Connection ErrorBad RequestThis page went staleSession ExpiredSign in requiredForbiddenNot FoundToo Many RequestsServer ErrorBad GatewayService UnavailableGateway TimeoutHTTP Version Not Supported
Session Expired
Your session has expired. Please log in to continue.
Sign in required
You need an account to do that. Sign in or create one — it only takes a minute.
This page went stale
Your security token was rejected, usually because the page sat open too long or you signed in elsewhere. Nothing was saved. Reload the page and try again.
Request Failed
We encountered an issue while processing your request.
Please check your internet connection and try again.
Well, cannibal and spell units are also key elements. Control is a reactive playstyle where you fend off enemy attacks and wait for your win condition to materialize. For Sylvan, it's the clown bolt or cockroach combo; for Dungeon, it's the anomaly.
Defense is also a form of control, you know. You force your opponent to trade creatures.
No. Because 1) There's no guarantee that the creatures will actually be "traded." The opponent might not suffer any losses during the attack, or the losses might be insignificant. 2) There's no guarantee that the wards will be removed specifically by attacking from the board, rather than by controlling the opponent. Not to mention that in certain cases, wards can be ignored by attacks/spells directly. In short, it's not control. It can perform that function, but not to the same extent. With control, you can specifically choose what to do with the opponent's creatures, which ones, and so on. Well, it's a matter of terminology and my understanding of it.
Don't say that. Wards force you to deal with them one way or another. At one point, I also thought it was insignificant, but then I noticed that the opponent has to change their plans in 95% of cases to avoid the wards, or even spend a turn trading.
No. Because 1) There is no guarantee that the creatures will actually "trade" blows. The opponent may not suffer any losses during the attack, or they may be insignificant.
That is possible. But this does not change the fact that a ward is a means of control. A spell that deals 2 damage may also not have much effect on a tough opponent, but it will not stop being a means of control. Or Siegfried, although he can be played as a simple monster, is taken into the deck (or rather, was taken) specifically for control.
2) There is no guarantee that wards will be removed specifically by an attack from the board, and not by controlling the opponent. Not to mention that in some cases, wards can be ignored by attacks/spells aimed directly at the opponent.
Any control can be countered. But it does not stop being control. Mordecai or Aegis laugh at removal spells, but removal spells do not stop being control because of that.
What interesting Dungeon builds. And it seems like Dungeon isn't a weak build, but it lost everywhere. The last one was the funniest - Zeus against everyone (resurrected twice). Thanks for the games!
ToX
Ple-Sen