Dreads still kill defs: why complain?

[lackofcheese]

Personally, as chaos, ive found that in 1:1 battles dreads can still get to the defilers and snap them in CC easily. The AC damage isnt enough to weigh the fight towards the defiler while the dread is still getting there

Dreadnoughts also have a major advantage as they have a faster rate of CC attack, giving them an advantage since they can often avoid a lot of damage when they kill the def.

[Grabnutz]

Try walking a dread through the 4 squads of missile marines to actually get to the def...

[lackofcheese]

why not rush in your plasma at his missiles and your missiles at the def? if hes got 4 missile squads hell have less plasma and you can snap em quickly, while using ur rockets on the def, then bring in the dread?

[Nephilim.]

why not rush in your plasma at his missiles and your missiles at the def? if hes got 4 missile squads hell have less plasma and you can snap em quickly, while using ur rockets on the def, then bring in the dread?

You can sit there and argue any kinds of combinations which would work perhaps, but I believe his point is that the Dreadnought needs to actually walk in, during which time it is vulnerable (especially if the Defiler walks away).

Defiler = Always hurting people
Dreadnought = Only in C/C.

[lackofcheese]

you can upgrade it to an assault cannon though. And what about hellfires, they kinda reverse the situation (now its the dread thats running...)

i.e. theyre decent anti-inf with the cannon and good for mopping up plasmarines once you finish the defilers.. if both the defiler and hellfire stay at range the hellfire is doing its bit of damage too

[AVD]

Hmmm - what can I say - I tried ingame to kill a spam Chaos player's 5 Defilers that had no support whatsoever in a team game. Sending 3 CC Dread to walk only bought me some time - not even one Defiler died in the end. 5 ACs firing continuously do make impression on the Dreads, trust me.

Use ML tac squads to kill the Defilers?, you mean the ones flying around from the BC fire of 3-5 Defilers (depending how many are engaged in CC at the moment). No, usually doesn't work.

It works only if you engage most if not all of the Defilers in CC sacrificing the much more expensive Dreads and then bring 3-4 ML tac squads to kill the bastra**s. Nothing else has worked for me ingame, other than doing the same and bringing a laspred or two to help a bit, but that's late game. If they have ML squads behind the Defilers your only hope is WWs (which happen to cost more than the Defilers again) to bomb his infantry and then proceed to killing the Defilers. Your artillery hardly harms your dreads, so in this regard it's ok.

Try it out - see for yourself. Report back if you find a way to beat Defiler spam Chaos players.

[Edit] - Hellfires, I don't want to offend you, but Hellfires are worthless vs Defilers (and vs almost anything else to be honest)

[lackofcheese]

then stick with assault marines to occupy / take out the MLs, so you can get into CC with the defs more easily

Also worth a try: infiltrating scouts around behind the MLs to engage them in CC

[iamthedave]

Dreads and ASM are more expensive than Defilers/CSMs, so he's going to have more Defilers (probably two, since they build faster than the Dread), and if he has a CL in there he can tie up a ASM squad on his own. It would only need one volley of missiles on a dread to mean the Defiler will take it out, and again that's assuming no micro is used for the Defiler to walk away and just shoot the Dreadnought into oblivion without taking any damage at all.

It's a workable strategy, but it does require the Chaos player to make some mistakes, especially since the Heretics are MUCH better builders than the Servitors, meaning that the Machine Pit will be up and running before the Machine Cult, thus meaning the Defilers will be out before the Dreads.

[lackofcheese]

and plus the anti-vehicle nades are a really good bonus: jump in, bomb a defiler and take out the MLs

another good idea: plas-scouts as a possible alternative as well, sneak em in behind and wreak havoc on the MLs

[Dymo]

In both of the 'sneak in scouts' scenarios there is one inherent flaw. Since we will assume this is the frontline of the battlefield the players detector units, FC, CL, BigMek, FS should be in the mix as well touting their weapons and special abilities as well.

Thus, if said scouts do not have a rather circuitous route to the rear area, they will become uncloaked and gunned down in literally seconds.

Coming up with good ideas is one thing, putting them to use in the real environment has a rather funny way of ruining even the best layed plans.

The Defiler is currently a very powerful unit, no doubt. If left unchecked, regardless of the cost to destroy, they can creep up the map and with just 2-3 CSM covering squads in the rear area, can simply decimate whole areas.

The biggest problem I have noted that even if you do waste boat loads of resources ridding the map of 2-3 defilers and their cover units, by the time it is accomplished another exact set is in place and marching towards your now heavily thinned, morale depleted battleline.

The one true but ugly solution, and rather difficult to do even in this case is the old...

"Don't let them get to Defilers" cliche'

[Asuka]

It is easy to think of a counter but it is much harder to make it work in game every thing can be made to work on paper or in your head but in game most of the time it just fails badly untill they boost hellfire dreads you are best off building a few Las cannon preads.

[AVD]

@ Asuka

No offense, but how often are you left alive vs Defiler spam to produce enough laspreds, not to mention that they cannot take down defilers fast enough, especially since they cost DOUBLE when fully upgraded compared to a Defiler ;).

[Inst]

Mass missile launchers plus woe, if you win the battle, they can't simply crank out more defs, since your force remnants are almost equal to the force you destroyed, and you have your own reinforcing marines. Stick to infantry until you must switch to vehicles, dreadnoughts chasing defilers will break their targeting focus, forcing them to target high hp dreads instead of soft and vulnerable missiles.

[TheLoneKnight]

The only semi-effective way to kill Defilers is to engage them in CC. Once you do that their autocannon/battle cannon stops firing and you're free to kill them.

If there are more than, say, two or three defilers however.. You're just screwed.

I tried to stop a defiler strike with two full-las Predator tanks. Against 3-5 Defilers they managed to kill 3.5, and most of the killing happened because the defilers weren't focusing on the preds themselves. When they did the Preds dropped like flies.

It made me sad. :(

[Sekator]

Something is terribly wrong with this game. You see, when you first pop up a vehicle (ok, a walker vehicle) unit, the most cost-effective way to counter it is popping out an another vehicle. Right now, walkers cost such a laughable amount of req that you dont have to decide whether you get them or stick to infantry - the cost comparison makes building both a natural choice. Im pretty much sure Relic was counting on that, hence the separate caps for infantry and vehicles. But, this makes missiles actually not a walker counter, lets count that we need, say, 2 missile squads to kill a defiler efficiently. Take a mirror match. That'll be 400 req for the marines, 480 req for launchers and probably, since you face artillery, 150 req for aspiring champions. Add in 120 energy for launchers. What do we have: 880-1030 req and 120 power. Now compare to the defiler. Even a minimum number for 1 missile squad is 440/60. (Could kill a Defiler only if the opponent is sleeping) So, the natural choice is to build a defiler of your own. You've just hit tier2, you have an amount of free power and a huge lack of req. But, hell, isnt a mirror match supposed to have a rock/paper/scissors model? If the mirror match has a single scenario, its a great clue for something being OP. But! The same problem applies not only to the Defiler, but practically to any other heavily used vehicle. Dreads, Prisms also share the same problem. Methinks theres a huge constructive problem with vehicles in the game that needs a long discussion.

[Vertigo]

The logic is: RP for infantry, POW for vehicles. The RP/POW ratio is skewed to RP for infantry, skewed to POW for vehicles.

So there's nothing wrong with this approach, in theory, as it provides an incentive to mix your forces. Otherwise you run out of one and have too much of the other.

This is a VERY common design technique: for example Starcraft, where the ratio swings from low vespene gas to high gas as you move up the tech tree.

So, I don't think there's a fundamental problem. Some of the exact values need to be tweaked, that's all.

[Inst]

well, no. The design is that when you get vehicles, the infantry counters to vehicles don't counter vehicles: they only negate them.

3 Rocket squads = 2 defilers(not cost effective, I know).

DOW is a game where melee/artillery/range balance decides the game, not vehicle infantry balances...

[Sekator]

This is a VERY common design technique: for example Starcraft, where the ratio swings from low vespene gas to high gas as you move up the tech tree.

Actually no. In SC, low-tech units cost no gas, high-tech units cost gas, but still they eat up a huge amount of minerals. A reaver is a very high-tech unit, a "vehicle" in SC terms, yet it costs double the mineral cost of a zealot, costing some gas also. There are units in SC that eat more gas than min, but they are scarce and this is done not to encourage mixing, but to limit their numbers in the field. Gas is a resource that limits teching, that's all. In DoW, vehicles cost less req than infantry. That's a very wrong approach imho. Mixing forces shouldn't be the final goal. The final goal should be choice. I mean, encourage mixing forces not by unit costs, but by the ability to counter different strategies. It would be very nice if someone tried a mod with vehicles actually costing req. Regretfully, I haven't enough time to manage such stuff.

DOW is a game where melee/artillery/range balance decides the game

No, it doesnt. By this moment, no. It should, but doesnt. By this moment the only cost efficient way to counter vehicles are vehicles. This, methinks, is one of the reasons ppl usually stick to one strat. Because they have no choice. That's the reason why Orks mid to late game. Cuz they have no reliable vehicles to counter enemy vehicles and infantry cannot counter vehicles effectively.

[TheDeadlyShoe]

logically, then, people who use just vehicles should carry through and win. this is pretty apparently not the case.

infantry vs vehicle balance is delicate but it works. a lot of it is tied up with infantry's ability to regenerate and reinforce in the field.

power is a limiting factor on advanced tech in dow. Hmm.. Sekator, what would be the difference if everything that cost vespene gas cost three times as much vespene but vespene gas was produced at three times the rate? not much. just looking at the ratios of req/pow are therefore foolish.

Another point not addressed is that power costs requisition to acquire, so its not like your vehicle costs exist in a vacuum.

To raise this point again, its a pretty rare situation when you will see vehicles vs infantry at the same 'cost'. Infantry will always have more cost available to it than vehicles will. Furthermore, multiple vehicles are much more awkward at bringing their firepower to bear than multiple infantry units are, especially if they're trying to operate in close concert with infantry.

people also underestimate infantry, i think. look at a space marine squad; approximately equal in cost to a predator until heavy weapons are tacked on. with both bionics upgrades, they have more hitpoints than a predator, and can regenerate health at a good clip esp with apothecaries. The squad can also outdamage a predator at any particular role.

[mercy]

:santa: :king: why are we only comparing def with dread? i mean thers 2 other races out there :damnu: hehe..... kans cant beat dread right the last time i checke and dread cant beat dread and wraithlords i last heard of was a green egg on a tooth pick... but then if you think about it in another perspective dread can do that weird spin thing to infantry while def uses his extremely anooying ac and kan can i guess stomp them while wraithlords ...... warithlords........ warithlords....kills them with smells of a rotten egg. but what do you expect from a dead guy piloting it? :cdance:

[Inst]

most of the time, there are no true counters to vehicles. Yet, vehicles are rather ineffective counters to vehicles also...

Tech tree

Crap -> Generalist -> Specialist 1 -> Tier 2 -> Specialist 2 -> Anti infantry vehicles -> Tier 3 -> Anti vehicle vehicles

basically, anti infantry vehicles are equal in performance to anti vehicle infantry.

[Seridos]

lackofcheese, please be so kind as to show me where the button to build a dred is(at tier 2) at the mek shop?

THe problem with the defiler is that the artilery makes sure your rokkits dont get a chance to fire or they break as thus do no real damage while the AC rapes them,jump in to CC and your sluggas give it so many kill animations good luck getting even HALF the rokkits you fire to actually do damage.when i have 24 rokkits vs 4 defilers and I dont kill ONE!!! theres something wrong.(didn't save the replay but it was DMC,negative cover :( )

[Inst]

HELLO BUY TANKBUSTA KIT FOR FIGHTING CHANCE (retardationprotectioncheatsretardationprotectioncheatsretardationprotectioncheatsretardationprotectioncheatsretardationprotectioncheatsretardationprotectioncheatsretardationprotectioncheatsretardationprotectioncheatsretardationprotectioncheatsretardationprotectioncheatsretardationprotectioncheatsretardationprotectioncheatsretardationprotectioncheats)

[Vertigo]

Actually no. In SC, low-tech units cost no gas, high-tech units cost gas, but still they eat up a huge amount of minerals. A reaver is a very high-tech unit, a "vehicle" in SC terms, yet it costs double the mineral cost of a zealot, costing some gas also.

Hence the word RATIO, my man. My post is totally correct. You are thinking absolute, but I said ratio. Basic SC units cost ZERO gas, it's hard to have a lower ratio than that.

The ONLY reason to have multiple resources is if there are varying ratios when spending it. Otherwise, they could mathematically be combined into one resource.

My point stands. Multiple resources exist to encourage unit diversity. It is not inherently flawed in DoW.

[Sekator]

power is a limiting factor on advanced tech in dow. Hmm.. Sekator, what would be the difference if everything that cost vespene gas cost three times as much vespene but vespene gas was produced at three times the rate? not much. just looking at the ratios of req/pow are therefore foolish.

Brrr... Read posts carefully. Gas is a tech-limiting resouce in SC, not power in DoW. While DoW has exactly the resource model of Total Annihilation, its used differently in DoW for some reason. It was proven by time the TA model functions much like SC. And the very point of my post was that you should first look at the req ratios for vehicles/infantry, not the resource sum ratio that many ppl at these forums seem to use. You can't sum resources in TA model. Req is the resource, power should be a tech-limiting factor. And what i say is that vehicles cost in req a very, very small amount of req compared to their killing abilities. Dont think your argue opponent is less smart than you. Never. Im not even looking at the req/power ratio. Im looking at the req/req ratio.

people also underestimate infantry, i think. look at a space marine squad; approximately equal in cost to a predator until heavy weapons are tacked on. with both bionics upgrades, they have more hitpoints than a predator, and can regenerate health at a good clip esp with apothecaries. The squad can also outdamage a predator at any particular role.

Yet a pred still kills an SM squad... OMFG, how come??? ;)

logically, then, people who use just vehicles should carry through and win. this is pretty apparently not the case.

Quite a strange logic. Logically, then, if someone builds vehicles and someone sticks to infantry-only, the first person wins 24/7. This is apparently the case. And the time window for that win is way too small. Orks dont usually fit into it, for example.

Basic SC units cost ZERO gas, it's hard to have a lower ratio than that.

Didnt get what this stands to... Basic DoW units dont cost "ZERO" power?

The ONLY reason to have multiple resources is if there are varying ratios when spending it. Otherwise, they could mathematically be combined into one resource.

Well, im very, very unhappy when my "ultimate" army is composed based on spending both resources equally, not based on what it could actually do.

Multiple resources exist to encourage unit diversity.

As i said before, that's forced unit mixing, that is the worst way to encourage unit mixing anyway. Its about reasoning and thinking. When mixing is forced by resource ratios it reduces thinking to zero. Ever read Kurt Vaunnegut? Calculating numbers is a mechanical work that doesnt require a human being to be done, actually.

How mixing is usually encouraged is a very easy approach. You, for example, have a wayload of defilers. They do their job pretty nice for cost. But you still keep a number of HB marines so that you wont die to the opponent that secretly built, say, tankbustas that counter defs. That's called predictive thinking. Now, switch to reality. A defilers/tankbusta req/req ratio for cost efficient values is so damn funny that you dont actually have to fear them. The only reason to mix units is the quiestion "where do I spend all that darn requisition?" Predictive thinking? No, just clicking the build unit button until req diminishes.

There's only one resource in the TA/SC resource model. Apparently, Relic intended to balance vehicles by making them cost that huge amount of power, so that actually it becomes a resource. But, that stuff is broken. Doesnt work very well. I dont say it doesnt work completely, but not how it should have been, imho.

And, as far as i know, i'm not the first one to surface the problem. They even invented the "Dreadought effect" spelling for it.

[CrossOrion]

Hmm. its hard to see where the 'forced' unit mixing comes in. You have a very obvious choice of whether to build a vechicle or not, if you don't, you don't win, and if you do, you still might not win but hey.

The reason why infantry units cost more then vechicles is that you get them in squads. A single Tac space marine only cost 50 req :P This is comparable to say a number of terran space marines with a single siege tank

But essentially your ignoring power costs for vechicles? Not to be a jumper but this seriously doesn't make any sense to me. Why overlook it and compare it with req. vs. req? Power is a resource, no matter how you look at it, I fail to see why its sole purpose is to limit technology. Its also not that HARD to get power, compared to getting req. Also infantry can do something vechicles can't. Cap strat points. Every single one of your infantry units is the sole REASON you can get any req at all, other then chainbuilding bases.

[Sekator]

This is comparable to say a number of terran space marines with a single siege tank

With the only exception of 4 terran marines actually killing a siege tank.

A few words about power. Req is the resource you fight for. If you don't have req, you won't have power. Now throw out Thermo Generator and you'll see that there's only one thing you actually mine. Req. You gain map control for req, you risk units for req, you lose your game clutching the mouse squeaking "req... precious...". While you have complicated stuff like power rates, actual amount of power and eco grades, it has not that many differences form waaagh. You build a banner(generator) and, after a time window, you're able to pop out a high-tech unit. You keep your banners(generators) alive and you can pop out more high-tech units. You lose banners(gens) and you lose the ability. The same thing viewed from another side. Not exactly the same, but closer that you ppl think.

[Vertigo]

As i said before, that's forced unit mixing, that is the worst way to encourage unit mixing anyway. Its about reasoning and thinking. When mixing is forced by resource ratios it reduces thinking to zero.

Not true. It puts emphasis on managing your REQ/POWER ratio. You must invest one to reap the other. And it's far from the worst way to encourage mixing. Unit caps and scaling costs are both worse approaches.

I frankly think that "POWER is only for teching" is a very limited view, and I don't agree with it at all. There's absolutely no reason it can't be 1st class resource in it's own right.

[Capitalist]

Inst: Flip out much?

[Inst]

well, no.

But while defilers are uncounterable by Ork, you can kill the first one or two defilers with tankbusta + tankbusta kit + tankbusta bomb, the big mek is great at task.

Don't forget to have sluggas in back firing rockets.

[Sekator]

You must invest one to reap the other.

By the time vehicles come into play the amount of req invested into harvesting power is funny compared to the amount of req invested to get req. There are some maps with early accessible slag deposites. And experience proves it that a one-time investment of a req price of 1 full tac squad can satisfy one's power needs for the rest of the game. Unless you go some crazy "I mass laspreds", it does. Not a very limiting investment, isnt it?

There's absolutely no reason it can't be 1st class resource in it's own right.

There are no obvious reasons pigs can't fly. But, everyday experience tells that they dont. The same can be said for TA economy model. There's a way it works, I've described it. Proven by a number of top-selling strategy games. Can it work another way? I have much doubt about it. Im not being absolute. Maybe it can. But, at this moment, it doesnt. I see no reason why a dread costs nearly the same amount of req as a landspeeder. Looking at their hp comparison, im absolutely positive that a person who wants to build the obviously better unit needs to have a better control of the map, needs to pay somehow for it. Power comes out of nowhere. Power is not a reward for map control, capping points, getting out of your safe haven called main base. It just is there. Req is, on the contrary, the reward you gain for winning battles. It is ethically right for it to matter more.

[TheDeadlyShoe]

But dreads are obviously not imbalanced. They do not dominate the game, and neither do any other vehicles except the too-powerful-for-cost defiler. Once again, if vehicles really were underpriced, we would see people sending nothing but vehicles forwards. This is not the case. The only times you see pure vehicle rushes are in team games with landspeeders and like vehicles, which have a low power cost.

[Sekator]

But dreads are obviously not imbalanced.

I never said that. Imagine a strategy game where there are two races, each with two units: a 100 hp unit with 10 dps and a 500 hp unit with 50 dps. First costs 100 gold, second costs 200 gold, but requires something else to built. Something is obviously wrong with this game, you will say, but it is perfectly balanced, in fact. Each side has even chances.

The only times you see pure vehicle rushes are in team games with landspeeders and like vehicles, which have a low power cost.

Hey, but those are beaten by missile squads for cost, so it's fair. And normal weapons actually do damage to them, too. So that you won't run away with a 60-man army from a single landspeeder just beacuse you dont have rockets yet, however, you'd do the running job when spotting a dread. That's kinda weird.

Once again, if vehicles really were underpriced, we would see people sending nothing but vehicles forwards.

Where to spend req then? Pump it into infantry. And you've got the cap, remember. That also looks like some artificial restrictment to me. However, removing the cap could spell death even for Cray supercomputers.

[iamthedave]

In order to get your power economy going to a level where you can build vehicles reliably, you need to invest at least 660 req, then an extra 200/40 to upstat generator output.

Also, that 170/400 of Dreadnought can die in moments against Missilemarines or BLs. When every heavy weapon, many squad leaders, hero, upgrade, and improved listening post needs power, you often find the stuff infinitely more precious than req, since your requisition rate (in my experience) steadily improves throughout the game. Getting your power economy going, on the other hand, needs some major attention and careful timing. Seems like another dimension of strategy to me.

And actually, you do need to pay attention to what you're spending req on. Tac squads won't take you far when its ASMs you need.

[Vertigo]

And experience proves it that a one-time investment of a req price of 1 full tac squad can satisfy one's power needs for the rest of the game. Unless you go some crazy "I mass laspreds", it does. Not a very limiting investment, isnt it?


I certainly is for me. I don't know what game you are playing, but I pretty much have no problem using all the power I can generate from 400 RP (not even three SM gens). Try double that, at least.


There are no obvious reasons pigs can't fly. But, everyday experience tells that they dont.

There are many obvious reasons, which is the point of the cliche, actually.



The same can be said for TA economy model. There's a way it works, I've described it. Proven by a number of top-selling strategy games. Can it work another way? I have much doubt about it.

C&C Generals was a top selling game. It had one resource, and that worked fine (tho other aspects of Generals were pretty bad). Anyway, I hope "top selling" isn't your only criteria of good. We can also find plenty of games that cribbed SC/TA's model and were horrible.

I can also name games that have different resource models that were OUTSTANDING, such as Kohan. You can harbor all the doubts you want, but I see no objective rationale for them.

IMO, a resource model different from SC/TA does not equal automatically broken.

All I see is someone who seems to be saying "DoW is different from game X and therefore inherently flawed."


Power is not a reward for map control, capping points, getting out of your safe haven called main base. It just is there. Req is, on the contrary, the reward you gain for winning battles. It is ethically right for it to matter more.

Again, this sounds to me like "I want it to be this way because that's what SC does" rather than "this model is broken because it causes bad thing X to happen."

What Power is... a resource where you must invest early on to reap benefits later. It's a reward, as you put it, for strategically managing your economy. It's also a reward for properly defending your base, as raiding units will otherwise destroy your Gens.

Power is also, quite interestingly, required to boost REQ income (via LP upgrades). Interesting feedback system there, as REQ boost strats rely on early Gens.

What *I* see is that Power provides a variety of strategic and economic nuances to the game. It's a solid mechanism that deepens the game.

[Inst]

Gen was great, it was balanced, contrary to popular belief. But problem was, it lacked complexity, so people quit. If they would just have the balls to release Gen WITH the expack, instead of releasing it crippled...

[Vertigo]

Gen was great, it was balanced, contrary to popular belief. But problem was, it lacked complexity, so people quit. If they would just have the balls to release Gen WITH the expack, instead of releasing it crippled...

I disagree. I was going to give a litany of WHY, but that's way off-topic. The POINT of mentioning Generals was to demonstrate that other resource models work. The game itself may or not be unbalanced, but the resource model worked fine. That's the point I'm making.

[BlueJackal]

Sorry, I've jumped in, and wanted to post a thread on this, but I'll post it here.

The Defiler (I play Chaos, I note) does more damage across the board to EVERYTHING with its autocannon than the Hellfire Dreadnought.

That's even including vehicles when the Hellfire Dreadnought has a Lascannon. They both cost roughly the same, and the Defiler has 700 more HP.

Seriously, Defilers are overpowered.

And IMO, while I'm not sure power is... awesome (regarding the concept of spending req. to obtain power)... I'm certainly glad that power is there. If it wasn't, then a losing player could scarcely ever come back if requisition was highly dominant.

[Dibujante]

Excellent point. Dreadnoughts do beat Defilers. The next time I'm faced with Defilers, I'll bring some dreadnoughts along with my boyz. Oh, wait, Orks don't GET Dreadnoughts.
Regards,
Dibujante

[General Modicum]

OK- Please don't laugh- I have only been the first to notice things once before in this game. (the bionic upgrade not effecting all marines) I been fooling around yesterday vs defilers trying to find a way to deal with them. I found (believe it or not) that killer cans are the answer. I tried dreds, rocket squads etc. Only thing that matched them (and was cheaper also) were the cans. 1 vs 1, 3 vs 3 the cans reliably cut those damned defilers down to size. Even a quick upgrade and a rocker launch will hold them up while you close and CC them.

[Katastrophikus]

We just needs a trukk that makes the kans walkin' fastah...

[Jetmech Jr.]

Cans come out far later than Defilers, and Cost more. And I've killed 5 Killa kans with 5-6 Defilers before, with 2 defilers remaining.

Not a counter for cost, sadly.