all.

I use formations and detatchments but not the gladius/decurion styles. 2 reasons, my codex (SW) doesn't have one and 2 my list wouldn't fit into one easily (all termis).

I do, but it's because War Convocation is the only way to play Admech currently.

With my Marines/Chaos Marines I only do the CAD with formations sprinkled in, but with Necrons I only do Decurion because non Relentless/MTC Necrons don't make much sense.

I have been playing the hell out of a Lions Blade battle company. Using ITC rules in building and missions i havn't been shut out completely and any loses have been determined by a single point.

I wanted to (and got to once), but my friends never let me the last few games I played. Considering they could never handle a single Riptide I didn't think it wise to use my formations. They declared them cheese and more or less didn't want me to use them.

It didn't make a difference what they wanted anyways when your losing to Kroot, Vespid, and Heavy Rail Rifle Broadside spam you know your perhaps some of the worst players in existence.

The funny thing is if I was to finally be able to get to a big tournament I wouldn't even use them since the CAD is more efficient for Tau.

pm713 wrote:

 KharnsRightHand wrote:

pm713 wrote:
I need a maybe option. My Space Wolves use a Deathwolves decurion most of the time because the army I use ends up being a decurion anyway because of what I use.
My Eldar sometimes use the Decurion but I usually find it too restrictive.
My other armies either can't use it or don't have one.

That's just "Yes, I play it often."

No it's "If I play Space Wolves I'll probably play it but most of the time I'm not". Hardly sounds like a yes.

Then it's "No, I don't usually play it."

For my Dark Angels, I've run the Lion's Blade Strike Force before, but I don't have the right models to be able to run the double Demi-company version (mainly lacking enough transports). LBSF with only one Demi-company + Auxiliaries is very fun to play, but not all that competitive. For competitive games, I usually run a Ravenwing Strike Force.

For my Khorne Daemonkin, I love the Blood Host detachment. It's so much fun to play, and it isn't totally worthless as far as power level. The problem is, in my area we have an extremely competitive meta (we sent 2 teams to ATC this year and they did very well, especially considering our hometown is only 100k people), so to compete I'm having to rework my Daemonkin list to include allies (gonna try the Cyclopian Cabal next). In a less competitive meta, the Blood Host is viable. In my meta, not so much. Still fun and not too OP for casual play though.

For my Tau, I usually don't run the Hunter Contingent or the Dawn Blade. I like those detachments, but I feel like I can be more competitive with a Farsight CAD, Optimized Stealth Cadre, and Drone Net. I might give the HC another go, but I lack the models to run a competitive Dawn Blade.

 KharnsRightHand wrote:

pm713 wrote:

 KharnsRightHand wrote:

pm713 wrote:
I need a maybe option. My Space Wolves use a Deathwolves decurion most of the time because the army I use ends up being a decurion anyway because of what I use.
My Eldar sometimes use the Decurion but I usually find it too restrictive.
My other armies either can't use it or don't have one.

That's just "Yes, I play it often."

No it's "If I play Space Wolves I'll probably play it but most of the time I'm not". Hardly sounds like a yes.

Then it's "No, I don't usually play it."

Which isn't on the poll.
The poll is yes or no. Neither works hence a maybe option.

pm713 wrote:

 KharnsRightHand wrote:

pm713 wrote:

 KharnsRightHand wrote:

pm713 wrote:
I need a maybe option. My Space Wolves use a Deathwolves decurion most of the time because the army I use ends up being a decurion anyway because of what I use.
My Eldar sometimes use the Decurion but I usually find it too restrictive.
My other armies either can't use it or don't have one.

That's just "Yes, I play it often."

No it's "If I play Space Wolves I'll probably play it but most of the time I'm not". Hardly sounds like a yes.

Then it's "No, I don't usually play it."

Which isn't on the poll.
The poll is yes or no. Neither works hence a maybe option.

Also most decently-accurate polls need a category for people who just choose not to answer or don't have an opinion.

Though now that I think about it for 2 seconds, that doesn't apply here at all.

pm713 wrote:
The poll is yes or no. Neither works hence a maybe option.

It's "yes" or "no" to whether you mainly use it or not. No "maybe" option is necessary.

So, simply, if the armies you use most often are nearly always built with a decurion-style list, then you'd answer "yes".
If the armies you use most often are nearly never built with decurion-style lists, then you'd answer "no".

(Example: If you play 10 games with a Space Marine Gladius, but 50 games with non-decurion style lists for other factions, you'd answer "no". If you play 40 games with a Space Marine Gladius, but 20 games with non-decurion style lists for other factions, you'd answer "yes".)

 Yarium wrote:

pm713 wrote:
The poll is yes or no. Neither works hence a maybe option.

It's "yes" or "no" to whether you mainly use it or not. No "maybe" option is necessary.

So, simply, if the armies you use most often are nearly always built with a decurion-style list, then you'd answer "yes".
If the armies you use most often are nearly never built with decurion-style lists, then you'd answer "no".

(Example: If you play 10 games with a Space Marine Gladius, but 50 games with non-decurion style lists for other factions, you'd answer "no". If you play 40 games with a Space Marine Gladius, but 20 games with non-decurion style lists for other factions, you'd answer "yes".)

And if you play an unlikely exact split 50/50, then just don't answer the poll. It's for people that play either less or more Decurion-style than non-Decurion-style.

 Purifier wrote:

 Yarium wrote:

pm713 wrote:
The poll is yes or no. Neither works hence a maybe option.

It's "yes" or "no" to whether you mainly use it or not. No "maybe" option is necessary.

So, simply, if the armies you use most often are nearly always built with a decurion-style list, then you'd answer "yes".
If the armies you use most often are nearly never built with decurion-style lists, then you'd answer "no".

(Example: If you play 10 games with a Space Marine Gladius, but 50 games with non-decurion style lists for other factions, you'd answer "no". If you play 40 games with a Space Marine Gladius, but 20 games with non-decurion style lists for other factions, you'd answer "yes".)

And if you play an unlikely exact split 50/50, then just don't answer the poll. It's for people that play either less or more Decurion-style than non-Decurion-style.

What about people whose army doesn't have one of those formations, but if it did they'd play the crap out of it?

What do they vote?

For me it depends on the army. For Deamons, yes from now on probably. For Eldar, nope, CAD is still better

I don't play Marines, but if I did, it would be Gladuis for sure.
Same goes for Necrons

 Pouncey wrote:
What about people whose army doesn't have one of those formations, but if it did they'd play the crap out of it?

What do they vote?

Well, "they" aren't playing any. So it should be fairly self explanatory.

Do you drive to work?
"I don't have a car, but I would if I had one."
So that's a no then. You don't drive to work.

 Purifier wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:
What about people whose army doesn't have one of those formations, but if it did they'd play the crap out of it?

What do they vote?

Well, "they" aren't playing any. So it should be fairly self explanatory.

Do you drive to work?
"I don't have a car, but I would if I had one."
So that's a no then. You don't drive to work.

Okay then.

I have to go re-read the OP then, because I don't know what the poll is trying to show then.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Okay, so the OP is trying to figure out how many people adopted these formations even though everyone hated them.

So people whose armies don't have one should either abstain from the poll altogether, or vote yes/no based on whether they would use them.

Because it's about what people decided to use, and you can't make a decision if you don't have any options to begin with.

For the intent, yes. You're right. But that's not the question posed. It simply states "do you or do you not use them."

 Purifier wrote:
For the intent, yes. You're right. But that's not the question posed. It simply states "do you or do you not use them."

Though I dither on both sides of this, I would rather answer the question that's intended than the one that was technically asked.

Especially when it comes to providing statistical information and I know what was intended.

 Pouncey wrote:

 Purifier wrote:
For the intent, yes. You're right. But that's not the question posed. It simply states "do you or do you not use them."

Though I dither on both sides of this, I would rather answer the question that's intended than the one that was technically asked.

Especially when it comes to providing statistical information and I know what was intended.

Yes, but that's where it fails. You can't do that, as most people won't even read his post. Just his topic/question. So many wil answer it the "wrong" way, and then your data will mismatch theirs.

 Purifier wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:

 Purifier wrote:
For the intent, yes. You're right. But that's not the question posed. It simply states "do you or do you not use them."

Though I dither on both sides of this, I would rather answer the question that's intended than the one that was technically asked.

Especially when it comes to providing statistical information and I know what was intended.

Yes, but that's where it fails. You can't do that, as most people won't even read his post. Just his topic/question. So many wil answer it the "wrong" way, and then your data will mismatch theirs.

And hence the poll is already giving inaccurate data for what it's supposed to be showing.

So... the poll's already borked.

 Pouncey wrote:
What about people whose army doesn't have one of those formations, but if it did they'd play the crap out of it?

What do they vote?

"No."

Personally, I think the author should have included the option "My army does not have the option," because otherwise it heavily skews the data with potentially useless info, but the logical answer is clear.

No. I've tried the decurion formation and while it has ple ty of bells and whistles, I've found it all to be the definition of cookie cutter. Not to mention I feel like I don't have the freedom to do what I want with the army- such as having to take a squad of immortals....I don't like immortals and don't like taking them.
I have tried the mephrit Dynasty formation and gave felt less of a douche for just having troops reroll 1s-this usually works out well for my army as I'm naturally warrior heavy. Buy even then I've only played that formation once.

My group generally sticks to CAD and we enjoy it and like to pump out a lot of low point games. There's only one person in our group who cried about it but he's the groups token flavour of the month player who's always itching to do the latest op formation.

Is Archangel Sanguine Wing supposed to be BA's gladius?

Martel732 wrote:
Is Archangel Sanguine Wing supposed to be BA's gladius?

If it's composed of multiple formations, then yes.

 Yarium wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Is Archangel Sanguine Wing supposed to be BA's gladius?

If it's composed of multiple formations, then yes.

No, it isn't.

With necrons I do maybe 60% of the time. But i don't bring the heavy cheese formations just the reclamation and a royal court.

 General Kroll wrote:


I've never really gone for the full on hard as nails ultramarine list, maybe I should try it, I think I might have enough transports now actually to do a Gladius. Is it fun, or is it as dull as some make out? I've been thinking of trying out the White Scar one where you can jump back in the transports as that looks like a fun one to try. I'm more about the fun than the power really.

Just because it was asked. It's sometimes fun, and sometimes totally cumbersome. The way I play it is mostly super resilient, super board-control. I usually play half Drop Pods, half Rhinos, so there's a bunch of dynamic Alpha Strike and an emphasis on redundancy of Grav Cannon bunkers. I enjoy that you can focus on positioning, rather than boosting special rules through spells or whatever. Overall it reduces randomness, and increases reliability.

I also take Sicarius for the bonus to Ld. (even more reliability) and to Scout or Infiltrate someone.

But man, after a while of playing it, it's tiresome. Sooooo many units.

Martel732 wrote:

 Yarium wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Is Archangel Sanguine Wing supposed to be BA's gladius?

If it's composed of multiple formations, then yes.

No, it isn't.

Is it your special foc?

No.

Martel732 wrote:

 Yarium wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Is Archangel Sanguine Wing supposed to be BA's gladius?

If it's composed of multiple formations, then yes.

No, it isn't.

Then no, it's not like the Gladius.

 Yarium wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

 Yarium wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Is Archangel Sanguine Wing supposed to be BA's gladius?

If it's composed of multiple formations, then yes.

No, it isn't.

Then no, it's not like the Gladius.

Ohhhhhh...

I think I misunderstood.

I assumed by "super-formation" we were talking about about really, really powerful formations.

Now I realize we're instead talking about what I would call a "meta-formation" where the formation consists of other formations.

Decurion is boring. Strong, but boring. Like 3 good builds, which is just variants of the 3 strong formations. CAD's and mephrit stuff is more fun.

I can count on one hand the amount of times I've used a "super formation".

Used Skyhammer against Battlesuit Tau, twice and Crons once and GK/Admech once. Works wondrously against everyone but crons for obvious reasons.

Used Gladius in two local tournaments. Both placed top 5, neither took home gold.

I run a Gorepack/Slaughtercult 1850 list for my KDK pretty often. I don't think either qualifies as a super-formation. Especially against Smurfs, Triptide with a SS and Furries.

The only other formation that I can access that is powerful (but not "super" by most people's standards ) is Cyclopia Kabal. I bring it to a lot of my Noise marine games and used it once with my KDK and a demon knight against the new IH decurion. Absolutely smeared him by top of T4 and haven't used that combo since.

As I tend to say, my meta varies but is on the casual end of competitive or the competitive end of casual (if that makes sense). Every once in a while someone asks for an "'ard Boyz" type game and that's when these come out.

I'm surprised by how many people don't run them. Quite interesting.

Not yet. I've mostly been playing Kill Team and 30k.

 krodarklorr wrote:
I'm surprised by how many people don't run them. Quite interesting.

Some of it is that games of 7E tend to take forever to arrange, set up and play. Having games large enough to use a Decurion tend towards the large size and thus take more time. That, and this poll is incapable of reflecting how many people use one when they have access to it.

Do Chaos Space Marines even have one yet?

I tend to use one or two CADs.

To be honest, I wish Grand Formations were still a thing (basically a double size CAD FOC for 2k+ points in 6th). The FOC shenanigans for chosen/cult marines only works in the detachment containing the warlord. I want an army with a lord of each mark and a troop cult unit of each god as my mandatory troops, dammit!

For Tau I really like the Hunter Contingent along with the Hunter Cadre and Retaliation Cadre. The sharing of markerlights is great for combine firepower from multiple units and its great when you combine squad firing to get increased BS. Really fits the whole Tau synergy playstyle and is awesome for my Fire Warrior focused strategy. Just wish it was easier to get a Ethereal without needing even more Commander Suits or having to take a bare bones CAD.

Space Wolves: I am in the works of putting together a Firehowlers + Murder Pack list to field 40 Skyclaws, 10 Wulfen, Wolf Guard bike squad, and land speeder/grey hunters in pod. Outside of that its mainly just running a CAD + a formation or two.

GK/Inq/MT: They don't have them so its not an option to even consider.

Orks: HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. The Orkcurion is such hot garbage for anything outside of making a Ghazz star or maybe trukk spam that its almost a bigger joke than the Ork codex itself. I run Blitz Brigade + CAD or just a CAD/Ork Horde Detachment (the one with 3 HQ slots).

 krodarklorr wrote:
I'm surprised by how many people don't run them. Quite interesting.

Many armies simply don't even have access to one.

I have run Gladius, Talonblade, and Fist of Medusa to reasonable success.

They are all very strong and quite fluffy but if you were ever curious Gladius is the cheesiest, Fist of medusa is the one that will make your opponent want to hang themselves (What do you mean he gets a 2+ FNP JUST FOR EXISTING!!!! He's not even in a unit anymore!!!!) and the talonblade is the most fun (10 man vanguard vet squad that isn't dogsh** YAY!!!
)

If the Command Benefits were more than just Run 6", I probably would use the Warhost (at least the Pale Courts anyway). As it is, almost every game I play is Objective-based, and giving up ObSec for a 6" run usually isn't worth it.

I usually play the Sternhammer Strike Force as it was what I usually took anyway before the Angels of Death book was released. It fits my IF Successor's fluff quite well anyway.

I don't use a Decurion for my Necrons, even though I could. Mainly because I find it boring for me and frustrating for my opponents

I have the models to run the Gladius, and perhaps I might, but I haven't played a regular 40k game with enough points to field it in a long time.

I use the Skyhammer along with the WS formation with the 3 tactical squads in rhinos.

Mind you I haven't played 40k in almost a year. For me it is all 30k all the time.

Gree wrote:


I don't use a Decurion for my Necrons, even though I could. Mainly because I find it boring for me and frustrating for my opponents

You sir, are a gentleman and a scholar.

Selym, Decurions can be run in 1K games. All they need is a reclaimat7with a min unit of flayed ones...

Dantes_Baals wrote:

Gree wrote:


I don't use a Decurion for my Necrons, even though I could. Mainly because I find it boring for me and frustrating for my opponents

You sir, are a gentleman and a scholar.

Selym, Decurions can be run in 1K games. All they need is a reclaimat7with a min unit of flayed ones...

It takes about 1500pts before I'll consider using a decurion. Not everyone just takes min units for them.

I find them all overly restrictive. While the benefits for some of them are great (many ate mediocre though) they are rarely worth having to conform to the detachments restrictions.

Certainly the Imperial Guard one - which for the non-tank version asks you to field an infantry company of three big platoons - requires a hell of a lot of stuff.

The cadian battlegroup is more useful for taking the component formations (most importantly the artillery one!) separately.

Is Archangel Sanguine Wing supposed to be BA's gladius?

No. Blood Angels are like tyranids (in fact much of their stuff came from the same publication) - they've got lots formations (including quite a few decent ones, especially for big games), and their own force organisation detachment (the archangels) but no 'formation of formations' detachment. Certainly they have nothing like a Gladius or Lion's Blade.

No. If anything, formations should cost points and not give abilities "for free". It just further unbalances a game that is teetering on the edge as it is.

I say this owning/playing armies for Tyranids, Tau, Space Marines (Ultras), Eldar, Chaos Space Marines, Orks, Necrons, Imperial Guard, Adeptus Mechanicus and Gray Knights.

As a side note, I don't play games with named characters either due to a really bad experience back in 3E Fantasy.

Some of the earliest formations (like the Reclusiam Command Squad) did cost points in addition to the value of the units themselves, but for some reason they gave up on it.

I haven't used one yet. I prefer the old way of 1 HQ, 2 troops etc.

I may use one in the future though, maybe the Scarblade strike force for my White Scars.

The big ones? Nope, they are generally too restrictive or add in too many squads I do not care for. Most other players in my area would also be considered "casual" by dakka terms, and I would like to think I prefer fun games wherein one or more players are not considered an awful cheese-nugget.

I generally run CAD with maybe one or two Aspect Hosts thrown in on the side.

I'll generally play whatever allows me to take my favourite models and whatever i feel like at the time.
This generally tends to include my sternguard and terminators which i got all the Ultramarine shoulder pads etc for.
So if anything 1st Company task force with a CAD.
I havent yet played Gladius or Full Battle company because i feel they're a little restrictive in what you need to take. Plus I feel like these just lend themselves to Space marine parking lot lists.
Hey I'm already Ultramarines I don't really need more doctrines.

Since they are restricted here, and my actual armies don´t have any, no.