Mission: Monsters

[rrc]

After countless threads and posts, we have tasted a small victory with the SK balance changes. It was annoying as hell to see Derren and Morgvarg is 100% of the decks, but hopefully, with the recent changes, it wont be 100% anymore (may be it will reduce it to 80%?). It was a great feeling. It took a lot of posts, threads, Ask a Dev questions to achieve it. Having a lot of meaning conversations and arguments with one of the most active and mature moderators (@4RM3D) who (I think) is SK main was good. We will have to see how SK does with these balance changes.

But all said and done, it now seems like we have to embark on our next important mission. Balancing Monsters. While every update brings nerfs to every faction (even for ST, which is the saddest and funniest part), MO always gets buffed (or their counters getting nerfed). The stupid Wild Hunt Raider with 8 point tempo with NO condition at all, Yrden, Geralt:Igni, Regis everyone getting nerfed to name a few. Clearly the whole of the community (may be except the MO main players) feel it is unfair and get dejected to see MO always on top and constantly getting buffed and unconditional love.

Yesterday Burza tried Eldain in his stream and I only watched one game (don't know if he played only one or many), and got crushed by Eredin. There was absolutely nothing he could do (or any Eldain players could do). So, it shouldn't need huge amount of convincing to the CDPR team that clearly MO has a huge advantage over other factions (now, that other factions got balanced).

So, we will have to create meaningful threads, posts, discussion (and even Ask A Dev) to bring balance to MO. It is just stupid, no-brainer, even-a-bot-can-play decks and mechanism should stop. Every faction should have a chance to shine and should need equal amount of skill to achieve it. Lets do it together as a community!

 

[4RM3D]

(@4RM3D) who (I think) is SK main was good.

Heh, funny story... So, I was reading the patch notes and saw that Rain got buffed with -1 provisions. I was thinking: "sweet, 2 more provisions available for my deck". Then I read that Harald got nerfed with +1 provisions and, on top of, that Morkvarg got the same treatment. This means that, in the end, the net total remains the same, as well as my deck.

As for being a Skellige main, well almost. I've mostly played Monsters in Beta, but there were periods where I switched to Skellige.

Spoiler

In Homecoming, I am trying more leaders and factions to complete my mastery achievements.

As for the actual topic, Monsters are the strongest faction now. Part of this is because a lot of "archetypes" overlap with each other creating a lot of synergies. Even the leaders support most archetypes. Thrive works in every archetype and Consume decks also use Deathwish (DW) units, just like a pure DW deck with Ge'els. Furthermore, DW decks can use Unseen Elder or Eredin (to protect Ge'els or his copy) and Consume decks can use Gernichora on top of that. Finally, there is also Big Monsters, who just play in their own bubble going for flat strength.

Ironically, I don't think Monsters are too strong. No, it's just that other factions are weaker. Every faction does have a strong deck, even ST. But none have as much choice and synergies as Monsters have. So, instead of nerfing Monsters, I rather would see other factions getting buffed or, at least, get more viable choices.

 

[M3e0w]

Monsters have a ridiculous short round,

Besides their conditions are simply too easy, like wild hunt rider.

Furthermore deathwish is broken, most dethwish units are essentially engines that cost 5 prov and easily provide 8+ value. Removal doesn't work against it since that already buffs their value, you can't just lock every deathwish unit either...


Personally I think deathwish shouldn't be triggered by consume & wild hunt rider should be 7prov + all the "control the strongest unit" units, should require that you actually control the highest unit, meaning that a tie DOESN'T count.

Sounds like a lot, but I think even with all that MO would still be the strongest faction.

 

[theogonist]

Well, Burza said that CDPR will look at MO after the release of the latest patch. So if our complaints are reflecting the reality (MO dominating the meta) the next nerf round will hit MO. Just tech against MO, play MO or wait 30 days.
I experiment a lot with the new leaders now and have fun without winning but that can get old quickly

 

[FG15-ISH7EG]

Ironically, I don't think Monsters are too strong. No, it's just that other factions are weaker. Every faction does have a strong deck, even ST. But none have as much choice and synergies as Monsters have. So, instead of nerfing Monsters, I rather would see other factions getting buffed or, at least, get more viable choices.

Pretty much reflects my own opinion. MO in general is in a great spot in my opinion, just the other factions neeed some buffs or reworks. Of course there are a couple of cards that could need a nerf, like Wild Hunt Rider, but overall MO is basically the perfect faction in my opinion, due to all the overlapping archetypes and huge possibilities for synergies.

 

[DRK3]

Well, Burza said that CDPR will look at MO after the release of the latest patch. So if our complaints are reflecting the reality (MO dominating the meta) the next nerf round will hit MO. Just tech against MO, play MO or wait 30 days.
I experiment a lot with the new leaders now and have fun without winning but that can get old quickly

That's the problem - i've been playing Gwent since the very beginning of closed beta, and even though i've seen a lot of OP decks, if my goal was to counter one specific deck, i could always do it easily.

Now, against Monsters, i'm having a hard time doing that, because pretty much all their units provide much more value than other factions (this of course, without me resorting to playing MO to counter MO)

 

[Dunkelgraf]

While i don't really agree with rrc's opinion on the skelige nerf, even though i have to admit that i am a skellige player, i totally agree with the monster faction beeing extremly op at the moment.

My current rating in rank is 0-14 while i was able to reach about a consistent 50/50 setting in the last season. Most of the time it's MO decks playing boostet immune units or immune Ge'els first round and consume and deathwish in between. If you compare MO units to units of Skellige with similar Provision cost, the output per Provision point is always way better for MO (Can't really compare to other factions, don't have the cards to play, so no experience there). Pretty annoying and boring to be honest. I also don't understand why they boostet the MO leaders provisions after they won the faction challenge basically unchallenged...

I am honestly a litte reluctant to believe they will ever nerf MO, since the lead developer stated its his favorite faction in the last developer's stream, but there is hope i guess. As long as enough players articulate their doubts and don't just switch to MO

 

[StrykerxS77x]

Eldain is just a bad leader. Needs some kind of rework.

 

[Restlessdingo32]

Short answer, efficiency and flexibility.

Barring DW/Consume most MS units are flexible. They can work in nearly any MS build.

Thrive units benefit from both areas. Most of those are flexible in that they have very few conditional requirements. An Archespore will reliably hit the board as a 3 value unit. If you kill it, it's likely going up to 4 or 5 value for 4p. If you don't kill it, it's reliably getting 4 value for 4p and only gets better as the round continues. Nekker Warrior, same deal. 4 body, 4p, thrive. Nekkers are less reliable but can have higher upside if they fully stick. Drowner, 4 value for 5p with a move. Alpha Werewolf fits the same theme. Reliable value, immune, no conditions. Abaya and Werecat are the only situational thrive units. None of these cards have any type of row restriction. The conditions to get the value are easily satisfied outside of those last two.

Most large units come with drawbacks. Either due to the DW proc (Golyat) or the provision deficit. Unfortunately, this ceases to be relevant when they are paired with thrives. If a few thrives stick and are followed by big boys the provision deficit quickly evaporates. The DW ability on Golyat is often irrelevant because knocking a 10 off the board takes a valuable removal. Even if he is removed, once again, the loss is often offset by thrives.

Big boys can also be paired with GY consume to instantly negate any cost deficit imposed by the tempo on both the original unit and the consume unit. A Ghoul at 8p with a 1 body is an expensive card. Ozzrel at 9p with a 1 body is also an expensive card. The expense ceases to be relevant when you're eating a 9+ power unit from the GY. Once again, thrives add to the potential value.

Even if we move over to DW/consume the same theme applies. A Rotfiend, Bridge Troll, Harpy Egg or Ancient Foglet starts as a 4 body for 5p, 3 body for 5p or 1 body for 4p, respectively. As soon as you consume these or intentionally burn them you're getting an additional 4-5 value. Run a Cyclops with a Rotfiend and now you spent 6p and 5p, respectively, and gained 13 points with the potential of 8 points worth of removal split across 2 targets, with half of it targeted.

The faction thin tools are both good and efficient when used with the proper cards. MS can play for tempo/short rounds or long rounds equally well. It's filled to the brim with quality cards and has very few with difficult to satisfy conditions or unreliable value.

All of the above would be perfectly reasonable if hard teching against it yielded results. It frequently does not. Yes, some MS builds are hard countered by the right tech cards. Those cards not only need to be carried but drawn at the right time for it to work, however. Furthermore, many are a liability against other popular builds, including MS builds.. Even if you do carry and draw them sometimes it simply does not matter. CDPR constantly throwing nerfs at these tech cards and options is not helping matters.

 

[M3e0w]

Monsters are beyond broken, and we don't even need to look far to see it.

Compare say drowner to Vrihedd dragoon:
-both are common units that cost 4 provisions and provide 4 value (although drowner provides 2 removal which is arguably better)
-both are movement control units, messing with cards that need to be on a specific row or with Magne division(that got a recent nerf)
-Drowner has thrive, which means it can easily get way more value.

Elves are the movement faction, but ofc. other factions should also have a similar unit here and there, what's distressing is that a copycat MO unit outperforms the ST unit...

Now take Archespore:
Common 4 provisions unit, provides 3 flat value + 2 deathwish damage.
But it has thrive.....

So how should one counter that, kill it and automatically give it 5+ value(5+ because there are very few units that only do 1 damage so if you hit a unit with 1power by 2 it provided 1 extra value) or let it grow? Or waste a lock you might need for a far stronger unit on a 4p common card? And those are just the common 4p bronzes.

Sure every faction has engines that can provide a lot of value, but they're easily shut down, and when they're shut down they usually fail to even pay for their provision value, while monster units ALWAYS pay their provision or even more.

Even if you lock them with alba armored cav, the units still provided more value.
Rotfeind; common 4power 5 provision.
Alba cav; rare 3power 5 provisions.
At turn-end monsters are 1 point up.

Playing vs a faction that just has better everything is extremely annoying.

 

[Luckless_Jack]

Ironically, I don't think Monsters are too strong. No, it's just that other factions are weaker. Every faction does have a strong deck, even ST. But none have as much choice and synergies as Monsters have. So, instead of nerfing Monsters, I rather would see other factions getting buffed or, at least, get more viable choices.

Exactly.

Currently, Monsters is reminiscent of Beta. Coherent design and good synergies across the faction, with solidly supported archetypes. The other factions, not so much.

Like you, I would much rather CDPR raise their game with the other factions, rather than take a crude nerfbat to Monsters.

Incidentally, I think the current OP state of things like Big Woodland and similar consume based boosting is not because they are inherently more powerful than in Beta. It's just that in Beta the answers were stronger and more flexible, e.g. Peter Saar Gwynleve, Mandrake, Mardroeme, Cockatrice, Witch Hunters. The HC equivalents are much weaker and difficult to include if a deck is to remain truly competitive, especially now that they can't be tutored out when needed.

(Edit) Just to be clear, I'm not defending Monsters because I play them. I haven't played them at all in HC. I just think that CDPR should improve the other factions to match Monsters, rather than ruining Monsters as well.

 

[DRK3]

So yeah, today i tried the new leaders i was missing: Gernichora and Eldain.

No surprise - won with Gernichora over 50% of matches (even a 5win streak), with a poorly optimized deck, plenty of mistakes, but having a huge thrive army is incredibly powerful on long rounds (the ones who tried to bleed me were the ones who won, since i refuse to use big monsters, the highest i got on that deck was 5pt)

With Eldain i actually had some success, but i feel like that was earned - i was never a big SC player, but traps were always my specialty, loved when there were 2 bronzes, 3 silvers and 1 gold trap, then it was actually hard to guess what the trap was. (again, players who won were the ones who went for the bleed R2)

Also, stupid Caldwell isnt switching sides when he should:

Luckily i still won, but the bastard should have switched to my side, even if i only got Milva at 8 (higher than all his units) at last turn, and he didnt.

(EDIT) Also, Gernichora vs Eldain is tough for Eldain, i had one use that expensive pit trap... only to destroy my gerni-fruit, i even felt bad for him. Same thing with the other 5damage traps, the gerni-fruit is great bait.

 

[Charles5pencer]

Hello, I am still quite new to game, so I may miss important things and I do not have comparison to previous version of game. Nonethless, I want to express my opinion, how I see current situation.

I think, game developers are constantly (since going out of beta in Season of Mahakam) focusing on petty little things while leaving big picture out of their view. Like how many times was Scoia'tael adjusted with focus on changing this little bronze unit and that little bronze unit, while HUGE COMBO CONTENDER Schirru was addressed after 3 months. Schirru himself brings much more points than all nerfed little bronze units of Scoia'tael could put together. And what is worse ... I think those many previous little nerfs were strongly affected by performance of big-points-bringers like Schirru. That means, they made many little-relevant changes to ballance out big combos and they realized after 3 months, that it is not enough and finally balanced Schirru, which means, Schirru is now, where he should have been months ago, but for that, all previous little nerfs should have been reverted, because they were done for other purposes than their own "overpowerness" and now they are just "cumulated malus" for no reason.
I think, similar things happened to other factions too, except Monsters, which do not really have big finish combo (with exception of Glustyworp, which is easily prevented with Gimpy Gerwin) (side note, Glustyworp combo is regularly ending in play of month, but in my duels, my opponent could never finish that combo and I always defended against it successfully, yet I doubt, that my careful defense and well timed Gimpy would qualify me for play of month; just like in football, where attackers are adored, but great defenders are mostly ignored).

Putting this all together to make my summary.
There are several people in this topic expressing, that Monsters are balanced, just other factions are weak. I do not know if it is fully true, but I am sure, that previous nerfs were too much focusing on little changes, while ignoring root causes, which was probably hard to get right out of fear, that striking there, would be too much, so developers prefered small changes in hope, that it will suffice. I think, most of little bronze unit changes done so far should be reverted and patches should focus on root causes, no matter how big they are and no matter if it would mean total redesign of a card. (Btw, I already several times expressed opinion, that Gwent went out of beta too soon.)

PS: I just think, that main differnce between Monsters and other factions is, that Monsters have reliable performance not depending on combos, while other faction mostly rely on big-points combos. ... An Craite Broadsword, Daugur Two blades, Foltest Pride ... Regis (yes, he is neutral, but some factions use their faction characteristic abilities to make him more useful, than other factions could do)

PS2: I think developers should focus their balancing effort on every card, that could bring 9+ points and has combo potential. Just how long it took to make Unicorn/Chironex combo more fair.

 

[M3e0w]

Fixing balance should start with bronze cards, how would you buff other factions bronzes for them to be on par with monsters?

 

[Charles5pencer]

Fixing balance should start with bronze cards, how would you buff other factions bronzes for them to be on par with monsters?

Your post shows fundamental misunderstanding on very basic level. Let me give you a question. You have balance scales and some amount of paperweights from same material but of different sizes of unknown nominal weight. Your goal is to put all paperweights onto balance scales and keep them as close to perfect balance as possible. What would be fundamentally better approach. To
a) start putting there objects from the smallest to the biggest size, while trying to keep scales balanced in every step
or to
b) start putting there objects from the biggest to the smallest size, while trying to keep scales balanced in every step?

Or another example ...
You have object of unknown weight on one side of balance scales and you want to know how much it weights, so you will start putting measuring masses of known nominal value on other side of balance scales. Will you start from the heaviest or from the lightest measuring masses? Like starting with kilograms, then decagrams, then grams and miligrams. Or will you start balancing from miligrams through grams, decagrams then at last kilograms?

 

[M3e0w]

Let me refraze both of your examples:
Should you start balancing from the top down or the bottom up?

Much simpler eouldn't you say?

Also this isn't some new game in need of balancing from scratch, it's existed for quite a while. Making your example void.

The opinion i expressed is that it's the bronze cards that provide too much value to MO.

While I may be wrong and you have every right to disagree I would appreciate it if you could disagree without implying that I'm an idiot.

 

[TheWIldHunt93]

Monsters and Skellige feel like Open Beta Scoia'tael Coinflip Elves abuse. I absolutely hated everyone that played that deck. I can't stand constantly playing the Woodland Spirit and Eredin decks anymore. Add to the insult they add another broken point abuse leader for them. It's really getting ridiculous how Northern Realms and Scoia'tael are getting nerfed every patch. What was the problem with Eithné? Nerfed her ability along with cards that synergised with it: Geralt: Professional, Geralt: Igni, Wolfsbane, Schirrú, Regis, etc in a span of 2 months and there was nothing wrong with her.
I'm really trying hard to like and keep supporting this game but I just can't anymore. It only gets more and more frustrating. I stopped GGing Monster players and soo will stop playing the game because of 1 (one) broken faction!
Eithné nerfed to 4 pings. Are you kidding me?! Unseen elder refreshes his ability every round so if he wins round 1 he can push round 2 and bleed you but god forbid Eithné having 3 pings every round like she used to have. I'm not waiting another 2 months for fixes, I'm done waiting for it to get good.

 

[Restlessdingo32]

Should you start balancing from the top down or the bottom up?

In this case, probably both.

Thrive bronzes, IMO, are too strong for engines. The condition is too easy to satisfy. Put unit on board, play a bigger unit. It's probably the easiest engine requirement to satisfy. This, by itself, is fine. What isn't is when they're also incredibly cheap engines with secondary abilities. Going back to my previous post, Nekker Warrior always breaks even and has a 4 starting body. Archespore has thrive and deathwish. Drowner comes with a -1p deficit (5p for 4 starting value) but has a move ability. Nekker starts at a -2 deficit but quickly recoups it and more when it stays on the board.

Compare this to something like Scoia bronze engine cards. Smuggler can provide 1 point per turn. It's also 7p and melee locked. Defender can provide 1 point per turn at a 4 body for 6p. Defender needs to be boosted, however. DB Sentry and Vrihedd Brigade cost 5 and 6p, respectively. Both start at a 3 body but only work with movement. Sage and Scout also start as a 3 body and cost 5p and 4p, respectively. These cards only work with spells and traps, and the first is highly unreliable. Pyrotechnician only works with traps, SM with elves (also melee locked) and Dwarven Mercenary with dwarves. SM, Mercenary, Sentry and Pyro are all on orders, with Pyro having Zeal. On an unrelated note... This Is a big part of the problem with ST, for both the golds and bronzes. The lack of flexibility in the deck builder.

Both of these faction engines, across the board, can get very good value if they stay on the board and work as intended. The difference is one is cheaper, has an easier met condition, less counter-play and/or very little requirements in terms of deck design. You can look at engines for other factions and find similar discrepancies.

IMO, card value potential should be pitted against both card cost and ease of use. As an example, setup and deck building requirements, and potential counter-play. In other words, if card A can get higher value compared to B in an ideal scenario it should have greater setup requirements, cost or both. This would be "balanced". If this is not the case, and all over the deck builder it is not (not just with MS, everywhere), it's not "balanced". I don't see this as true with MS engines.

In terms of fixes.... Slight provision increases could work. With an emphasis on slight. Row restrictions could work too. For instance, maybe Archespore gets thrive on the ranged row and deathwish on the melee row. Maybe Nekker Warrior is row locked to melee. Power adjustments could work too. In any case, the thrives are arguably a bit too "good" due to the flexibility and cost.

Big units are equally out of hand. MS has access to Speartip, Golyat and Speartip: Asleep. Only two of these come with a provision deficit to offset the tempo. Again, it doesn't offset the tempo when thrives stick. It typically doesn't matter with Golyat. They can also run Caldwell and Dao as neutrals. That's 5 units right there over a 9. Even if you don't run them all, and it really doesn't make sense to do so, this affords too much ability to point-slam a board. Toss in the three Ghouls and now you can potentially do it over two rounds. Run Incantation and you can now get the value of one of these cards, 3 bonus points and a card draw, plus shove it in the GY to be eaten.

For fixes here.... The most obvious is to redesign a few of these cards so they do something beyond, "Play card, put 9+ points on the board.". Throwing 9 points on a board instantly should be more involved. A more straightforward fix is to drop the output, with a corresponding provision decrease. If the Regis: HV, Yrden, Scorch, Gigni and Professionals of the Gwentiverse were left as they were this probably wouldn't be needed. When you nerf all the counters to tall units it's unreasonable to leave said tall units unchanged, however. If player A can get big points on a whim player B should be able to stop them on a whim.

Ghouls could probably also be looked into. Ozzrel is fine. The bronze ghouls, IMO, are not. It's less about the points and more about the ability to replay tall units. I'd rather see Ghouls have a provision decrease and a restriction to bronze consumes added. This way they could still see play, grant decent value for a bronze but lose the ability to replay 9+ point gold cards.

The problem with all of the above is bringing MS down a peg without destroying it. I'd hate to see a rehash of what happened to Scoia. And yes, I'm aware Scoia is still "viable". Whether it's worth it is another discussion entirely.

 

[rrc]

In this case, probably both.

Thrive bronzes, IMO, are too strong for engines. The condition is too easy to satisfy. Put unit on board, play a bigger unit. It's probably the easiest engine requirement to satisfy. This, by itself, is fine. What isn't is when they're also incredibly cheap engines with secondary abilities. Going back to my previous post, Nekker Warrior always breaks even and has a 4 starting body. Archespore has thrive and deathwish. Drowner comes with a -1p deficit (5p for 4 starting value) but has a move ability. Nekker starts at a -2 deficit but quickly recoups it and more when it stays on the board.

Compare this to something like Scoia bronze engine cards. Smuggler can provide 1 point per turn. It's also 7p and melee locked. Defender can provide 1 point per turn at a 4 body for 6p. Defender needs to be boosted, however. DB Sentry and Vrihedd Brigade cost 5 and 6p, respectively. Both start at a 3 body but only work with movement. Sage and Scout also start as a 3 body and cost 5p and 4p, respectively. These cards only work with spells and traps, and the first is highly unreliable. Pyrotechnician only works with traps, SM with elves (also melee locked) and Dwarven Mercenary with dwarves. SM, Mercenary, Sentry and Pyro are all on orders, with Pyro having Zeal. On an unrelated note... This Is a big part of the problem with ST, for both the golds and bronzes. The lack of flexibility in the deck builder.

Both of these faction engines, across the board, can get very good value if they stay on the board and work as intended. The difference is one is cheaper, has an easier met condition, less counter-play and/or very little requirements in terms of deck design. You can look at engines for other factions and find similar discrepancies.

IMO, card value potential should be pitted against both card cost and ease of use. As an example, setup and deck building requirements, and potential counter-play. In other words, if card A can get higher value compared to B in an ideal scenario it should have greater setup requirements, cost or both. This would be "balanced". If this is not the case, and all over the deck builder it is not (not just with MS, everywhere), it's not "balanced". I don't see this as true with MS engines.

In terms of fixes.... Slight provision increases could work. With an emphasis on slight. Row restrictions could work too. For instance, maybe Archespore gets thrive on the ranged row and deathwish on the melee row. Maybe Nekker Warrior is row locked to melee. Power adjustments could work too. In any case, the thrives are arguably a bit too "good" due to the flexibility and cost.

Big units are equally out of hand. MS has access to Speartip, Golyat and Speartip: Asleep. Only two of these come with a provision deficit to offset the tempo. Again, it doesn't offset the tempo when thrives stick. It typically doesn't matter with Golyat. They can also run Caldwell and Dao as neutrals. That's 5 units right there over a 9. Even if you don't run them all, and it really doesn't make sense to do so, this affords too much ability to point-slam a board. Toss in the three Ghouls and now you can potentially do it over two rounds. Run Incantation and you can now get the value of one of these cards, 3 bonus points and a card draw, plus shove it in the GY to be eaten.

For fixes here.... The most obvious is to redesign a few of these cards so they do something beyond, "Play card, put 9+ points on the board.". Throwing 9 points on a board instantly should be more involved. A more straightforward fix is to drop the output, with a corresponding provision decrease. If the Regis: HV, Yrden, Scorch, Gigni and Professionals of the Gwentiverse were left as they were this probably wouldn't be needed. When you nerf all the counters to tall units it's unreasonable to leave said tall units unchanged, however. If player A can get big points on a whim player B should be able to stop them on a whim.

Ghouls could probably also be looked into. Ozzrel is fine. The bronze ghouls, IMO, are not. It's less about the points and more about the ability to replay tall units. I'd rather see Ghouls have a provision decrease and a restriction to bronze consumes added. This way they could still see play, grant decent value for a bronze but lose the ability to replay 9+ point gold cards.

The problem with all of the above is bringing MS down a peg without destroying it. I'd hate to see a rehash of what happened to Scoia. And yes, I'm aware Scoia is still "viable". Whether it's worth it is another discussion entirely.

Fantastic points @Restlessdingo32

 

[M3e0w]

If player A can get big points on a whim player B should be able to stop them on a whim.

That's the biggest problem
and most MO units never brick.

But as I understand most constructive posts here present an opinion that it would be better to buff other factions rather than nerf monsters.

And whilst the big monster units make for good short rounds I feel that's part of the faction style, big units are vulnerable to removal & they usually don't provide too much value for their cost.
I'm still of the opinion that it's the bronzes that make monsters OP.