It seems to me that an agressive mage will have to show his hand sooner than a controlling mage.
The controller is built to react to what his opponent is playing, at the same time trying to conceal his own strategy whereas the agressive mage is more built towards getting into the opposition's face armed and ready in a couple of rounds.
Obviously, one tries to hide its strategy as long as possible but at the same time you have to get the most out of every action you have, and sometimes that will give the opposition a tip. It's that or taking a sub-optimal or reactionary action which gives nothing away. Question is : does this help you more getting the win or not ?
For example, when playing my Adramelech warlock I want to Fireball/Flameblast/Devil's Trident the enemy mage no later than round three. I also foresee I may have to deal with some armour or an Intercept creature at that point so I may have to select a Force Push or Disarm in round three as well.
That means I have two turns to get everything out that I want out.
R1 you can move and have a FD Hawkeye and FD Akiro's Favor on you which doesn't give away much
but by Round 2 I also want the Fireshaper Ring out and an Elemental Wand so I can use my two planning cards in the following rounds to anticipate to the board situation.
Obviously, I'm giving my strategy away on R2 but delaying my strategy is more likely to diminish my chances than improve them imo.
I'd rather have the enemy react to the Warlock at that point than the Warlock having to react to the opposition.
It's the old Chicago Bears Defense philosophy. ( not the Bears of the last two years mind you
)
We don't mind that you know what we're going to do on defense, we're going to do it anyway. See if you can stop us. Sometimes, the best thing to do is to do what you do best and let the opposition worry about the rest