Hearthpwn

You are asking us to defend a definition of what Hearthstone is, and to me, tournaments are not it. The game does not live or die on the tournament scene. It never needed such a thing, nor is it the reason 75-99% of players play the game. It lives and dies on its entertainment value. (As an aside, it also explains why people like watching HS streamers so much. The game is just entertaining to watch.)  

I love Yogg-Saron, Hope's End, and he is the latest  (indeed the greatest) in a long line of cards that can swing a game wildly depending on the outcome. I even made a wild deck that is composed exclusively on RNG based cards and called it MadMedivh's Clown Casino. No Discover, no draw, no heal, no assurance at all. Only the bodies on the board and the spin of the wheel. I noticed that there is A LOT of variance in the effectiveness on each card in each circumstance. Sure, I could cherry pick the 20 or so wins I got and say Ragnaros the Firelord, Unstable Portal, and even Yogg-Saron, Hope's End are bad RNG and should be removed, but I also get soundly crushed by the curvestone decks like secret Pally and Claws Shaman. It turns out even with the best RNG cards in the game, they don't always work in your favor. I will tell you something though, I have A LOT of fun playing that deck, and that more in line with my definition of the game. 

Quote from nevr3000 >>

Quote from Haussenfuss >>

This.

While the community is pretending to be in hysterics regarding the card, no one has actually presented a data set suggesting the card is remotely close to having the power levels which are commonly assumed. Similar community histrionics led to Blizzard nerfing a deck with a 46% win-rate almost a year ago. Neither the Druid nor Mage Yogg decks are tearing up the ladder - indeed, the Mage deck is third-tier. They see play in tournaments because neither is powerful enough to ban. FWIW - to all appearances, the card doesn't seem to have the sort of consistent, unfair effect which other playable 10-drops possess in order to see play. In the twenty games shown in the video, Yogg won a few more than he lost. It doesn't show how many games were lost owing to Yogg being a dead draw in the early and mid-game - 10-mana cards have low "win-rates when drawn" and need to compensate by having high "win-rates when played." It frankly doesn't matter how they achieve it - Anyfin+Murky and C'Thun simply burst the opponent down; N'Zoth resets the game so unfairly that the opponent can't recover. It is difficult to "play around" any of this, as the effects are often independent of game-state - that's why these 10-drops see play, and Mind Control doesn't. Sometimes, Yogg achieves a similarly unfair result. I would guess that the card isn't unfair enough to justify its play-rate, but no one seems to know - it would be nice to see a data analysis from VS.

 Again: The inconsistency is the issue, not the (potential) power. C'thun warns your opponent and even keeps you up to date on how strong he's getting. You can counter minimize the damage done by keeping bodies on board to soak up damage, and keep a removal.
N'Zoth is well telegraphed as well and you know what minions your opponent will get back. You can anticipate and keep a boardclear to minimize the impact.
Yogg however says fuck all. It doesn't require you to build your deck in a specific way, outside of needing spells which many archetypes run anyway, Yoggs output doesn't care wether the spells played were 10 mana spells or 0 mana spells, and it could or could not change the game.
No predictability. No preparation. No counter. Just sit there and pray it casts the right spells.

Comparing Yogg to other 10 mana cards falls short because no other win or comeback condition is so untransparant.

Quote from TheRealMalfurion >>

Well let's just do what magic did and do the math.
Run the numbers of control mirrors vs. aggro mirrors, and see how often the better player wins.
Magic found Aggro takes 3x as much skill as control, and really when you sit down and look instead of wanting to be smart it makes sense, aggro let's your opponent interact with it, control not so much.
Board Presence is the soul of interaction.

Well most decks (not necessarily control, since some people need me to be literal about this) don't have enough ways to interact with the board and still need to because of ridiculous cards currently in the game. The typical aggro player in Hearthstone plays out his cards taking special care to waste as little mana as possible and then proceeds to chip away at your health until you lose. That my friend doesn't require skill. Also you were quick to catch a part of what I said, but not the part where I mentioned how my opponents playing those decks painfully misplayed several times and then still won. So yeah, I am not trying to be smart, because I don't really care for what you think about my intellect. In my book if you can misplay several times and still win by turn 6 - 8, then your deck doesn't require that much skill after all. Control on the other hand requires planning (how to spend your cards, when to heal, when to clear, etc., whereas in aggro you mostly play minions, do some basic math and need to position things right, which a lot of people fail at), you can't just play cards and win and if you think that is the case then you can't be that good at the game.

Edit: Magic isn't the same as Hearthstone I am assuming so making those comparisons is not correct on principle.

Quote from Woomod >>

Quote from TheRealMalfurion >>

Well let's just do what magic did and do the math.
Run the numbers of control mirrors vs. aggro mirrors, and see how often the better player wins.
Magic found Aggro takes 3x as much skill as control, and really when you sit down and look instead of wanting to be smart it makes sense, aggro let's your opponent interact with it, control not so much.
Board Presence is the soul of interaction.

Well most decks (not necessarily control, since some people need me to be literal about this) don't have enough ways to interact with the board and still need to because of ridiculous cards currently in the game. The typical aggro player in Hearthstone plays out his cards taking special care to waste as little mana as possible and then proceeds to chip away at your health until you lose. That my friend doesn't require skill. Also you were quick to catch a part of what I said, but not the part where I mentioned how my opponents playing those decks painfully misplayed several times and then still won. So yeah, I am not trying to be smart, because I don't really care for what you think about my intellect. In my book if you can misplay several times and still win by turn 6 - 8, then your deck doesn't require that much skill after all. Control on the other hand requires planning (how to spend your cards, when to heal, when to clear, etc., whereas in aggro you mostly play minions, do some basic math and need to position things right, which a lot of people fail at), you can't just play cards and win and if you think that is the case then you can't be that good at the game.

Edit: Magic isn't the same as Hearthstone I am assuming so making those comparisons is not correct on principle.

 You can't say magic isn't the same as hearthstone and then make the same arguments nearly to a word as to how aggro takes no skill Control Timmies made in that game and not admit how similar they are.

I mean let me reduce control as much as you reduce aggro, clear the board, kill everything they play after that and drop my win condition. 
But devil's in the detail's, that's why i suggested sitting down and doing the math, seeing how often the better player wins in mirror matches.

As for play mistakes well? To be blunt. Most control decks I see don't have turn 1 or 2 and sometimes even turn 3 plays they are intending to rely on, Hearthstone has a pretty consistent boundary of 15 or less being the unsafe space for your health, and aggro can get you there turn 4 reliably. Is it really so surprising they can lethal you down in the next 2-4 turns when control decks basically let them get into burst range for free?

Quote from LefticusRighteous >>

Quote from codyischida >>

I already lost games due to Yogg, it's very frustrating but the card it's fine for me, it's a 10 mana Legendary! Sometimes it helps you, sometimes not, sometimes it kills you, sometimes it does nothing.

PS: the first guy was a Zoo, he deserved (i'm kidding).

 There are plenty of situation where Yogg goes wrong, and that's why you should play Yogg when you already lost, then there are no downsides. The card should not exist, you can play terrible the entire game and still win because of a lucky Yogg. Imagine having no board and 1 Health against an opponent with a full board and 30 health, Yogg is the only card in the game that can turn this unwinnable situation around. Sure, there is only a 0,01% chance of that happening, but the chance is there. This card should be banned for that reason. No single card should be a win-condition by itself.

Quote from Haussenfuss >>

Quote from nevr3000 >>

Quote from Haussenfuss >>

This.

While the community is pretending to be in hysterics regarding the card, no one has actually presented a data set suggesting the card is remotely close to having the power levels which are commonly assumed. Similar community histrionics led to Blizzard nerfing a deck with a 46% win-rate almost a year ago. Neither the Druid nor Mage Yogg decks are tearing up the ladder - indeed, the Mage deck is third-tier. They see play in tournaments because neither is powerful enough to ban. FWIW - to all appearances, the card doesn't seem to have the sort of consistent, unfair effect which other playable 10-drops possess in order to see play. In the twenty games shown in the video, Yogg won a few more than he lost. It doesn't show how many games were lost owing to Yogg being a dead draw in the early and mid-game - 10-mana cards have low "win-rates when drawn" and need to compensate by having high "win-rates when played." It frankly doesn't matter how they achieve it - Anyfin+Murky and C'Thun simply burst the opponent down; N'Zoth resets the game so unfairly that the opponent can't recover. It is difficult to "play around" any of this, as the effects are often independent of game-state - that's why these 10-drops see play, and Mind Control doesn't. Sometimes, Yogg achieves a similarly unfair result. I would guess that the card isn't unfair enough to justify its play-rate, but no one seems to know - it would be nice to see a data analysis from VS.

 Again: The inconsistency is the issue, not the (potential) power. C'thun warns your opponent and even keeps you up to date on how strong he's getting. You can counter minimize the damage done by keeping bodies on board to soak up damage, and keep a removal.
N'Zoth is well telegraphed as well and you know what minions your opponent will get back. You can anticipate and keep a boardclear to minimize the impact.
Yogg however says fuck all. It doesn't require you to build your deck in a specific way, outside of needing spells which many archetypes run anyway, Yoggs output doesn't care wether the spells played were 10 mana spells or 0 mana spells, and it could or could not change the game.
No predictability. No preparation. No counter. Just sit there and pray it casts the right spells.

Comparing Yogg to other 10 mana cards falls short because no other win or comeback condition is so untransparant.

Both Yogg Druid and Mage run spells which have never otherwise seen competitive play. You can draw whatever conclusions you wish regarding how that impacts the consistency of the decks.

You can play around Yogg - you don't over-extend on the board. You can just as easily "keep board clears and removal" for a post-Yogg board which favours your opponent as you can for a post-N'Zoth board or post-C'Thun board - Yogg doesn't magically remove those cards from your hand.

Yogg is predictable - it has an expected value when cast, and you play the game to minimize the effect of a Yogg DOOM. You can also prepare for that expected outcome - keeping cards in hand to deal with a strong post-Yogg board, just as you would for N'Zoth or C'Thun. If you prefer praying - you might live in a free country, so proceed as you wish.

Quote from TheRealMalfurion >>

 Tell me how many classes have a lot of good reactive cards from turn 1 - 3 to control the board? Maybe that is why they do little or nothing on those turns and not because they want to wait for you to burst them down. That is not a mistake, but the fact that for them it is impossible to play something (Warrior and Mage are the exception to this).

Quote from TheRealMalfurion >>

I can't understand if you are trying to troll me here, because I doubt anyone can talk about skill when better aggro cards are printed by Blizzard and control players are thrown a bone every other expansion. With Control Warrior you need to know when to hold some cards so as not to spend all your resources. I have never seen aggro hold cards if they can play something. So you must measure skill by the amount of cards a player can play throughout a game. Finally, I encourage you to go listen to pro players, because I have often heard them complain about how ridiculous Shaman is at the moment.

Finally if shaman is so good, why don't the pros play nothing but? But they do, so shaman must not be problamatic. As for blizzard's tuning of shaman, they got an overload versions spider mech, boulderfist ogre and tunnel trogg. Maybe these shouldn't have been in the same standard, but let's be honest most previous overload cards and support outside feral spirit and lightning bolt was shit is it that surprising when Blizzard decided to make overload work they might overtune it?
Tbh. I think the per crystal thing is the right support and the real problem is tunnel trogg being a one drop, unleashed elemental getting his bonus per crystal would go a long way towards making overload work through formats as a 3 drop is much easier to deal with than a 1 drop. 

This will be my final reply on this issue as I feel it doesn't pertain to the original discussion. However, I invite you to create a new thread or send me a private message and we can discuss this further.

One of the reasons is that they need to play multiple decks in a tournament and by playing decks you gain experience in them. The second reason is that they don't need broken cards to win. The third reason would be for the game to feel a bit fresh (I mean would you really want to play the same deck for days on end). Shaman currently has a lot of ridiculous early game and that being so I feel like the skill required of a player to win drastically diminishes. If your cards are powerful and you are winning despite misplays that implies that the deck is winning for you. In this context, I can't recognize someone who plays them as skilled (this is not to say that aggro players can't be skilled). It is not good design by Blizzard to create such powerful minions without creating powerful answers. Remember that answer cards are needed even by non controlling classes that don't have the explosive early game of the Shaman, but that still aim to be proactive a bit later in the game.

I also want to touch a bit on overload. It is not an excuse to claim what is the big deal with stuff like Totem Golem and Flamewreathed Faceless. The point is that Blizzard was just lazy and abused the overload mechanic by just adding stats to a minion. Hearthstone's main focus is to be a fun game and there is nothing fun about a 7/7 on 4. Instead of the lazy way to do things I would rather they use this mechanic for more interesting / unique effects while also keeping the cards premium stated or close to that. If these things weren't enough the latest expansion introduced a Fiery War Axe that costs 1 mana and has one more durability making this class even more suffocating. In this same environment Priest, Paladin and Rogue only see fringe play. So to tie this to the discussion of this thread I feel like removing Yogg from ladder doesn't solve much (first of all since competitive really starts after rank 5 or even at Legend rank so we should not compromise for the few), while making Shaman a different kind of class would probably help more.

Final Note: I don't hate the Shaman class nor do I want it to disappear, but its current design is unacceptable for a healthy meta. And to people who say let Shaman have its time in the spotlight I would agree with you, but I would rather it not last two years until WotOG rotates out (since Blizzard seems hellbent on creating more aggressive cards for the class as witnessed by Spirit Claws.

What's a "Good" reactive card? One that trades up? Then reactive cards are just plain better. One that trades equally? Then Late game decks are better, Aggro plays a 2 drop, Control pays 2 mana to remove it so control wins out both delaying it's opponent's game plan while moving it's own(Delaying the game.) forward. 

Well by good reactive cards I mean better board clears as well as better tools for survival to allow the more controlling (or even midrange) decks more viability in ladder. Better board clears than the ones we currently have would make aggressive decks think twice before vomiting their hand into the board and I feel like the AOEs of Hearthstone are not punitive enough (i.e., often at least a few minions will survive your board clear or your opponent will easily refill his board next turn). My point is aggressive decks shouldn't feel like it is ok to have 5+ minions on their side of the board at any time (thus making playing into / around the board clear more a matter of skill / calculated risk and less one of getting lucky because your opponent couldn't have the right answer given the poor reactive options). In essence board clears should feel powerful, when you play them you should destroy your opponents board (they should, as the name says, clear the board) and healing should heal in way that is proactive like Moonglade Portal and not just do a bit of healing, whose effect turns out to be inconsequential because you opponent still has a board.

I mean look at a card like Starfall. Should a card that provides an option between a bad Consecration and a terrible Fireball really cost 5 mana. At 4 mana it seems more fair (since you have paid something for the flexibility and still kept the card playable look at Wrath for a good example of how a Choose One spell should be made) it would be a great alternative to Swipe since Zoo especially plays a lot of minions with 1 - 2 Health. This would also combo well for Shaman boards with some spell damage (since shaman minions tend to be around 2-3 Health). I am focusing on Druid since I play a lot of it, but some other AOEs that I feel are overpriced are things like Excavated Evil as well as Elemental Destruction, whose overload amount is crazy (keep in mind you are dealing damage to your board too).

Quote from TheRealMalfurion >>

Well by good reactive cards I mean better board clears as well as better tools for survival to allow the more controlling (or even midrange) decks more viability in ladder. Better board clears than the ones we currently have would make aggressive decks think twice before vomiting their hand into the board and I feel like the AOEs of Hearthstone are not punitive enough (i.e., often at least a few minions will survive your board clear or your opponent will easily refill his board next turn). My point is aggressive decks shouldn't feel like it is ok to have 5+ minions on their side of the board at any time (thus making playing into / around the board clear more a matter of skill / calculated risk and less one of getting lucky because your opponent couldn't have the right answer given the poor reactive options). In essence board clears should feel powerful, when you play them you should destroy your opponents board (they should, as the name says, clear the board) and healing should heal in way that is proactive like Moonglade Portal and not just do a bit of healing, whose effect turns out to be inconsequential because you opponent still has a board.

Quote from TheRealMalfurion >>

I mean look at a card like Starfall. Should a card that provides an option between a bad Consecration and a terrible Fireball really cost 5 mana. At 4 mana it seems more fair (since you have paid something for the flexibility and still kept the card playable look at Wrath for a good example of how a Choose One spell should be made) it would be a great alternative to Swipe since Zoo especially plays a lot of minions with 1 - 2 Health. This would also combo well for Shaman boards with some spell damage (since shaman minions tend to be around 2-3 Health). I am focusing on Druid since I play a lot of it, but some other AOEs that I feel are overpriced are things like Excavated Evil as well as Elemental Destruction, whose overload amount is crazy (keep in mind you are dealing damage to your board too).

And now for my next trick. As I was thinking to myself, in shame, that I have not been contributing to the Yogg discussion with my latest posts in this thread, so I decided to provide an idea you are not prepared for.

I propose a further division of the ladder (on top of Standard and Wild). This division could be indicated by a checkbox named Competitive. Previous names included Tryhard (just joking) and SkillStone (that would be offensive to the rest of the player-base and if it wasn't clear I am joking here as well). With this filter on several cards are banned (including and not limited to Yogg-Saron, Hope's End, Tuskarr Totemic etc., i.e. swingy cards that people don't want in the competitive scene). While the filter is checked you will only face people with these bans enabled (i.e., who also have the filter enabled). In essence the ladder will still be united (perhaps with two separate Legend rankings for Standard, i.e., Competitive Legend and Non Competitive Legend). As long as you are in numbered ranks you can easily switch between the two modes, while in Legend should you switch you will find yourself with the score that corresponds to the other Legend queue of Standard. Blizzard can get its top 100 from Competitive Legend and can enforce the same bans in tournaments.

Now, before people who like Yogg (like me) start complaining I would ask them to think of all the super aggressive decks that will now move on to Competitive letting us have our fun while still measuring our skill against other like minded players through a ranking system.

For people who will say that is what Casual should be, I will say that some players still want the benefit of rank (such as end of season rewards, unlocking their Golden Hero Portrait, knowing where they stand in terms of skill etc.). That is why I am proposing this solution.

I look forward to what people think of my idea.

Quote from TheRealMalfurion >>

I propose a further division of the ladder (on top of Standard and Wild). This division could be indicated by a checkbox named Competitive. Previous names included Tryhard (just joking) and SkillStone (that would be offensive to the rest of the player-base and if it wasn't clear I am joking here as well). With this filter on several cards are banned (including and not limited to Yogg-Saron, Hope's End, Tuskarr Totemic etc., i.e. swingy cards that people don't want in the competitive scene). While the filter is checked you will only face people with these bans enabled (i.e., who also have the filter enabled). In essence the ladder will still be united (perhaps with two separate Legend rankings for Standard, i.e., Competitive Legend and Non Competitive Legend). As long as you are in numbered ranks you can easily switch between the two modes, while in Legend should you switch you will find yourself with the score that corresponds to the other Legend queue of Standard. Blizzard can get its top 100 from Competitive Legend and can enforce the same bans in tournaments.

Bluntly the swingy RNG cards exist to fix a design flaw with hearthstone.
You have EXTREMELY slim decks, to the point where decking is a real issue and people at times avoid draw affects for fear of over drawing. You also have guaranteed resources each turn on a predictable schedule without paying any kind of cost. You will always be able to make a 2 drop on turn 2, a 3 drop on turn 3, etc.

"Competitive" mode would basically boil down to if people were honest the only real form of RNG left, the least interactive form there is. What deck is your opponent playing? It would be a mode where conceding turn 1-2 if you have a bad match up to get to the next game would actually be the best play.

I said something similar before. However, my idea isn't meant to completely remove RNG from "Competitive", but what the community at large calls bad RNG. So "Competitive" wouldn't remove all RNG just the crazy RNG.

Quote from TheRealMalfurion >>

 

I said something similar before. However, my idea isn't meant to completely remove RNG from the game, but what the community at large calls bad RNG. So "Competitive" wouldn't remove all RNG just the crazy RNG.

Quote from Woomod >>

Quote from TheRealMalfurion >>

 

I said something similar before. However, my idea isn't meant to completely remove RNG from the game, but what the community at large calls bad RNG. So "Competitive" wouldn't remove all RNG just the crazy RNG.

 The problem is this right. Soft Mana screw is good for MtG not knowing if you will be at 4 or 5 mana next turn(The difference between wiping your opponent's board and not, so do you play assuming you will or assuming you won't? That can decide the game.), but sometimes it's a REALLY REALLY bad thing then you are at 2 mana turn 5. But hard mana screw is a side effect of soft mana screw.

Hearthstone removed every way the game can soft screw you in the core rules RNG besides just bad Draws, then gave an incredibly generous mulligan rule and super thin decks. So.....what's left?
Cards that can sometimes pull out some crazy RNG stuff.
Are you going to cut the portals? Flame&Knife Juggler? Faceless Summoner? Forbidden Shaping?  Ragnaros? Cabalists Tome? Barnes? The list goes on. Why introduce a Scrub Mode when we can accept blizzard is working out the kinks of the right amount of RNG on Cards, No one is complaining about the portals(Except firelands in arena.), or the new 1/1s for 1 that give you a random card. Yogg was even mentioned better than they thought which they thought it was just gonna be a cool for fun card not a central card to tournament decks.(P.Sure they thought c'thun and n'zoth would be the tourney gods.)
But guess what, you have standard now, In 2 years Yogg will be relegated wild.

I do play a lot of Tempo Mage and have been for months since I got Yogg from one of the bonus packs when WotOG came out. From what I have seen, this really only became a problem recently because Tempo Mage as well as the Yogg Token Druid became top tier. Nobody cared even just a month or 2 ago.

I don't play the Druid version so I don't really know but every time I enter a game as a Tempo Mage, I'm not thinking "I need to race to turn 10 to play Yogg." I'd say about 90% of the time when I win Yogg usually goes unplayed. There are those games where he gets played but he only really wins for you when its close, you have to actually be in the game to get Yogg to win for you. If you're already down to 10 health on turn 10 and your up against a warrior with 30 health and 15 armor, Yogg isn't saving you.

My suggestions would be to instead of removing the card from the game, change it to perhaps only cast spells that you casted in the game or random class spells. You could also even just make him only cast 5 spells. It would still be RNG, you could still clear a board or draw enough cards however, its a way lesser chance to get what you need at 5 than it would be at 15 or more. However if you nerf his spell counts, you'd also have to buff his stats in order for him to remain playable.  Maybe make him a 9/9 with the 5 spells.

Quote from TheRealMalfurion >>

And now for my next trick. As I was thinking to myself, in shame, that I have not been contributing to the Yogg discussion with my latest posts in this thread, so I decided to provide an idea you are not prepared for.

I propose a further division of the ladder (on top of Standard and Wild). This division could be indicated by a checkbox named Competitive. Previous names included Tryhard (just joking) and SkillStone (that would be offensive to the rest of the player-base and if it wasn't clear I am joking here as well). With this filter on several cards are banned (including and not limited to Yogg-Saron, Hope's End, Tuskarr Totemic etc., i.e. swingy cards that people don't want in the competitive scene). While the filter is checked you will only face people with these bans enabled (i.e., who also have the filter enabled). In essence the ladder will still be united (perhaps with two separate Legend rankings for Standard, i.e., Competitive Legend and Non Competitive Legend). As long as you are in numbered ranks you can easily switch between the two modes, while in Legend should you switch you will find yourself with the score that corresponds to the other Legend queue of Standard. Blizzard can get its top 100 from Competitive Legend and can enforce the same bans in tournaments.

Now, before people who like Yogg (like me) start complaining I would ask them to think of all the super aggressive decks that will now move on to Competitive letting us have our fun while still measuring our skill against other like minded players through a ranking system.

For people who will say that is what Casual should be, I will say that some players still want the benefit of rank (such as end of season rewards, unlocking their Golden Hero Portrait, knowing where they stand in terms of skill etc.). That is why I am proposing this solution.

I look forward to what people think of my idea.

I think it is better if you either remove cards like Yogg or keep the game as is and people like me find a new game. Then you, and your peers, are free to enjoy watching HS complete the metamorphosis into a reward-less slot machine.

But nice try on the aggro slight. Of course it would be vice versa, as the only decks Yogg doesn't severely reduce the edge versus are the ones that kill consistently before T9 (since we're talking mainly druid running Yogg, after all).

But yeah, we could name your mode "I don't like competitions with decisions". just joking, of course. You know how it is.

Now go zip in your e-peen and be clever somewhere else.

Wow man good job. You got me I was really going for the aggro slight. Some of us enjoy the slower game and I truly believe that a lot of people play aggro because those decks are faster and you can climb quicker. So, if a mode like the one I was saying was created I believe, that the non competitive one would have on average slower decks in it, which is something a lot of people have asked.

Also if you take so much offense from people who are genuinely joking then maybe you shouldn't be reading forums as it isn't good for your health to get worked up by what other people say. I don't know if you have read what I have said so far in this thread, but I have agreed that cards like Yogg are very powerful, however, there are other very powerful cards in the game that to me are more problematic. Somebody who thinks and doesn't take everything I say at face value would understand that while I accept Yogg I am also expecting Blizzard never to print cards that create crazy swings like this anymore (not only Yogg, but also stuff like Tuskarr and 4 mana 7/7 shouldn't be printed in the future).

I was merely proposing a quick fix that doesn't need to see the game remove cards (which if you haven't understood it yet, Blizzard doesn't intend to do) while keeping both sides happy. As for the dig that I took to what I must assume are your favorites decks (aggro) it was meant in good fun and it was made because I find such decks really frustrating to play against (just like you find Yogg).

UPDATE: Yogg is getting nerfed - THANK GOD. 

Looks like I was right :)