Is control dying? Serious question...

  • Shwarzinator's Avatar Island 305 182 Posts Joined 05/28/2019
    Posted 1 year, 8 months ago

    The meta right now is Face Hunter, Evolve Shaman, Aggro Demon Hunter (is there another kind?), Totem Shaman, "Enhancement" (Face) Shaman, "Soul" Demon Hunter (uh, be real and just call it Face DH), Highlander Hunter, Silver Hand Paladin (board flood).....and Pure Paladin. 

    Every single one of those decks is ultra aggro/face with the exception of the Paladin decks, which are aggressive midrange. I don't know of a single viable control deck right now. Druid's trying to make big clowns but that deck's gotta be getting wrecked by these face decks. Same thing with any controlling Warrior, Priest or Mage. If you look at Tiers 3 and 4 on HSReplay you'll see all the control decks. Tiers 1 and 2 are all aggro with a few midrange decks in the bottom half of Tier 2, and Paladin.

    I first discovered Hearthstone during the Kobold and Catacombs meta, which was very controlling. It was all the great control decks and epic games you could have with them that made me fall in love with the game. I feel like we're as far as can be from that. There's a lot of talk about Blizzard's business practices and the restrictiveness of the the new rewards track. I'm on board with most of that but the lack of control decks is a much bigger problem for me than any of that. Anyone having the same experience? I've been willing to pay for Hearthstone. I'd love to pay less and all that, but if I buy in and all I can do is a) play an aggro/face deck, b) play Pure Paladin, or c) play the kind of control deck that I love and feel impotent as aggro rushes me down....then...I hate to say it but what am I doing here?

    In fact I can't even play a control deck that I enjoy because I enjoy playing good control decks that have a decent chance to at least win over 50% of their games. There's not a single one right now. Not one. 

    Demon Hunter has obviously pushed the game in an aggro direction. They said they didn't want to print more charge cards, yet they flood DH with powerful damage from hand every expansion. What is that if not charge??? They give hunter meme deathrattle cards and meta-defining face cards like Toxic Reinforcements. They pushed Shaman towards aggro with this expansion. They gave Zoo Warlock powerful tools like Revenant Rascal and Wriggling Horror. They even gave Paladin an aggro deck with all the silver hand cards!

    Meanwhile what did control players get to work with? Tickatus? Control Warlock isn't even in the meta as far as I can see. Warrior got control tools right? Nope. The menagerie stuff is all oriented to aggressive midrange lists. Only Priest got some decent control tools. But they're not enough to make the deck even Tier 2. Maybe Big Priest can just eke out a 50% winrate.

    I was actually kinda hoping this meta would slow down due to the old gods and the corrupt mechanic but it's actually worse than ever!! So what it is going on? Why is control being squeezed out? Because the people shouting on Reddit are mostly F2P aggro players and Blizzard thinks everyone hates control? Because they did market research and found out most players don't have the attention span for control? Because they made some toxic control decks that took too long to lose to like Quest Priest and now they're playing it safe by letting every lose quickly to aggro...so that they can lose quickly to aggro again or just play aggro? Because only whales play control decks and most people that play the game just have one cheap aggro deck that they can run?

    I need answers. If the game is going to be like this from now on then, all theatrics and denunciations aside, this is just not Hearthstone anymore. Not for me and players like me. I'm not an aggro player. I'm not into rushing face damage and flooding boards. I'm into reacting and carefully executing my plan. I'm into cool combos and synergies and fun interactions. I'm into mid-length games and the occasional long game, not races. I'm into epic, awesome, control matches. That's my thing. Is it just me? Has the game and the community left me behind? If Hearthstone is all about aggression now and control is a thing of the past someone please let me know and at least put me out of my misery!

    11
  • Shwarzinator's Avatar Island 305 182 Posts Joined 05/28/2019
    Posted 1 year, 8 months ago

    I posted the same thing on Hearthpwn and got the following answer back. It blew my mind. Makes a LOT of sense.

    "I think you already know the answer to this question.  This game originated on PC and offered mobile as a secondary means of playing; over the years, that model has completely flipped and now we are looking at a mobile experience which allows you to play on your computer if you so desire.

    Control style decks are not conducive to a mobile game play style model which needs to keep the player engaged for short bursts of time while they play on the train to work, a lunch break, taking a dump, etc.  Control is dead and never coming back."

    I just felt my love for Hearthstone start to die a little inside me for the first time. Nothing to do with anything on Reddit or any of that stuff. If control really is dying then the game is basically dead for me. I have no interest in aggro. Or in playing only meme decks with 45% winrates or worse. This is really depressing.

    15
  • Fedrion's Avatar Zombie 1675 733 Posts Joined 05/28/2019
    Posted 1 year, 8 months ago
    Quote From Shwarzinator

    I posted the same thing on Hearthpwn and got the following answer back. It blew my mind. Makes a LOT of sense.

    "I think you already know the answer to this question.  This game originated on PC and offered mobile as a secondary means of playing; over the years, that model has completely flipped and now we are looking at a mobile experience which allows you to play on your computer if you so desire.

    Control style decks are not conducive to a mobile game play style model which needs to keep the player engaged for short bursts of time while they play on the train to work, a lunch break, taking a dump, etc.  Control is dead and never coming back."

    I just felt my love for Hearthstone start to die a little inside me for the first time. Nothing to do with anything on Reddit or any of that stuff. If control really is dying then the game is basically dead for me. I have no interest in aggro. Or in playing only meme decks with 45% winrates or worse. This is really depressing.

    I think that's a totally accurate answer, Aggro decks take like 10 turns to either win or lose, so people have a tendency to expending less time in a game where it's normally quantity over quality.

    Thing about it as a game of any FPS, when people is losing, they prefer to either give up/concede and play another match with better chances of winning.

    Then there's the factor of "What has a better winrate and takes 10 minutes to decide an outcome?" mentality.

     

    I love control/combo decks, so after trying to climb a little in standard, I just said "F' it" and got back into Wild, where a lot can happen (Even when the meta is actually Razakus Priest, and aggro decks), and you can have fun with a lot of decks (DMH Warrior, N'zoth Secret Mill Rogue, Shudder Shaman).

    Papa Nurgle wants to share his gifts.

    0
  • meisterz39's Avatar 925 1200 Posts Joined 06/03/2019
    Posted 1 year, 8 months ago

    If I had a dollar for every time I've seen someone bemoan the death of control, I'd be rich.

    When a new set comes out, metagames adjust in a fairly predictable manner. The "first metagame" of a new set is consistently an aggro metagame, for two major reasons:

    • Aggro decks are easier to build on day 1 because their goal is to hit you in the face, and that's an easy goal to plan for with small tweaks to existing aggro lists.
      • Everyone playing slow decks on day 1 tends to be playing wacky new stuff, so those small tweaks lend themselves to immediate success on ladder.
    • Aggro decks are faster to tune because their games are shorter.
      • An day of playing aggro gives you way more data than an day of playing control. This makes those decks more powerful more rapidly, which leads to an uptick in playrates because people like winning.

    The "second metagame" of the expansion is when control starts to come back more forcefully. Once the aggro decks have settled on what they're playing, you can start to build a control deck designed to disrupt those aggro lists and get to the late game. The "third metagame" of any expansion starts to feature more combo decks, which can take advantage of the slower "second metagame" to do silly combo stuff.

    All of this is, of course, a bit academic. No real metagame moves in perfect waves like that, and you can find success for all manners of playstyles in each phase of the metagame. Today, most of the successful "slower" decks are midrange (e.g. Secret Mage, Secret Rogue, Bomb Warrior), but there are control lists right now which are seeing success. This Control Warlock list, for instance, has a win rate of about 55% right now according to HSReplay.

    And to the point about the game being a mobile game, there's a grain of truth in that. Hearthstone was always designed to be mobile friendly, and that's a big part of why attackers have advantage (whereas in games like MTG, blockers get to decide trades) - it makes games faster. (It's also why there's no stack or active counterplay - just secrets that trigger on your opponent's turn. All of that speeds up the game and avoids clunky mobile interactions.) But that doesn't mean control can't exist, it just means a Hearthstone control deck probably looks different from an MTG or LoR control deck where the game structure lends itself to slower play.

    10
  • grayghost39's Avatar 240 34 Posts Joined 03/26/2020
    Posted 1 year, 8 months ago

    The mobile idea is interesting, but I doubt they would design the game around that. I think it's simpler than that; aggro decks are fast and cheap. You climb fast and when you lose, it doesn't hurt as much because the match only took a few minutes. The decision-making in aggro decks revolves around when to trade and when to go face (broadly) which is strategic, but is a different way of thinking than control decks, which is about when to be proactive and when to save resources. Different people have different preferences, but aggro has other factors in it's favor that control doesn't.

    I think Team 5 recently has struggled to balance aggro decks, because cheap cards being powerful is harder to balance than expensive cards being powerful. At the end of the day, on ladder, people play what wins. It's up to Team 5 to make that field diverse; I think they more of less succeeded with Scholomance, time will tell for DMF. 

    7
  • dapperdog's Avatar Dragon Scholar 1670 4229 Posts Joined 07/29/2019
    Posted 1 year, 8 months ago

    Firstly, can't really see the argument where control decks are shunned because its inherently designed as a mobile game, where its audience have the attention span of a puppy on coke. Its the same flawed argument that aggro decks requires neither skill nor thought. If anything, aggro decks are even harder to play on mobile, since there's just more stuff to click on. An average control deck, in the same vein as control warrior, plays 1-2 cards per turn or just hero power. It is in fact even less skill testing for control when going up against an aggro deck, since there's really just very little you can do in the first few turns.

    Now, let's tackle the meaty issue of why aggro decks are currently on the top, if it really is just too good, and if there's any other slower decks around;

    - As have been highlighted by meisterz39, its still too early to judge the meta because aggro decks tend to be easier to build, more consistent, and most players are currently playing unoptimized builds, mostly trying out the 4 old gods in all varieties and shapes. Its still only week 2 after all. If we look at the Scholomance meta, week 1-2 are mostly filled with stealth rogues, weapon rogues, pure pally and face hunter. The meta ended with soul dhunter and libram pally on top, with highlander hunter, galakrond rogue, and bomb warrior on its heels; nearly all of them midrange/control decks.

    - If you've been watching the pros in tournaments in the previous meta, none of the top players opted for aggro decks. And the reasoning is simple; its too predictable. Played at high level, we see secret rogue and control spell priest on the list, with only a small amount of highlander hunters in the mix. I won't be too surprised if none of the current aggro decks (bar highlander hunter) survive past the 6th week in this meta, as far as high legend is concerned

    - There are slower decks around. I'm still playing my old scholomance control spell priest with only a small amount of darkmoon cards and I'm doing better than would be suggested by the stats (priest is currently at bottom tier of the list). I might experiment further with cthun later. But bottom line is that you can still play slower decks provided you build your deck to face up aggro decks.

    4
  • Tumbleweedovski's Avatar Protector of Elwynn 1450 586 Posts Joined 06/12/2019
    Posted 1 year, 8 months ago

    Have you tried playing Wild? I think the kind of deck you're looking for can be found there. As far as I'm aware, most control decks are highlander decks, so if you like playing those, you should be good to go. Highlander Priest can't really be called control anymore as it can already pull off it's game winning combo by turn 9. Highlander Mage needs 1 or 2 more cards like Volcanic Potion to truly be able to compete against the most agressive decks like Token Druid, but has a fair chance against the faster midrange decks assuming you teched accordingly.

    And then there is Renolock. It wasn't very populair before Darkmoon Faire, but it was good place actually. It has enough early board clears and taunts to counter aggro, enough value to go late game and enough flexible deck slots to tech against the flavor of week. This list below is one I enjoyed playing a lot before Darkmoon Faire arrived, but I wouldn't surprised is something similar can still compete. I had an around 50% percent winrate with it in legend.

    And if you don't like playing Highlander, I guess there's always Big Priest you can try, or Dead Man's Hand Warrior, Odd Warrior, or Cubelock. At least more options than in Standard. That's for sure.

    Arena > Wild > Standard

    4
  • Ticomon's Avatar 350 146 Posts Joined 03/25/2019
    Posted 1 year, 8 months ago

    Last year, control warrior was absolute dominating

    0
  • grayghost39's Avatar 240 34 Posts Joined 03/26/2020
    Posted 1 year, 8 months ago
    Quote From Ticomon

    Last year, control warrior was absolute dominating

    It was and it was awful. I much prefer getting rolled over in 5 minutes than waiting 35 knowing you are going to lose. 

    0
  • Duke's Avatar 205 82 Posts Joined 05/31/2019
    Posted 1 year, 8 months ago

    Control warrior is ruling already. This deck seems almost unstoppable now as it got another win condition in ETC.

    Before Darkmoon  control shaman did pretty well. 

    So, no, there is already a super powerful control deck.

    Start of an expansion is always the time for aggro decks that are easier to build.

    No need to lose it only because of the normal early meta. 

    -3
  • Live4vrRdieTryn's Avatar 485 866 Posts Joined 07/14/2019
    Posted 1 year, 8 months ago

    It would be nice even for casual if there were a way to queue into random opponents who want to play control versus control. Yes you can play versus friends but that isn't the same thing.

     

    RIP control shammy...

    HS Needs Mirror Mode: Make Any Deck, 50% You Play it Versus Itself or Play Someone Else's Vs Theirs.

    Please Help Support This Obvious and Needed Idea. Stop Playing With 1% of your Collection.

    0
  • Tetsuo's Avatar Magma Rager 835 636 Posts Joined 05/29/2019
    Posted 1 year, 8 months ago

    I get the sentiment of the original post, but I disagree that control is dying. In the last meta alone, we've had a number of viable control decks like Control Priest, Control Shaman, and Big Warrior. Even the Galakrond Bomb Warrior was played like a control deck sometimes; the game plan was to control your opponent's board long enough to see them die from all the bombs you shuffled in, if you don't kill them with weapon damage first.

    I think the previous metas (outside of the Outland one, where DH was dominating) are pretty balanced, where you've got a good mix of aggro, control, and midrange decks to choose from. Honestly, I don't want a meta dominated by control. Do you remember the Dr. Boom, Mad Genius days? The Elysiana Warriors were terrible to face too. The games were long, grindy, and tiring. I definitely don't want to see a similar meta again.  

    0
  • PopeNeia's Avatar Darkmaster 580 810 Posts Joined 07/06/2019
    Posted 1 year, 8 months ago

    In my opinion, people are just playing aggro decks to rank up quickly because its the end of the season. There are also those mongloids that want to ruin everyone’s fun and plays aggro to beat all the experimental decks. There’s still a lot of experimentation going around, but once the control decks are tuned a bit more to playing good cards rather than new cards, then I am sure you’ll see a resurgence of Control decks in the meta. (Which unfortunately means Big Priest has a chance to show its stupid grubby face

    This ain't no place for a hero

    0
  • clawz161's Avatar The Undying 825 827 Posts Joined 07/16/2019
    Posted 1 year, 8 months ago

    I tried to play control in standard for a long time. When rise of shadows came out i decided to switch to wild because it was no longer sustainable to play control in standard. It's not bad enough they don't release control tools, but they constantly buff aggro with things like Voracious Reader, and if the only way they want me to play control is be a scumbag and play res priest with Convincing Infiltrator i'm not gonna do that. I tried playing control warrior in standard recently, old school style. Lots of removal tools, some big value bombs at the end when my opponent was out of cards. But the thing was. They just keep playing everything, they play shit and play shit and i can't remove everything. they always have the card draw they always have the Voracious Reader and the token buffs to avoid the shitty aoe they give you. It's impossible. 

     

    People complaining about doctor boom control warrior, where they would gain 50+ armor every game and make the games last forever forget that mechathun also came out in boomsday to directly counter this kind of thing. Your warrior opponent with 150 health is no match for a card that says "win the game"

    Living like that.

    3
  • fractl's Avatar 150 7 Posts Joined 11/14/2020
    Posted 1 year, 8 months ago

    I'm a control player, period, and have been playing since G&G, and the whole card-vomiting paradigm is extremely boring to me as well.  Not that aggro didn't always exist, but, as has been said, things have definitely changed over the years.

    I've always figured the allure of aggro was the ability to climb ladder fast and gather gold quickly as well, not to mention that it's one of the various aspects of the game's design that minimizes the difference in win rates between the best and the worst players, in order, frankly, to keep more people playing, as opposed to someone losing at a rate commensurate with their skill level and leaving the game out of petulance or frustration.

    But, over the past few days, I've begin to question this.  I mostly just play casual, because, hey, it's a silly game that's fun and attaining higher ranks accomplishes nothing that's particularly meaningful in life.   I play for fun, and play control in casual, and I thought that the new XP system, even if it's less rewarding, would result in less people playing aggro in casual, since your rewards are based on total time spent, as opposed to winning quick games by vomiting out lots of small cards.

    But I was wrong.  Tons of people are playing aggro in casual.  Sure, everyone's free to do whatever they want, but I personally don't get it.  If you're getting the same rewards playing more interesting and challenging decks, why not do that?  I'm not saying aggro doesn't demand some skill, but it's really a lot of people just doing the same simple things over and over, without the variation in game play evident with more complex decks.

    I suppose some will say that people just enjoy winning, as opposed to being challenged.  As I said, to each his own, but, to me, that philosophy is just... bleh.  I just don't see how it doesn't get boring, unless it ends up morphing in an OCD ritual.  Personally, I'd rather just do something else rather than play that way.  The point being that, if few people are willing to play control in casual, even if there is no difference in rewards, then maybe the game has indeed become something too different for me.  Oh well.

    2
  • clawz161's Avatar The Undying 825 827 Posts Joined 07/16/2019
    Posted 1 year, 8 months ago
    Quote From fractl

    I'm a control player, period, and have been playing since G&G, and the whole card-vomiting paradigm is extremely boring to me as well.  Not that aggro didn't always exist, but, as has been said, things have definitely changed over the years.

    I've always figured the allure of aggro was the ability to climb ladder fast and gather gold quickly as well, not to mention that it's one of the various aspects of the game's design that minimizes the difference in win rates between the best and the worst players, in order, frankly, to keep more people playing, as opposed to someone losing at a rate commensurate with their skill level and leaving the game out of petulance or frustration.

    But, over the past few days, I've begin to question this.  I mostly just play casual, because, hey, it's a silly game that's fun and attaining higher ranks accomplishes nothing that's particularly meaningful in life.   I play for fun, and play control in casual, and I thought that the new XP system, even if it's less rewarding, would result in less people playing aggro in casual, since your rewards are based on total time spent, as opposed to winning quick games by vomiting out lots of small cards.

    But I was wrong.  Tons of people are playing aggro in casual.  Sure, everyone's free to do whatever they want, but I personally don't get it.  If you're getting the same rewards playing more interesting and challenging decks, why not do that?  I'm not saying aggro doesn't demand some skill, but it's really a lot of people just doing the same simple things over and over, without the variation in game play evident with more complex decks.

    I suppose some will say that people just enjoy winning, as opposed to being challenged.  As I said, to each his own, but, to me, that philosophy is just... bleh.  I just don't see how it doesn't get boring, unless it ends up morphing in an OCD ritual.  Personally, I'd rather just do something else rather than play that way.  The point being that, if few people are willing to play control in casual, even if there is no difference in rewards, then maybe the game has indeed become something too different for me.  Oh well.

    I used to be like this until demon hunter came out, and casual mode was flooded with aggro demon hunter spam.

     

    People say winning in hearthstone is fun, but to me it never has been. It's not fun to cross the finish line or see the final scene of a movie. It's more about how i got there. And if i play cards on curve without thinking about them it's not fun to play. Going face is not fun to me. Making the perfect defile combo, gonking my opponent when i have 5 health remaining. Using nozari or reno when my opponent thinks they've won and won't stop emoting. that's fun. I get upset when i do all that and still lose, but it's easily forgettable in the next game. But it's straw on a camel's back. There's only so many aggro demon hunters or token druids, lackey rogues, or totem shamans in casual mode i can take. They should just separate the two categories. Gate aggro off to ladder where it belongs and leave casual mode for testing out decks and making fun combos.

    Living like that.

    0
  • ArcticFox's Avatar Zombie 375 118 Posts Joined 05/30/2019
    Posted 1 year, 8 months ago

    So I just played a game in Rank Wild against a very powerful handbuff Warrior as a reno quest mage. I barely won after he had destroyed my board, handled my Reno, and revealed my ice block. I played double [Hearthstone Card (TimeWarp) Not Found] into double Kazakus 5 damage and polymorph Spell. I played Zephrys the Great and after all of that... he still had insanely handbuffed minions I had to deal with! I got lucky I pulled and played Devolving Missiles along with with Solarian Prime (and no I didn't have Astromancer Solarian in my deck.) Solarian Prime then casted Puzzle Box of Yogg-Saron...

    I won the game with the most insane good luck but I knew in my heart of hearts that the handbuff warrior is back and it is VERY strong. (Rank 4 Wild)

    All this to say, control decks do exist some days are better than others.

    The above comment assumes a Hearthstone Wild perspective.

    0
  • NLbouncyknight's Avatar Supporter 380 101 Posts Joined 05/29/2019
    Posted 1 year, 8 months ago
    Quote From Tetsuo

    I get the sentiment of the original post, but I disagree that control is dying. In the last meta alone, we've had a number of viable control decks like Control Priest, Control Shaman, and Big Warrior. Even the Galakrond Bomb Warrior was played like a control deck sometimes; the game plan was to control your opponent's board long enough to see them die from all the bombs you shuffled in, if you don't kill them with weapon damage first.

    I think the previous metas (outside of the Outland one, where DH was dominating) are pretty balanced, where you've got a good mix of aggro, control, and midrange decks to choose from. Honestly, I don't want a meta dominated by control. Do you remember the Dr. Boom, Mad Genius days? The Elysiana Warriors were terrible to face too. The games were long, grindy, and tiring. I definitely don't want to see a similar meta again.  

    You not serious calling control shaman viable in the last meta it was tier 999999 XD you def not know the last meta if you say things like tha

    -1
  • TyrionFordLannister's Avatar 165 11 Posts Joined 07/03/2019
    Posted 1 year, 8 months ago

    There are always aggro decks near the top tiers in the meta, but I think it's disappointing that in an expansion themed around the old gods, barely anyone is actually playing an old god deck because of all the aggro on ladder. You could say they're trying to appeal to mobile gamers, but then why make an expansion themed around turn 10 cards? In the last few days the only old god I've seen on ladder is C'Thun, and I have literally never seen anyone actually play C'Thun in his final form. The games never last that long.

    Perhaps blizzard focus too much on stats for individual cards rather than the overall experience for ladder, because I feel like if Blizzard cared about their own themes for each expansion, they'd be a little quicker to nerf a lot of the broken aggro nonsense that's permeating ladder at the moment, and preventing players trying out the more fun, slow decks.

    0
  • Shwarzinator's Avatar Island 305 182 Posts Joined 05/28/2019
    Posted 1 year, 8 months ago
    Quote From TyrionFordLannister

    Perhaps blizzard focus too much on stats for individual cards rather than the overall experience for ladder, because I feel like if Blizzard cared about their own themes for each expansion, they'd be a little quicker to nerf a lot of the broken aggro nonsense that's permeating ladder at the moment, and preventing players trying out the more fun, slow decks.

    Well first off you do have to wonder if they're trying to make the game faster in general to accommodate the mobile crowd. I really hope not. Also, hard as it is to comprehend, control players seem to be in the minority and many more players seem to prefer aggro. Now let's not be too harsh. Aggro does require some decision making and sometimes even more when it comes to predicting what the opponent is likely to do next. Control players don't have to do that so much since our decks are more reactive, whereas aggro is proactive. Our decision making is more about resource management.

    They're two very different playstyles. Aggro can be fun actually. I'm just out of the habit with it. I, like most control players probably, only tend to play it when I've had my fill of control. I haven't felt satisfied in a while though. I've kinda been starved for options with control since Dr. Boom rotated so really just been searching. I'm starting to feel just a little better though since I've been playing Control Warrior and Big Priest the last couple days. Control Warrior seems legit good and runs 2 Old Gods. Big Priest feels like lower Tier 2 and it's fun (probably actually Tier 3 through). The two decks are very different from each other and they win enough so right now I'm getting my fix. Maybe Druid has something to offer? Not sure yet. And you can gear Pure Paladin more towards value so maybe there's some fun to be had there. If Warlock can just find a good control deck then I guess for now we count our blessings.

    I'd like the pendulum to swing back towards a slower, more controlling game in general. We've had quite a few aggressive metas. It's a good time to shift into something different.

    BTW who else (potential problems aside) would love for them to add the Monk class from WoW and for it be very controlling? I'm imagining powerful attack buffs that only can target minions (self defense), healing, animal companions or some kind of nature theme, defense and control tools (but board clears etc. feel un-Monkish), and of course the classic monk thing of going into different stances or something which would maybe change the hero power. You could play a card which changes your hero power and then play cards that synergize with that and then come out of that stance. Kind of like the monk style guy in Slay the Spire.

    1
  • Leave a Comment

    You must be signed in to leave a comment. Sign in here.