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.

Hey guys. In the wake of formations, detachments etc. Does anyone who has access to Decurion-style org charts still roll with the classic CAD? And if you do, why?

Myself, I still run SM using the CAD. Why? Allows better force customization imho, so i'm not forced into fielding Assault Marines/Bikes/Speeders as part of a formation (Demi-Company requires one of those 3 iirc...)

I still use a CAD - I can take what I want, however I want (more or less), without being decried as "cheese".

I play Eldar, so outright declaring I'm not using Wraithknigts, Scatbikes, Aspect Hosts or Warhosts is pretty much my only way of getting a pick-up-game.

I also play Dark Angels, and simply don't have the models for any other option yet (aside from the DW force-org... Where I lose in the first turn).

I pretty often use a CAD as a secondary detachment to support my bikers. The RW Strike Force is so vulnerable to flyers, especially Heldrakes which I face way too often, and has no obsec units which can be easily fixed with a CAD. Also this way you can go around the strict RAW bullgak concerning RWSF HQ slots.

My orks use CAD a lot.
And it works great for some allied imperial forces next to primary inquisitors.

None of our local players are running decurion. Codex marines don't have enough razorbacks or tacticals to really consider it but one's getting them up and we'll see soon. Dark angels just go full bikes and speeders everywhere. Eldar play a mix with harlequins or go full-out crazy on cheeze. Crons...no crons here, really.

Yes. I use a cad for my Tau. I like my FW models too much for all the extra tax the taueron forces you to take. I do use the formations though.

CAD is the only way to still take Forge World. I play Astral Claws that require their Forge World tools, so no Formations for me. For now. Looking at some White Scar ones though pretty seriously to fit in all of the things I want, but never a Decurion.

Actually my Necrons are still in a CAD, but that's just because I just started them and still don't have a full Decurion. A handful of units short.

I play Eldar and I am known for unconventional lists. The core detachments for Eldar are too expensive and too restrictive. I often have to resort to using a CAD if I want a particular HQ without paying a 350+ point tax for the windrider host.

The decurion-style detachment work well if you intend to make the list GW wants you to make god forbid you have a different approach.

I only use it in Orks, but I always have a Great Waaaagh! for the Big Bosspole.

I'd never use anything but a CAD vs armies without decurion style stuff since it's clearly going to give me a ridiculous advantage

I use CAD all the time. Sometimes I take the Ork Horde detachment, and sometimes Ork Horde + CAD for 5 HQ's.

As a Chaos player, I have no choice but to stick to CAD's, (or go Unbound), since we don't have any really shiny formations yet outside of a few Hellbrute ones. (and I don't play KDK)

I switch between formations and CADs all the time.

The perks are nice in the formation, but they lock you into certain builds. I play a different list every time; mixing things up keeps things fun.

My collection of minis also dictates either a CAD or a life of dust for some units. I just don’t own all the formations. But if I want to put a flyer in the sky, or field my pred, the CAD is there for me. I am (slowly) expanding my collection to enable the new things, but it’s slow going. And even if I did (for example) get the second talon for the stormwing formation, do I want to dedicate that many points to air cover? In a larger game, sure. But in smaller ones I’m not going to be dedicating ~500 points to flyers hanging out in reserves.

On the Eldar side, the formations are a lot less restrictive (pick any 3 aspect squads, etc) but a lot of the same things apply. Crimson Hunters are nice, but do I need 3? Moot point, as I only own one. But even if I did, I don’t think I’d field that formation in anything less then a 2k list. CAD lets you bring what you want.

I do and for the same reason as the OP. I'm building marines and I don't really like the bike models, the FW ones are interesting but I don't feel like they're worth it still and I've always kept in mind how they can't climb floors since 4th editon, something that's been pretty helpful while using skimmers as Eldar.

I use a CAD for my Daemonkin at 1850 simply because I can't fit Blood Host into that many points using what I have. 1500 and 2000? Absolutely. The usual difference between 1500 and 2000 for my Bloodhost is a ~500 pt Khorne's Bloodstorm formation which I just can't fit into 1850.

I use a CAD and usually bring along some sorta inquisitorial presence for my marines. Not a fan of the mega detachments.

I still use CAD fairly often as it is the only way to 1) take forgeworld units and 2) CAD is still the most flexible way to build a list outside of unbound and Obj Secured and reroll on strategic warlord traits is actually a huge benefit. People forget when talking about the CFD (Combined Formations Detachment) that they always require you to take a number of what are usually considered suboptimal choices. They also don't let you reroll on the strategic warlord traits table which is actually a much bigger deal than people tend to realize.

I play Marines but I like a CAD if you just want one of something... although I cant argue with the power of a Gladius

Being an IG player I have no other options as of yet

Csm here... and yes

It's dependent on what the army needs, and what I need out of my army.

Space Marines, for example, are always made using the CAD. I absolutely hate Tactical Marines, and therefore why would I ever take them outside free Razorbacks? Scouts and Bikers are just great, thanks.
Necrons have me always using the Decurion except in very specific instances. I never miss Objective Secured.
Daemonkin uses the Blood Host. I want to get to FNP asap.
Last I used CSM's, I used The Purge FOC. So kinda like a CAD, but not.

I use the CAD all the time. It's a good structure and is easy to base an army around.

I still do. I play KDK, and I find that the main detachment doesn't offer the fullest potential and lacks freedom. For example, if I was using the detachment, I couldn't use the skull cannon without taking the charnel cohort, nor take terminators without taking bloodcrushers, or take a land raider without terminators. I mostly use a CAD and then add a formation if I want access to more special rules or have access to more units that what the standard chart allows us.

Eldar Players....

My 'crons are usually CAD.

I use a CAD to include Jetbikes in my army. I don't like the Windrider Host at all, but still like 2 squads. I also like a second Farseer who doesn't have to come from a seer council.

So Warhost+CAD of 2 Jetbikes and a Farseer for me.

People mostly use CADs if they either don't want to use Formations, or are just trying to get a minimum primary detachment.

Personally, I like to use formations. The Eldar Warhost is great and relatively balanced. However, for more casual or smaller-point games, I will use a CAD. My tournment list uses a CAD to fill out what I can't easily get in the Eldar formations.